Benjamin Franklin: Unmasked!

Benjamin Franklin by David Rent Etter, after Charles Willson Peale, after David Martin (1835). National Park Service photo [Public Domain].

The Cambridge Companion to Benjamin Franklin by Carla Mulford

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I have taken Mortimer Adler's advice to heart and so I try to read an author's work before delving into "companion" volumes. But there were many questions I had about Benjamin Franklin, in particular his autodidacticism and his thirteen virtues. How did this happen? What resources did he draw on in developing this process? What did he mean by "Moderation"? This volume, edited by Carla Mulford, answered many of my questions in the first two chapters: "Benjamin Franklin's Library" and "The Art of Virtue". Funnily enough, the first thing I noticed is that Franklin had a habit that was mirrored by Adler (p. 15):

Marginalia provide a way to make a book more practical as well as more personal.

Franklin also found the need to organise his books, although his personalised system was much more pragmatic than mine (p. 18). I discovered, too, ideas about Franklin's pedagogy. For instance (p. 53):

The lecture, the sermon, and all forms of face-to-face hierarchical instruction seemed to Franklin to avoid enlisting people in the creation of mutual understanding and of new forms of knowledge. Such one-sided articulations forced people to accept established truisms, unexamined claims that served and preserved the old order.

Further (p. 54):

His memoirs document his abandonment of methods of forceful assertion and concerted argument in favour of an equivocal, Socratic method.

Franklin saw "enlightened reason" as what we would call today a "democratic" faculty (p. 78), and he believed that (p. 79):

...all received knowledge could and must be tested empirically.

Franklin's views on religion are interesting, if not pragmatic. He advocated for Congress to begin with opening prayers (p. 100) (this still happens in the Australian Parliament) and saw religion as a way of keeping "the ignorant masses from sloth and insurrection" (p. 83). In terms of virtues, Franklin looked not only at individual virtues, but those in relation to "social customs through an evaluation of their results" (p. 108). One point that clarified the dilemma I had noticed but could not articulate (p. 142):

Franklin... simultaneously preached the doctrines of self-denial and good living.

There is so much more in this small volume but best of all it is an academic work. Which means my marginalia focuses almost exclusively on the detailed notes and references provided to each of the essays. I wouldn't recommend reading this before at least reading Franklin's autobiography, but as a companion to the Great Man, this volume is excellent.

View all my reviews

Idealism's fine, but actions speak louder than words...

Eleanor Roosevelt and Fala at Val,Kill in Hyde Park, New York. Photo taken by FDR, November 1951 [Public Domain] via Wikimedia.

Tomorrow is Now by Eleanor Roosevelt

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I am involved in a research project focusing on the four pillars of women, peace and security, emanating from the United Nations' Security Council (UNSCR) Resolution 1325. So I have been doing a number of courses by UN Women and learning about the UN's "gender mainstreaming" project. The basic premise is that gender matters in how people experience their rights, and from here, I decided to read some of Eleanor Roosevelt's work because she was instrumental in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Without Roosevelt, the document that has become so important as a guiding principle for much of the UN's work may not have come to fruition.

There are many critiques of the universality of the declaration, because it starts with a liberal premise, as in the individual is key. I have Roosevelt's autobiography to read at a later stage, but this work intrigued me as it has an introduction by Bill Clinton, and Roosevelt (effectively) stayed alive to finish the book, and died soon after it was completed. (The book was published a few months after her death.) There is much that will make the "Yay, Democracy" crowd happy, and it is clear that the examined life is her idea of the right life:

Self-government requires self-examination, action by the individual, standards, values, and the strength to live up to them.

This is not too far from Mortimer Adler's idea of The Great Conversation. Roosevelt was sceptical of science, and no doubt would have disapproved of the "I f*#king love science" crowd, channelling Huxley and Orwell (p. 123):

...each provided us with an appalling picture of the future of mankind, a life dominated by scientific method in which the humanities and the human spirit had been destroyed... [rather than] use science as an enlightened tool to make this world closer to a Utopia than man has ever dreamed.

Nothing for me to disagree with here, but I attended a number of research presentations lately looking at post-colonial African politics, and the findings were disturbing. So much of the liberal tradition does not readily apply to the rest of the world. I recall Theodore Roosevelt's Autobiography (he was Eleanor's uncle) where the politics of the United States were so corrupt at the beginning of the 20th century, more than 100 years after democracy had been instituted. How are poor, post-colonial countries meant to transition to democracy (which assumes that in itself is a good thing) in a few years when it took the world superpower over a century? These are the questions that concerned me as I read Roosevelt's ideal future. But it certainly fits with my own liberal ideals, for example (p. 124):

I have emphasised in this book two areas in which we must begin preparation today: education and the essential need of sparking in a new, deep, and fervent sense of responsibility in every individual.

Yet I immediately think of Margaret Thatcher and the extreme ends of individualism - all extremes lead to the same rot. That is not to say that Roosevelt's work isn't important, or that it isn't timeless. But is is certainly worth questioning from a non-liberal perspective. The ideas of the United States are seen as a panacea for the ills of the world, and I just can't see how that idealism means much today.

In her life she achieved so many things and many of these were of benefit to those who needed it most. She saw the benefits of education and travel, and was impressed by her grandson's education in the Peace Corps - he learnt that systems of manners are as important as fast access to clean drinking water, and that honouring one's culture enables collective action, so she was certainly not an individualist in the modern sense. Rather than find value in this work as a program for the world, I found value in the program for the self, or, to quote James Allen (1921, p. 48)

...he who has conquered self has conquered the universe.

For Seneca Daily Stoic, p. 241):

Many words have been spoken by Plato, Zeno, Chrysippus, Posidonius, and by a whole host of equally excellent Stoics. I'll tell you how people can prove their words to be their own - by putting into practice what they've been preaching.

Eleanor Roosevelt personifies this idea: actions speak louder than words.

View all my reviews

Dr Sax isn't writing, it's just typing...

Jack Kerouac Alley, San Francisco. Photo by Beyond My Ken [CC BY-SA 4.0] via Wikimedia.

Doctor Sax by Jack Kerouac

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I finished this book and thought to myself, "What the hell was that about?" I still don't know. It is poetic in the sense that it has a distinct rhythm, not as hectic as the rhythm of On the Road, but a rhythm nonetheless. I read this book over a few days, and my dreams were haunted by visions of my childhood. Not that my childhood compares with Kerouac's, in many ways he seemed to have an enjoyable childhood with many friends. But his childhood recollections of creativity and games and imagination allow one to recall a time long past. As I read the book, I wanted it to finish as soon as possible. I couldn't stop reading it, but I wanted it to end. When it ended with:

Written in Mexico City,

Tenochtitlan,1952

Ancient Capital of Azteca

I was convinced Kerouac was completely off his nut when he wrote this work. So I looked to The Guardian and The New York Times to see what it was all about. In The Guardian, Lettie Ransley suggests that Kerouac was using what he:

...came to refer to as his "spontaneous prose" method: incantatory and insistent in its rhythms...

One can certainly feel the rhythm, much like an ebbing tide. But David Dempsey (1959) of the New York Times was closer to how I feel about the work:

"Dr. Sax" is not only bad Kerouac; it is a bad book. Much of it is in bad taste, and much more is meaningless. It runs the gamut from the incoherent to the incredible, a mishmash of avant-gardism (unreadable), autobiography (seemingly Kerouac's) and fantasy (largely psychopathic).

While I am reluctant to say it was bad, I am none the wiser as to why one might read it, other than for historical study purposes. Dempsey tells me that Truman Capote said of Dr Sax:

...this isn't writing, it's just typing.

Capote might be close to the truth, but I find it difficult to accept that the little I have read of Finnegan's Wake is somehow art while Doctor Sax is something else. So while I must appreciate it for its historical merit, and I while I have not lost anything from reading it (it has forced me to think and to recollect forgotten moments from childhood), I find it hard to say this is a good book, and I would hesitate to recommend it to anyone other than the student of literature. I enjoyed Maggie Cassidy and On the Road, but I have struggled to commit to Kerouac's Wake Up. All I can say is that after this book, I think Jack and I need a little time apart.

View all my reviews

Theodore Roosevelt: An Exemplification of the Golden Mean of Virtue

George Street, Sydney, decorated for the visit of the US "Great White Fleet", 1908. State Archives and Records  NSW [CC BY 2.0] via Wikimedia.

The Autobiography of Theodore Roosevelt by Theodore Roosevelt

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This autobiography is a mini-tome. Reading it from the perspective of a foreigner means I comment disinterestedly on the work of one of the US Presidents who was immortalised in Mount Rushmore. I have read Theodore Roosevelt's The Strenuous Life, and while I enjoyed reading it, I was surprised by the rather cumbersome writing style of a man who allegedly read tens of thousands of books. Maybe speed-reading (for which Roosevelt was apparently famous) doesn't help with writing? 

There was so much of the man, speaking plainly and as one might expect a politician to write one's memoirs, but I felt the endless ebb and flow of agreement and disagreement, while the numerous letters included as annexes to the chapters read something like following President Trump's Twitter feed. Justifications and defences and sharing text of his earlier and others' letters - all the things one might expect a president to do. 

While reading this book, I completed a humanitarian training course that enabled me to use some of my long underutilised military skills. During the course, I found myself using these skills but with the opposite purpose. Indeed, if I did the exact opposite of my military training, it would invariably be the right decision in the humanitarian sphere. This had me thinking about Aristotle's "golden mean" of virtue, at the precise time I was reading about Theodore Roosevelt's idea of courage. 

Roosevelt, for example, stayed away from bars and other trouble spots, preferring to respond decisively to unexpected challenges to one's safety or dignity only as a last resort, rather than go looking for trouble. He wore glasses, and as a "cowboy", he had to work doubly hard to earn the respect of the men he worked with. All of this follows closely the idea of the golden mean. Brave, but not cowardly or reckless. (Roosevelt was awarded the Medal of Honor for his efforts in leading "Roosevelt's Rough Riders" during the Spanish American War; dealing with the police corruption, corporate and political corruption, not to mention the Philippines, the Panama Canal, Russia and Japan and so on.) 

Roosevelt appears to have ever been in the right place at the right time, especially in being awarded the Medal of Honor (he was only four months away at war); to become President (he became President in the first instance after William McKinley was assassinated); and to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. 

His achievements were remarkable. I did not know the extent he had played in bringing about modern corporations and competition laws. The Sherman Antitrust Act came into being in 1890 but by Roosevelt's time it was hardly having the desired impact. All sorts of modern checks and balances we now take for granted in liberal democracies were simply not happening. It would seem that Roosevelt's leadership in creating a governance culture made liberal democracy, in the American sense, to function at least somewhat fairly. 

The United States had been a wealthy, functioning democracy for at least four decades (from the time of the Civil War until Roosevelt's presidency). Yet we assume much poorer, less well governed, less educated countries can become functioning democracies in the space of a few years when the oldest liberal democracy in the early 1900s suffered from all of the corruption we see in poorer nations today. 

Roosevelt had the idealism of the times; a form of neo-conservatism tempered by a strong sense of moral purpose. He was tough with the corporations and the unions, but equally interested in prosperous businesses looking after workers - a form of "fair trade" that was unique for the times. I also found the references to Australia interesting, around the time of the "Great White Fleet" and its circumnavigation of the globe, visiting numerous ports throughout the world (including Sydney - pictured above) over a sixteen month period. 

I didn't have the "Team America" theme song playing in my head while I read this, but rather the thoughts and actions of a sober, intelligent man influencing my own thoughts and actions as I discovered, in the practical sense, the idea of the golden mean of virtue. 

My trepidation with reading Roosevelt is that many modern fans of his work talk up his manliness and courage. But having read the man's memoirs, I discovered a sensitive man (which appears obvious in his letters - I think Woodrow Wilson cut him a little too deeply) who was far from fake and far from superhuman, yet strong and of moral righteousness all the same. 

The book ends along with the end of his presidency, almost as if he was hoping to write more after he was re-elected. (Roosevelt was encouraged to stay on after his second term, as he had not been elected to the first term, nor had served two full terms, but he refused on principle.) And so the book ends with a few letters. No uplifting moral lesson, no standing ovation. And that was how he lived. 

If I am to take the Stoic's view, he lived a good life. Not the Disney-fied life we have come to expect from the popular media, but a real man doing real things for good. How times have changed.

View all my reviews

How I Journal

My prompts for daily journalling

This week I delivered a guest lecture to a postgraduate leadership class at the University of Canberra. I lectured on the importance of self-knowledge in becoming an effective leader, with a focus on Stoicism and journalling. The most common question I am asked when I lecture on this topic is: How do you journal?

I began keeping a daily journal on 3rd December 2016. Since then, I have developed a simple formula that helps me to write, even when I don't feel like it. In this article, I outline the process and the resources I use when journalling.

Why keep a journal?

Marcus Aurelius kept a journal, and so did Seneca. The primary purpose of keeping a journal is to live the examined life (as espoused by Socrates) but also to "declutter the mind". Journalling is also central to the practice of Stoic philosophy. For the simplest overview of this philosophy, read the first paragraph of Epictetus' Enchiridion. This sounds simple enough, but to actually believe in the correctness of the philosophy requires daily practice. If one doesn't constantly remind oneself that what is good and bad is within us and we choose how we react to external events, it is easy to slip into old habits. Journalling is a powerful tool to not only establish new habits, but to keep Stoic philosophy at the forefront of living.

And what is the best time to write? Again, Aurelius wrote in the morning as part of his daily preparation, and Seneca wrote in the evening to reflect on the day that was, so I journal both in the morning and the evening. 

Keeping the discipline of journalling can be difficult, so there is some self-discipline involved. Research by James W. Pennebaker suggests that writing about and to oneself (as Aurelius did) can improve our mental health and well-being. But the proof is in the pudding: whenever I miss a morning session (which has happened twice), and even though I have "caught up" with my morning routine that same evening, I have found myself to flounder during the day. 

The reverse is not so true. If I miss an evening (which has also happened a couple of times, particularly when travelling), as long as I catch up the next morning, the effect is less drastic (although I do tend to forget some of the lessons learnt during the previous day).

What do I write?

I had tried several times in the past to keep a journal, but the purpose always escaped me. My writing was directed by my mood, and I was often too tired to write anything meaningful. At the beginning of 2017, I purchased a copy of Ryan Holiday's The Daily Stoic and used the daily meditations as a prompt for my writing. This was simply a case of reading the daily meditation, then writing about the ideas or the quote or whatever else entered my mind. This led me to add a number of other daily prompts.

I use three other books that provide prompts for my reflection and writing. The first work is Benjamin Franklin's Autobiography, where he outlines his thirteen-week virtues program. Franklin deliberately practised each of what he considered to be the thirteen key virtues, focusing on one each week, and leaving the rest to happen by chance. At the end of each day, Franklin assessed himself against each virtue, making a mark in a table against the virtue he had compromised that day. His idea was to complete four 13-week programs each year. 

Franklin was realistic, and accepted that humans can never be perfect. But self-improvement was the goal, and the daily process forces one to take stock of the daily practice of the thirteen virtues. Self-awareness is the greater part of the battle.

The second work is La Rochefoucauld's Maxims. Although very witty and rather sarcastic at times, I enjoy the way La Rochefoucauld is realistic. His is not all positive thinking, but rather a reminder that we are human, and despite the best intentions, we can never be perfect.

The third work is James Allen's (1921) collection of morning and evening meditations, As A Man Thinketh. Allen believed in the law of attraction: that we bring into our lives the things that we hope for (and the reverse). He meant we attract inward states, not a McMansion or a Lamborghini. But Allen also believed that we can control our own minds, and only through a process of self-analysis and self-examination and deliberate reflection, bit by bit, can we conquer ourselves (and therefore the universe).

At the beginning and end of each session of journalling, I draw on Franklin's Virtues Journal and prepare myself for the day ahead, then assess my behaviour each evening. Again, one can never be perfect (as Franklin admitted), but it does provide a long-running record of behaviours and indicates rather clearly one's strengths and weaknesses.

The Routine

Each morning, I write systemically against the following:

1. Reflection on the day ahead, and any thoughts that I "slept" on.
2. La Rochefoucauld's Maxims. Usually, I write the maxim out in full.
3. James Allen's morning thoughts. I usually summarise the key parts for the relevant day (there are 31 days with morning and evening thoughts, so it is a month long process).
4. Ryan Holiday's The Daily Stoic. I summarise the key parts for each day (there are 366 meditations).
5. Ryan Holiday's Daily Stoic Journal. There is a question relating to 4 above and I write in the journal in pencil. There is a short space for journalling in the morning and evening.
6. Franklin's Virtues Journal. I ask myself "What good shall I do today?" 

Each evening, I write systemically against the following:

1. Reflection on the day just gone, and any issues or lessons learnt.
2. James Allen's evening thoughts. I summarise the key parts for the relevant day.
3. The Daily Stoic Journal: I write in pencil against the day's question.
4. Virtues Journal. I assess myself against the 13 virtues, place a black circle where I compromised the virtue, an open circle where I could improve for next time, and a tick when I feel I did the right thing, and a blank if there was nothing related to the virtue.

The Results

It is difficult to assess oneself objectively, but the key thing for me is that I have developed an evidence base on my own thoughts, behaviours, and issues. Because it is my evidence, I have little choice but to accept it. This provides an important "mirror" in which I can see my behaviour more clearly. I suppose the process is a form of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. But the process is my own, and I do enjoy it. While others may not notice an improvement in my behaviour, the benefits are importantly internal.

As James Allen would say, we must fly to the "Rock of Refuge" which resides deep within our soul, and with our minds, we either forge weapons for our own destruction, or tools with which to quarry the mine of our soul. The point is to develop an "inner citadel" where we can be at peace, and all of our "possessions" reside. Not earthly possessions, but the possessions of our very soul. 

This is just one way of practising Stoic journalling, but it works for me. Even on the days when I have no clue what to write, I can read and reflect on the various texts. This usually becomes a trigger for personal reflection.

But it must be daily. Seneca (I think it was) said something about how his entire philosophy was battered and bruised every time he left his house. 

It is only through morning and evening practice that I can stay true to the philosophy: to focus on what I can control, and be indifferent to external events, and to act right in response to the things that I cannot control. 

Daily journalling makes Stoicism work. It justifies why Ryan Holiday says "Journalling is Stoicism". And I think he is right.

Nietzsche in: "I Smell a Decadent"

The School of Athens [featuring Zoroaster] by Raphael, 1590. Public domain via Wikimedia.

Ecce Homo by Friedrich Nietzsche

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Nietzsche's autobiography is bewildering. The title, Ecce Homo, means "Behold the Man" in Latin, and is ascribed to Pontius Pilate when he presented Jesus to the mob. The title is clever in that Nietzsche, in concluding, is "Dionysus versus Christ" (p. 143). But this seems to me to be misleading when the subtitle (which is absent from this Dover version), reads "How One Becomes What One Is". Without the subtitle, one might justify an off-handed rejection of Ecce Homo as little more than vanity given too much regard by posterity. Indeed, I wonder had Nietzsche written this today, would he have ever been known? At times I felt that Nietzsche was of a privileged class and was able to publish at will, but this is not entirely the case. Nietzsche's father, a Lutheran pastor, had worked for the state and, following his premature death, this qualified Nietzsche for a scholarship. Hardly peak bourgeoisie, yet Nietzsche was a polymath; surely symptomatic of genius. If the subtitle is considered during the reading, then "how Nietzsche became Nietzsche" is less troubling to the modern mind. At the same time, Nietzsche goes out of his way to tell us that the effeminate, decaying, degenerative way perpetuated by Christianity is a denial of nature, of the body, of the present - so why would he be all meek and modest? Hence my bewilderment. Believe "neither in 'ill-luck' nor 'guilt'" - this is the opposite of a decadent (it is Nietzsche) (p. 13). "Unselfishness" and "neighbourly love" are conditions of the decadent, these are signs of weakness; pity is not a virtue (p. 18). Nietzsche tells us how he has never felt bad about himself, no guilt, no self-flagellation. The basic argument is that Christianity has poisoned us against ourselves - not faith, not God per se, but the religion of Christianity. Undoing this decadence is therefore essential. But atheists find no solace, either: Socrates is no role model. Nietzsche hints at Heraclitus as one of the few who understood (at least through the Stoics) (p. 73). This is interesting in that Heraclitus had a particular view of God and the gods that one steeped in the atheistic view of Nietzsche will struggle to comprehend. The most important words from Ecce Homo outline Nietzsche's philosophy for living: amor fati (p. 54):

My formula for greatness in man is amor fati: the fact that a man wishes nothing to be different, either in front of him or behind him, or for all eternity. Not only must the necessary be borne, and on no account concealed,- all idealism is falsehood in the face of necessity,- but it must also be loved...

Nietzsche writes disapprovingly of equal rights, particularly for women (p. 65), yet, at the same time, in addition to his view of the "opiate of the masses", betrays a Marxian loathing for the decadence of the "false economy" of "the division of labour" (p. 76). He goes on to address the problem of our current times: the "large number of young men... all in... [a] state of distress" because of the false "calling" to vocations that are unnatural and lead to a "feeling of emptiness and hunger" (p. 87). With so much going on, it is unlikely that a reading of Nietzsche's work in its entirety is enough to comprehend his insights from the rabbit hole of the human soul. But if I have taken away just one thing from Ecce Homo, it is a deeper understanding of the concept of amor fati. Its opposite can be seen in those who reject the body (interesting that Nietzsche says he can "smell" the decadents), where the golden arrow of consumption masks much of the truth (that many could not face if it were revealed, but can happily consume while it is well-masked), and I take it that Nietzsche meant both the corporeal and spiritual aspects of the analogy. But I will let Nietzsche have the last word:

...that which is necessary does not offend me. Amor fati is the core of my nature.

View all my reviews

Romans? Lend me your ears: or, Nietzsche: The Neo-Con Flâneur

Marble sarcophagus with the Triumph of Dionysus and the Seasons; Roman, circa 260-270 CE; Metropolitan Museum, New York [Public domain] via Wikimedia.

Twilight of the Idols/The Antichrist/Ecce Homo by Friedrich Nietzsche

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

The first interesting thing I discovered about Nietzsche is something I suspected when I read Beyond Good and Evil: Nietzsche "learnt much from La Rochefoucauld" (p. viii). And to start off with first principles, Nietzsche makes an interesting observation: morality is "a misrepresentation of certain phenomena, for there are no moral facts whatever (p. xi). I have now come to terms with the idea of Dionysian "chaos" versus the Apollonian "order". Interestingly, this struck me last night at the Canberra Symphony Orchestra's performances of Prokofiev's Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, op. 16 (with acclaimed Australian pianist Tamara-Anna Cislowska as the soloist), and Shostakovich's Symphony No. 9 in E flat major, op. 70. My friend and colleague, a sociologist, who invited us to the concert, has often spoken of these two opposing approaches. But until now, I have been ignorant to the depth of meaning that is so readily missed when one's antennae are not properly directed. And so, Nietzsche sees art as "Dionysian. It is amoral". "Christian art" is an oxymoron, yet Islam is "a virile religion, a religion for men". Nietzsche sees Christianity and alcohol as "the two great means of corruption" (p. 160). A central message (one of too many!) is that, "where the will to power is lacking, degeneration sets in" (p. 97). Nietzsche blames Saint Paul for destroying Rome, and Luther for destroying the Renaissance. Well I never! Kant perpetuated some of the decay, but Goethe, the antipodes of Kant, "disciplined himself into a harmonious whole, he created himself" (p. 81). Further, and while Nietzsche may well have predicted the World Wars, he may also have predicted the decay of our current institutions. Nietzsche argued that we have forgotten the purpose of our institutions (something that would seem apparent in my understanding of theories of institutional change), in effect, institutions require:

...a sort of will, instinct, imperative, which cannot be otherwise than antiliberal to the point of wickedness: the will to tradition, to authority, to responsibility for centuries to come, to solidarity in long family lines forwards and backwards in infinitum. If this will is present, something is founded which resembles the imperium Romanum: or Russia, the only great nation today that has some lasting grit in her.

In speaking of first principles, Nietzsche appears as a Neo-Con Flâneur (p. 72); yet he does not mince words:

First principle: a man must need to be strong, otherwise he will never attain it. - those great forcing-houses of the strong, of the strongest kind of men that have ever existed on earth, the aristocratic communities like those of Rome and Venice, understood freedom precisely as I understand the word: as something that one has and one has not, as something that one will have and that one seizes by force.

I can't pretend to know everything about Nietzsche, and I doubt I can commit to further study beyond a once-reading of the majority of his work. But something has changed in me as a result. I will blog about Ecce Homo in a subsequent post, as I am reading it in a separate book with an easier-to-read type-font, but from Nietzsche's autobiography, he arose from illness (and, paradoxically, to return to it soon after) to suffer no longer from "'ill-luck' nor 'guilt'". He "is strong enough to make everything turn to his own advantage" (p. 176). In this way, Nietzsche is much like Marcus Aurelius: Amor Fati. And no longer can my response be "merely" academic: I feel a weight of centuries lifting, I see why our institutions are crumbling, I fear the solution will not be forthcoming until the next major crisis disrupts human society yet again; I know that this will all be forgotten by future generations. And so time will march on. But Nietzsche does not leave me pessimistic, nor does he leave me disturbed as Viktor Frankl does. He leaves me free. Is this too dramatic? Read what I have read and tell me. I am all ears.

View all my reviews

On Giving Yourself a Break: or, You are a man, not God!

Entrega de las llaves a San Pedro (The Delivery of the Keys to Saint Peter).
Fresco, Sistine Chapel, by Pietro Perugino, c. 1481. Public Domain via Wikimedia.

The Imitation of Christ by Thomas à Kempis

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Benjamin Franklin's Virtues Journal lists "humility" as the thirteenth virtue, with the catchphrase "Imitate Jesus and Socrates" as guidance for practising humility. But what does this mean? It is easy to shrug this off with assumptions about the "What would Jesus do?" heuristic, but to specify what Franklin meant by imitating Jesus or Socrates led me to this classic text of Christian devotion from the early fifteenth century. Franklin was, at least towards the end of his life, a monotheist, and he doubted the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth. I read Kempis' work in a similar spirit. Kempis advises us to

...imitate His life and habits, if we wish to be truly enlightened and free from all blindness of heart.

"Book Two: The Interior Life" was especially enlightening, in that it echoes Epictetus. Epictetus would have us "indifferent" to externals, and while his assumptions about God or "the gods" echoes Heraclitus, Kempis is more to the point:

If you attend to God and yourself, you will little be disturbed by what you see about you.

Instances of Stoic philosophy are scattered through Book Two, less so in Book Four which looks at the taking of Holy Communion. The ongoing dialogue between "The Voice of Christ" and "The Disciple" clearly links Jesus with God (as in the Trinity), and there is clearly a Christian focus. Of course, this is a translation, and while I looked at another translation online, the differences were mostly in readability, as opposed to differences of opinion (as far as I can see). There are frequent references to what is "manly": love, self-conquest, not complaining. But also, an appreciation for the ups and downs of life. God grants His grace one moment, then withdraws it another. This is a normal thing. We should be grateful for when we experience God's grace, and patient when God withdraws His grace. Further, we should be aware that nature is about the self (as in survival), whereas grace is about the community (the social). So, "nature" would have us proud, whereas grace would have us humble. Yet, I did not have this sense of simply buckling oneself to everyone else's will - it was about self-conquest in the spiritual realm, rather than self-flagellation. I could relate this to Epictetus's and Seneca's ideas about managing our impressions - being "indifferent" to them - and James Allen's As A Man Thinketh amplifies Kempis' themes (indeed, Allen now reads as a diary-version of Kempis' Book Two). Most importantly, Kempis reminds us that "all is not lost" as we can never get it right:

You are a man, not God. You are flesh, not an angel.

I found this work mesmerising, enlightening, beautiful. Have I found the answer to Benjamin Franklin's riddle? Well, not quite. Franklin has a number of other riddles that will require a reading of Aristotle's Ethics, and there is more to be gleaned from St. Teresa of Ávila's Interior Castle. Yet I can feel that I am nearing an understanding. Of course, Mortimer Adler would say that if I cannot explain it, then I do not understand. Thankfully, Kempis tells me that I am a man, not God, so I can give myself a break. But I am glad that I took Alder's advice and I have started making notes in the margins of my books (in pencil only!), for I shall be returning to this book again and again and it will sit with my copy of Benjamin Franklin's Autobiography for ready reference.

View all my reviews

On First Principles and Stoicism

Radcliffe Camera, a part of Oxford University's Bodleian Library, and All Souls College to the right, in Radcliffe Square, looking north from the tower of St Mary's Church, the University Church, in central Oxford, England.
Photo by Tejvan Pettinger via Wikimedia CC BY 2.0

The Stoic Philosophy; Conway Memorial Lecture Delivered at South Place Institute on March 16, 1915 by Gilbert Murray

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

I discovered this lecture in George Strodach's notes to Epicurus' The Art of Happiness. I have been thinking about the format of Ancient Greek philosophies, specifically the outlining of the ethos, pathos, and logos of each philosophy. Put simply, these are modes of persuasion, where ethos refers to "character" and the guiding beliefs; pathos refers to emotional appeal, and logos refers to the appeal to logic. From what I can gather, a good deal of the logos of Stoicism is lost to antiquity, whereas Epicurus' logos is contained in his letters to Herodotus and Pythocles. Murray outlines the two major questions Zeno of Citium (the founder of Stoicism) grappled with:

How to live and what to believe.

While the first question was the focus, Murray points out that one cannot address the former without first addressing the latter. First principles, if you will. The Sceptics (and Platonists) had developed ideas about ontology (the nature of being, reality, or existence) and epistemology (theories of knowledge and how we can know something), but Zeno was "a fighter" and "wanted to get to business". This explains in large part the practical nature of Stoicism. But here, like Heraclitus and Epicurus, the idea of God or the gods is an important first principle. Murray uses examples of the Duke of Wellington in asserting the positivist nature of Stoicism - this is a table, here it is, one can see it and touch it - an "uncompromising materialism". But how do we know?

By the evidence of our senses; for the sense-impression (here Stoics and Epicureans both followed the fifth-century physicists) is simply the imprint of the real thing upon our mindstuff. As such it must be true.

The idea of managing one's "impressions" is a cornerstone of Stoic philosophy, and here Murray points out that our "sense-impression [is] all right; it is we who have interpreted it wrongly, or received it in some incomplete way". So our impressions are true - we can believe what we see - but how we react to these external events is the focus; the world is "real" and "knowable". So when we ask, What is it to live the good life? - Zeno meant it in "an ultimate Day-of-Judgment sense". Goodness is "performing your function well". This reminds me of Bentham's idea of utility - not being drunk all the time as a source of happiness, but utility as in a hammer to a carpenter. And acting well in accordance with one's "nature" is the point - Phusis here is translated as "Nature", but in the context of evolution, growth, or the process of growth - continuous improvement comes to mind - moving ever closer to perfection:

It means living according to the spirit which makes the world grow and progress, [where] Phusis is not a sort of arbitrary personal goddess, upsetting the natural order; Phusis is the natural order, and nothing happens without a cause.

Such ideas about "natural law" were not unusual to the Ancient Greek philosophers, "indistinguishable from a purpose, the purpose of the great world-process". Phusis is regarded by the Stoics as a form of intellectual fire, which forms:

a principle of providence or forethought [that] comes to be regarded as God, the nearest approach to a definite personal God which is admitted by the austere logic of Stoicism... Thus Goodness is acting, according to Phusis, in harmony with the will of God.

It is worth quoting Murray at length here to explain the idea of "good" and "nature":

The answer is clear and uncompromising. A good bootmaker is one who makes good boots; a good shepherd is one who keeps his sheep well; and even though good boots are, in the Day-of-Judgment sense, entirely worthless, and fat sheep no whit better than starved sheep, yet the good bootmaker or good shepherd must do his work well or he will cease to be good. To be good he must perform his function; and in performing that function there are certain things that he must prefer; to others, even though they are not really "good"; He must prefer a healthy sheep or a well-made boot to their opposites. It is thus that Nature, or Phusis, herself works when she shapes the seed into the tree, or the blind puppy into the good hound. The perfection of the tree or hound is in itself indifferent, a thing of no ultimate value. Yet the goodness of Nature lies in working for that perfection.

Murray ties his discussion together by looking at two problems of government - a government that is good during the bad times is not necessarily good during the good times, and vice versa. Stoicisms' dual character, however, provides armour when the world is evil, and encouragement when the world is good. In summing up, Murray states that we all, like herd animals, look for a friend, and we ineradicably and instinctively look for a Friend-God so we are not alone in the universe. This is not about reason but a "craving of the whole nature". Two other interesting features of this work are worth recalling. First, the chairman's introduction. He indicates what a good chair should do by outlining what a poor chair had done to Murray on a previous occasion. Second, the purpose of the lecture series was in honour of Dr Moncure Conway, whose:

untiring zeal for the emancipation of the human mind from the thraldom of obsolete or waning beliefs, his pleadings for sympathy with the oppressed and for a wider and profounder conception of human fraternity than the world has yet reached.

What I find most interesting about this work (and the purpose of the lecture series) is its congruence with my reading of Epicurus. Epicurus warned against believing in the popular gods and insisted instead upon an empirical understanding of the world. Maybe not as practical as Zeno's positivism, but certainly not a case of blind faith. Yet Epicurus was not an atheist, and his conception of God may well have been a precursor to monotheism, as much of Stoicism was a precursor to large elements of Christianity and Islam. Indeed, Murray provides a glimpse of this comparison - Ryan Holiday in "A Star is Born" on the Christmas edition of the Daily Stoic newsletter draws out comparisons between the words of Seneca and Jesus - and Strodach reads something similar. Add to this my present reading of Teddy Roosevelt's Autobiography, where he is discussing the power of the herd instinct when rounding-up cattle, and the coincidences are strongly correlating around a common theme! I began by discussing the lack of logos in Stoic philosophy, but Murray's work goes a long way to bringing this to light. It may not be obvious in the practical "enchiridion" sense of the three main books of the Roman Stoics, but when combined with a reading of Epicurus, this lecture says much in very few words.

View all my reviews

Practising Stoic Philosophy

Practising Stoic Philosophy at the Gunning Library. 7th October 2017. Photo by Leslie Bush.

After reading on Trove about the various lectures that have been conducted in Gunning from at least the 1880s, I wondered if there was still an appetite for such lofty pursuits in the Gunning of the 2010s? And after a surprising response via the Gunning Community Facebook group, it seems there is!

During my recent long service leave, I began reading a number of books on Stoicism, and I have embarked on a cover-to-cover reading of the Great Books. As a political scientist, I have always believed that a liberal education is essential to a healthy liberal democracy. Of late, the Great Books have fallen out of favour in our education system, and so too has our faith in our political system.

I have always been inspired by Robert Hutchins' (of the University of Chicago and the person responsible for the Great Books education system which is seeing a revival in the United States) idea of The Great Conversation.  

In the Gunning Library today, librarian Peta Luck made an important observation: Libraries are essential to democracy. And she is right.

So when fifteen people attended the two workshops (on 7th and 10th October) to discuss Practising Stoic Philosophy, it was pleasing to discover that there is so much more to love about Gunning. Many people are interested in the history of their family, their family's military history, or their house, but philosophy? At least three percent of Gunning's population provided the empirical evidence: an emphatic "yes"!

In the lecture, I drew upon some of the ideas I have developed in teaching leadership. My favourite textbook for leadership is by James Clawson, of the University of Virginia, who defines leadership as "the ability to manage energy first in yourself and then in others". Stoic philosophy begins its focus with the individual, too (as does a liberal education), so there are many parallels. 

I also mentioned Stephen Covey's 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, a 1980s classic. Covey said our attention is often divided between our circle of influence (e.g. our families and local communities) and our circle of concern (Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un). If we expend most of our energy in our circle of concern, it will be difficult to bring about any positive changes in our circle of influence (another Stoic-like concept).

Next, we looked at a brief history of Stoicism. I spoke about the idea of education as a transformational experience, where we learn and grow as we are exposed to new ideas, new ways of thinking, and the assumptions and beliefs we have inherited are challenged by our own reasoning. If, of course, we choose to do so. An age-old problem for many people is that, even when the evidence is indisputable, individuals will cling to their prior assumptions and beliefs.

Heraclitus (circa 500BCE), taken from Fragments, noticed that this was a common problem for many (Confucius said, “When you see that [students] do something wrong, give them sincere and friendly advice, which may guide them to the right way; if they refuse to accept your advice, then give it up”). Further, Socrates (circa 399BCE), suggested that "the unexamined life is not worth living" (which appeared in Plato's Apology, but attributed to Socrates, which is disputed, of course). The point is, it is up to the individual. But how does one know?

The Stoics suggested that happiness could be found in the virtuous life. I introduced two approaches to understanding "virtue". Aristotle (circa 350BCE), in his Nicomachean Ethics, outlined the idea of finding the "Golden Mean" in twelve virtues. But a more practical way to assess one's "virtues" is to consider Benjamin Franklin's Autobiography, where he outlines his thirteen virtues and his 13 Week Program for living a virtuous life. This entails keeping a schedule and a diary and self-assessing on a daily basis. More about "journaling" later. I gave this a bash over two 13-week periods and it is quite effective, at least in identifying one's weaknesses in this regard.

Then to a brief history of Stoicism. Stoicism was founded by Zeno of Citium. Only second-hand sources, written years after the event, particularly the work by Diogenes Laertius, The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, remain. But the focus of the session was largely on the three Roman Stoics: Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius.

When I teach leadership, it is underpinned by a simple philosophy. Leaders are either born or one can learn to be a leader. The jury is out on whichever is "right". But as I teach leadership, my philosophy, logically, must be that one can learn to be a leader. If I didn't subscribe to this "philosophy", then I couldn't teach leadership. Simple.

The "simple" philosophy that underpins Stoicism is this (from Epictetus):

Some things are in our control and others not. Things in our control are opinion, pursuit, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever are our own actions. Things not in our control are body, property, reputation, command, and, in one word, whatever are not our own actions.

But how does that help us? Well, try these. What do you first see?

Duck or rabbit?

Old woman or young woman?

Imagine if you were unable to change your first "opinion" or "impression" or "perception" of what the pictures above represent? There are two possible ways to comprehend what you see. For Marcus Aurelius, "external things are not the problem. It's your assessment of them. Which you can erase right now". Imagine if you were stuck with your first opinion of everything? As they say, "first impressions last".

So Stoics see things in terms of good, bad, or indifferent. Only our actions (which are the only things we can really control) can be good or bad. Everything else is beyond our control. Our response can be good or bad, but one should be "indifferent" to the external event. Not uncaring, not unsympathetic, simply indifferent.

Stoics see the externals as opportunities to practice our virtues. Like with learning; if we are never challenged, we never grow. For Marcus Aurelius: "Choose not to be harmed — and you won't feel harmed. Don't feel harmed — and you haven't been". External things are beyond our control, but we can control how we react.

The best way to do this is to slow down the process of managing our impressions, or interpreting how we perceive external events. Journaling is the best way to do this...

• Marcus Aurelius journaled every morning to prepare for the day ahead. The book Meditations is what survives as his journal. It was never meant to be a book for public viewing as far as we know. 
• Seneca journaled every evening to reflect on the lessons of the day.
• For Ryan Holiday, the young powerhouse who has recently published The Obstacle is the Way, Ego is the Enemy, and The Daily Stoic, journaling is Stoicism. 

The daily process is most important – self-mastery happens over time, not in an instant. Think of how today you probably jumped in the car, backed out of the driveway and drove off to work. All without a single thought about how to drive or what to do - it all happened naturally.

Then think back to the first time you sat behind the wheel of a car. It wasn't simple, it was a long process of learning, step by step, until eventually it became second nature. Journaling facilitates the same process, but it is an intellectual process, rather than physical.

We then looked at a number of Stoic techniques. Rather than go over these in detail, have a look at Ryan Holiday's website The Daily Stoic, where you will find all sorts of techniques and resources.

So the next time someone cuts you off in traffic, control your impressions. It is not good or bad, it is external and beyond your control. So choose to be indifferent. If you get angry and stew about it all day, the Stoics say you choose to do so. Choose different.

-----------------------------------------------------------

I wish to thank Peta and Maree at the Gunning Library for making the seminars possible, Vanessa Mackay for rounding up the troops, the Gunning community for being so interested and supportive, and the talented Leslie Bush who is nothing less than superhuman in her ability to make things happen. The lessons I have learnt will be drawn upon next year when I teach a new subject at the University of Canberra entitled Political Leadership, where I will cover the Stoics as part of political leadership in Ancient Greece and Rome. 

The following books on Stoicism will be available for loan from the Gunning Library in the next couple of weeks:

• Letters from a Stoic - Seneca
• Discourses - Epictetus
• Meditations - Marcus Aurelius

You can also find many classic texts online for free at archive.org. If you want a really quick read that covers the basics of Stoic philosophy, try Epictetus' Enchiridion (The Handbook). Some of the books I had on display at the seminar are shown below. These titles are all available for purchase via The Book Depository. And to top it all off, next week is Stoic Week!

Some useful books. Photos by Vanessa Mackay.

The Inner Life

Thomas a Kempis on Mount Agnes (c. 17th Century) via Wikimedia.

The Inner Life by Thomas à Kempis

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Penguin's Great Ideas series showcases important works in an abbreviated format (not my favourite way to read), and this work by Thomas à Kempis is drawn from the larger work The Imitation of Christ. After reading Benjamin Franklin (see his 13-week virtues program in The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin), Albert Camus, and James Allen, I can see the connections to this work dating from the early fifteenth century. There are also elements of Stoicism, recalling Marcus Aurelius. For example, on death at p. 20:

If you are not ready to die today, will tomorrow find you better prepared?

And of being in the world, especially when one is distracted by others, on p. 28:

But to be able to live at peace among hard, obstinate, and undisciplined people and those who oppose us, is a great grace, and a most commendable and manly achievement... He who knows the secret of endurance will enjoy the greatest peace. Such a one is a conqueror of self, master of the world, a friend of Christ, and an heir of Heaven.

Here, James Allen's meditations shine through and it is pleasing to read these in the original. Having said that, there are times when the dialogue between Christ and the disciple, I suppose borrowing from Plato, irked me a little. Nevertheless, there is one part where, and I say this without having researched others' views on the matter, but in Chapter 2 of Book 3 (pp. 40-41), entitled How Truth Instructs us in Silence, the disciple raves on and on and never lets God put a word in edge-wise. This reminded me of Franklin's second virtue, silence, and how we tend to talk too much. I wonder if this was a precursor to the style of La Rochefoucauld? It certainly had me yelling at the disciple to just shut up and listen! Finally, Franklin's thirteenth virtue, to be like Jesus or Socrates, might make the reading of the complete book worthwhile. This is the most difficult of the virtues to comprehend. My reading of Kempis suggests that to think ourselves capable of imitating Christ is folly, and as a non-Christian, even emulating Socrates is egotistical, especially if one were to self-assess as anything other than a black mark for each day for not having been able to be so. Again, without looking to others, what I have gained from Kempis is not that we can imitate Christ (or Socrates, for that matter), but that we can only strive for the ideal. In self-assessing against Franklin's thirteenth virtue, I can only ever give myself a perforated black mark, as I could never say I had reached such levels of perfection (some suggest that Socrates belongs to the list of Abrahamic prophets, so he may well be out of reach, too). And yet the struggle over this one problem is exactly what Kempis suggests we do. Herein lies the genius of Franklin. In assessing himself every day for thirteen weeks, I doubt he could ever not give himself a black mark; yet every day he was reminded to strive for the ideal, no matter how imperfect a man may be in (as opposed to "of"), the world.

View all my reviews

Speech at the Breadalbane History Meeting

Some of the Participants at the Inaugural Meeting of the Breadalbane History Group

About twenty people from the Breadalbane community met at the Breadalbane Hall on Sunday 27th November to share photographs and stories of the history of the region. I was invited to give a talk on the importance of local history. My talk was rather personal, but I thought this was important because the group hope to interview some of the residents of the area, and, having an interest in local and family history, I thought it important to outline some of the issues that one usually encounters when delving into the past. I have added the transcript from my talk here. It is rather personal at times, but so be it!

The Importance of Local History in Australia

Dr Michael de Percy

Good afternoon. I am pleased to have this opportunity to address you here today and I thank you for the invitation. Let me start with my interest in history.

Paul Ings and Terry Hannan with their old photographs

In my political science research, I am particularly interested in how decisions made in the past help or hinder the choices we can make in the present. This is obvious in networked infrastructure such as roads. Le Corbusier, writing about architecture in the 1920s, made a point about how the roads in Paris were based on tracks carved by beasts of burden over many centuries.  While there have been changes over time, a good deal of the road network still traverses those same tracks and may continue to do so for some time. The past, once traditions, habits, and patterns become entrenched, can be difficult to change.

In Australia, we have a similar situation with internet access, although it is often difficult to convince others how decisions made at the time of the telegraph continue to impact upon broadband access today. Many technologists will tell you that the telegraph has nothing to do with broadband, but the interpretation of the wording of section 51(v) of the Australian Constitution, which gives the Commonwealth powers for “telegraphic, telephonic and other like services”, and the way these powers are put into practice, explains why your local councillor cannot help you with your internet connection or speed up the delivery of the NBN. In countries such as Canada, different approaches to deploying the telegraph have resulted in a much stronger role for municipal governments in enabling broadband. 

This is all history, and while it may not mean much today in the context of the NBN, pretending that the decisions made in the past have not influenced the way we do business in the present is little more than denying the impact of history. And so it is with local history, and I would like to talk to you today about how local history can play an important role in not only understanding where we came from, but where we could go in the future if only today’s choices were better informed. Drawing on Karl Marx, Bogdanov suggested that “the dead lay hold of the living”, and in many ways, our present is lived in the very future established by generations past. Understanding history, then, is to me something quite necessary. And in Australia, where the history of European settlement has been rather short, we still have a lot of work to do.

I would like to start by talking about family history, and then move to the importance of local history, particularly in this region. Why family history? Well, to me, local and family history are often linked. I am sure for any of you who have already delved into the history of this region, you will be familiar with the names of the families that bring that local history to life. Indeed, I suspect that many of you here today will be members of those same families. But like all families, there are many myths that become legend that eventually become accepted family facts. It is not unusual for people to use these accepted facts as key pillars of their identity. In my own family history research, I remember the first fact was that my paternal great-grandfather had been a member of the light horse, had served at Gallipoli, and had won some sort of medal for bravery during the Great War. The truth was that he joined the 33rd Infantry Battalion and went to France in 1916, and was subsequently gassed twice. He was charged with being absent without leave a few times, but he never did receive a bravery medal. But the truth didn’t mean he wasn’t a hero. He volunteered again in the Second World War – I believe he lied about his age. His second time in the infantry didn’t last long – he appears to have become a sapper and worked building roads. Very different from the family legend, to be sure, but fascinating nonetheless. There are many more family legends that I have “myth-busted”, and I will share one more of these with you.

I was fortunate enough to have met each of my great-grandmothers. My maternal great-grandmother told us how she was Cherokee Indian. The family believed this for more than two decades. We were also told that there were no convicts in our family – none at all. But just recently I discovered that my great grandmother was born on Walhallow Mission. Not only was her great grandmother an Aboriginal woman, but her great grandfather was a convict. Her own father appears to have been an Aboriginal man, too. If I were to believe the historical trail she left behind in her marriage certificates and her own mother’s death certificate, she had two different European fathers. There was also a view that my maternal grandmother’s family were Irish ne’er do wells, but I have been able to trace her father’s family back to the 1500s in Kent, England. So I have busted many myths, but the truth has always been more fascinating than the family legends. But I do not recommend this approach if you have created your own identity based on family legends! But the truth is there are many stories like these waiting to be discovered.

Now to local history. But allow me to digress. It wasn’t until 2006 that I first travelled overseas. Since that time, I have visited the old Quebec City and the Maritimes in Canada, the ancient ruins at Palmyra, Syria (well before the current war), the Great Pyramids of Egypt, the site of the Great Library of Alexandria, the fascinating ancient city of Petra carved out of the mountains in the deserts of Jordan, made famous by the scene in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, the Baptism Site on the Jordan River, the great old city of Jerusalem, the ancient burial crypts of Bahrain, the Buddhists monuments in Thailand, ancient pagodas in China, the ruins of St Pauls in Macau, the tenements of Glasgow, and many of  the famous historical sites of London and Paris. And then recently, I moved to Gunning, NSW, population 500.

I first visited Gunning last year. I had seen the signs, but had never driven beyond Gundaroo. While conducting research for a radio show I presented on the words of Henry Lawson set to music, I stumbled upon Max Cullen’s autobiography. At the end of the book, Max states proudly that he lives in the old Coronation Theatre in Gunning. I asked my wife if we had ever been to Gunning – we hadn’t – and that afternoon I made an offer on the house we now live in. It is a federation house built by the Caldwell brothers for Samuel Bush in 1926. My great-grandmother owned a federation house in Haberfield, and I have always wanted to live in one and now I do.

Between the time of the offer until the settlement date 3 months later, I discovered that the original owner of the block of land was a journalist who bought it in the first town lot release in 1875. By the 1890s, he was bankrupt and the land changed hands several times until purchased by the Bushes. In 1949, Samuel Bush gave the house to his son as a wedding present. I believe they lived in that house until the 1990s, and I am pleased to say that after numerous transactions, it is now in good hands. But I couldn’t stop there. I have been fascinated with the village of Gunning. Every building has its own story to tell. My favourite piece is a story by a journalist written in 1878. He walked from Meadow Creek up to the Public School on Yass Street, crossed the road and walked back down the other side, describing every building along the way. Many of those same buildings are still there now. It is not unusual to become addicted to such a quest for historical knowledge, and it is one of the few healthy addictions!

In June this year, I ran two workshops on using Trove, the National Archives, and the Australian War Memorial records for family and local history research. Both workshops were fully booked out and the team at Trove and ABC 666 in Canberra were interested in what we were doing at a local level. Participants were encouraged to bring along their own research projects, and after a brief introductory session on the database, I shared some of my tips and tricks.

Each participant found something interesting and relevant to their research projects. One was able to confirm a family legend about a relative who had performed at the Sydney Opera House, others were able to learn about the history of their house or about family members who had served in the military.

Some of the tips and tricks I shared included to notice the typing conventions of particular periods and to recognise repeated patterns in the transcription errors. For example, when looking for street names, it was once common for newspapers to hyphenate the street name. Yass Street then becomes Yass-street. If you use quotations marks and search for "Yass-street", then it excludes the many articles that relate to Yass the town, rather than Gunning’s main street. Even simple tips like using a minus sign to exclude certain words can improve the search results. More tips can be found in Trove's Help system.

After a while, I was able to recognise standard errors in the transcription. For example, Saxby-street often appeared as Samby-street. By searching for the error, I found most of the missing links in my project. And each time I found an error, I corrected the text so that future researchers will have an easier time searching.

One of Trove’s important functions is the ability to fix transcription errors. If there is a particular topic or region of interest, a committed group of researchers can improve access to the historical records by enabling better search results. It can also be useful to have shared lists on particular topics. 

As a result of the workshop, local history research has improved as the accuracy of the transcriptions of local articles has increased and searching Trove has become much easier.

The most recent workshop held at Gunning Library focused on Australian military service records using Trove in conjunction with the online collections from the National Archives of Australia and the Australian War Memorial. We are hoping to make further exciting discoveries about the town that will eventually feed in to planned walking tours of the village.

Trove provides rural and regional communities with access to all sorts of digitised information held in collecting institutions around the country, including maps, photographs and music. Trove’s advantage is that it provides information that you would otherwise have to travel to to find. Indeed, Trove overcomes the barriers of distance and many local libraries provide internet access so you can search Trove and its many treasures. But as I said - be careful – it can be highly addictive!

And what I have realised is that while we do not have the Great Pyramids, or ancient Greek and Roman ruins, in this fair land we have everyday stories that together form a rich tapestry of a nation forged out of the antipodes, and many of those stories are just waiting to be told. I recently read Robert Macklin’s book about Hamilton Hume, and, while somewhat starry-eyed in its patriotism, I couldn’t help but feel that Hume’s story is part of my own. Hume was a native born “currency lad” while his historical companion, William Hovell (as we were taught at school - but I am reliably informed that the name should be pronounced “Hove-ell”) – was a “sterling” or English-born. Hove-ell attempted to claim most of the glory for Hume’s bushmanship and navigation skills but was later found out. Charles Sturt, although another “sterling”, had a good deal of respect for Hume’s abilities and did all he could to ensure that Hume received the recognition he deserved. Nevertheless, the “Hume River” is now known as the “Murray River” because Sturt, fascinated by the prospect of finding an inland sea, thought he had discovered another river. Macklin suggests that Sturt may well have regretted this transgression. 

But as we know, Hume’s name has been recognised in the name of the highway nearby that traverses much of the original track established by the famous explorer. And while I have no wish to put down Hove-ell, Hume’s importance to this region and the legends of his abilities to negotiate with and befriend the Indigenous peoples, his expert bushcraft, navigation skills and so on, all contributed to the folklore of the Australian bushman, a theme later captured by the official historian of the Great War and founder of the Australian War Memorial, Charles Bean, in developing the now celebrated legend of ANZAC. 

So legends, myths, myth-busting, stories of the past and their influence on the present – all of these things are part of our local history, often intersecting with the history of our own families and, en masse, forming the rich tapestry of our national culture and identity. Which brings me to the purpose of this meeting today.

Often, when I discuss local and family history stories with older members of the family and community, it is apparent that much of the knowledge of the 19th and early 20th centuries, if not already lost, is no longer part of our living memories. You may never know if you are of Aboriginal heritage if, like me, your ancestors had no birth certificate and stories were devised to hide that fact. Legends may also hide your convict heritage or, indeed, your ancestors may never have been at Gallipoli. Such things are part of living. But what of our local communities? Is Breadalbane and the pioneers who forged a community here, the coach services, the railway station, the Aboriginal peoples who once walked this land, Thomas Byrnes who may or may not have been a bushranger, the battle between troopers and Ben Hall’s gang nearby, all to be relegated to the dustbin of history because we did nothing about it?

Paul Kelly once wrote that Australia suffers a “settlement” mentality where we rely on the government to provide our every need, and it is unfortunate that the funding of our national cultural institutions is steadily being eroded. But our local communities are now more important than ever, particularly in the regions. And in re-building, re-creating, or re-imagining these communities, whether socially, economically, or spiritually, I believe it is important to begin at the beginning. To begin with history. 

But that history begins with you. On the website “Aussie Towns”, under the heading “Useful websites about Breadalbane”, it reads: “There are no websites with information about Breadalbane”. Yet the National Library’s Trove database provides information about a number of interesting things about the region, including:

• Iron, gold, and copper mines were worked nearby;
• There were numerous engagements between troopers and the bushrangers Gilbert, Hall, and Dunn here
• This land is known traditionally as “Mutmutbilly”
• The centenary holidays in 1888 were “very quiet” here
• A photograph of the honour roll from the Second World War
• A photograph of the highway in 1938
• A photograph of the centenary plaque at the school from 1968

I am certain there are many more stories hidden in Trove, but even more so in your personal collections. And photographs from the past are rare, especially those that are digitised and freely available to others.

There are of course some issues with family history. One of my great-grandmothers refused to tell us who her father was. One of our well-regarded ancestors was a Salvation Army officer who mysteriously “disappeared” after the Great War. His medical record reveals that he spent a very long time recovering from a particular disease in Paris, and then married a nurse in England and moved to Canada, never to return to his native land. There are appropriate reasons that historical records are not often available to the public until well after our ancestors are but distant memories. But this does not help us to understand where we came from, how our values, assumptions, beliefs and expectations were forged by generational experience, or what our ancestors looked like.

Fortunately, technology is providing us with greater access to our knowledge of the past than ever before. But it is a truism that technology can only produce what we put in to it – the basics still apply. Therefore, I encourage you to support this local initiative to capture the history of this village. There are many benefits to doing so, be they social, economic, or spiritual.

But more than that, while the cultural cringe that has plagued Australia since European settlement is far from dead, there is a rich history in this region just waiting to be discovered. And although I have been fortunate enough to see the Great Pyramid, the last surviving Ancient Wonder of the World, to see a version of the Temple of Artemis at Jerash in Jordan, to walk on the Mount of Olives, to touch the walls of the old fort at Quebec and to stand on the walls of Saladin’s Qalat Ajloun (or Ajloun Castle), to enter centuries-old Chinese pagodas and to see some of the ancient wonders at Palmyra in Syria that are now no doubt lost to us forever, there is a rich history right here in our own back yard waiting to be discovered. From the history of the Indigenous peoples dating back some 800 centuries before “ancient” times to the end of the railway station here in 1974, there is much to record, and much to be lost if we do not act soon.

I wish you well in establishing this group, in recording your individual and collective histories, and I commend to you the Gunning and District Historical Society as a vehicle to help you on this journey. Thank you and good luck.