Print

Print


Anne Prescott beat me to posting something about the need to appreciate
the tragic aspect of existence in life, history and literature. It is
something I have been thinking about for many months, with others, in
light of some scattered remarks in Eric Voegelin's writings. Preferring
Machiavelli to the 16thC anti-colonialist Francisco de Vitoria, Voegelin
wrote, "The idea that in a conflict both sides can be equally right or
wrong, or rather that the strife of existence is fundamentally beyond
right or wrong, is for [Vitoria] unbearable. His victor cannot bow before
the vanquished, respecting the mystery of rise and fall in which the
roles might be reversed; he must defile the enemy and execute him as a
criminal." One might ask if Spenser had this same attitude toward the
Irish, and if today's hawks in the US have it. Or if the incredibly
angry, anti-war, anti-Bush factions have it. Not that it's an easy
thing--it sounds crazy to "bow" before an enemy one is convinced is
monstrous.

While I am inclined to appreciate the tragic dimensions of the present
conflict in Iraq, I feel this sentiment is rather meaningless when so
many people, including our leadership, have no sense of the tragic. So
there is the double tragedy--that two sides can be equally right and
wrong and that so few are capable of grasping that.

Voegelin also observed that the lack of "a tragedy of high rank" has not
been produced in American literature because we lack the European sense
of the tragic which comes from a long history of fighting and compromise.
-Dan Knauss