Collaboration as Human Destiny

Grand Valley Review Volume 23 | Issue 1 Article 13 1-1-2001 Collaboration as Human Destiny Ivo Soljan Grand Valley State University Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/gvr Recommended Citation Soljan, Ivo (2001) "Collaboration as Human Destiny," Grand Valley Review: Vol. 23: Iss. 1, Article 13. Available at: http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/gvr/vol23/iss1/13 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@GVSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Grand Valley Review by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@GVSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. by Ivo Soljan Collaboration as Hutnan Destiny These are the thoughts of all men in all ages and lands, they are not original with me, If they are not yours as much as mine they are nothing or next to nothing ... (Walt Whitman, "Song of Myself') ed W alk lattering es ichos shops erfume. fame. mbt ands, vera table all notes, l arks Clark is an Associate Professor in iting Department. She has recently 1ed poems in Slate, Cortland Review, vfiscellany, and Gulf Coast. hen Sisyphus, in that touchingly paradoxical" existentialist" rewriting of his life story by Albert Camus, finally starts cooperating on the fulfillment of his originally dismal destiny, so that his torment-pushing the proverbial boulder uphill again and again-becomes his meaningful blessing, simply by filling up and structuring his otherwise empty human days, the concept of collaboration receives one of its most eloquent, poignant, and even laudatory, modern twentieth-century expressions. The only way the gods could spite this new, awakened, Sisyphus would be to separate him from his boulder, but this seems so senseless to any typical tormentor, that they cannot even imagine such a solution. Thus, Sisyphus collaborates with his tormentors, pushes on, and "we must assume that he is ultimately happy." In order to comprehend this curious, and yet apparently profound, happiness, one should accept that in the world of the eternal dichotomies that we have inherited, deconstruction is a basic building technique and principle. For, whatever one utters can be understood only by assuming what one does not utter; the totality, the whole, is always seen as only one half, a section trailing behind its unfinished and obscure forms their illuminating complements, the eternal Others, the other halves, the entities offering explanations, while, at the same time, ramifying into many more puzzling directions. "Construction" needs, nay, demands, "deconstruction" and, of course, vice versa ... This simple rule is also fully operative in the Concept of Collaboration; its vast complexity promises an exciting archeology, and, like all ar- 121 Iva Sol jan is a professor in the Department of English. Ivo Soljan cheology, it is simultaneously both breathtaking and terrifying. The primal curse of the Tower of Babel reverberates in this one mostly sweetly sounding word no less ominously than in any other verbal or nonverbal signum of the human discourse. To collaborate is to work together on a project, to respond to a call for unity, to transcend one's ego for the sake of the universal good, or, more cynically, to find a safe and cozy niche for that ego within a meaningful structure of society. But, to collaborate also means, often in a more narrowly political sense, to betray the positive community principles and to join and support the opposite ones, for the sake of "survival," or the simple, elementary "joy" of power, to give up the purity of individual idealistic motives for the feeling of security within the collectively defined good or objectives, and to succumb to the intoxicating temptation of becoming "free," "independent," and thus "powerful." Non seroiam! -the primordial expression of the radical cancellation of collaboration-becomes ironically the war-cry of all those who, through their lack of understanding, promote negative collaboration, "the collaboration to end all collaborations ... " For even negativism and nihilism cannot be alone and hate the profound pain of nonparticipation. One should be reminded, in this connection, of Paul Tillich' s brilliant analysis of participation, in his essential study The Courage to Be. Discussing human "courage to be as a part," Tillich reminds us that "the self is self only because it has a world, a structured universe, to which it belongs and from which it is separated at the same time." "Self and world are correlated, and so are individualization and participation," continues Tillich, bringing us to the essence of what we, in one of its forms, call collaboration: "For this is just what participation means: being a part of something from which one is, at the same time, separated." For us today, living at the end of the much vaunted 20"' century and straining our eyes, in order to discern, in the prevailing mists of all etiologies, the promised golden bridges into the next century and the millennium, Tillich' s short and pregnant historical analysis of the ideas of individualization and participation might come as a healthy warning and an enlightening lesson. Starting with the so-called Dark Ages, in which, according to Tillich, participatory powers were strong, healthy, and beneficial, stopping at the next psycho-sociological stopover, in which the Reformation and Renaissance accents on the primacy of the individual, were responsible for impressive individual achievements, but also for the very modem prevalence and tyranny of anxiety, we are brought to the neo-collectivist phenomena of this our century, which, with the names like Fascism, Nazism, and Communism, bring into this world some of the worst collaborative evils recorded in the entire human history. He does not mention Consumerism, though some of its ultimately debilitating influences, masked as pleasure- inducing and socially beneficial, might be no better than those of the above mentioned totalitarian forms of collaboration. The chilling reality of such "perfectly" organized forms of collective participation, collaboration, gazes at us from W.H. Au den's celebrated poem, "The Unknown Citizen," a searing satirical piece describing the posthumous destiny of a collectively "ideal" citizen, the one whose very name is in reality only a numbe1 thing he is expected to do collaboration. Having had to the Modem Man: a pho and a Frigidaire," and ha opinions for the time of y1 have been happy and fre~ the numerous state agenci1 being of such humans-nurr the case. The terrible an happiness of such proto-cl consumer dreams in too n today, shake the foundati< ern-day theories of hap collaboration. To those w: even scandalized, by sud tions, the only answer is tr a world of paradoxes, or, call a paradox is, in fact, you try hard to understru ist Science, of course, "h that," or better, it is perha ingly towards that unscie late Carl Sagan's immodc incredible happiness of" tl parison to the relative mi: ones, in the introduction t< twenty years ago, makes plaisant "vision" perfecl exhilaration of "the time ignorance to knowledge,' temporal event, Sagan co nearly in an emotional fah billion-year history of life the four-million-year hist ily, there is only one gene1 through that unique tra1 knowledge) moment: thai This ultimate narcissisn something like the first c an antidote or explanatio evokes Vladimir Ilych Le days of 1917, both sugges mate (redemptory?) call; human cognitive powers inded, in this connection, tt analysis of participation, ne Courage to Be. Discussto be as a part," Tillich ;elf is self only because it red universe, to which it ich it is separated at the world are correlated, and t1 and participation," conus to the essence of what s, call collaboration: "For )ation means: being a part :hone is, at the same time, ty, living at the end of the llry and straining our eyes, the prevailing mists of all d golden bridges into the 1illennium, Tillich' s short 1 analysis of the ideas of participation might come 1d an enlightening lesson. ;o-called Dark Ages, in llich, participatory pow', and beneficial, stopping logical stopover, in which ~naisce accents on the ual, were responsible for 1chievements, but also for ence and tyrarmy of anxito the neo-collectivist century, which, with the 1zism, and Communism, >me of the worst collabothe entire human history. n Consumerism, though debilitating influences, ducing and socially ben~r than those of the above forms of collaboration. tch "perfectly" organized ticipation, collaboration, mden' s celebrated poem, " a searing satirical piece wus destiny of a collecte one whose very name Iva Soljan is in reality only a number, and who does everything he is expected to do in that world of "full" collaboration. Having had "everything necessary to the Modern Man: a phonograph, a radio, a car and a Frigidaire," and having "held the proper opinions for the time of year," he is supposed to have been happy and free. At least, that is what the numerous state agencies in charge of the wellbeing of such humans-numbers claim to have been the case. The terrible anonymity and shallow happiness of such proto-clones, who dream their consumer dreams in too many parts of the world today, shake the foundations of numerous modern-day theories of happy participation and collaboration. To those who might be surprised, even scandalized, by such disturbing interpretations, the only answer is that this has always been a world of paradoxes, or, perhaps, that what we call a paradox is, in fact, the only real truth, if you try hard to understand. Traditional Positivist Science, of course, "has nothing to do with that," or better, it is perhaps still groping unwillingly towards that unscientific "discovery." The late Carl Sagan's immoderate encomium of the incredible happiness of "this generation," in comparison to the relative misery of all the previous ones, in the introduction to his Broca's Brain, some twenty years ago, makes this myopic, self-complaisant "vision" perfectly clear; stressing the exhilaration of "the time in which we pass from ignorance to knowledge," as if that is a discreet temporal event, Sagan concludes his encomium nearly in an emotional falsetto: "In all of the fourbillion-year history of life on our planet, in all of the four-million-year history of the human family, there is only one generation privileged to live through that unique transitional (ignorance to knowledge) moment: that generation is ours."(!) This ultimate narcissism, which requires at least something like the first of "The Beatitudes" for an antidote or explanation, and this tone, which evokes Vladimir Ilych Lenin in the most ardent days of 1917, both suggest triumphantly the ultimate (redemptory?) collaboration between the human cognitive powers and the Cosmic Abso- 123 Ivo Soljan 11 lute, as they seem to whisper, After such knowledge, what forgiveness ... Now that Ignorance has gone, and Knowledge is here to stay, life will probably be increasingly boring, as all the traditional drama of life is based (again!) on the dichotomy of opposite principles, and life without drama, they say, is not life at all. We shall have to rack our brains and come up with something really new, something fun! Collaboration being a post-Lapsarian phenomenon, for labor is located East-of-Eden, the scientific cancellation of the lapsus will also cancel the need for collaboration. This reasoning takes us inevitably to some metaphysical regions, in which, in the JudeaChristian tradition at least, Collaboration assumes some significant theological attributes and accents. The famous Michaelangelo's reclining Adam, in the Sistine Chapel, stretching effortlessly his index finger, in order to meet and touch the Finger of the Creator, is not a belabored human being; what he is experiencing is pure coexistence with the Divinity, not collaboration, for collaboration requires effort. Collaboration comes later on, when the unperturbed coexistence has gone. And, indeed, it is through Adam's sweaty labor, and Eve's painful and sweaty labors, that the ultimate, heroic Collaboration is being performed, its final result being the Salvation of the World. The project is in full swing, and the academic world, often symbolized by "the burning of the midnight oil," a laborious effort to enlighten the world, is deeply and passionately engaged in the numerous ramifications of that Project. Any possible aspect of the academic work is, in fact, profoundly collaborative, nearly symbiotic. Teaching, lecturing, reading, grading, examining, writing, translating, discussing, delegating, corresponding, fumbling with the computers-with the accompanying utterances, committee serving, reviewing, evaluating, and dozens of other typical procedures; all these are possible only through collaboration. Somewhat in the vein of Carl Sagan, the academic project has frequently been seen as a Savior, a miraculous way to a better, nay, perII feet and fully redeemec explains the curious fact partments have grown al rather immoderate sizes and agencies are so wil amounts of money into even Swiftian, grandiose 1 projects, which, by the VI the world .... The star) the great philosophers a least one volume of thei elaborate pedagogical Pl the world. Thus, the latE turies saw a fervent worl United European educa called Emendatio magna 1 gna universal is. Like most projects or reforms, this o hoopla and great hopes, the appearances. The pn laborative, or we woul team-conducted. The re the participants, includi from Prague, the capital pire, crept silently back ir no doubt with the inte1 selves with writing nE presumably pay for the . . 0 tempora, o mores. Writing in April of magazine, The Adventure plications of human c Johnson, the famous Dr. author, critic, editor, an• strates conclusively how • project is only partly ~ doomed because of the c psyche and mind, frighh laboration threatens the or one's self. In the essay of Forming ConfederaciE academic world, with ih evitable disappointment Iva Soljan rhisper, After such know l"Now that Ignorance dge is here to stay, life will gly boring, as all the tradiis based (again!) on the e principles, and life withis not life at all. We shall sand come up with sometething fun! Collaboration :1 phenomenon, for labor is the scientific cancellation :ancel the need for collaboII iS ..• :es us inevitably to some , in which, in the Judeo~ast, Collaboration assumes gical attributes and accents. 1gelo' s reclining Adam, in etching effortlessly his inmeet and touch the Finger 1 belabored human being; 1g is pure coexistence with boration, for collaboration boration comes later on, ~d coexistence has gone. ugh Adam's sweaty labor, sweaty labors, that the ulration is being performed, 1e Salvation of the World. swing, and the academic ed by "the burning of the ous effort to enlighten the 1ssionately engaged in the B of that Project. Any pos:ademic work is, in fact, 1tive, nearly symbiotic. tding, grading, examining, :scussing, delegating, corwith the computers-with ranees, committee serving, and dozens of other typi~ are possible only through 1t in the vein of Carl Sagan, 1s frequently been seen as way to a better, nay, per- feet and fully redeemed world. That probably explains the curious fact that the Education Departments have grown all over the world to often rather immoderate sizes and that governments and agencies are so willing to sink enormous amounts of money into various, often amusing, even Swiftian, grandiose pedagogical-educational projects, which, by the way, still have not saved the world .... The story is an old one; most of the great philosophers and thinkers have left at least one volume of their labors devoted to the elaborate pedagogical Plans for the salvation of the world. Thus, the late 16th and early 17th centuries saw a fervent work of a large group of the United European educators in the sphere they called Emendatio magna mundi, or Emendatio magna universal is. Like most present-day educational projects or reforms, this one was approached with hoopla and great hopes, or, at least, these were the appearances. The project was, of course, collaborative, or we would prefer to say today, team-conducted. The results were predictable, the participants, including Johannes Comenius from Prague, the capital of the Holy Roman Empire, crept silently back into their university holes, no doubt with the intention to comfort themselves with writing new grants, that would presumably pay for the new, remedial, projects. . . 0 tempora, o mores. Writing in April of 1753, in his celebrated magazine, The Adventurer, about these ironic implications of human collaboration, Samuel Johnson, the famous Dr. Johnson, the Augustan author, critic, editor, and public figure, demonstrates conclusively how any collaborative human project is only partly successful and is often doomed because of the opposite pulls in human psyche and mind, frightened that too close a collaboration threatens the extinction of one's ego or one's self. In the essay entitled "The Difficulty of Forming Confederacies," he also mentions the academic world, with its great hopes and its inevitable disappointments: There is no class of the human species, of which the union seems to have been more expected, than of the learned: the rest of the world have almost always agreed, to shut scholars up together in colleges and cloisters; surely not without hope, that they would look for that happiness in concord, which they were debarred from findings, in variety; and that such conjunctions of intellect would recompense the munificence of founders and patrons, by performances above the reach of any single mind. But Discord, who found means to roll her apple into the banqueting chamber of the Goddesses, has had the address to scatter her laurels in the seminaries of learning. The friendship of students and of beauties is for the most part equally sincere, and equally durable: as both depend for happiness on the regard of others, on that of which the value arises merely from comparison, they are both exposed to perpetual jealousies, and both incessantly employed in schemes to intercept the praises of each other. Although a lot of this might sound like a high-handed cynicism, there is here a profound underlying psychological and sociological truth and perhaps a saving grace, visible when, continuing this dissection with genuine, if brutal, honesty, Dr. I !25 I Ivo Soljan Johnson points out that in such academic set-ups, highly and fiercely competitive by definition, the fear of comparative inferiority becomes a positive spur and urges the participants/ collaborators towards the "incessant endeavors after great attainments": These stimulations of honest rivalry, are, perhaps, the chief effects of academies and societies; for whatever be the bulk of their joint labors, every single piece is always the production of an individual, that owes nothing to his colleagues but the contagion of diligence, a resolution to write because the rest are writing, and the scorn of obscurity while the rest are illustrious. One might perhaps emend Johnson in some of his theoretical assumptions, by pointing out that paradigms do change and that not only individuals, but also groups or teams, can, and do, also produce collaborative results. Today, this is, more often than not, the rule, especially in the fields of the pure and applied sciences, and, then, even in his own times, at least one great example of scholars' collaborative efforts was highly visible and influentially present in the world, namely, that proverbial, exemplary collaboration published some 150 years before Johnson's essay, The King James Bible. However, to redress the balance, even that great work concedes significantly that what is going to be Johnson's judgment is true, when, in its florid "Epistle Dedicatory" to the Bible the team of scholars-translators point out to "the Most High and Mighty Prince, James, etc." the danger of "the self-conceited Brethren, who run their own ways, and giving liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on their anvil." This question of one's own creative "anvil" is still totally open, for, in the last analysis, despite our present-day, often strongly politically motivated, adoration of the cult of the collective, group, team, nation, Dr. Johnson might be more in the right than we care to see. Paradigms are, after all, mighty chains and humans not infre- quently sacrifice lives (pn than these so comforting < and reflections of the wor this polemical exercise, anc any polemical (Polemos!) in fact, requires at least a · library. Collaboration is tr ible subject, but that is, c for one of the fundamenta verse. Can, indeed, the plane1 not to collaborate? Thus, ever, amassing examplE always, inevitably, in thee· of the constructive-decc flames of the portentous F Traveling, moving on, is : damentallaw, but adin~ to the already prepared a us into the situation beau presented by another Alexander Pope, in his eel cism: While from the bounded le, Short views we take, nor st But more advanc' d, behold New distant scenes of endl So pleas'd at first the tow'r Mount o'er the vales, and ~ Th' eternal snows appear a And the first clouds and m But, those attain' d, we tren The growing labors of the 1 Th' increasing prospect tin Hills peep o'er hills, and AI In order to leave the rr ful prospect of "the Alps" one might recourse into world, the realm of a poi~ able. This might smack sor but, then, even the most ! cal, theological, or ethica history have been convey vehicles. The powerful an< Iva Soljan tin such academic set-ups, rrpetitive by definition, the tferiority becomes a posiparticipants/ collaborators t endeavors after great at- f honest rivalry, are, per- of academies and r be the bulk of their joint piece is always the proual, that owes nothing to ~ contagion of diligence, )ecause the rest are writobscurity while the rest emend Johnson in some mptions, by pointing out nge and that not only inlps or teams, can, and do, tive results. Today, this is, he rule, especially in the pplied sciences, and, then, at least one great example ve efforts was highly vis' present in the world, :, exemplary collaboration ~ars before Johnson's es:bze. However, to redress great work concedes sigs going to be Johnson's in its florid "Epistle DediBible the team of nt out to "the Most High es, etc." the danger of "the who run their own ways, to nothing, but what is and hammered on their 's own creative "anvil" is . the last analysis, despite strongly politically motile cult of the collective, ·. Johnson might be more re to see. Paradigms are, ;; and humans not irtfre- quently sacrifice lives (preferably others') rather than these so comforting and so tyrannical icons and reflections of the world in our minds. Thus, this polemical exercise, and finally conclusion, like any polemical (Polemos!) experience, deserves, in fact, requires at least a book length study or a library. Collaboration is truly a huge, inexhaustible subject, but that is, of course, only normal for one of the fundamental principles of the universe. Can, indeed, the planets and the stars choose not to collaborate? Thus, one might go on forever, amassing examples and evidence, and always, inevitably, in the ever lengthening shades of the constructive-deconstructive flickering flames of the portentous principle of dichotomy. Traveling, moving on, is no doubt another fundamental law, but adding numerous new icons to the already prepared array would only bring us into the situation beautifully metaphorically presented by another Augustan thinker, Alexander Pope, in his celebrated Essay on Criti- parable with which Professor George Steiner of Geneva and Cambridge ends his Death of the Tragedy might help us to see clearly, and to feel viscerally, the ultimate interpretative openness, mysteriousness, and even joy, of the ubiquitous principle of collaboration. The anecdote describes, with wry humor, a terrible pogrom somewhere in Eastern Europe in the 181h century, one of the many such horrible events. It is a moment of a pairtful and slow agony; the village (stetl) is largely burned down by the Russian troops; the horrified Jews are bemoaning and burying their too many dead ... In the dead of the night, the rabbi goes to the smoldering remains of the synagogue in order to pray, but, even more, to argue with Yahweh about the While from the bounded level of our mind, justification of all that horrorShort views we take, nor see the lengths behind; a singular, collaborative action, But more advanc'd, behold with strange surprise, for collaboration is always give New distant scenes of endless science rise! and take. In the deep shadows So pleas'd at first the tow'ring Alps we try, of the still standing walls of the Mount o'er the vales, and seem to tread the sky, badly charred building, the rabbi Th' eternal snows appear already past, sees a trembling, crouching, And the first clouds and mountains seem the last: huddled figure of an old man he But, those attain'd, we tremble to survey does not recognize as one of his The growing labors of the lengthened way, local faithful. "And who are you, Th' increasing prospect tires our wand'ring eyes, Hills peep o'er hills, and Alps on Alps arise! my son?" asks the rabbi. The pitiful figure turns his bewildered In order to leave the magnificent and dread- and scared face fully towards the ful prospect of "the Alps" rather imperceptibly, rabbi and whispers slowly, in a one might recourse into another metaphorical hesitant, trembling voice, "I am world, the realm of a poignant anecdote or par- your God; I am Yahweh. I've able. This might smack somewhat of obfuscation, been watching all this and I but, then, even the most significant philosophi- don't understand what is going cal, theological, or ethical messages in human on here. I am very, very scared. history have been conveyed by the use of such " vehicles. The powerful and typically paradoxical 1 27 Iva Soljan Humor is, of course, also a form of collaboration, the one that functions through the mollification of the cruel and the painful, or through subversion. If Yahweh cannot understand and solve the mystery of evil, who are we to claim that we can? Yahweh's plight here is grotesquely funny, but, then, ours is, by the same token, much easier too, as we collaborate in pain, share the fear. Collaboration is, after all, a strong proof and method of faith, hope, and love, the Three Great Ones. If Sisyphus manages, by curious abracadabra and a psychological somersault, to turn his curse into a blessing, are we, even unpunished, to stick to the old grumpy, masochist ways and to deny an exciting alternative that seems to work? Probably not. The very fact of our choosing, even accepting, the total openness of experiences, judgments, ideas, is tantamount to collaboration, collaboration with the forces that be, collaboration with our human destiny. There are, perhaps, various alternatives, but this one is so simple and, in the last analysis, ultimately so logical. And, furthermore, they say, it does not lead into a senseless defeat. .. Not a bad deal. As for the logic of things, direct or paradoxical, let us conclude with a vignette from a recent e-mail message (Collaboration galore there!) from my friend StanK. Writes Stan: "I can barely finish this message be- cause our cat Jack is all over my lap and keyboard, trying to ghostwrite this or collaborate and share the credit." The image of the purring tomcat Jack collaborating unwittingly in an act of friendly communication is an amusing and instructive mythos or parable stressing the creative openness and benevolence as the main prerequisites in the Redemption, or perhaps Recreation, of the World. Only a simple cat, Jack is a creature whose collaborative effort, instinctive, spontaneous, is recorded so lovingly and memorably in a personal history ... How many, how redeemingly many, gentle touches of purring furs and of angels wings, there must be all around us in this miraculous world trembling with collaboration! This beatific vision brings us thus to yet another peak of "the Alps," the one that typically makes us gasp with marvel and shudder with dread and holy fear: Is collaboration ever fully and clearly, or even partially, understood by the participants? How often do we happen to collaborate without even sensing it? Who is, really, in charge? We or the paradigm? Camus does not indicate anywhere that the monumental paradigm shift of his Sisyphus was the result of a purposeful action. Did Sisyphus ever know what he was after? You will hardly know who I am or what I mean, But I shall be good health to you nevertheless, And filter and fibre your blood. Failing to fetch me at first keep encouraged, Missing me one place search another, I stop some where waiting for you ... (Walt Whitman, "Song of Myself') The Beach Stairs I. last wE hung h beame< As I dE the be< -fog b over th 2. Once, I ancien1 along t AnothE a fawn I am al when I 3· That h: As I w< it bust1 -pine My foo shadov I had r 4. The sc out pa~ resemb but thE floatin! 5· The W3 I can s, Years a I learw The fe> we sav1 never],