Monday, October 13, 2008

My hope is built

Can we doubt that presently our race will more than realize our boldest imaginations, that it will achieve unity and peace, and that our children will live in a world made more splendid and lovely than any place or garden that we know, going on from strength to strength in an ever-widening circle of achievement? What man has done, the little triumphs of his present state…form but the prelude to the things that man has yet to do.
- H. G. Wells, A Short History of the World (1937)

The cold-blooded massacres of the defenceless, the return of deliberate and organised torture, mental torment, and fear to a world from which such things seemed well nigh banished – has come near to breaking my spirit altogether… “Homo sapiens,” as he has been pleased to call himself, is played out.
- H. G. Wells, A Mind at the End of Its Torture (1946)*

So, I was reading these extracts and it got me thinking about what is man, and what course is he on. We seem to have some vast potential, but will it ever be fulfilled? I cast my mind back to a particularly profound play:

I think everything on earth is bound to change bit by bit, in fact already is changing before our very eyes. Two or three hundred years, or a thousand years if you like I it doesn’t really matter how long – will bring in a new and happy life. We’ll have no part in it, of course, but it is what we are now living for, working for, yes and suffering for. We’re creating it, and that’s what gives our life its meaning, and its happiness too if you want to put it that way.
- Vershinin (Anton Chekhov, Three Sisters)

It’s quite an attractive theory to see us – homo sapiens, that is – as progressing along some path, predestined for glory. What hope! Such a theory places us as agents of remarkable power and prestige. And it answers all life burning questions – why are we here? why must we endure suffering? is our work, our achievements, our life of any value?

But take heed of Chekhov – the same scene offers another, more sobering view:

When we’re dead, people will fly around in balloons, there will be a new style in men’s jackets and a sixth sense may be discovered and developed, but life itself won’t change, it will still be difficult and full of mystery and happiness as it is now. Even in a thousand years men will still be moaning away about life being a burden. What’s more, they’ll still be as scared of death as they are now. And as keen on avoiding it.
- Tuzenbakh (Anton Chekhov, Three Sisters)

Looking back at all the promising developments of the past – drugs that would free us from disease, machines that would allow us to live lives of leisure, laws that would secure our security and happiness – what has really been achieved? We are richer than ever before, but apparently no happier. We fly, not in balloons but in rockets to outer space, yet no more understand life on our own planet. We know the intricate functions of organism in our ecosystem, are completely at odds with how to manage the environment. Our suicide rate swells with those running from life. But most of us are running from death. I see no development in human nature.

We are apt to exaggerate the abilities of man – but maintaining such faith is a great challenge. Men fail. Macbeth, Lord of the Flies, Animal Farm, Jekyll and Hyde - they all teach us that man is fooling himself with visions of progress and grandeur. Given the opportunity man will forsake any semblance of civilisation in order to fulfil his own insatiable desire for power. We are locked in a cycle from which we cannot save ourselves. Place too much faith in man, Wells' experience suggests, and you will end up with a hopeless, broken spirit.


Trust in the LORD with all your heart
and lean not on your own understanding;
in all your ways acknowledge him,

and he will make your paths straight.
- Proverbs 3:5-6


*okay, so I haven’t actually read any of HG Wells’ acclaimed works; these interesting passages were extracted from Tim Keller’s The Reason for God. highly recommend the book.

† apologies to any women out there who feel excluded by the generic use of ‘mankind’ – i didn’t invent the word, i just use it

3 comments:

Elizabeth said...

so use 'humankind', or 'human beings', or 'people' instead :P

Nate Raiter said...

no.

it sounds better and is completely unambiguous in this context. it is my own little rebellion against senseless political correctness.

as an interesting side, i was just reading Psalm 1 in a TNIV a couple hours ago and noticed that they had changed the words from 'man' (found in the NIV and any other literal translation) to 'those', and 'he' to 'they' and was a bit angry. i think we have a real problem when we start changing the words of God because we don't like the way they are put.

Elizabeth said...

To quote de Beauvoir:

'The terms masculine and feminine are used symmetrically only as a matter of form, as on legal papers. In actuality the relation of the two sexes is not quite like that of two electrical poles, for man represents both the positive and the negative, as is indicated by the the common use of man to designate human beings in general; whereas woman represents only the negative, defined by limited criteria, without reciprocity'

So by using the word 'man', you are engaging in the perpetuation of the hegemony of masculinity.