Posted on 02/04/2010 9:59:38 PM PST by Lorianne
On October 30, 1990, V S. Naipaul, considered by many to be the greatest living English language novelist, delivered the fourth annual Walter B. Wriston lecture in Public Policy, sponsored by the Manhattan Institute. Mr. Naipaul takes as his subject the “universal civilization” to which the Western values of tolerance, individualism, equality, and personal liberty have given birth. He describes the personal and philosophical turmoil of those who find themselves torn between their native civilizations and the valued of universal civilization. ___________________________________
The universal civilization has been a long time in the making. It wasn’t always universal; it wasn’t always as attractive as it is today. The expansion of Europe gave it for at least three centuries a racial taint, which still causes pain. In Trinidad, I grew up in the last days of that kind of racialism. And that, perhaps, has given me a greater appreciation of the immense changes that have taken place since the end of the war, the extraordinary attempt of this civilization to accommodate the rest of the world, and all the currents of that world’s thought.
Because my movement within this civilization has been from the periphery to the center, I may have seen or felt certain things more freshly than people to whom those things were everyday. One such thing was my discovery, as a child—a child worried about pain and cruelty—of the Christian precept “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.” There was no such human consolation in the Hinduism I grew up with, and though I have never had any religious faith, the simple idea was, and is, dazzling to me, perfect as a guide to human behavior.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
Drugs might ease the pain. And if not, there's always euthenasia.
Never heard of the "greatest living English novelist"???
The flip side would work also:
Don't do to others you wouldn't want others do to you.
The sad thing about “universal civilizations” is that they crop up from time to time throughout history ... and immediately die in the face of less forgiving neighbors. Why is so hard for liberals to admit that western culture IS superior to other cultures, and that America is the best country and the best culture that the world has ever seen?
It’s called the Golden Rule:
EAST AND SOUTH ASIA
The Golden Rule expressions can be found in the religious and non-religious literature of East and South Asia.
Confucius is a European way of saying K’ung Fu-tze, or “Master K’ung.”
Confucius lived in the 500s BCE and his secular philosophy was put into writing by his disciples after he died. These writings include:
“Do not do to others what you would not want others to do to you.” (Analects 15:23)
“Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire.” (Doctrine of the Mean 13:3)
“Try your best to treat others as you would wish to be treated yourself.” (Mencius VII A 4)
Taoism developed alongside Confucianism in China and includes this instruction: “Regard your neighbor’s gain as your own gain, and your neighbor’s loss as your own loss.” (T’ai Shang Kan Ying P’ien, 213-21)
Hinduism is the oldest religion in South Asia, going back more than 3,000 years. Jainism is also an ancient Indian religion. Buddhism developed out of Hinduism about 500 BCE. Sikhism came into existence in the sixteenth century CE as a result of both Hindu and Muslim influences. All these traditions have variations of the Golden Rule.
The following Hindu quotations are from the Mahabharata, written in classical Sanskrit about 300 CE:
“Do naught unto others (that) which would cause you pain if done to you.” (Mahabharata, Bk. 5, Ch. 49, v. 57)
“One should not behave towards others in a way which is disagreeable to oneself.” (Mahabharata, Anusasana Parka 133.8)
From Jainism:
“We should regard all creatures as we regard our own self.” (Lord Mahavira, 24th Tirthankara)
“A man should wander about treating all creatures as he himself would be treated.” (Sutrakritanga 1.11.33)
From Buddhism:
“Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful” (Udana Varga 5:18)
“...a state that is not pleasing or delightful to me, how could I inflict that upon another?” (Samyutta Nikkei v.353)
From Sikhism:
“As you deem yourself, deem others as well; only then will you become a partner in heaven” (Guru Granth Sahib, p.480)
http://www.scarboromissions.ca/Golden_rule/school_curriculum.php
So in this 20 year old article by one unheard-of V.S. Naipaul he calls himself “the greatest living English language novelist”?
Humility. Must be a nice experience.
“On October 30, 1990, V S. Naipaul, considered by many to be the greatest living English language novelist...”
This is not his own opinion of himself, but rather the opinion of the person indroducting V.S. Naipaul as a speaker. Naipaul won the Nobel prize for literature. It was a shock at the time, because he was not an anti-western author. There were a lot of “This can’t be!” remarks on the day it was announced.
Ah, should’ve followed the link to the article...it’s clear there by the use of italics (that do not show in the exerpt).
Thanks for the clarification.
Anyway, for someone with a Nobel prize, he sure didn’t make any lasting impression on Western readers (except perhaps in academia...). Hmm, what other (hint: recent) Nobel laureate immediately comes to mind?
VS Naipaul is very well known.
And he is not calling himself the greatest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._S._Naipaul
It is a very good article IF YOU READ IT.
City Journal is running a retrospective of this article because it is so good, and so timely still today.
See my post #9.
Heard of him? I’ve read almost everything he’s written.
Apparently others have never heard of him and have to taken the time to inform us of that fact here.
I started reading Naipaul around 1985 when I was in college. His writings have had a profound affect on me. Particularly:
Guerrillas - (1975)
A Bend in the River - (1979)
A Way in the World - (1994) was his best IMO
Nihilism?
|
|
|||
Gods |
Naipaul takes as his subject the "universal civilization" to which the Western values of tolerance, individualism, equality, and personal liberty have given birth.He's just beggin' for a fatwa. Thanks Lorianne. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
I see Naipaul as a sort of Solzhenitsyn lite—his vat knowledge and experiences have soured him on the contending forces in the world today, economic and ideological(islam).
“Don’t do to other you wouldn’t want other do to you.”
I believe this is the Muslim equivalent. Note the negativity involved? Perhaps this difference is what has made Christianity such an activist religion. Always doing, always doing.
The golden rule is expressed in different words the world over. Its not a christian-born conception.
As for it being a negative act (negative doesn't mean 'bad') I believe its just as important and relevant as the 'positive'. It's just as important to me for people to leave me about my business (negative) as it is for them to try to help (positive). There's a time and place for both.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.