What I find helpful with thinkers like Girard is to remind myself that their insights, no matter how comprehensively they may seem to explain things, are really only ever imperfect models for our complicated existence in this world. As such, we should feel free to set them aside when they don't seem to match the terrain of reality, or to help us make sense of things. Their models may be insightful for others, but not for ourselves, at least in a particular moment. Or, to put it another way, they're maps, and we should never mistake the map for the territory - no map is ever exact unless it is 1:1, and then it become unwieldy reality itself. And sometimes one type of map is more descriptive of things than another, depending on what it is we're encountering, or trying to understand. As you say, it's easy to become a bit of a fundamentalist, which is essentially the act of trying to make the terrain fit the map. I've found Girard a struggle myself - at times he seems to be exactly describing reality, at times he's so abstruse that I'm lost. Personally, sometimes I find Douglas Adams a better guide - just laugh at the absurdity without necessarily trying to find hidden meanings.
Skip- I doubt I would be as sane as I am--though that might not be saying much-- if it weren't for humor, particularly of the absurdist kind. I have kept what humor I have expressed here to a dryer variety, though we shall see what the future holds.
I often wonder if humans are just inescapably fundamentalists by nature. Even absurdism can be a dogma and a trap. Purported anti-fundamentalists can be as rigid and dogmatic as anybody. Being endless open-minded can become its own special brand of lunacy as it endlessly defers a response. It is surely a conundrum to me.
I do think there is a great value in apprenticing oneself to great thinkers. I tend to do this by really diving in and trying to drink deeply and try to see the world through their insights. But I have done this enough in my life that failure is inevitable, and therefore should not shunned. But it can be an instructive failure. I don't think I will address Girard's worldview directly here--there are enough resources out there to do that better than I can--but I do think he will show up around the edges and in my implicit assumptions as I look deeper into what he has to say. We will see how it goes.
Thank you for your comment. I hope you are well. -Jack
I'm reminded of a bit of advice I heard years ago (though can no longer remember from whom). "Don't be so open minded that everything just falls out". But yes, you're right, there's much value in (as you put it well) "apprenticing oneself to great thinkers." I think most of 'em were at least mostly trying to honestly grapple with reality.
Hi Jack, I just finally finished listening to David Cayley's series on Girard that you linked in this post. I'm slow. I think he's brilliant, and what's even more rare, humble and honest. Like you, I am fighting the urge to bubble up with amazing connections to everything going on all around me. My hubby was drawn in to a "drama" at the town level where one of the selectmen (the most sincere and wise one of the 5) was scapegoated (forced to resign). The whole situation was so precisely suited to illustrate the psychological forces Girard wrote about. I really appreciate the 'ambivalence' he expresses about things like progress, capitalism, violence etc. I've only just begun the other link with the two younger guys discussing him. It seems clear to me that these insights are deeply Christian. If used as an interesting or helpful philosophy, as they seem to be doing, it is understandable that they conclude that Girard leaves one hopeless. I yelled at the screen when they said that, though. He doesn't leave us hopeless, he shows that we must hope in God and the salvation we are offered. In a real sense, he clarifies that hopes of reforming the world are vain, but hoping to follow in Jesus' steps is a very real hope. Thanks for sharing your journey here so I can tag along at my own pace. --Clara
Clara- The discussion/lecture series with Jonathan Bi is very good also. I think it makes the connections even clearer. I think Girard is unambiguous that our only hope, the only actual hope, is to follow Christ, come what may. When asked what to do about living in the end times Girard responded, "pray" and at another point "cultivate personal sanctity". That and "withdraw" all of which will be no surprise, for what it's worth, that I heartily concur.
I think that our repentance/metanoia in the broadest sense most go down to our very bones. Down to the marrow and into our cells. Anything less will leave us at the mercy of Mammon. Easier said and done, to be sure. Perfect love casts out all fear. In that I find hope. Because if I am still fearful what does that tell about my own heart? Less so am I interested in finding a way to elude the net being laid for us. Which may not be possible.
One way to test out Girard's insights is to test them out. Am I able to see where I situation is headed due to the dynamics of it, is that insight correct? Do I see myself and my life differently? In that sense Girard has proven so far to be deeply and disturbingly clear sighted. I think it is worth being captured by his viewpoint for a while for that reason alone.
And thankful for riding along and sharing your insights as we all try to fathom how to respond to the rapid, disorienting changes going on around us. -Jack
Ok I'll keep on with Jonathan. I know in my bones that what you are saying and what Girard has said are true. There is nothing worthwhile to do if we don't "repent right down to our very bones".
Hi Jack, very much enjoying your posts. I respect the route you are on and look forward to further updates from your journey. I don't know Girard at all but feel glad you have found some enlightenment from him and i will pray it leads you further.
Good to hear from you. Thank you for your kind words. Needless to say we live in strange times and are in dire need of wise guidance through all the weirdness. I think Girard is deeply strange in what he offers, but also compelling because of that and much well beyond that. There is, I suspect, a deep sanity to his strangeness. We shall see what this engagement may have to offer.
Jack, Girard has been a thinker who has deeply shaped me over the years. If im honest, I find reading theologians reading of his work more accessible in understanding his thinking, one theologian I have found deeply helpful is the Roman Catholic James Alison, his first book knowing Jesus is worth a look at.
Thank you Jack, for your posts, personally I have found them deeply illuminating, with much food for thought.
Garreth- Seeing what the world has become and is seemingly moving towards I think that it will become increasingly difficult to avoid Girard's insights. At the same time the more unavoidable it becomes the more the pressure to avoid them will grow. The more we need them, the more we will reject them. A Girardian insight itself, I think.
In foraging around the internet I did come across James Alison, though I have not read him yet. Thank you for the book recommendation. And thank you for your comment and kind words. We shall see what my Girardian epiphany might yield. If nothing else there is a need to expand on his worldview and make it poetic, or even musical more or less. Right now it hides itself by being difficult to grasp. I think that will change.
I am well Jack, hope everything is well with yourself.
I haven't read the book you recommend, but I will check it out.
I would think Girard would be the first to claim that it is not his idea, simply because the novelists who writes about from Shakespeare to Dostoyesky understood it well before Girard did, it just that Girard has focused in on the idea more than any other thinker, hence why he is commonly viewed as hedgehog thinker were he has mainly wrote about one over reaching idea mimetic desire.
Personally I don't think that Girard mimetic theory can be turned into a form of fundamentalism, because for Girard theory is something to be appropriated and lived in how we interact with others, rather than an idea to master, it would understand mimetic theory as a theory of conversion/transformation in our relational lives with others, rather than some system of thought, especially when it is appropriated through a Christian lens and that is why I think James Alison book Knowing Jesus is such a good read because it main point is the only why we can know Jesus is by following the crucified and risen Lord, rather than simply believing in Jesus.
This is a helpful comment. Thank you. That there is so much art and literature hiding in plain sight what Girard has made explicit only strengthens his ideas. Obviously, Mimetic theory is an academic theory, but it is also, as you say, a call to a way of life, to conversion. This is encouraging.
Relatively speaking, mimetic theory is new. There is likely a lot of work to been to flesh it out, as it were. Bishop Barron has called Girard a "father of the church". That is an interesting thought to meditate on.
Yeah I did see that Bishop Barron does seem to have a very high regard for Girard.
It can also be said that Girard understanding of mimetic desire has a deep similarly with St Augustine understanding of desire, the only real difference is that Girard understand desire through what he called a interdividual psychology, because are desire are not autonomous but are desire through an other we are then not individuals but interdividual and the triangulation of desire, but apart from that their understanding of desire was on the same page.
There is also an Italian philosopher called Guiseppe Fornari who is interesting. He wrote a book called A God torn to pieces, the book uses mimetic theory to illustrate what cause Nietzche's insanity, it is well worth a look, if you have any interest in Nietzche.
Garreth- In nosing around I did come across Fornari. I also so he has a two-volume magnum opus "Dionysus, Christ, and the Death of God" which looks interesting, but I will not attempt something so ambitious at this point. I do have an interest in Nietzsche, so that one may be on the short(er) list. -Jack
Garreth- It is obvious that Girard was a scholar and has inspired a growing body of work that is also scholarly. Not being a scholar myself I am far more interested in the practical aspects of his work--which also may be starting to grow. In what sense has Girard influenced/change your life in practical terms? I would be interested to know, if you are so inclined. -Jack
To be honest Jack i wouldn't claim to be a scholar myself, in any shape or form. I suppose one of deep problems with Girard body of work is that he focuses so much on the negative consequences of mimetic desire like human violence, victimising etc. That he doesn't himself give across in his writing a more positive way that we can inhabit and embody our desires for good.
I suppose the major thing that Girard thinking practically calls us to is humility and forgiveness, because if we are not individuals but what Girard calls interdividuals, then we are always other dependent, we are never an island as it were, which for me means it opens us up more to others and instead of building an over against Girard thinking calls us to create a we, but a we that is one that is open to others, a we that is more about listening rather than conflict, a we that is based on respect, trust, openness simply because we are nothing without others, and it is this which opens us up to our common humanity, but if we are honest this is easier said than done, because for me personally I struggle with the practical aspect of being a Christian, I just feel that most of the time there is such a disconnect between saying yes I believe in Jesus, and following, I feel like I am always crawling, but at the end of the day it is easy to believe, but to follow is more difficult thing, and for me Jesus asks us follow, not just simply believe.
Garreth- I think you are on to something. The path laid out for us by Jesus often seems impossible. There is a strong tendency to want to reduce it to something more manageable, a statement of belief that require little or not further effort on our part, or even turn it into its opposite. Have you read Dostoevsky's The Grand Inquisitor from the Brothers Karamazov? It is short and well worth reading if you haven't already.
The more I have been thinking about Girard the more necessary he becomes for what the world is fast becoming. But his ideas need to be translated out of the language of scholarship and into something both more deeply poetic and immediate. Something Girard himself admitted:
"Very, very few people understand. More people now do understand, but not too many. **However, it must be said that there are better ways to formulate it than the way I have done so far; it could still be done better. I mean more clearly, more explicitly, more forcefully, more dramatically** while at the same time showing that the scapegoat, the lie of scapegoating, this unconsciousness of scapegoating (to have a scapegoat is not to be aware that one has a scapegoat), therefore means that a text that openly mentions a scapegoat cannot be a scapegoat text. I have confidence that this will be done and is already being done by interpreters of the Bible who use mimetic theory."
I have read some of brothers karamozov, I have never completed it, but it has to be argued that Ivans mutiny against God, is the only argument that should make any Christian sleep uneasy when thinking deeply about there understanding about God and creation relation. I am actually currently reading another dostoevsky book notes from underground. I think I have read more books written about Dostoevsky rather than Dostoevsky, a very book is Rowan Williams book Dostoevsky language, faith and fiction, but I will have to read the whole book sometime.
I was looking at the book you quote quite regularly Christ and the eternal toa, and it said something about Western Christianity that made me think, simply because I would very much fall into one of the factions, the author said one of the factions is intellectualism and the other emotionalism i would very much fall into the first category, but it is something that hasn't brought me any peace of mind, and I think that is what Girard is maybe getting at that his thought is more seen as a form of intellectualism, but because his thinking is to do with desire, it should impact us in our gut, or heart, at the core of our body rather than just our heads, so we are transformed. When I read James Alison Knowing Jesus I feel that he is trying to guide us to follow the path between intellectualism and emotions, simply because these two position can be used as scapegoat mechanisms, but as we all know it is easier said than done. I think with an intellectualism it just gets you into a way a thinking you are right, it opens you up to conflict, but I think if Girard thinking is correct that we are formed by our other, then it shows us that even our thinking is not our own, is it something that it is received, something given, as a gift, in the same way that God gives creation as a gift, which reveals our giftedness and that all we have is given, and this should open us to an attitude of gratitude and thankfulness and this attitude should open us when related to God, his creation, and to our each other, rather than seeing these thinks as an obstacle to possess and appropriate, simply because we don't possess anything because everything we have is given as a gift., something we receive, and maybe it is this attitude of our dependence on others that will help us relate to others in a non conflictual way, and to receive each other as a gift rather than an object to possess.
I suppose the archetypal Girardian prayer would have to be Jesus prayer on the cross, Father forgive them, for they know not what they do, and I suppose if we are to practically follow Jesus that this would be were we begin, however difficult it would be.
Jack, you and I have had opposite weeks, yours silent and devoid of others, mine noisy and crowded.
Regarding epiphanies: I enjoy intellectual epiphanies, in the same way I enjoy a good espresso. There is a dopamine hit, a pleasant heightened alertness, but no great change. I might go so far as to say there is nothing I have ever read that has changed my life; only things that I have read that have articulated changes that were already emerging or close to awareness. Good change is a marriage of word and Spirit.
Peter- I have long trusted in what we call the unconscious. It seems to do most of the real work. Up front, there is a lot of conscious effort to engage in learning a topic, but the deeper work goes on outside of our awareness and control. Which is good, I think. So much so, that my approach has been to intellectually carpet bomb myself on a topic and then forget about it. At some point, it bubbles up in a whole new way. The interesting thing about this last epiphany is that it took so long and I had largely given up on it. I do think there are deep parallels between Girard and A Canticle for Leibowitz, so I don't really know which is illuminating which. But I have read A Canticle for about the same amount of time as trying to understand Girard, the former resonated from the first. But more to your point, we may seek in books what we are already groping for in our own depths, but haven't yet the words to express.
Mads- I have also asked this question of Garreth elsewhere in this comment section. It is clear that the Girard--and those who more or less follow him--tend to be scholars. While I find that interesting, I am not a scholar myself. I am far more concerned in the practical applications of his work. How does this change our lives? How does it inform the contemplative path?
If you are so inclined, I would love to hear how Girard has changed your life in practical terms. How do you see it as a path, as a way of life? -Jack
Thank you for your reply. I can only agree. Through Girard one has the opportunity to see what is hidden from us, and hiding in plain sight. It has been a slow process for me, at least in one sense. For example, I ordered Gil Bailie's book again a few days ago, for the *third time*. I kid you not. I think I might actually understand it this time (just in case, please say a prayer for me).
I can go on and on about my love for the novel A Canticle for Leibowitz, but it is in many ways a Girardian book before Girard. Particularly about the ambivalent nature of science, the often unwitting complicity of Christianity in giving birth to science, but more importantly about the seemingly inescapable escalation of apocalyptic violence.
And, in the novel's strange ending, a solution of sorts, however improbable. A Canticle for Leibowitz is a book that I have been reading for as long as I've tried to grasp Girard, but unlike Girard it had grabbed me from the start. Also a true binge of reading Dostoevsky's novels about 10 years ago that changed me and continues to change me.
It wasn't that I didn't grasp the basic mechanics of Girard's thought so much, but the inner meaning eluded me. I don't know why I just got it now. Regardless, I am glad to hear you had a more immediate experience with Girard than I have had. I think his work will become even more indispensable as the whole catastrophe unfolds.
As for being an undiagnosed saint. Bishop Barron sees Girard as a Father of the Church. Maybe that is the beginning of the diagnosis.
I am currently working on a post on the need for, "fire, betrayal, exile and deep suffering to get to a place where [one can] begin [the] Christian journey and begin to experience the transcendent.' Which you put quite well, I might add. I am hoping I can have said post sufficiently coherent in the very near future. I would love to hear your further thoughts on the matter.
Mads- From your comment to Garreth I take it that the covid era has been a lesson in mimetic desire and the scapegoating mechanism. You did the right thing. It was like something surfaced from the depths of our culture that had been largely hidden from us. Once one sees it, it is hard to unsee. Of course, we seem to be in the process of pretending it didn't happen. So that is one of the questions I have. Given all that, and the likelihood of some kind of escalation of the same in the near future, how do we prepare? How do we respond? The culture warrior path isn't it. This is only to further escalate. Girard is key.
I am in the midst of "Reading the Bible with Rene Girard" which is a very good overview of his work in relation to, well, the bible. The following passage stood out. When asked if people understand his theory, he says:
"Very, very few people understand. More people now do understand, but not too many. **However, it must be said that there are better ways to formulate it than the way I have done so far; it could still be done better. I mean more clearly, more explicitly, more forcefully, more dramatically** while at the same time showing that the scapegoat, the lie of scapegoating, this unconsciousness of scapegoating (to have a scapegoat is not to be aware that one has a scapegoat), therefore means that a text that openly mentions a scapegoat cannot be a scapegoat text. I have confidence that this will be done and is already being done by interpreters of the Bible who use mimetic theory."
This was something I was thinking about before I read this and it immediately resonated. As a former musician I know the power of art. There needs to be poetry of mimetics and scapegoating, using poetry in the broadest sense of art and philosophy etc. If his ideas remain at the level of scholarship then they will remain locked away and understood by very few. This is a project worth engaging in.
And thank you for your story. From this distance it sounds like there are disparate strands of your life starting to come together. Even if it might not feel that way. Do you have a contemplative practice? It is worth looking into if you haven't already. Centering Prayer and Fr. Thomas Keating, for example. If there is already silence and solitude in your life then this may be a way of going deeper with that. And you have a arachnid threshold guardian already in place!
Thank you Mads fior your thoughts, iI have to agree with your opening statement because it was also Girard thinking that took my Christian faith in a totally different direction, turn my understanding of my faith upside down, and what it meant to follow Christ and the cost that it involved, even though most of the time I do find it hard to claim that I am a follower, more like a crawler most of the time, but suppose being on your knees is a good place to be.
I know of Gil Bailie, but I have never read the book, ill have to give it a go. Thanks for the recommendation, I would also recommend James Alison book Knowing Jesus, or any of his books to be honest, but knowing Jesus is a good place to start.
Another thing that had a big effect on my faith is a film called Of God's and Men, I dont know if anyone has seen it but it is worth a watch, it is actually based on true events also. Deeply challenging and much food for thought and also has a bit of Girardian overtones within it, especially the idea of religious violence and victimisation .
What I find helpful with thinkers like Girard is to remind myself that their insights, no matter how comprehensively they may seem to explain things, are really only ever imperfect models for our complicated existence in this world. As such, we should feel free to set them aside when they don't seem to match the terrain of reality, or to help us make sense of things. Their models may be insightful for others, but not for ourselves, at least in a particular moment. Or, to put it another way, they're maps, and we should never mistake the map for the territory - no map is ever exact unless it is 1:1, and then it become unwieldy reality itself. And sometimes one type of map is more descriptive of things than another, depending on what it is we're encountering, or trying to understand. As you say, it's easy to become a bit of a fundamentalist, which is essentially the act of trying to make the terrain fit the map. I've found Girard a struggle myself - at times he seems to be exactly describing reality, at times he's so abstruse that I'm lost. Personally, sometimes I find Douglas Adams a better guide - just laugh at the absurdity without necessarily trying to find hidden meanings.
Skip- I doubt I would be as sane as I am--though that might not be saying much-- if it weren't for humor, particularly of the absurdist kind. I have kept what humor I have expressed here to a dryer variety, though we shall see what the future holds.
I often wonder if humans are just inescapably fundamentalists by nature. Even absurdism can be a dogma and a trap. Purported anti-fundamentalists can be as rigid and dogmatic as anybody. Being endless open-minded can become its own special brand of lunacy as it endlessly defers a response. It is surely a conundrum to me.
I do think there is a great value in apprenticing oneself to great thinkers. I tend to do this by really diving in and trying to drink deeply and try to see the world through their insights. But I have done this enough in my life that failure is inevitable, and therefore should not shunned. But it can be an instructive failure. I don't think I will address Girard's worldview directly here--there are enough resources out there to do that better than I can--but I do think he will show up around the edges and in my implicit assumptions as I look deeper into what he has to say. We will see how it goes.
Thank you for your comment. I hope you are well. -Jack
I'm reminded of a bit of advice I heard years ago (though can no longer remember from whom). "Don't be so open minded that everything just falls out". But yes, you're right, there's much value in (as you put it well) "apprenticing oneself to great thinkers." I think most of 'em were at least mostly trying to honestly grapple with reality.
Hi Jack, I just finally finished listening to David Cayley's series on Girard that you linked in this post. I'm slow. I think he's brilliant, and what's even more rare, humble and honest. Like you, I am fighting the urge to bubble up with amazing connections to everything going on all around me. My hubby was drawn in to a "drama" at the town level where one of the selectmen (the most sincere and wise one of the 5) was scapegoated (forced to resign). The whole situation was so precisely suited to illustrate the psychological forces Girard wrote about. I really appreciate the 'ambivalence' he expresses about things like progress, capitalism, violence etc. I've only just begun the other link with the two younger guys discussing him. It seems clear to me that these insights are deeply Christian. If used as an interesting or helpful philosophy, as they seem to be doing, it is understandable that they conclude that Girard leaves one hopeless. I yelled at the screen when they said that, though. He doesn't leave us hopeless, he shows that we must hope in God and the salvation we are offered. In a real sense, he clarifies that hopes of reforming the world are vain, but hoping to follow in Jesus' steps is a very real hope. Thanks for sharing your journey here so I can tag along at my own pace. --Clara
Clara- The discussion/lecture series with Jonathan Bi is very good also. I think it makes the connections even clearer. I think Girard is unambiguous that our only hope, the only actual hope, is to follow Christ, come what may. When asked what to do about living in the end times Girard responded, "pray" and at another point "cultivate personal sanctity". That and "withdraw" all of which will be no surprise, for what it's worth, that I heartily concur.
I think that our repentance/metanoia in the broadest sense most go down to our very bones. Down to the marrow and into our cells. Anything less will leave us at the mercy of Mammon. Easier said and done, to be sure. Perfect love casts out all fear. In that I find hope. Because if I am still fearful what does that tell about my own heart? Less so am I interested in finding a way to elude the net being laid for us. Which may not be possible.
One way to test out Girard's insights is to test them out. Am I able to see where I situation is headed due to the dynamics of it, is that insight correct? Do I see myself and my life differently? In that sense Girard has proven so far to be deeply and disturbingly clear sighted. I think it is worth being captured by his viewpoint for a while for that reason alone.
And thankful for riding along and sharing your insights as we all try to fathom how to respond to the rapid, disorienting changes going on around us. -Jack
Ok I'll keep on with Jonathan. I know in my bones that what you are saying and what Girard has said are true. There is nothing worthwhile to do if we don't "repent right down to our very bones".
Hi Jack, very much enjoying your posts. I respect the route you are on and look forward to further updates from your journey. I don't know Girard at all but feel glad you have found some enlightenment from him and i will pray it leads you further.
Rick-
Good to hear from you. Thank you for your kind words. Needless to say we live in strange times and are in dire need of wise guidance through all the weirdness. I think Girard is deeply strange in what he offers, but also compelling because of that and much well beyond that. There is, I suspect, a deep sanity to his strangeness. We shall see what this engagement may have to offer.
I hope you are well. -Jack
Gsrreth
Jack, Girard has been a thinker who has deeply shaped me over the years. If im honest, I find reading theologians reading of his work more accessible in understanding his thinking, one theologian I have found deeply helpful is the Roman Catholic James Alison, his first book knowing Jesus is worth a look at.
Thank you Jack, for your posts, personally I have found them deeply illuminating, with much food for thought.
God bless.
Garreth- Seeing what the world has become and is seemingly moving towards I think that it will become increasingly difficult to avoid Girard's insights. At the same time the more unavoidable it becomes the more the pressure to avoid them will grow. The more we need them, the more we will reject them. A Girardian insight itself, I think.
In foraging around the internet I did come across James Alison, though I have not read him yet. Thank you for the book recommendation. And thank you for your comment and kind words. We shall see what my Girardian epiphany might yield. If nothing else there is a need to expand on his worldview and make it poetic, or even musical more or less. Right now it hides itself by being difficult to grasp. I think that will change.
Have you ever read A Canticle for Leibowitz?
I hope you are well. -Jack
I am well Jack, hope everything is well with yourself.
I haven't read the book you recommend, but I will check it out.
I would think Girard would be the first to claim that it is not his idea, simply because the novelists who writes about from Shakespeare to Dostoyesky understood it well before Girard did, it just that Girard has focused in on the idea more than any other thinker, hence why he is commonly viewed as hedgehog thinker were he has mainly wrote about one over reaching idea mimetic desire.
Personally I don't think that Girard mimetic theory can be turned into a form of fundamentalism, because for Girard theory is something to be appropriated and lived in how we interact with others, rather than an idea to master, it would understand mimetic theory as a theory of conversion/transformation in our relational lives with others, rather than some system of thought, especially when it is appropriated through a Christian lens and that is why I think James Alison book Knowing Jesus is such a good read because it main point is the only why we can know Jesus is by following the crucified and risen Lord, rather than simply believing in Jesus.
Garreth-
This is a helpful comment. Thank you. That there is so much art and literature hiding in plain sight what Girard has made explicit only strengthens his ideas. Obviously, Mimetic theory is an academic theory, but it is also, as you say, a call to a way of life, to conversion. This is encouraging.
Relatively speaking, mimetic theory is new. There is likely a lot of work to been to flesh it out, as it were. Bishop Barron has called Girard a "father of the church". That is an interesting thought to meditate on.
-Jack
Yeah I did see that Bishop Barron does seem to have a very high regard for Girard.
It can also be said that Girard understanding of mimetic desire has a deep similarly with St Augustine understanding of desire, the only real difference is that Girard understand desire through what he called a interdividual psychology, because are desire are not autonomous but are desire through an other we are then not individuals but interdividual and the triangulation of desire, but apart from that their understanding of desire was on the same page.
There is also an Italian philosopher called Guiseppe Fornari who is interesting. He wrote a book called A God torn to pieces, the book uses mimetic theory to illustrate what cause Nietzche's insanity, it is well worth a look, if you have any interest in Nietzche.
Garreth- In nosing around I did come across Fornari. I also so he has a two-volume magnum opus "Dionysus, Christ, and the Death of God" which looks interesting, but I will not attempt something so ambitious at this point. I do have an interest in Nietzsche, so that one may be on the short(er) list. -Jack
Garreth- It is obvious that Girard was a scholar and has inspired a growing body of work that is also scholarly. Not being a scholar myself I am far more interested in the practical aspects of his work--which also may be starting to grow. In what sense has Girard influenced/change your life in practical terms? I would be interested to know, if you are so inclined. -Jack
To be honest Jack i wouldn't claim to be a scholar myself, in any shape or form. I suppose one of deep problems with Girard body of work is that he focuses so much on the negative consequences of mimetic desire like human violence, victimising etc. That he doesn't himself give across in his writing a more positive way that we can inhabit and embody our desires for good.
I suppose the major thing that Girard thinking practically calls us to is humility and forgiveness, because if we are not individuals but what Girard calls interdividuals, then we are always other dependent, we are never an island as it were, which for me means it opens us up more to others and instead of building an over against Girard thinking calls us to create a we, but a we that is one that is open to others, a we that is more about listening rather than conflict, a we that is based on respect, trust, openness simply because we are nothing without others, and it is this which opens us up to our common humanity, but if we are honest this is easier said than done, because for me personally I struggle with the practical aspect of being a Christian, I just feel that most of the time there is such a disconnect between saying yes I believe in Jesus, and following, I feel like I am always crawling, but at the end of the day it is easy to believe, but to follow is more difficult thing, and for me Jesus asks us follow, not just simply believe.
Garreth- I think you are on to something. The path laid out for us by Jesus often seems impossible. There is a strong tendency to want to reduce it to something more manageable, a statement of belief that require little or not further effort on our part, or even turn it into its opposite. Have you read Dostoevsky's The Grand Inquisitor from the Brothers Karamazov? It is short and well worth reading if you haven't already.
The more I have been thinking about Girard the more necessary he becomes for what the world is fast becoming. But his ideas need to be translated out of the language of scholarship and into something both more deeply poetic and immediate. Something Girard himself admitted:
"Very, very few people understand. More people now do understand, but not too many. **However, it must be said that there are better ways to formulate it than the way I have done so far; it could still be done better. I mean more clearly, more explicitly, more forcefully, more dramatically** while at the same time showing that the scapegoat, the lie of scapegoating, this unconsciousness of scapegoating (to have a scapegoat is not to be aware that one has a scapegoat), therefore means that a text that openly mentions a scapegoat cannot be a scapegoat text. I have confidence that this will be done and is already being done by interpreters of the Bible who use mimetic theory."
Thank you for your thoughts. -Jack
I have read some of brothers karamozov, I have never completed it, but it has to be argued that Ivans mutiny against God, is the only argument that should make any Christian sleep uneasy when thinking deeply about there understanding about God and creation relation. I am actually currently reading another dostoevsky book notes from underground. I think I have read more books written about Dostoevsky rather than Dostoevsky, a very book is Rowan Williams book Dostoevsky language, faith and fiction, but I will have to read the whole book sometime.
I was looking at the book you quote quite regularly Christ and the eternal toa, and it said something about Western Christianity that made me think, simply because I would very much fall into one of the factions, the author said one of the factions is intellectualism and the other emotionalism i would very much fall into the first category, but it is something that hasn't brought me any peace of mind, and I think that is what Girard is maybe getting at that his thought is more seen as a form of intellectualism, but because his thinking is to do with desire, it should impact us in our gut, or heart, at the core of our body rather than just our heads, so we are transformed. When I read James Alison Knowing Jesus I feel that he is trying to guide us to follow the path between intellectualism and emotions, simply because these two position can be used as scapegoat mechanisms, but as we all know it is easier said than done. I think with an intellectualism it just gets you into a way a thinking you are right, it opens you up to conflict, but I think if Girard thinking is correct that we are formed by our other, then it shows us that even our thinking is not our own, is it something that it is received, something given, as a gift, in the same way that God gives creation as a gift, which reveals our giftedness and that all we have is given, and this should open us to an attitude of gratitude and thankfulness and this attitude should open us when related to God, his creation, and to our each other, rather than seeing these thinks as an obstacle to possess and appropriate, simply because we don't possess anything because everything we have is given as a gift., something we receive, and maybe it is this attitude of our dependence on others that will help us relate to others in a non conflictual way, and to receive each other as a gift rather than an object to possess.
I suppose the archetypal Girardian prayer would have to be Jesus prayer on the cross, Father forgive them, for they know not what they do, and I suppose if we are to practically follow Jesus that this would be were we begin, however difficult it would be.
Jack, you and I have had opposite weeks, yours silent and devoid of others, mine noisy and crowded.
Regarding epiphanies: I enjoy intellectual epiphanies, in the same way I enjoy a good espresso. There is a dopamine hit, a pleasant heightened alertness, but no great change. I might go so far as to say there is nothing I have ever read that has changed my life; only things that I have read that have articulated changes that were already emerging or close to awareness. Good change is a marriage of word and Spirit.
Peter- I have long trusted in what we call the unconscious. It seems to do most of the real work. Up front, there is a lot of conscious effort to engage in learning a topic, but the deeper work goes on outside of our awareness and control. Which is good, I think. So much so, that my approach has been to intellectually carpet bomb myself on a topic and then forget about it. At some point, it bubbles up in a whole new way. The interesting thing about this last epiphany is that it took so long and I had largely given up on it. I do think there are deep parallels between Girard and A Canticle for Leibowitz, so I don't really know which is illuminating which. But I have read A Canticle for about the same amount of time as trying to understand Girard, the former resonated from the first. But more to your point, we may seek in books what we are already groping for in our own depths, but haven't yet the words to express.
I hope your week was noisy, crowded and fruitful.
Mads- I have also asked this question of Garreth elsewhere in this comment section. It is clear that the Girard--and those who more or less follow him--tend to be scholars. While I find that interesting, I am not a scholar myself. I am far more concerned in the practical applications of his work. How does this change our lives? How does it inform the contemplative path?
If you are so inclined, I would love to hear how Girard has changed your life in practical terms. How do you see it as a path, as a way of life? -Jack
Mads-
Thank you for your reply. I can only agree. Through Girard one has the opportunity to see what is hidden from us, and hiding in plain sight. It has been a slow process for me, at least in one sense. For example, I ordered Gil Bailie's book again a few days ago, for the *third time*. I kid you not. I think I might actually understand it this time (just in case, please say a prayer for me).
I can go on and on about my love for the novel A Canticle for Leibowitz, but it is in many ways a Girardian book before Girard. Particularly about the ambivalent nature of science, the often unwitting complicity of Christianity in giving birth to science, but more importantly about the seemingly inescapable escalation of apocalyptic violence.
And, in the novel's strange ending, a solution of sorts, however improbable. A Canticle for Leibowitz is a book that I have been reading for as long as I've tried to grasp Girard, but unlike Girard it had grabbed me from the start. Also a true binge of reading Dostoevsky's novels about 10 years ago that changed me and continues to change me.
It wasn't that I didn't grasp the basic mechanics of Girard's thought so much, but the inner meaning eluded me. I don't know why I just got it now. Regardless, I am glad to hear you had a more immediate experience with Girard than I have had. I think his work will become even more indispensable as the whole catastrophe unfolds.
As for being an undiagnosed saint. Bishop Barron sees Girard as a Father of the Church. Maybe that is the beginning of the diagnosis.
https://www.wordonfire.org/articles/barron/rene-girard-church-father/
I am currently working on a post on the need for, "fire, betrayal, exile and deep suffering to get to a place where [one can] begin [the] Christian journey and begin to experience the transcendent.' Which you put quite well, I might add. I am hoping I can have said post sufficiently coherent in the very near future. I would love to hear your further thoughts on the matter.
I hope you are well. -Jack
Mads- From your comment to Garreth I take it that the covid era has been a lesson in mimetic desire and the scapegoating mechanism. You did the right thing. It was like something surfaced from the depths of our culture that had been largely hidden from us. Once one sees it, it is hard to unsee. Of course, we seem to be in the process of pretending it didn't happen. So that is one of the questions I have. Given all that, and the likelihood of some kind of escalation of the same in the near future, how do we prepare? How do we respond? The culture warrior path isn't it. This is only to further escalate. Girard is key.
I am in the midst of "Reading the Bible with Rene Girard" which is a very good overview of his work in relation to, well, the bible. The following passage stood out. When asked if people understand his theory, he says:
"Very, very few people understand. More people now do understand, but not too many. **However, it must be said that there are better ways to formulate it than the way I have done so far; it could still be done better. I mean more clearly, more explicitly, more forcefully, more dramatically** while at the same time showing that the scapegoat, the lie of scapegoating, this unconsciousness of scapegoating (to have a scapegoat is not to be aware that one has a scapegoat), therefore means that a text that openly mentions a scapegoat cannot be a scapegoat text. I have confidence that this will be done and is already being done by interpreters of the Bible who use mimetic theory."
This was something I was thinking about before I read this and it immediately resonated. As a former musician I know the power of art. There needs to be poetry of mimetics and scapegoating, using poetry in the broadest sense of art and philosophy etc. If his ideas remain at the level of scholarship then they will remain locked away and understood by very few. This is a project worth engaging in.
And thank you for your story. From this distance it sounds like there are disparate strands of your life starting to come together. Even if it might not feel that way. Do you have a contemplative practice? It is worth looking into if you haven't already. Centering Prayer and Fr. Thomas Keating, for example. If there is already silence and solitude in your life then this may be a way of going deeper with that. And you have a arachnid threshold guardian already in place!
I hope you are well. -Jack
Thank you Mads fior your thoughts, iI have to agree with your opening statement because it was also Girard thinking that took my Christian faith in a totally different direction, turn my understanding of my faith upside down, and what it meant to follow Christ and the cost that it involved, even though most of the time I do find it hard to claim that I am a follower, more like a crawler most of the time, but suppose being on your knees is a good place to be.
I know of Gil Bailie, but I have never read the book, ill have to give it a go. Thanks for the recommendation, I would also recommend James Alison book Knowing Jesus, or any of his books to be honest, but knowing Jesus is a good place to start.
Another thing that had a big effect on my faith is a film called Of God's and Men, I dont know if anyone has seen it but it is worth a watch, it is actually based on true events also. Deeply challenging and much food for thought and also has a bit of Girardian overtones within it, especially the idea of religious violence and victimisation .
God bless
Garreth