- This topic has 8 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Cal briefly thinks about politically correct language and sensitivity training when he remembers how Ben was always using the “right term” but not doing anything useful (pg. 265). He notes that Ben is “always listening for other people to tell him what’s moral and immoral now. It seems to Cal that this isn’t how a man, or a woman either, goes about having a sense of right and wrong.” He makes the distinction between words and doing and that nowadays “Everyone was always talking about talking, and the most moral person was the one who yelled at the most other people for doing the talking all wrong.” What are your thoughts on this quote?
-
To me, this quote seems to make morality fluid and not a compass by which to live one’s life. That seems to be one of the problems today. If someone in authority is doing it, then it must be OK. If you have no code, “you just drift any way things blow you.” You have to be able to not only talk the talk, but walk the walk. To do right by others involves a certain amount of unselfishness, empathy and thought about the common good.
-
My first reaction to this quote was to wonder if Tana French had some ability to see the future; it so succinctly captured some of the current criticism in the US of sensitivity training and inclusive language. In my view, much of that criticism is driven by an intent to depersonalize and denigrate others and a refusal to demonstrate basic respect. (Given that “The Searcher” was written in 2020, I suspect the author was simply capturing a dynamic that existed but was not as “in your face” as it has become in the US body politic).
I think, though, that Cal’s criticism of Ben captures an important point and the one Nancy identifies. At the end of the day, it is what one does and how one treats people that is important. Language is important and it can be used as a weapon and often is. But, norms of language change and it is more important how people behave than if they have kept up with changes views on language. I regard Cal as a fundamentally decent and respectful person, one whose respect for others is part of his “code” and informs how he relates to others.
Perhaps his criticism of Ben is partly influenced by the fact that Ben is his daughter’s partner and Cal may be looking for things to criticize? But, I think he has something of a valid point about the importance of one’s actions.
-
I very much agree with what you both wrote, Nancy and Jane. You both very succinctly sum up what Cal is trying to convey. I think he’s trying to say that no matter where you lean in regards to your beliefs or politics, if you are just caught up in defining words, spewing words, or reacting to words, but not actually taking compassionate actions to help people, then all it is is hot air. He also seems to be frustrated about people’s lack of critical thinking for themselves. Their lack of problem-solving and taking accountability for their action or inaction frustrates him. He thinks people should work out what is right and wrong and decide for themselves, to have principles and not wait for other people to define their morals for them. I too was impressed that Tana French seemed to pick up on this cultural dynamic ahead of it becoming “mainstream” in the body politic. Language, as Jane says, is dynamic and I feel it is constantly changing in response to culture, so it is important to note, but it’s also important to look behind the words and see what people are doing.
-
We all form our moral fiber from different sources. As children, it usually starts with “listening for other people to tell… what’s moral and immoral…”, but I think what Cal’s saying is that an ADULT should no longer be led around by other’s ideas but instead form their own, from what they’ve gathered and observed, and that it’s not good enough to simply say the right thing without living the life. Ben has perhaps not matured enough to understand that (who knows what sort of environment he was raised in, or what influences he’s been exposed to); Cal seems to think that his character is as yet undefined, or worries that he will never become more than superficial, a person who never acts on his conscience but still wants to be seen as “one of the good guys.” This is not to say that maybe Ben won’t grow into his ideals, but he may just still be a work in progress. Meanwhile, Cal continues to look more into “deeds, not words,” when he evaluates a person. Perhaps if Ben gets to know him better, he will see this and be inspired to emulate him.
-
I like your explanation of Cal’s thoughts on Ben. I think you are right that he’s both worried and critical of Ben’s lack of maturity. But I can understand why given that Cal’s daughter seems far more mature than Ben.
-
-
I had difficulty trying to work through all the nuances of what Cal is trying to express here but I’ll give it a try. I think Cal doesn’t have respect for Ben because he’s observed Ben parroting other people’s thoughts and ideas, and therefore sees him as weak. And Ben uses those ideas to present himself as morally superior. People in authority often use a facade of words to obscure their true intentions or actions and to increase their power and influence. We see this in Mart and what he does. How many politicians, preachers etc, have been exposed as corrupt while still presenting themselves as morally righteous? So, seeing people blindly following what they are being told without any self-reflection is disturbing. Cal’s musings feel especially relevant today, when language is being weaponized to the point where many people are too afraid to speak out, too concerned with getting or retaining power to challenge it, or accept what they’re told without question. And Nancy, you’re right that this quote seems to present the idea of morality as fluid, but it’s a dangerous kind of fluid. I’d liken it to the bogs in Ireland, where the morality of those in power (like Mart) can pull you under and trap you if you’re not careful.
-
I love that analogy of the bogs, Maureen! Paints the perfect picture. If you follow the wrong path you may get sucked in and be lost forever.
-
-
My interpretation was that this was a statement about a tendency for some to be followers. That some who are followers adapt language or echo other people’s words and present them as statements of their own beliefs and understanding of why certain words were used, when in reality, the follower doesn’t really understand nor believe. The “not doing anything useful” would confirm that the follower’s words were not confirmed by their actions. I think the statement is about how many people may offer empty words without sincere belief behind their words, and the noise that comes about from trying to find the right words, while all the while not full understanding, believing or behaving in accordance with the words they use.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.