Giving Blogs


« And Who Are You? | Main | Video Archive of Tuesday, May 17, at TPI »

May 24, 2005




People may want to be completely anonymous in their commenting here. I can help. There are some free services I know to be reliable in hiding identity from web site owners.
Anonymizer see upper right hand corner on the page, Anonymouse and Proxify. These are easy to use and will shield people who require some discretion. Perfectly respectable people use them all the time. A complete list of resources is avilable from Epic.

One of the problems people with public profiles face is that they're accustomed to speaking with authority on certain subjects. If I, for example, were a chemical engineer who published regularly in well known journals, I might be concerned about my style being recognized. Outside that specific area, I would feel much more comfortable. Perhaps posts that are tangential to the main purpose here would help break the ice.


Thanks, Harry. People who want anonymity can also just sign in with a fake email, and assumed name. The issue of "persona," as you know is of critical importance to many people, particularly when they are official, or well recognized, personages. In what capacity, with what authority or auctoritas is the author speaking? As private citizen? Official within an organization? The management of online identity is part of what Jan Hauser's paper, in his vision of a better world gets at. As you know, I am a great believer in Wilde's quip, "If you want a man to tell you the truth, give him a mask." Which is as much as to say, do not expect candor from the candid man speaking in public in propria person as Factotum. That is the flaw in the plain style, and the style of moderation. It is a decorum within which not much can said that departs from business as usual. So its vision, that "speakable" in plain gracious prose, of The World We Want is ameliorative at best. You can see in some of Peter's own essays the torsion between truth-teller and the candid, gracious plain style. Just can't be done, in many cases. Hence we have the much neglected profession of the "all licensed Fool." Having adopted the plain-style here, I too feel hamstrung by it. If we are driven to masks, even to hint at dfficult truths, let it be a carnival.


I have been lurking across WB, and gifthub for quite a while. Marek informs that there is a movement working where both King and fool will dine on the leg of a lamb roasted in the middle of the court yard. Talking while gnawing on bones.

For years I have been frustrated at how my quest for wealth in order to to have influence has yielded little in any type of social change.

In short, I am trapped still just in a different Cage. Dorothy meet the wee wittle wizzard.

Maybe it is time to come out of the shadows. This move to converse is the dream.

In WHo Wrote The Bible (I think that is the title) the author writes that when getting into biblical interpretation and discussion about said book everyone should be invited to come to the banquet table and drink coffee and wine while discussing. All people-Atheists, Christians, muslims, etc.

The point being no one has ownership of scripture. All voices are to be heard.

And doing that, it seems to me, would be a massive move that eventually will get us to carnival.

Thanks for doing this in other words.

phil cubeta

Thank you, Mayosan. Lurking is good, conversing is better. Please pull up a chair. Coffee? Wine? They say the Prodigal Son has returned and the Master will hold a feast.


I must done the crown or the clown suit shortly. Off to make merry with mary (oh how I wish). Or work.

I will converse more a bit later. Many questions. Need to make more masks so I can play.

In the meantime...

How are these conversations to happen when we have such difficulty conversing with the people we make love to?

Thanks for letting me use your digs.

JJ Commoner

Love (or not) is a language unto itself (is my belief). Many many reasons to communicate, not necessarily with language, while making love .. and not all of them sweet or heavenly, of course

And your point is a delicious and deep one .. though in my case I would have changed the final word "to" to "with".

phil cubeta

Love may well be a good analogy for giving, which is no less over- determined, and subject to many of the same refinements, including but not limited to the exchange of power, c.f,


Yes, "with" would deepen the context. But, sometimes we are not sure if the partner is indeed with us. We can hope and trust it to be so.

This is weaving an interesting thread with the task at hand.

Anyway, point taken.

But this raises yet another question. WHat happens when you want to make love but your partner just wants raw unemotional sex ?

Does this have anything to do with the world we want? I am not sure but I know the world is made up in small bits and this sex thing is a small bit (speaking for myself of course so no males should be offended).


Could be an interesting subject for the next Tues at TPI. With a good webcast they might expand the audience. Maybe the question is whether giving like love or eros is a basic human drive. To be rebuffed or used in one's desire to give, to be unrecognized as giver, to be seen as just a provider of cash, is to feel small and slighted.

JJ Commoner

But this raises yet another question. WHat happens when you want to make love but your partner just wants raw unemotional sex ?

Love is as love does ;-) Trite, I know.

I suppose that both of those *conditions* may form part of both making love and having raw sex. For me, having a "partner" implies some form of connection at a certain level of caring about the other, so the two would get mixed. Otherwise, it would be some form of rape or escape from reality. Raw sex with my life partner is just great .. and we laugh and smile at each other whilst jumping up and down on each other.

phil is more eloquent than me, but i think is saying more or less the same thing directly above.


Actually, what I am saying is let's stay on topic. We all have personal lives as a refuge from our public responsibilities. What I am suggesting is that even Dumpster Dwellers are citizens, and have responsibilities to something larger than just their family, friends and lovers. Eros, art, giving, and the structures of status and power, are all connected, no doubt, but the topic is the public spaces in which we appear as citizens, not flashers, though it is perfectly true that my mentor, Diogenes, lived naked in a Dumpster, once masturbating in public to make the teaching point that desire is easily satisfied, and that we ought to get on with more important business.

Or are you suggesting that the public prefers being worked over? Prefers wealth bondage to caritas?


I hate to bring up lenses and filtering. So I will.

Love what we hate and such.

We all have places that we wanted to improve as we saw them restrictive. Hmm, no that is understating.

Places we saw as suffocating certain voices. Shoving a pillow over the face of someone uglier, poorer, or richer.

God, bare with me, working it out here (but not in a dumpster with appendage in hand).

Okay, try again, I was in college studying theology and translation theory. My select sect (the only right one btw ) had 4 different subscription papers/magazines that represented the different views of christianity and "proper" translation. Every sect has em.

Anyway, I remember being angry. Pissed because it made no sense to me. One group "defended the truth." Other groups wanted more openess.

You see how this is the same in politics or whatever.

Point in all this was I never was able to get the groups together and get deep into conversation. Not just shaking hands and handing out food to the poor but I mean letting down the walls and giving up the firm grip on being right.

I later found business which turned out to be my real personal savior so all is well now. (Just in case you were concerned.)

And maybe I am going way wrong. Maybe this is not about letting the walls down.

But the question is the world we want. I don't want to let go of the things I hold as beautiful and true and fun. Yet, I want to be able to really dig into what YOU view as those things.

I want to do these things while doing other things. So, getting to "get" you while also sweeping the streets or painting a house. And not because this is the yearly find a person to help out day.

No, I mean this as a part of life. This hold up in the hole of the home while tv burns a hole in my head has gotta go bye bye.

And in all this I feel I am making no sense whatsoever. Yet, that is what I want. The ability to make no sense and for my crack buddy to make more sense and laugh at the rich guy's jokes while eating food from a jewish person.

Hell, I just figured out I just need to show up at an event or watch a webcast...

Ignore all this stuff. But, thanks for letting me play.

phil cubeta

Mayosan, thanks, that is actually as lucid as the subject permits. I do get it. Yes, The World We Want is one in which people may cherish and defend their "differences," but also seek understanding, fellowship, and a raucus unity, not imposed by "message discipline," dogma, branding, or fear, but the unity that arises in music from many instruments playing for a moment in contrapuntal harmony. ("Cordia discors.")
Or, "open society." Not "winning," but creating a playing field and rules that allow the contest to be fair, perpetual, and instructive.

These are classical, neoclassical, or "englightenment" ideals - the same enlightenment that has been deconstructed by some and disparaged as "secular humanism," by others but is central to our constitution, to science, and to our polity, let alone our poetry.

Thanks for playing here. Surprising to me and very graitfying how many trained as theologians read WB, or the Gifthub and The World We Want. The quest partly "spiritual" in the sense of the holy spirit, aka "the muse," or whatever it is in the holy that expresses itself in our diverse and contentious world.


Okay, then I get it. Yes, the secular humanism theme resonates with me.

And my dad now says, "If you want your kid to leave THE faith, send him to theology school." Not accurate for all people but I was attracted to a different lover.

Funny as what helped me to find my path was the net. Blogging. Talking. Getting around non-white, non-southern, non-U.S...Well, lots of "nons."

The striking thing is this net thing also brings many people to the path I left. Very interesting.
<---end aside--->

Then there wer the puppet masters. Those that asked questions in odd ways (like wealth bondage and rageboy). I found satire much more challenging in dealing with my questions as opposed to outright debate and logical arguments.

This is why I am heavily thinking about getting involved in this whole gig. If it followed the stephen covey lay out a mission statement plan I woulda shown my middle finger and moved along.

phil cubeta

Alright! Mayosan, you made my day. Consider how Jesus taught in parables. Why didn't he just debate things in the Temple or preach Sermons on various Mountains? Sermons and polite conversation in the vestry don't have much impact on how people see, think, feel or live - do you think? If the message got through, the worldly wise would crucify the preacher as they did his leader. The only gathering more pious than a country church is philanthropy.


"Snap" as the kids say now days. I am sure you are all hip and consume consume consume. Holy heck. I am speaking in Marek voice pre-K. (You must admit that was a nice play.)

Marek said you had skills. Been debating an email to you for months now. He said you were the man. It was an international 3 hour call mixed with Jack Daniels though. Good mix btw.

I have rarely posted at WB for I have little talent with satire. Some of us are writers of cheesy (no to be confused with Who Stole The Cheese which sucks) action films and others produce art. I am not a spewer of art though make love with it above the bed.

So, an email you will get.

Off subject and I am sure your valued readers will understand.

Yeah, death of saviors being buried and decomposed to the fruit we all eat that makes the followers and the opposers strong. Both together. Odd that is (yes we have modern caskets now that robs us of this).

Very good here. Feels like home. Home is not always appreciative and happy. It is, in theory, to be a place where you can take off your toupe.

I have played in philanthropy. True. Yet, business is the same shake and grab as philanthropy as church.

We do not get to far away from our DNA and the same peronalities show up.

You know what I want (changing here. Damn). I want heartbreak.

That is a marker in my life. The more heartbreak I have the more rich my life. Well, the more hearbreak I ENDURE and soften to again.

I have a feeling that my issues and frustration deals with those that have not seen heartbreak and then quit playing victim.

See Locke, et alllllllll.

The fallen. Then those that have recovered. Addicts of heartbreak. And of life.

Hi, I am Mayosan and I was once a lover of Drama...

phil cubeta

The broken man, the man born in a manager, or dumpster, and crucified among thieves, at odds with the then current administration, promoting freedom in the Middle East. How this figure, the epitome of a loser, becomes the hero of those whose God is the crassest wordly success, I never understood, perhaps because I was raised Catholic, and taught service and humility are virtues. Calvin was a heretic. The meek, not the resentful, will inherit the earth. The Rapture is the great cleansing that preceeds Christ's triumphant return to succor the weak. We must remember our own stories and retell them, pass them on, because the story-machine belongs to Candidia, and she has a way of maintaining "message discipline." She makes her money off the tie-in sales, the toys in Kiddie Meals, and the joint ventures with the Department of Defense and Homeland Security.

Yes, here you don't need your toupe. You can always borrow mine.


Oh, that Mayosan is a wise wise dumpster diver.

This post should live until it dies.


Oh, that Mayosan is a wise wise dumpster diver.

This post should live until it dies.


We touched the core issues in this thread, and of course it was met largely with silence. Peter and I have traded notes on how to make this conversation between King and peasant happen in the courtyard while dining together on a leg of mutton. Or maybe there is a private feast for the nobles, but the common people can critique after the fact. But in any case, engineering the social dynamics is key. No one has done this successfully that I know of. A few have tried, as at but the results have not been inspiring.


I'm a heretic, Calvin was just a man of his time.


The World We Want is surrounded by a moat.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Order The World We Want