Thank you so much, Satya. Framing how responding to the wound perpetuates the wounding (i.e. “Men are cut off from themselves, and so they are cut off from empathy, and so they choose violence, guns, weapons, and war on repeat. Over and over and over.”) is so helpful and validating. This morning, I read your fantastic post on the last day of an annual men’s weekend retreat I lead for a weekly men’s process group I run. Being with each other in our wounds with empathy, love, and connection, while restraining/shedding the impulse to deflect, minimize, fix, or even soothe (“it’s not that bad”) is much of the work in this group. I have seen these men grow more connected with their bodies and feelings, risking emotions and love toward themselves and others. And yet, the world (which shows up of course in group) tells them, shows them, again and again the dangers of risking vulnerability and authenticity with the assumption (the demand, even) of individual isolation. We are working slowly, collectively, to shift this story. I have Elise Loehnen’s interview with Gilligan cued up for the drive home today. Thank you.
A new comment that may be more relevant now than when posted.
Since I was 15 years old, I have roughly every 7 to 10 years rewatched Charlie Chaplin's bold (albeit flawed) parody of Hitler, his 1940 film "The Great Dictator".
But not until I was 45 (having seen the film about 4 times) did I realize something was happening.
Chaplin uses the "Grail motif" from Richard Wagner's opera "Lohengrin" both(!) in the dictator's dance with the giant globe (anticipating world domination) AND as the music in the Jewish barber's final speech in favor of freedom and democracy. And Chaplin almost certainly knew that Lohengrin was Hitler's favorite opera.
The subject first occurred to Chaplin when Hitler banned all Chaplin movies in Germany probably because of the vague similarity in their appearance especially the mustache. Hitler also mistakenly believed Chaplin to be Jewish.
Chaplin researched Hitler's life and discovered:
1) He and Hitler were born 4 days apart. (April 16 and 20 in 1889
2) He and Hitler both had their father die in their teen years (Chaplin's when he was 11, Hitler's when he was 14. The latter's father was a severe bully, the former's father a severe alcoholic). When Hitler was 18, his mother died. When Chaplin was 14, his mother was permanently institutionalized. Both spent their childhoods quite poor.
3) Both Chaplin and Hitler were enormous fans and devotees of the music of opera composer Richard Wagner.
There was a strong unofficial rule in Hollywood that as long as America was not in the war, films should not be made criticizing Naziism. This was pushed by both the Hays Code and isolationist Congressmen. The only filmmakers to defy this were Chaplin and the Three Stooges.
IMO, in making this remarkable dual use of the Grail motif from Wagner's Lohengrin, Chaplin is kind of doing what Wagner's Parzival does. In that opera, the "good guys" already have the Grail, but they need to rescue it's counterpart, the Sacred Spear, from an evil magician named Klingsor. Similarly, Chaplin is kind of rescuing the Grail from the evil magician, Adolf Hitler, and restoring it to a better person, the Jewish barber (also played by Chaplin).
On top of this, one thing I never liked about Wagner's Parzival is that Wagner took a character portrayed by Wolfram von Eschenbach as a bit of a comic cutup who clowned around a lot, and utterly drained him of his sense of humor, making him morbidly solemn (as have so many films of Joan of Arc). Chaplin on the other hand......
I was floored when after seeing the film 4 times, I realized what Chaplin was doing with Wagner's Grail music. The Grail theme is played throughout the entire globe balloon scene but only as the introduction and finale of the Jewish barber's speech which is mostly delivered without music. Several youtube videos of the latter have replaced the original with music by Hans Zimmer from "Inception".
The Dictator's Balloon Dance- first appearance of the Grail motif
Bravo!! I love the pieces you lifted up to bring home the point that we need to recover our loving, relational impulses to bring healing to our communities. Thank you for your wise thoughts.🙏
This is so profound! My heart aches for the day when we can actually learn from this and begin to heal the collective. Hopefully it has begun with enlightened leaders!
I’ve been thinking about the question for the king and trying to find what would be the most purposeful question rooted in love. It feels like we are here to evolve and create a soulfully embodied humanity. It seems in order to do that we must understand how each of us are called to uniquely serve that purpose. Recently, I saw an Instagram post of this singer of this song that we all know as a huge hit of the 90s. I had no idea that the inspiration for the song came from her own near death experience. As she was given a second chance at life, her intention was to ask God how she could serve and what way was she needed. Knowing her story has made this song resonate, that much deeper.
A course on this piece and on the thinkers and writers you’ve mentioned should be required in every high school or college.
Thank you so much, Satya. Framing how responding to the wound perpetuates the wounding (i.e. “Men are cut off from themselves, and so they are cut off from empathy, and so they choose violence, guns, weapons, and war on repeat. Over and over and over.”) is so helpful and validating. This morning, I read your fantastic post on the last day of an annual men’s weekend retreat I lead for a weekly men’s process group I run. Being with each other in our wounds with empathy, love, and connection, while restraining/shedding the impulse to deflect, minimize, fix, or even soothe (“it’s not that bad”) is much of the work in this group. I have seen these men grow more connected with their bodies and feelings, risking emotions and love toward themselves and others. And yet, the world (which shows up of course in group) tells them, shows them, again and again the dangers of risking vulnerability and authenticity with the assumption (the demand, even) of individual isolation. We are working slowly, collectively, to shift this story. I have Elise Loehnen’s interview with Gilligan cued up for the drive home today. Thank you.
A new comment that may be more relevant now than when posted.
Since I was 15 years old, I have roughly every 7 to 10 years rewatched Charlie Chaplin's bold (albeit flawed) parody of Hitler, his 1940 film "The Great Dictator".
But not until I was 45 (having seen the film about 4 times) did I realize something was happening.
Chaplin uses the "Grail motif" from Richard Wagner's opera "Lohengrin" both(!) in the dictator's dance with the giant globe (anticipating world domination) AND as the music in the Jewish barber's final speech in favor of freedom and democracy. And Chaplin almost certainly knew that Lohengrin was Hitler's favorite opera.
The subject first occurred to Chaplin when Hitler banned all Chaplin movies in Germany probably because of the vague similarity in their appearance especially the mustache. Hitler also mistakenly believed Chaplin to be Jewish.
Chaplin researched Hitler's life and discovered:
1) He and Hitler were born 4 days apart. (April 16 and 20 in 1889
2) He and Hitler both had their father die in their teen years (Chaplin's when he was 11, Hitler's when he was 14. The latter's father was a severe bully, the former's father a severe alcoholic). When Hitler was 18, his mother died. When Chaplin was 14, his mother was permanently institutionalized. Both spent their childhoods quite poor.
3) Both Chaplin and Hitler were enormous fans and devotees of the music of opera composer Richard Wagner.
There was a strong unofficial rule in Hollywood that as long as America was not in the war, films should not be made criticizing Naziism. This was pushed by both the Hays Code and isolationist Congressmen. The only filmmakers to defy this were Chaplin and the Three Stooges.
IMO, in making this remarkable dual use of the Grail motif from Wagner's Lohengrin, Chaplin is kind of doing what Wagner's Parzival does. In that opera, the "good guys" already have the Grail, but they need to rescue it's counterpart, the Sacred Spear, from an evil magician named Klingsor. Similarly, Chaplin is kind of rescuing the Grail from the evil magician, Adolf Hitler, and restoring it to a better person, the Jewish barber (also played by Chaplin).
On top of this, one thing I never liked about Wagner's Parzival is that Wagner took a character portrayed by Wolfram von Eschenbach as a bit of a comic cutup who clowned around a lot, and utterly drained him of his sense of humor, making him morbidly solemn (as have so many films of Joan of Arc). Chaplin on the other hand......
I was floored when after seeing the film 4 times, I realized what Chaplin was doing with Wagner's Grail music. The Grail theme is played throughout the entire globe balloon scene but only as the introduction and finale of the Jewish barber's speech which is mostly delivered without music. Several youtube videos of the latter have replaced the original with music by Hans Zimmer from "Inception".
The Dictator's Balloon Dance- first appearance of the Grail motif
https://youtu.be/-jj-PaqFrBc?si=pTLa0HauAigfT9v9
The conclusion of the democracy speech in which the Grail motif appears again
https://youtu.be/G4jI-xkYtPk?si=4U-tNROQTMU1My-z
Thank you for this, Jonathan! Enlightening and fascinating on many accounts.
Bravo!! I love the pieces you lifted up to bring home the point that we need to recover our loving, relational impulses to bring healing to our communities. Thank you for your wise thoughts.🙏
This is so profound! My heart aches for the day when we can actually learn from this and begin to heal the collective. Hopefully it has begun with enlightened leaders!
A Healing/Wholeness happens while reading this missive❤️🙏✨
I’ve been thinking about the question for the king and trying to find what would be the most purposeful question rooted in love. It feels like we are here to evolve and create a soulfully embodied humanity. It seems in order to do that we must understand how each of us are called to uniquely serve that purpose. Recently, I saw an Instagram post of this singer of this song that we all know as a huge hit of the 90s. I had no idea that the inspiration for the song came from her own near death experience. As she was given a second chance at life, her intention was to ask God how she could serve and what way was she needed. Knowing her story has made this song resonate, that much deeper.
https://music.apple.com/us/album/back-to-life/723348678?i=723349014
Brilliant Satya, wish you were on the silly talk shows
more often so folks could get educated!!!