From Soliloquies in England (1922):
Santayana was part of a world that was rubbing its eyes after the end of what they called the Great War, wondering what it all meant and where civilization can go from here. The moment produced some fine (one might even say 'stellar') intellectual work. Hold that metaphor.
Santayana, in Soliloquies, gave us this aphorism.
"It would seem that when a heavenly body ceases to shine by its own light, it becomes capable of breeding eyes with which to profit by the light other bodies are shedding: whereas, so long as it was itself on fire, no part of it could see."
What does that mean? I think I know, at least vaguely. And it is a better piece of work than some other famous Santayana quotes, including the condemned-to-repeat-it thing.
On one level, Santayana means here what he says. When earth (and possibly other analogous planets) cooled a bit it became a host for life, and some of the lives made possible by this contain eyes capable of looking at hot non-life-supporting heavenly bodies in admiration.
But of course we often use metaphors from astronomy when discussing humans, even when doing something as mundane as singling out certain Hollywood actors as especially prominent -- the "stars". On that line, Santayana is offering an observation about human passion and the intellect. Their mutual opposition is not complete, but it is real, and many is the time when we may have to 'cool down' in other to think well -- in other words, to see things clearly.
I am open to suggestions about other levels of meaning here. It is a great image.
Christopher, I like your passion versus reason interpretation but not your literal interpretation, because the quotation says nothing about lives made possible by the earth's cooling down. Literally, it refers to the earth's breeding its own eyes, with which it -- not other lives -- profits. With the passion versus reason interpretation, the passionate person breeds his or her own eyes to see things clearly.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that you stretched Santayana's literal meaning to fit your passion versus reason interpretation. My literal reading of it does not fit that interpretation. Therefore, I think that Santayana would have been better off making his point about cooling down to see things clearly non-metaphorically -- just stating it as you did.
DeleteHenry, Santayana's phrase "breeding eyes," suggests to me that he does have in mind the literal meaning I stipulated. The earth does not grow (its own) eyes. It breeds eyes. As a pet store supplier might be said to breed rabbits or even (by a simple synecdoche) to breed long ears.
DeleteChristopher, I agree that the earth does not grow its own eyes, so your literal meaning seems valid to that extent. But how do you explain that by breeding eyes IT profits and, whereas before "no part of it could see," now (I infer) IT can see? Sometimes, it's better to say what you mean and not use a metaphor. (At least it's better for me, because, having an overly literal mind, I have difficulty understanding poetry.)
DeleteMuch of our view of life and living is assisted by metaphor and the wisdom(?) of parables. When we talk about *not seeing the forest for the trees*, we are advocating a big picture view of things, which goes to planning and strategies for living fully, not merely surviving, day to day which is the province of most of our primary conscious brethren. In this sense, we abhor stochasticism. I think this was at least part of what Santayana was getting at.
ReplyDeleteAre you saying that Santayana had in mind here the distinction between human (mindful) life and pre-human (more passionate?) life?
DeleteShort answer: No, that was not my intention.
ReplyDelete