Power, Privilege, Paradise, and Prophecy

Isaiah prophesizes “And there shall come…” (61)….  There shall come a time, I suppose, when peace is our prime directive instead of war, when creativity triumphs over destruction, when justice is served, and so on.  Generally speaking, there shall come a time when things are better.  And perhaps even, there shall come a time when “wolf also shall dwell with the lamb”—but not likely (61). Unless, of course, there is a drought….  Whether we’re talking about the literal meaning of inter-species peace or the metaphor of peace across any barriers, the words do not ring hollow.  Prophecies always make me uneasy, but perhaps if for no other reason, they’re good for dreaming.  This reminds of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, in which he referenced Isaiah’s words:

“I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice….I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together." – MLK

Hey yall, I Have a Dream Today!
http://www.brandywinepeace.com/images/mlk_king_subj_e.jpg

Isaiah prophesized that one day “the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water…” (62).  We all know that water is the ultimate source of life.  To compare injustice to something lacking water and thus lacking life is significant.  To me, it means fighting social injustice is a necessity for survival.  It is in many ways as necessary for humans as is water.  


MLK emphasized equalizing the sociological field in the Jim Crow South (“every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low”) and rectifying “crooked” and “rough” political and social conduct.  The metaphor I understand of Isaiah’s words, in a few words, is that opposites can coexist. That is, powerful and powerless, upper-class and working class, predator and prey.  But I am much more inclined to agree with MLK’s interpretation than the original text for a few reasons.  For one, in what universe can energy be simply created without destroyed (and vice versa)?  Clearly, MLK was a tireless advocate for equality, freedom, and justice.  But by invoking Isaiah’s words, he rebuilds the metaphor that to create social equality, you must take power from the powerful and give power to the powerless.  That means, it won’t just magically or naturally happen.  His “I Have a Dream” is more than just a proclamation of a biblical prophecy or dream, but a call to action.  In my signature course, The Legend of Doctor Faustus, we talked at length about the difference between “shall” and “will.”  Shall, for example, does not mean “will.”  It is a strong imploration, a prediction.  In this same way, I understand Isaiah’s words to be more of an imploration to realize this dream than a simple statement of what is to come. 

Perhaps this gradual social change, this process of realizing the dream, is akin to the story of the leopard who “spoke with human voice” and whose habitual and instinctual actions were brought to a cognitive level (68).  “…and gradually my heart was changed,” the leopard said.  It was not so much a matter of right and wrong or intellect as it was a matter of the heart.  This harkens back to earlier readings on compassion and empathy.  It is odd, however, that the idea of cognition and “self-knowing” (as stated in our last readings) is attributed only to humans in some way or another.  Whether it is an animal with a human voice or simply a fully clothed and civilized human animal, the “mildness” and “tameness” is associated with humans; with supreme morality; with good.  But the next lines smack of hypocrisy: animals shall at once “forsake their nature of beast and cattle…and no longer eat flesh” and “follow us wherever we go, and eat what we eat” (68).  So, in this example, we are vegetarians or Janes, right?  Perhaps it is not so much the meat-eating that is called into question—at least not entirely, but rather the ability to rationalize.  Do I kill this living creature with a human voice or not?  But sometimes, translators in cultures are perceived as powerful and morally advanced, simply because they are able to communicate in the same language.  (The Spanish/Maya interaction in the New World illustrates par excellence the power of translation, communication, and language.  For all intents and purposes, the Maya translators were considered a “breed” of their own, as they spoke the language of the conqueror and the indigenous, and therefore more worthy of respect and power).   

But again, William Blake references prophecies and “visions” of the future.  Figuratively, “the vision”—or the lion—led the humans into a paradise in which there is no life-threatening situations, no fear—a paradise in which an innocent child sleeps safely “among tigers wild” (77).  To me, the vision of paradise is one-sided.  Humans are in danger—their hearts stop when they see a lion—but to their surprise, they are in fact in no immediate danger.  In the wild, I assume it is rarely the case that a hunter who works for Mary-Kate and Ashley’s fur clothing line will suddenly say to its target endangered animal, “say, I think I will see you as a peaceful ally.”  I suppose my observance has more to do with the fact that the relationship of power between predator and prey (and the analogy in human and systemic relationships) must be understood from the “prey’s” perspective.  Blake writes:  “each outcry of the hunted hare a fibre from the brain does tear” (80).  This echoes what MLK said: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”  The “hunted” is of course the exploited, the oppressed, the underprivileged, the relatively powerless “hare.”  But the “hare” represents the generally oppressed population of human beings as well.

We can apply this to Latino’s with stereotypically Mexican phenotypes who are living in Arizona today.  They are “hunted.”  Hunted by the ICE, border patrol, the police, by fearful citizens.  And everytime that this happens, “a fiber from the brain does tear” (80).  For me, at least—and I’m sure for the rest of the human rights activists globally. 

In the article, The Miracle of Purun Bhagat, I noticed the connection between Purun Dass and the current movement for social change.  When people hear about my work, they respond much like the “English ladies in evening dress”:  “This is the most fascinating man we have ever met at dinner” (85).  (Except that I am not a man).  The idea is that it is strange to at once hold a position of political and intellectual power and be humble and understand the need for social change in world riddled with social injustices.  I admire that he is in fact so humble that he believed that “Earth, people, and food were all one” (86).  It is not so much a fascinating quality in way that the privileged English ladies described, but rather a quality that demonstrates his knowledge of things beyond his individual ego.  If for no other reason, I am drawn to his story because of his vision of social change and because of his analysis of choices.  Many privileged people—myself included—often think that we are entitled to our power.  But what if we “resigned position, palace, and power”—so to speak—and took up the lifestyle of the majority of the rest of the world?  Not to say that this would be productive or necessarily help the movement for social change, but it is a choice I have indeed pondered. 

Is this god-given?  Is this a "divine right"? Are we entitled to it?
I think not--and yet, I have it and am benefiting from it everyday.
http://gretachristina.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341bf68b53ef01053679e445970b-800wi

One might think that Puran Dass understood that social “paradise” was only possible because of the privilege and power he initially possessed.  But such power is carefully constructed and one must not deviate from certain social norms in order to maintain it.  It is interesting to compare a zoo of animals, for example, to a zoo of humans (hotels)—and for that matter, all human interactions with a system of power (zookeepers).  It is paradise contained and manipulated and in many ways manufactured.  Zoos, like intricate relationships between powerful and privileged people, are only considered a “paradise on earth” by those with the power (96).  Im not so sure the underprivileged (by choice) Puran Dass and the zoo animals in captivity would agree on this idea of “paradise.”

MLK “I Have a Dream” Speech Source: http://links.visibli.com/19f4a270eca83f93/?web=930437&dst=http%3A//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Have_a_Dream