GREED

Vincent is back on TV, and so is the full arsenal of signs and sites: his height, his shirt, his interjections. At the end of the day, you tell yourself: you've got to love this man for his consistency. The new series of 8 installments, Controversy, takes issue with some existential concepts, ranging from greed to values, language, religion, identity, and so on. This time Vincent hosts 4 different people for every show, who all represent different layers and social class in Denmark. None are politicians. This is good, as we are tired of schmucks.

The first installment tackles the problem of greed, and the invited debaters range from singer and producer to directors of think tanks, and investment companies. Greed is approached from different angles, and as always, it is clear from he outset that there is a problem with definition. What is greed? No definitions are given other than through association. And the premise for greed is different for each of the speakers. Greed is seen both as a deadly sin but also as ambition, success, and excess. Greed is always bad, one of the speakers says and brings in the example of the film Wall Street. It is also bad when the Danish Royal House accepts money from sponsors even though they have enough money. Another suggests that greed is good. “Just look at Niels Bohr,” he goes, “he was driven by greed, and the desire to know more, and that's why he invented all that he did.”

While opinions were divided, and I went from ha, ha to OMG, I have to say that I liked the best the contribution given by the singer-song writer Remee. He used his own example of what happens when one has too much money and then loses it. Remee suggested that if greed is ever good, then it is when it teaches you to be humble and consequently to be generous. Knowing how to be generous is a gift, he claimed, and I couldn't agree more. At the end of the day, I said to myself that it goes to show that the poets, however good or bad they may be, are still the ones who can be more reflective, analytical, interesting, and genuine in their public statements than the 'professionals'. Remee complied with Democritus's injunction: “one should tell the truth not speak at length” which made me think of the way greed is defined in the Upanishad as a form of appropriating and as a form which estranges us from the thought of infinity. We read these lines in chapter 5 of The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad: “Greed is ingrained in everyone's mind. It is not merely the trader, the miser, or the shopkeeper who is greedy. Greed can take a very subtle form. A desire to keep everything is a form of greed [...] Greed is another expression of our finitude.” Indeed, greed is to be kept in check by charity. One should hope, then, that more will start listening to the bards and perhaps follow their example.

Comments

Robert Gibbons said…
Tak, Camelia, you would know best how much I would love this the way it meanders through many of the alleys & walls & culs-de-sac of the labyrinth of life.

Where in & among all those alleys, walls, & dead ends, greed lurks, almost invisibly, only to have you (in your writing here) flip it over on its backside to find tattooed = Humility.

There's good reason for it, too, not reason, that's just a phrase, but experience for it, say, for poets, for what we all find at some point in the fierce pursuit of turning words into art is that how next to nothing it is.

It's essentially valueless as commodity. In fact, in offering of it to others, few want to take it on. So we come back to ourselves, & soul.

Now, we find we can be generous with our soul. Now, we find we can be charitable with our empathy with the lowliest.

Because we are among them.

Just as you said so wonderfully already, here.

Most gratefully,
Robert
Dovile Budryte said…
To me, the most interesting parts of this essay are the ones where transformation(s)/metamorphoses/ways to limit greed are discussed; perhaps it can be read as a manifesto for the continued relevance of the humanities. Indeed, without humanities ("bards") capitalism ("greed") can be deadly and dangerous... At the same time, it is interesting to change the question and ask: What are the ways to limit altruism? Limitless altruism can be deadly and dangerous as well... I keep thinking about the case of George Price-a scientist who practiced what he researched (altruism); took it to an extreme and could not live w/himself/his ideas in the end.
Robert Gibbons said…
Limitless altruism? Right. I know what you mean, & see the dead bodies strewn all over the world as America foists its beliefs on age-old systems, for the good of us all. -rg
Dovile Budryte said…
Interesting... I did not think about "limitless altruism" in this way, to be honest. I guess a more accurate term would be "the use of altruistic rhetoric" in foreign policy... and one also has to admit that this is not an exclusively American phenomenon...
Bent Sørensen said…
It is good that you two got into this conversation through Camelia's essay - both being among our dearest and closest friends, and both being individuals with unique perspectives on what it is like to live in America and be "in it" without necessarily being "of it."
Dovile is right that we need the humanities, and Robert is right that a major reason we need the humanities is because by virtue of them being useless they cannot so easily be subsumed by capitalist greed...
Camelia said…
... which of course, gives us a good incentive for believing in limitless altruism. For it does exist, and it is dangerous, but only to those who cannot understand it, or cannot grasp, finally, what 'limitless' means.
Robert Gibbons said…
Indeed, Dovile, perhaps there's a distinction between greed from an individual versus group or power motivation. Surely, American governments have taken the Good Will of the American people away from them, what Good Will there was, & I think there was, & still is, but when one fights for survival itself, altruism takes the back seat in the bus.

Altruism's a funny concept, nonetheless, & one Camelia did not bring up. It may be too abstract, too philosophically flimsy to juxtapose to the sticky fingers of hard-hearted greed, which for me is why "humble," "generous," & "charity" stand better chances against the foe.

Thanks for your response, Dovile. -rg
Robert Gibbons said…
Robert, Camelia, Bent: Many thanks! I completely agree with Robert's point re: individual v. group/power motivation. In the so-called social science (including international studies/political science), there is a tendency to generalize about groups, not individuals. Perhaps this leads to more common use of philosophically fuzzy concepts, including altruism--an excellent point as well.
Robert Gibbons said…
Do I adore Open Minds!!! -rg
Camelia said…
Altruism requires courage, courage requires an open mind, and an open mind requires distinction.
Bent Sørensen said…
Robert, you are a great opener of minds and creator of open circles...
Btw, it was Dovile - another superlative connector - who hosted Camelia and me in Lawrenceville, GA when I presented on the transatlantic collaboration of minds that became Jagged Timeline, so it's time you two 'met'!
Robert Gibbons said…
Love to do so, Bent! Who would I know without you & Camelia, for that matter? Merci, Tak, Gracias!!! -rg
Dovile Budryte said…
Unexpected meetings (imagined, real, online or offline) are probably the best that life can offer. Quoting from Bent's "Atlanta reading": "Robert is a seeker by nature, but one who lets serendipity do its subtle work and one who is unafraid to embrace and celebrate the results thereof." I would like to develop a similar relationship with serendipity in the nearest future. Thanks to FB for helping me understand what I really want from life. :)
On the other hand, I will never forget Camelia's titillating presentation as well as Robert's poem read by Bent in Danish (as well as English, of course) in lawrenceville--this was a great exercise in opening many minds, no irony here.
Robert Gibbons said…
TAK, Camelia, for your fine post!!

A grand instigation!!

-rg
Camelia said…
Ah, well, when all is said and done, credit must go where credit is due, to the source of inspiration and to all of you, like-minded fellows, who follow a thought here and a thought there.
James said…
Jean-Paul Sartre, an avid student of football, insightfully remarked in his Critique of Dialectical Reason: "In a football match, everything is complicated by the presence of the other team."

I hope you are taking today's challenges in stride.

All the best,
james
Camelia said…
James, you're being prophetic again, as I said. And yes, if you must know, today's challenges brought about thoughts on my favorite phrases: and yet (open), whatever (cynical), meanwhile (parallel), and so it goes (defeatist). A master can shift between these states and their manifestations, and yet it is very hard to enforce the whatever, when in the meanwhile you know what you know, in spite of things going as they go. But we keep exercising. Didn't they say that practice makes perfect? All good wishes to you too.
James said…
It is not at all surprising that a serious and curious thinker, like you, would choose a series of, essentially, logical connectives as her favorite phrases. For those phrases elegantly create and distill meaning from the relationships between the other phrases they connect. Of course, in college I was always chastised for not making my use of such connecting phrases more meaningful -- a failing that is probably painfully obvious to all here. But, fortunately, this is a more forgiving place.

Popular Posts