Skip to main content

Rebecca Solnit on Paris

Image result for terrorism Paris


In the front matter of the December issue of Harper's, Rebecca Solnit writes about the climate change talks in Paris.

I'm afraid I can't follow her points very well, because my mind has been distracted to the guessing game of when she wrote this essay.

It was obviously written before the Paris talks, which concluded with an agreement December 12th. The political/diplomatic leadership of the 196 nations involved committed to keeping global warming at or below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Solnit essay was not only written before that (and phrased sensibly in the future tense), it was probably written before the terrorist attack on the streets of Paris on November 13, 2015. She writes of "the possibility that the most important activity in Paris this month  will happen not in any meeting room but in the place where most revolutions happen: the streets."

Context indicates that she meant that scruffy activists in their street demonstrations would force the hands of the officials in expensive suits negotiating in their meeting rooms.

But the wording unfortunately reminds us of the event the previous month, an event that was neither a meeting nor a revolution, but a post-modern invasion.

I don't know how the implementation of the agreement is going to work out. Nor do I know whether the street demonstrations that did occur during the climate talks had any impact on the talks themselves. But what I'm pretty sure of is that two or five years from now, what people around the world will remember about Paris in late 2015 won't be either the talks or the 'revolution.' It will be the invasion.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.



We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majestic wate…

Hume's Cutlery

David Hume is renowned for two pieces of cutlery, the guillotine and the fork.

Hume's guillotine is the sharp cut he makes between "is" statements and "ought" statements, to make the point that the former never ground the latter.

His "fork" is the division between what later came to be called "analytic" and "synthetic" statements, with the ominous observation that any books containing statements that cannot be assigned to one or the other prong should be burnt.

Actually, I should acknowledge that there is some dispute as to how well or poorly the dichotomy Hume outlines really maps onto the analytic/synthetic dichotomy. Some writers maintain that Hume meant something quite different and has been hijacked. Personally, I've never seen the alleged difference however hard they've worked to point it out to me.

The guillotine makes for a more dramatic graphic than a mere fork, hence the bit of clip art above.

I'm curious whe…