Theology and moral codes tell us to be good, in conflict with our natural desires and appetites, which tell us the opposite: be bad! Take what you want! Look out for #1! Socializing ourselves to develop a sense of empathy–that is, an emotionally-based understanding for how our actions affect others–is crucial for the development of ethical frameworks, the rule of law, and free societies. However, there are two sides to moral injunctions, the social and the personal. For example, when we teach the Golden Rule (“Do unto others…”), a version of which is found in virtually all religions, the focus is usually on the social, playing on the empathetic feeling and the impact of one’s actions on another. The personal, self-centered side of morality is often ignored.
Empathy requires an imaginative leap: How would I feel if someone did that to me? But since we are naturally wired to be selfish, it is a shorter leap to imagine: How would I feel if I did that? Of course, those feelings are inextricable from empathy, a quality that (thankfully) all but sociopaths have to some degree, but I don’t mean the feelings of being sorry because of the pain I cause somebody else, I mean the effects on myself of what I do, without taking into account how others feel.
Nor am I talking about a cycle of violence, in which my actions invite retaliation from others I have harmed. In fact, I am not talking about violence at all, although certainly it could be argued (as Steven Spielberg recently has) that violence psychologically harms its perpetrators. Instead, I mean basic selfishness and its spiritual costs, which is the topic of XTC’s magnificent song, “The Man Who Sailed Around His Soul.”
Set against a John Barry-esque background suggested by producer Todd Rundgren, “The Man Who Sailed” would be a perfect title song for a James Bond film in which Bond gets honest with himself and finds that, despite all his babes and cool toys, his spiritual life is barren and sad. Such is the predicament of the Sailor, who sets out on life’s voyage “with ego as his drunken captain” and greed as a mutineer who has “trapped all reason in the hold.” The self, driven by greed, has “no compass, guide, or chart” to guard against carnal temptations represented by “sirens that sing.”
The implied injunction against carnality should by no means be read as some kind of fundamentalist or Puritan tenet. Because songwriter Andy Partridge is probably an atheist, as witnessed by the more famous (and also great) song “Dear God” from the same album, there is no evidence to suggest that these orienting tools necessarily represent a religious moral framework. However, what’s important is not whether the framework is religious or secular, but that such a framework accounts for the self as part of a community rather than just a unitary, “ugly and cold” consumer of experiences. Considering Partridge’s rejection of an explicitly religious morality in “Dear God,” it is ironic that the fourth verse of “The Man Who Sailed” hints at predestination:
Â
Was doomed to journey from the start
Of every love affair he’d broken
All the lies he’d ever spoken tattooed on his arm.
Implicit in “The Man Who Sailed’s” crisp depiction of a rudderless and lonely soul is the Big Question, “What is a life for?” As the song suggests, the hedonistic life is easy, but its reward is nothing but a “bag to keep life’s souvenirs in.” It’s a terrific and terrifying line, suggesting cheap plastic novelties, T-shirts with place names, and other items we buy to prove to ourselves that we have been there. And so a shallow life, led like a permanent vacation, yields similar gaudy, momentarily diverting, but ultimately disappointing returns. Partridge does not describe what his vision of a good life would be, thereby happily avoiding any hint of preachy-preach talking to kissy-kiss. As admirable as the sentiments may be, there are no “c’mon, people now, everybody get together, we are the world” mealy-mouthed and easily mocked platitudes. But he really doesn’t need to explain; in this negative, we can see all the outlines of the things that aren’t there.[tags] XTC, Andy Partridge[/tags]Â
“I’ve been to paradise, but I’ve never been to me.”
Now there’s an unlikely pairing. I doubt those two songs have ever been on the same mix tape.
I forgot about the spoken bridge…classic. I think only Elvis, or James Brown, can really pull that off without smelling of cheese.
Naw, I take that back. Even Elvis smells like cheese when he does that.
Great post.
I’m not talking about implementation, but this is for me why Rousseau is my favorite moral philosopher. A reaction-based understanding of humanity explains the world a lot more clearly than Locke’s “natural rights”, which are, in the end, just another ideology.
Reaction based?
Hmmm…. Rousseau is your favorite?
Well now we know something important. I’ll have to reflect on that.
No, really, that’s okay. I’ll backtrack.
Don’t get me wrong, his (from what I remember) imagined governance structures were somewhere between unwieldy and fantastic, and the general will becomes an airy-fairy concept as soon as you try to use it, and is easily hijacked by totalitarians…
But as a youngun, Locke-era social contract theorists irriated the heck out of me. The social contract itself is a good metaphor, but their explanations of the origin of society and positive behavior seemed laughably unrealistic and superimposed, to the point of Platonism and arrogance.
Rousseau’s concepts in this era – arbitrary, intuitive empathy reflected in a million localized environments and sloppily codified – definitely touched a chord.
And that’s what I do to my “favorites”.
Too late, I already have a big batch of straw men to throw at you based on that. Like a certain couple of someones, I know what you believe and I am going to hold you to it no matter how much you protest;^}
Pingback: A Second Hand Conjecture » Whither Lebanon
To me, what’s ultimately ironic about Partridge and Skylarking is the how the final song, Sacrificial Bonfire, Brings it all back around to square one. It seems like Partridge saying “okay, this religion didn’t work out, let’s start over.”
It’s hard to say if the irony is intentional or not.
yours/
peter.
I gather that Todd Rundgren pretty much determined song selection and track order, so I’m uncertain how much credit or blame to assign Partridge on the concepty-ness of the whole album.
If Todd Rundgren offered to produce my album, I would accept while realizing that it would be a deeply unpleasant experience.