like some zionist guy on here was arguing with me about yemen and israel, and in response to me saying i dont support the the united states’ imperialist bombing campaigns in any instance, he said something about how american isolationism is “certainly An Opinion™️ to have!”
its disturbing and grotesque that this is how people perceive others opposition to senseless imperialist violence and can only speak about it through the same unserious fandomized language of commodities that is generally reserved for condescending text posts about the queer politics of a tv show. get a fucking grip
too true
New York
Vivian Maier, 1954
it looks so Brooklyn
thanks
Rafflesia arnoldii is the world’s largest flower, with a diameter of around one meter and weighing up to ten kilograms. The flower is very rare and not easy to locate, growing only once a year, for five days. It grows in the rain forests of Asia and the Philippines. The flower is nicknamed “meat flower” and “corpse flower” due to the fact that it looks, and smells, like rotting flesh.
how do you deal with the problem of reading poetry in translation? or is it a problem to you? do you view the translated poem as a completely separate poem?
Poetry is already strange, and estranged, even from itself. When we speak of translation, there is a phrase that comes to mind: “the poem behind the poem.” Behind every existing text there is the sense of things, the poem behind the poem, waiting, for the reader, to be unveiled. All poetry is in translation. Reading the poem, even in your native tongue, requires your participation and active translation. We modify and are modified by the language of this cultural text. To read–in the way poetry demands it be read–is to translate.
Do I think this is a “problem?” No. At least surely not in the normal sense. It is one of the things I most love about poetry. Because many of my favorite poets and poems have only ever been accessible to me in translation, I have come to think of the translated poem as a gift. Yes, it is something different from the “original” (though we must consider the tenuous nature of the original itself).
So often we focus on what is “lost in translation”–culturally, subtextually; but there is also something gained–a movement, a conversation between cultures, readers, a dialogue, and an opening in which the strangeness of language is accepted and revealed as a promise rather than a fault. A poem is a cipher, and translation deciphers.
“In her essays, “reflections on the right use of school studies” and “Human Personality,” Weil describes the kind of attention that she argues is fundamental to both ethical and intellectual life. “[T]he spirit of justice and the spirit of truth,” says Weil, “is nothing else but a certain kind of attention”. It is a kind of attention that forgoes mastery, concern for success, and hasty solutions in order to “contemplate attentively and slowly” the phenomena before us. Weil distinguishes such attention from the practice of “contracting [our] brows, holding [our] breath, stiffening [our] muscle” that schoolchildren often confuse with paying attention but that is more about posturing than genuinely engaging a problem. Genuine attention, she suggests, is more of a “negative effort” in which we “loosen up,” so as to allow our senses and mental energies to be absorbed and directed by the phenomena to which we are attending. While such attention relinquishes all expectations and takes “joy in the work,” it also must counter a deep-seated “evil” within us that resists earnest attention. We mitigate this evil, Weil says, each time that we concentrate fully on something, “not seeking anything, but ready to receive [the phenomenon before us] in its naked truth”. Weil does not deny the inevitable influence on our thinking of received beliefs, but she advocates for a kind of “interplay,” as code might describe it, between received beliefs and particular phenomena. As Weil explains, we hold our acquired knowledge “on a lower level,” as we focus with an open mind on the problem at hand, paying particular attention to errors in our own thinking. such attention not only tests received beliefs but yields “the virtue of humility,” which is “the right foundation” of all knowledge. The etymology of “attention” accords with Weil’s and Williams’s reflections. The Latin root of “attention,” tenir means to hold. Ad tenir means to hold oneself to. Thus “attention” signifies connecting with, attaching to. It is the opposite of detachment. No wonder that Williams identifies paying attention with “honoring the connection that exists between all beings” and Weil calls “[t]he name of this intense, pure, disinterested, gratuitous, generous attention … love”. Like love, the attention that Weil and Williams describe involves a “meshing” of boundaries;”
— Shari Stone-Mediatore, Attending to Others: Simone Weil and Epistemic Pluralism
play it again Sam
“The defenders of authority dread the advent of a free motherhood lest it rob them of their prey. Who would fight wars? Who would create wealth? Who would make the policeman, the jailer, if woman were to refuse the incriminate breeding of children? The race, the race! shouts the king, the president, the capitalist, the priest. The race must be preserved, though woman be degraded to a mere machine.”
Emma Goldman June 27, 1869 - May 14, 1940
the Bronx or Russia
Connecticut College students playing cards in their room
Nina Leen, “Life Visits Connecticut College,” Life, Jun 4, 1945
looks like bridge
Our long and shameful history continues to this day.
Our long and shameful history continues to this day.
Our long and shameful history continues to this day.




