Thanks for standing for sanity in a world going mad. Integrity is getting scarcer and not precious by the day.
The claim I would add to the mix here is that the only real anchor of sanity is Christianity. Individual Christians go astray to a certain extent, but (a) not the whole church and (b) Christians always retain powers of repentance and renewal. Christianity is the rock.
If you stick with Jesus, you won't turn into a rhinoceros.
I just produced and played Berenger in a production of this play right before this last election at the Slipper Room in NYC. Sold out shows. Sadly, the play more relevant than before election. There are masterful aspects to this great play.
I have had so many similar thoughts over the past 8-ish years. And, I think the thing that has disturbed me more than anything else about “Trump-ism,” etc. is the way it has fundamnetally changed so many people I once admired. I looked up to these folks and thought of them as good, decent people just trying to “do what’s right;” seemingly overnight they became something completely different, almost directly opposite of what I had thought. This then makes me wonder if the good, decent person thing was an act; was this monster hiding inside them all along?!
Despite my holding-a-PhD-in-a-somewhat-related-field (Musicology) status, I am actually pretty unfamiliar with Ionesco’s work. Perhaps it’s time to fix that :)
Thank you for this! I really needed to feel less alone. To me, the reasoning behind people giving in to the mob is pretty simple. It's the primal need to survive and, alongside death, we fear this scary little thing called ostracisation.
Liberalism is hard, requires tolerance, vigilance, constant rationality, and with the world changing so rapidly maybe so many just dont have the bandwidth to maintain it. Becoming a rhino, a creature of pure id is the easy way out of
A most interesting clarification of Sartre and Camus. I had two philosophy professors lumping them indestinguishably in the same bag. They were incidentally both pro Christian. I considered them both unable to think otherwise, and believed nature is essentially Disney-eske. The leading figure articulating the true essence of Camus is the brilliant actor who starred in "The Good" and in Cormac McCarthy's "The Road." Camus would have loved Cormac McCarthy, whose works are coordinate with his exestentialism.
Thank you for the background on Ionesco! Many of us have encountered his play in some class or another but it was so helpful to understand his work in context. I don't know why this rise of authoritarianism is happening now or what weakness we can't understand about liberal democracy that is contributing to its own collapse.
Sometimes I think that liberal democracy was a bubble that is going to burst returning us to authoritarian models of governance. After all much of Europe did not transition to liberal democracies until the mid to late 19th and even into the early 20th centuries. Liberal democracies flowered for two decades and then were devoured by Hitler and Stalin. Only a cataclysmic war could give liberal democracies a second life for about 80 years with post colonial attempts failing first.
Perhaps some sort of authoritarian governance is the default position for human societies composed of peoples so vastly different in social, economic and educational experience. Perhaps bureaucratic states are themselves "liberal authoritarian" structures. After all contrary to the myth of the 2nd Amendment as the ultimate defense against tyranny--- the fact is that our Constitution outlaws armed resistance to the government. Only democracy can fix what is wrong.
The bourgeois revolt we are seeing today (and as much as we like to chat about the proletarian image of MAGA the bourgeoisie have made it politically possible) is simply a rejection of the bureaucracy that liberal democracy has created and sustained for most of the last 100 years.
People have come to see "benign neglect" of the state as malevolent disregard where elites talk amongst themselves but don't listen to those outside their circles of concern.
Power loves a vacuum and as confidence in the liberal institutions dissolves authoritarianism will invade and transform or discard what does not serve its ends.
I am now and have been wondering for many years what “philistine” means exactly and who were their main antagonists during what geographic place and time? Perhaps you can help by writing something on the subject?!
Thank you for this great analysis of Ionesco and his work. It was always a little unclear to me. Also, incredible to think the “resistance “ in France was only 2% of the population!
I did not know about this play. Truly Ionesco understood what was happening then and would understand what is happening now. It would be good if the play were resurrected on stages everywhere.
Ordinary people do not want their lives disrupted and there is a strong tendency to go along to get along. Humans are also flawed creatures and we are extremely susceptible to self interests and easy answers. Thank you for reintroducing me to Ionesco, I read a little bit of his work while studying French. At the time I did not have an appreciation of his insights, which certainly seem timeless.
Thanks for standing for sanity in a world going mad. Integrity is getting scarcer and not precious by the day.
The claim I would add to the mix here is that the only real anchor of sanity is Christianity. Individual Christians go astray to a certain extent, but (a) not the whole church and (b) Christians always retain powers of repentance and renewal. Christianity is the rock.
If you stick with Jesus, you won't turn into a rhinoceros.
I just produced and played Berenger in a production of this play right before this last election at the Slipper Room in NYC. Sold out shows. Sadly, the play more relevant than before election. There are masterful aspects to this great play.
Thanks! Lucky new years for all of us!
𝗦𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀𝗹𝘆. 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻𝘀 𝗦𝗼 𝗗𝘂𝗺𝗯?
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗚𝗢𝗣’𝘀 𝗪𝗮𝗿 𝗼𝗻 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲: 𝗙𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗧𝗿𝘂𝗺𝗽, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘆 𝗛𝗮𝘀 𝗧𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝗦𝘁𝘂𝗽𝗶𝗱𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝗮 𝗕𝗮𝗱 𝗝𝗼𝗸𝗲
https://patricemersault.substack.com/p/seriously-why-are-republicans-so
I have had so many similar thoughts over the past 8-ish years. And, I think the thing that has disturbed me more than anything else about “Trump-ism,” etc. is the way it has fundamnetally changed so many people I once admired. I looked up to these folks and thought of them as good, decent people just trying to “do what’s right;” seemingly overnight they became something completely different, almost directly opposite of what I had thought. This then makes me wonder if the good, decent person thing was an act; was this monster hiding inside them all along?!
Despite my holding-a-PhD-in-a-somewhat-related-field (Musicology) status, I am actually pretty unfamiliar with Ionesco’s work. Perhaps it’s time to fix that :)
Thank you for this! I really needed to feel less alone. To me, the reasoning behind people giving in to the mob is pretty simple. It's the primal need to survive and, alongside death, we fear this scary little thing called ostracisation.
Liberalism is hard, requires tolerance, vigilance, constant rationality, and with the world changing so rapidly maybe so many just dont have the bandwidth to maintain it. Becoming a rhino, a creature of pure id is the easy way out of
A most interesting clarification of Sartre and Camus. I had two philosophy professors lumping them indestinguishably in the same bag. They were incidentally both pro Christian. I considered them both unable to think otherwise, and believed nature is essentially Disney-eske. The leading figure articulating the true essence of Camus is the brilliant actor who starred in "The Good" and in Cormac McCarthy's "The Road." Camus would have loved Cormac McCarthy, whose works are coordinate with his exestentialism.
Thank you for the background on Ionesco! Many of us have encountered his play in some class or another but it was so helpful to understand his work in context. I don't know why this rise of authoritarianism is happening now or what weakness we can't understand about liberal democracy that is contributing to its own collapse.
Sometimes I think that liberal democracy was a bubble that is going to burst returning us to authoritarian models of governance. After all much of Europe did not transition to liberal democracies until the mid to late 19th and even into the early 20th centuries. Liberal democracies flowered for two decades and then were devoured by Hitler and Stalin. Only a cataclysmic war could give liberal democracies a second life for about 80 years with post colonial attempts failing first.
Perhaps some sort of authoritarian governance is the default position for human societies composed of peoples so vastly different in social, economic and educational experience. Perhaps bureaucratic states are themselves "liberal authoritarian" structures. After all contrary to the myth of the 2nd Amendment as the ultimate defense against tyranny--- the fact is that our Constitution outlaws armed resistance to the government. Only democracy can fix what is wrong.
The bourgeois revolt we are seeing today (and as much as we like to chat about the proletarian image of MAGA the bourgeoisie have made it politically possible) is simply a rejection of the bureaucracy that liberal democracy has created and sustained for most of the last 100 years.
People have come to see "benign neglect" of the state as malevolent disregard where elites talk amongst themselves but don't listen to those outside their circles of concern.
Power loves a vacuum and as confidence in the liberal institutions dissolves authoritarianism will invade and transform or discard what does not serve its ends.
I am not optimistic.
Thanks so much for this. I hadn't thought about this play in a long time.
I have been trying to persuade a local theater company to perform Alfred Jarry's Ubu plays. I think they are similarly relevant these days.
Here is an exchange which I don't remember exactly but this is the general idea:
Wittgenstein (to Bertrand Russell): "One cannot make an unequivocally true statement."
Russell: "There is not a rhinoceros in this room."
And yet, from Ionesco's perspective, perhaps the room was filled with rhinos!
I am now and have been wondering for many years what “philistine” means exactly and who were their main antagonists during what geographic place and time? Perhaps you can help by writing something on the subject?!
Thank you for this great analysis of Ionesco and his work. It was always a little unclear to me. Also, incredible to think the “resistance “ in France was only 2% of the population!
Not 100% sure, but I think Philistines were Phoenicians.
Interesting point about the resistance. I thought a postwar survey showed that 99% of the French were in the resistance.
Shikha, I read this play when I was an undergraduate, and I didn’t get the point at all. Now I do. Thank you.
Excellent piece. I’m convinced we study such people in school way before we have enough experience in the world to appreciate what they are saying.
By the way, just found and followed you on Bluesky. Posted this there too.
I did not know about this play. Truly Ionesco understood what was happening then and would understand what is happening now. It would be good if the play were resurrected on stages everywhere.
wonderful piece, thank you!
Ordinary people do not want their lives disrupted and there is a strong tendency to go along to get along. Humans are also flawed creatures and we are extremely susceptible to self interests and easy answers. Thank you for reintroducing me to Ionesco, I read a little bit of his work while studying French. At the time I did not have an appreciation of his insights, which certainly seem timeless.
We are pack animals. The lone wolf (or human) gets eaten.