Concord River and Slaughter

I found myself aching through the aching disconsolation of the reflections of facebook friends (once in a blue moon I go there) to the slaughter in Connecticut.  Two philosophers I know, Claire Katz and Jim Hadley, were present there (on facebook).  And their presence reminded me of  comments they made on a paper of mine a couple of years ago,  “The Face of the River,”  on Levinas, the Shoah, and Thoreau on slaughter and life on the Concord River. I asked in that meditation if a biblical frame might assist in extremity — an unfixed, porous, wild frame that holds ‘senseless kindness’ and ‘senseless evil’ together, that nails utter horror through our skulls and souls, that gives no answers, none at all, to the ‘why’ of our pleading yet lets us feel that asking our desperate whys is itself a response in the affirmative, part of the partial and fragile reconstitution of community rent asunder.


One comment on “Concord River and Slaughter

  1. dmfant says:

    after the initial state of shock and awe there is often some degree of relief for people who have suffered tragedies to find that others are in, or have been in, a similar position, and any way into imagining the ‘unimaginable’ (horrors to which we respond by saying I can’t imagine…) is another small step back into the flow of life, but as Levinas has taught us even that animal faith ( il y a) routine flow can take on an aspect of uncanny horror for those ‘guilty’ of being survivors.

    an interesting study of this is @:
    tho I think he is wrong to try and distinguish a “vicarious” religious response from any other.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s