Howls of derisive laughter, Eric
Mar. 8th, 2007 11:29 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
More from George Orwell, who can feel one of his moods coming on:
"In addition to this there is the horrible - the really disquieting - prevalence of cranks wherever Socialists are gathered together. One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words 'Socialism' and 'Communism' draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, 'Nature Cure' quack, pacifist and feminist in England."
[on vegetarianism] "... the food-crank is by definition a person willing to cut himself off from human society in hopes of adding five years onto the life of his carcase; that is, a person out of touch with common humanity."
These are from The Road to Wigan Pier. My gods, what would he have made of me!
Orwell doesn't explain what he finds objectionable about feminism (or sandals, for that matter), although I have seen him go into detail elsewhere about his issues with pacifism. I'd be quite interested to know if it was simply prejudice, or had some basis in the real world. I'm also curious about what the vegetarian movement was like at the time. I personally gave up meat for ethical reasons, and it was many years before I found out this was also good for my health.
"In addition to this there is the horrible - the really disquieting - prevalence of cranks wherever Socialists are gathered together. One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words 'Socialism' and 'Communism' draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, 'Nature Cure' quack, pacifist and feminist in England."
[on vegetarianism] "... the food-crank is by definition a person willing to cut himself off from human society in hopes of adding five years onto the life of his carcase; that is, a person out of touch with common humanity."
These are from The Road to Wigan Pier. My gods, what would he have made of me!
Orwell doesn't explain what he finds objectionable about feminism (or sandals, for that matter), although I have seen him go into detail elsewhere about his issues with pacifism. I'd be quite interested to know if it was simply prejudice, or had some basis in the real world. I'm also curious about what the vegetarian movement was like at the time. I personally gave up meat for ethical reasons, and it was many years before I found out this was also good for my health.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 01:00 am (UTC)Now, the thing is, I'm sure I've got an umbrella like this, I'm sure a lot of people have. For example, I'm pleased to get the majority of my vegetables from the local organic box scheme, but would shake my head and tut at those denouncing leather shoes.
Different situations call for different furling of people's personal umbrellas, of course, but if someone's ever gone "Um, yeah, right on, but get a grip!" then chances are, they have a museli-knitter umbrella too. It's unlikely to be as huge as George Orwell's, and might cover a very different group of people, but the principle's the same.
Anyway, that's the theory I'm currently going with.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 01:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 01:03 am (UTC)Hitler was known for being a vegetarian in the 1930s and 1940s, which probably didn't do wonders for its PR. The other famous vegetarian of the time was Kellogg, who was marketing his cereals to do things like lessen masturbation and so on, so there was an element of the snake oil cure to it. Many advocates of vegetarianism were members of Christian sects or Eastern-influenced fringe groups (like Mazdaznan, and, in the Christian vein, Kellogg again). So at the time, it probably had a reputation of being a common symptom of some sort of slightly wacky zealotry and snake oil salesmen/cult leaders, rather than a strictly food-related choice.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 01:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 01:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 01:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 01:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 02:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 02:45 am (UTC)It's not vegeterianism that is objectionable, it's the attitude of certain vegetarians. It's not feminism that's objectionable, it's the attitude of certain....well, you get the idea. Substitute Christianity, paganism, fandom, etc. as you wish.
It's not the idea, usually, but those who espouse it in really annoying and/or problematic ways.
I've always known you as a *rational* proponent of the things you believe in -- you made your choices both from the heart and from the head, and you're willing to accept that being a vegetarian means fewer choices when going out to eat. As with most pagans I know, you are willing to discuss your faith but unwilling to force it down others' throats.
You share without evangelizing, and you wish to discuss without blaming.
Sadly, I have met obnoxious proponents of other "fringe" beliefs. Attend a protest in DC sometime to see what I mean -- many of the folks who show up for those give the protests a bad name, and ordinary folks a reason to poo-poo and marginalize the rational folks in the movement.
Imagine if the only contact people had with Doctor Who was via the RADW crew right around the time you left.
Perhaps that's what's happening here?
no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 03:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 03:54 am (UTC)...This would be a good response, except that Mr. Orwell's comment refers to "every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, etc etc pacifist and feminist in England." You're discriminating between good and bad ones in those groups; he explicitly isn't!
no subject
Date: 2007-03-08 05:33 pm (UTC)Hey!