Of homes and buckets
Posted on November 6th, 2006, under Politics, Saturn Returns
‘I don’t really have a pool of men, it’s more of a Jacuzzi, or even a bucket.’
Lately I’ve been soothing feelings with noise - drowning or amplifying, depending on the urgency. Now the days are oh so quiet. I’m taking in new kinds of pleasures. So is the city. It’s raining for the fourth night in a row. On Friday, as we smoked on leather street couches, Jean could smell it before it arrived, matching the promise of the bars that awaited. By Saturday I’d confused its unfamiliar, vice-like mustiness with the aftershave I was wearing through dinner. Scared that the woman next to me would hate it, I tried to wipe it off secretly and make myself smell of wine or something better. Now I’m used to it: the dust that can’t quite believe it’s not here to stay fighting the clouds that roll in, hug the skyscrapers and crumble.
Baudelaire wrote: ‘only those who leave for leaving’s sake are travelers; hearts tugging like balloons.’ But hearts tug just as much on the part of those who are left, and travelers may tire of leaving (or of leaving alone). The tugging is the enigma: and isn’t it at least partly a sign of how much one wants to have a home - a safe place to be able to leave and find again?
I’ve been thinking a lot about Kate’s determination for an ethics of adulthood. She sees ambivalence as the route to maturity in public debate so that we may recognise and fight for shared values without the implicit threat of condemnation. I love her optimism that there is a place for more of us, those who may not be the sweetest or the most content or the most lovable people, largely because we are frustrated by the times in which we find ourselves.
‘What happens when there are men and women living with the anxiety that they are not becoming what the world desires of them?’ she writes: ‘Being on the outside of social norms is not just emotionally difficult. It limits what kind of contributions can be made. People who are silenced have few options. They can try to challenge the prevailing wisdom … They can actively seek to change themselves to become what is expected of them. If that becomes impossible, they can try to hide their differences and act “normal”. Or they will simply come to believe that there is something wrong with them; they are not as good as everyone else.’
Despite such odds, there continue to be a few brave people strong enough to challenge the prevailing wisdom. I’m starting to think adulthood involves taking some risks with maturity if it means making sure that those people don’t feel they are alone when they speak. And rather than owning a home (and finding interest rates the definitive barometer of one’s politics and/or national news agenda), I wonder if the most important counter-politics in contemporary Australia may be - as it has always been - to use whatever space you have to treasure and protect those that most need it.
On November 8th, 2006 at 8:07 am, bo said:
Hi Mel,
That’s a nice way of putting it — “taking some risks with maturity” to protect (and maybe extend?) the space for acceptable speech.
I’m trying to follow what you have in mind with the word ‘ambivalence’ as part of Kate’s ethics of adulthood. To me, ‘ambivalence’ suggests a disregard for the status of the adult, as if we shouldn’t care how we’re categorised.
But in Kate’s book she tends to use the word ‘ambiguity’ (in reference to Beauvoir’s Ethics of Ambiguity) as a means of defining a pluralised adulthood. ‘Ambiguity’ connotes a position that occupies multiple (supposedly) mutually-exclusive categories at once, a kind of deliberate deception that undermines the system of categories.
Or am I missing something?
On November 8th, 2006 at 11:26 am, melgregg said:
No, you’re not missing anything, that’s the word she uses. Is there some linguist nerd out there who can tell me what ‘ambi’ means anyway? Because I guess the reason I Freudian slipped to ambivalence instead is because that deliberate deception would seem to avoid the confrontation (or ‘agon’ maybe) needed for progress. Oh yeah, I’ve always been pretty bad at philosophy
On November 8th, 2006 at 6:58 pm, jean said:
i consider myself an amateur linguistics nerd, so let me have a go. I’m pretty sure it means “both” in the original latin but I think it’s also from the same root as “amb” (as an ambulance and perambulate) which means “around”. Anyway, in “ambiguity” it just means both, as in ambivalence meaning the belief that more than one thing is true, and ambidextrous meaning you’re good with both hands
I don’t think it’s am+bi, but would love to hear a real linguistic nerd’s explanation.
On November 9th, 2006 at 12:22 am, Kate said:
I’d like to see the delicious space between ambivalence and ambiguity drawn out. In coloured pencils. By a linguistics nerd.
On November 9th, 2006 at 1:10 pm, Will said:
hello! me no linguistic expert neither, but the root of ambulance/perambulate/abulate is the Latin “ambulatus” meaning he/she/it walked. (I had to check the dictionary for the reason ambulance has anything to do with walking–apparently it’s from the French “hopital ambulant” meaning a walking hospital.)
To me, ambiguity implies some intention in not expressing or coming to a clear meaning or decision or judgment. This might involve an intention to deceive. Alternatively it might express a sense that there is a cost attached to coming to judgement. Ambivalence suggests a wavering between alternatives, each which has some worth (from “valens”, I guess cos it means strong or powerful). To me, being ambivalent expresses less of a sense of having some intention than does ambiguous. It also seems to presuppose eventual judgement. Also, ambivalence sounds a bit more sexy than ambiguous.
As for what Kate says in her book, I still wouldn’t know cos I still haven’t got my copy. I’m thinking of writing a terse letter to Choice magazine to get them on my case.
hearts tugging reminds me, I think, of Flaubert. Was it he who longed to travel to Egypt when he was in France, and when in Egypt longed to be back at home in France? To take this in a literal direction: this is part of my problem with travel, that there’s no “there” when you get there and the pace of movement can make it difficult for you to make that sense of thereness (for me, this generally requires meeting or meeting up with people who live there). For people who are attached to cosmopolitanism or jetsetting, I think the movement is itself the “there”. For me, I find the movement unsettling, partly because I’m attached to the idea of home and in particular of belonging to a nation. To me, it’s useful as an ethical unit, and also as a a way of creating a sense of home. And at the moment, this one is failing on both counts, for interrelated reasons. So my anxiety about being away is that this country is in the process of being fucked up as an object of nurturance that can offer nurture in return.
don’t you think it’s important to think in terms of *making* a space that can offer nuturance and protection, rather than using a space that you already have. This not to say that you make that space in a void (like you don’t make a home in a void) but the process of making is important as a way of nuturing the object (eg a home) so that it can offer nurturance in return. Like putting fresh flowers in a vase in your loungue room charges the room with a sense that it has been cared for which then enriches the experience of being there for you and whomever you might invite over. I’m procrastinating right now from reading Mythologies, so how about a mythological interpretation to make me feel like I’m double tasking: you could say that your lounge room is a sign. When you place the flowers in it you empty it of its literal meaning (say, my lounge room) and it signifies on a mythic level: this is a home–a cared for space that in return cares for its inhabitants. (more careful thinking about this on my part might be handy)
back to single tasking, but first: what is a “leather street couch”? Is this slang for something? Or is it a couch you picked up off the street?
On November 9th, 2006 at 1:29 pm, catri said:
I’m not a card carrying linguistics nerd but I am still lamenting that I missed out on the nineteenth century craze for taxonomy of everything. As such, I am a huge fan of the OED which supplies the following etymological detail:
Ambiguous: [f. L. ambigu-us doubtful, driving hither and thither (f. ambig-re, f. amb- both ways + ag-re to drive). This is an old word - the earliest quotation in the OED is from the good Sir Thomas More in 1528 - whereas the term ambivalence is an early 20th c import from German and a recent word in that language.
Ambivalence takes its cue from equivalence ([ad. late L. æquivalent-em, pr. pple. of æquivalre, f. æquus equal + valre to be powerful, to be worth. Cf. Fr. équivalent.]). The prefix here also carries the sense of ‘both ways’ but its usage has tended to suggest the coexistence of contradictory values in the one entity.
From this, perhaps we can conclude that the ambiguous allows crazy drivers to move in a dynamic fashion between positions whereas the ambivalent suggests a static hold on a number of possibly contradictory positions. Or alternatively, that I should finish my paper.
PS: alas, there’s no connection between the amb in ambivalent and that in ambulance. the latter comes from the Latin ambulare, to walk.
On November 9th, 2006 at 1:38 pm, Will said:
like, omg. just when I posted that I realised how long it was. I rilly should do some (sob) thesis work.
On November 9th, 2006 at 1:53 pm, catri said:
as a professional doubter, will, i am, like, so not with you on the relative sexiness of ambivalence and ambiguity. ambiguity, anyday, mate… c
On November 9th, 2006 at 5:22 pm, Seonaid said:
Ambiguity is poetic, allusive, suggestive, open, more.
Ambivalence is less ‘pregnant’. A dulled state of indecision, or disinterest, or worse. For me, ambivalence does not disclose anxiety, but anxiety may be sublimated (perhaps) in the expression of ambivalence.
I am not a linguistics nerd, but I do love language and good writing. I thought your post was very evocative.
On November 10th, 2006 at 2:31 pm, jean said:
Why all this ambivalence-bashing? I think it’s dead sexy, demonstrating an openness of belief and mental agility, rather than ‘dull’ indecision. When I feel ambivalent, it’s because I’m tossing and turning, circling around at least two possible truth…besides, I get so tired of being _right_ about everything all the time;)
Ambivalence is the ennui.
Hmm, maybe ambiguous is the new enigmatic.Also quite sexy.
On November 10th, 2006 at 2:31 pm, jean said:
‘at least two possible truths’, I mean.
On November 10th, 2006 at 6:07 pm, Will said:
wait, I only said “sounds” more sexy; I meant sonorially (is that a word?). It’s a bit more slinky.
I’m with Catri that ambiguous is more sexy as a concept, but I only introduced the whole sexiness thing as a joke anyway, of course.
I don’t think ambivalence is more sexy, but I also don’t equate unsexy with bad (well, not all the time). I agree about with Jean’s observation about the inference of tossing and turning. I don’t find tossing and turning sexy tho’. I like ambivalence, just not in bed.
On November 10th, 2006 at 9:46 pm, Jason W said:
I can’t decide whether or not ambivalence is sexy.
On November 11th, 2006 at 12:48 am, Seonaid said:
^
“Ambivalence is the ennui” is a good characterisation and strikes precisely at why I find ambivalence so ennervating (but that’s just my take). I hate not being able to make up my mind. How unreconstructed is that?
It’s a fine thing that ambivalence can be considered as productive and agile state.
On November 11th, 2006 at 12:52 am, Seonaid said:
‘… a productive and agile state’. >
On November 11th, 2006 at 8:33 am, jean said:
Doh! I meant ambivalence is the *new* ennui, of course. It doesn’t sound like such a good t-shirt slogan without the ‘new’.
Will, I agree with you. There is no place for ambivalence in the bedroom, no matter what you intend to do there.
Butdon’t underrate yourself, sexiness, sonorial (!) or otherwise, is the most serious of matters in my book!
Also there was no point in me going on with the pretence that I had any clue about the etymology of the two terms after Catri’s cogent analysis of the matter.
On November 11th, 2006 at 7:14 pm, melgregg said:
I had always thought that amibvalence and ambiguity were the two reasons I hardly ever make it to the bedroom (and why there’s a bucket, not a pool of men). You guys are giving me hope. I feel like I’m in some kind of linguistics chat room, which is unambiguously awesome.
Will, a leather street couch is a leather couch on the street. Strangely, they have featured a lot in Brisbane venues I’ve been to this week (e.g. the art gallery Jean and I were at, then a restaurant with my Dad). I wonder if they will still feature as the temperature continues to rise.
Also: Deleuze has a nice concept of ‘home’ which captures some of the ingenuity and the tactical deployment of space I was getting at… which doesn’t preclude the kinds of gestures you’re getting at with the room-making. Sigh. I should really stop waiting for other people to buy me flowers.
I can’t believe ambulance means a walking hospital.
On November 12th, 2006 at 12:22 am, glen said:
jean, ambivalence is the *new* black. that is all I wear nowadays. am i an adult? ambivalent, so i wear my shorts… and a tie. I call it ‘naughty school boy’. mainly for work. the mullet is essentially ambivalent, business up front and party out the back. mullets! look how fashionable they are at the mo?
“I can’t believe ambulance means a walking hospital”
but, mel, then all you need is a dr love. maybe. i am thinking something along the lines of macgyver, but he was like a walking hardware store. does anyone know the reverse latin-french-germanic-lalala etymology of ‘walking hardware store’? ambacgyverulance. so not just macgyver. you need some doogie houser L.D. (love doctor) to get the nerdilicious faux innocence. and perhaps some other 1980s icons. but definitely doogs. maybe the A-Team cause they had the best theme song. and a rockin van. i’m sure you could have a van with a motif of ‘my little pony’ mythology and a rainbow on the side. a panelvan with airbrushed rainbowed-up my little pony panelvan art. excellent. it would need some sort of crushed velvet interior. perhaps purple. and maybe some incense. and a crystal prism that refracts the light making it reflect off the sequins. and two tear drop windows. and a pine bookshelf.
On November 12th, 2006 at 10:06 am, melgregg said:
eeeeewwwww!
On November 12th, 2006 at 11:01 pm, Seonaid said:
Etymological excursions aside, I think I am going to have to buy (and read) your friend’s book, Dr Gregg. As someone, who in her 39th year sought radically (and in the eyes of some, devastatingly) to deviate from “the life that was expected” of her, I have become somewhat uncertain of the ‘ground’ of adulthood. I have a mortgage and personal debt on a single income, a child, a career, but still don’t feel like a grown-up. Seems like your colleague could offer some solace. I also think her book might be a good companion text to another book I’ve started (but not finished) by William Ian Miller - Faking It.
Wonder if this comment will get spam filtered like my previous apologia (which I would be grateful if you now ignored BTW
)
On November 13th, 2006 at 4:10 am, adam m said:
oh dear, I got nothing remotely academic.. I just can’t stop ROFLing at the almost non-sequitur nature of that van comment.. the mental image of Glen driving the ATeam-MyLittlePony van through the wall of the linguistic nerd library, with Macguyver and Doogie Houser leaning out the window, tongues lolling; in a scene reminiscent of the video clip to the Beastie Boys’ “Fight For Your Right” filmclip… Farken Classic!
hee!
Secondly, I did notice a bunch of couches around the front of a few venues in the valley a few weekends ago. And then they were conspicuous in their absence from the front of the Columbian. Problem with couches outside is that’s where all the smokers hang, esp at venues between bands. When you go outside for some fresh air. And then you sort of hover indecisively.. ahh, see. I knew I had something ambivalence-related to type!
On November 27th, 2006 at 10:46 pm, craig bellamy said:
Wow, these are the most in depth comments that I have come across on a blog. You must be doing something right.
and your research is looking good, although i am indifferent to your research networks. All I see is a ghetto of like minded people; bad for democracy. I am good for democracy because I remind others that there are reference points beyond what they imagine is a full academic engagement.
Keep up the good work; and make some new friends, learn to delibarate beyond like minded people. We aren’t as bad as you imagine.
Best,
Craig Bellamy
On February 16th, 2007 at 9:51 pm, seonaid said:
Read the book. Genki des.