In On Becoming The Example, Kimmy Sharing Light wrote:
"When we watch our children start a new journey, or life challenge, they look for role models or inspiration. We usually never think of being an inspiration for them." And she added that "whatever we do, we need to have the aim of becoming an example, an inspiration for others."
I posted a comment on her blog with the following words, which, in their mix, impose upon me a re-varnishing duty which I cannot avoid, even as I repeat them:
You ask elsewhere: "How do people judge you?" And you answer: BY OUR ACTIONS." That's right. Talk can reveal the inner soul, and talk can inspire; but talk, as someone or other keeps saying, is cheap.
To be inspired is to be fired up. The question is: By what? By whom? Yet "whom" is an imperfect word, for what it brings to mind in the first instance is a kind of singularity that is too confined and, as an anchor of sorts, too confining. The only safe "whom" is a plural "whom." But we, as individualities, are a part of that -- or a part of it as well. That's what you had in mind I think. And that's the main story.
As for the question "By what?", the essential answer remains, in your own words: BY OUR ACTIONS. But any layered answer we attempt returns us to the base, to the realization, that the "what" can be many things, and can never be the one size that fits all. It may be a moment that sits up; or an event that rewires the brain by refreshing pictures in the mind. Yet words too -- as JFK's, as MLK's, as Obama's, as Kimmy's -- can inspire. If we live by them.
In a community enriched by social capital, and to anyone over five or six or seven years -- I hit "t" for tears for a moment there, but caught myself (so, no oops) -- there are many points and instances of light besides mother or father or older sibling. As they say, "it takes a village."
But the village is more than the sum of the people, for it has many parts, and fuses nurture and nature in ways we strive to understand, but typically do only in half-measures.
And it sometimes takes, yes, tears -- to come upon the true path to our destiny. And not tears of joy.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Monday, August 11, 2008
Celebrity, Graffiti and Leadership
On Saturday, August 09, 2008, John Rubery published a piece titled "Celebrity Obama chasing after celebrities", in which he said, inter alia:
"Two recent John McCain ads have mocked Barack Obama's celebrity status. The Obama camp acted like a bunch of cry babies, calling the first commercial a "dishonest attack." Of course if Obama had a legislative record to run on after three years in the US Senate--How many of his bills have been enacted into law?--they wouldn't need to have responded in such a fashion. The ads were effective--Obama is increasingly looking like a lightweight..."
And he added: "The Telegraph of London reveals tonight that the Democrats will place quite a few Hollywood celebrities in prominent roles at their convention later this month.
The decision to let some of them take to the center stage is a calculated gamble by Mr. Obama to stick to his guns in courting the celebrity vote. It comes after his Republican rival John McCain landed a telling blow last week, mocking him as the "Paris Hilton" of the White House race in a so-called "attack ad". Mr Obama's strategists have concluded that the publicity gains from rubbing shoulders with actors like George Clooney, Ben Affleck and Matt Damon will outweigh the risks of appearing lightweight. The list of those approved for credentials to attend the event includes the actress Gwyneth Paltrow, who recently filmed a campaign advertisement for Mr. Obama, who is expected to bring her friend Madonna. Hollywood royalty, including Quentin Tarantino, Spike Lee, Warren Beatty, Susan Sarandon, Forrest Whitaker and Scarlett Johansson, will also be in Denver, as well as singers Kanye West and Wyclef Jean. Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones may also put in an appearance."
There are, of course, celebrities, and then there are celebrated leaders -- leaders whom the public put on a symbolic pedestal for the vision, and preferably the record, which they personify. To know the difference between the two is to know what politics and leadership are all about. Celebrity may be fleeting, but may also last a long time -- feeding on our less than critical adulation. On the other hand, while autocratic leadership may be perpetuated ad nauseam by force of arms, charismatic or "rational-legal" leadership must always, in the end, come to terms with the test of delivery. Certain leaders have achieved celebrity status, without being "mere celebrities". These include, in our time: Mahatma Gandhi, John Kennedy, Patrice Lumumba, Charles De Gaul, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Ronald Reagan, Che Guevara, Nasser, Pierre Trudeau and Tony Blair (for a while). By popular will, Obama has joined this select group, while McCain never will.
I posted a response to Rubery's piece as follows (I have amended the post somewhat):
The celebrity crowd is, as you suggest, mostly lightweight; people who are, as has been said of Paris Hilton (and as can be said of most), "famous for being famous." These are people whose fame make them think they have a mandate to "throw their weight" at every public policy matter, and at other things which don't quite matter.
But there's the paradox: being famous pads upon their shoulders a weight they can throw around, and which we others cannot fail to see, or feel. So, we cannot simply assume their light weight -- if we are not to be, ourselves, small-minded in our snootiness (or snooty in our small-mindedness). Or if we are not in Hilton's eyes to appear, like McCain, "wrinkly" tasteless and out of what should be our own depths.
So we must interrogate what is to be deemed truly light of weight, and what is to be heavy-duty. And let's not forget that it is McCain who provoked Paris Hilton to react to his clumsy association of what she and Spears ordinarily do (plus how they do carry themselves in public) with the serious campaign which Obama is waging (and with the ground-breaking candidacy which he represents). And her sarcastic video response told the world that it was McCain who appeared "hare-brained" (or lightweight), when there is no reason otherwise to believe he is, in comparison to Obama and to her (and the likes of her) and in terms of leadership in general and the energy debate in particular.
Let me add: It seems to me that Obama's joining that select group of celebrated leaders has deeply disturbed Sen McCain; and his recent Grand Tour must have brought McCain's discomfort to a head. So what does Team McCain do? There is no speculation here, it is there for all to see: They rush to spray graffiti and throw other dirt on the most telling images of Obama's Tour. In doing so, they hope, they will have sufficiently polluted them to prevent Obama from even thinking of using them in his Fall campaign -- as widely anticipated.
What McCain's team forgot as they plotted this devious scheme was that Spears and Hilton -- this new kind of political graffiti -- were a kind that can fight back! In fighting back, Paris Hilton has achieved what seemed impossible: she has wiped off all the graffiti and all the dirt.
"Two recent John McCain ads have mocked Barack Obama's celebrity status. The Obama camp acted like a bunch of cry babies, calling the first commercial a "dishonest attack." Of course if Obama had a legislative record to run on after three years in the US Senate--How many of his bills have been enacted into law?--they wouldn't need to have responded in such a fashion. The ads were effective--Obama is increasingly looking like a lightweight..."
And he added: "The Telegraph of London reveals tonight that the Democrats will place quite a few Hollywood celebrities in prominent roles at their convention later this month.
The decision to let some of them take to the center stage is a calculated gamble by Mr. Obama to stick to his guns in courting the celebrity vote. It comes after his Republican rival John McCain landed a telling blow last week, mocking him as the "Paris Hilton" of the White House race in a so-called "attack ad". Mr Obama's strategists have concluded that the publicity gains from rubbing shoulders with actors like George Clooney, Ben Affleck and Matt Damon will outweigh the risks of appearing lightweight. The list of those approved for credentials to attend the event includes the actress Gwyneth Paltrow, who recently filmed a campaign advertisement for Mr. Obama, who is expected to bring her friend Madonna. Hollywood royalty, including Quentin Tarantino, Spike Lee, Warren Beatty, Susan Sarandon, Forrest Whitaker and Scarlett Johansson, will also be in Denver, as well as singers Kanye West and Wyclef Jean. Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones may also put in an appearance."
There are, of course, celebrities, and then there are celebrated leaders -- leaders whom the public put on a symbolic pedestal for the vision, and preferably the record, which they personify. To know the difference between the two is to know what politics and leadership are all about. Celebrity may be fleeting, but may also last a long time -- feeding on our less than critical adulation. On the other hand, while autocratic leadership may be perpetuated ad nauseam by force of arms, charismatic or "rational-legal" leadership must always, in the end, come to terms with the test of delivery. Certain leaders have achieved celebrity status, without being "mere celebrities". These include, in our time: Mahatma Gandhi, John Kennedy, Patrice Lumumba, Charles De Gaul, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Ronald Reagan, Che Guevara, Nasser, Pierre Trudeau and Tony Blair (for a while). By popular will, Obama has joined this select group, while McCain never will.
I posted a response to Rubery's piece as follows (I have amended the post somewhat):
The celebrity crowd is, as you suggest, mostly lightweight; people who are, as has been said of Paris Hilton (and as can be said of most), "famous for being famous." These are people whose fame make them think they have a mandate to "throw their weight" at every public policy matter, and at other things which don't quite matter.
But there's the paradox: being famous pads upon their shoulders a weight they can throw around, and which we others cannot fail to see, or feel. So, we cannot simply assume their light weight -- if we are not to be, ourselves, small-minded in our snootiness (or snooty in our small-mindedness). Or if we are not in Hilton's eyes to appear, like McCain, "wrinkly" tasteless and out of what should be our own depths.
So we must interrogate what is to be deemed truly light of weight, and what is to be heavy-duty. And let's not forget that it is McCain who provoked Paris Hilton to react to his clumsy association of what she and Spears ordinarily do (plus how they do carry themselves in public) with the serious campaign which Obama is waging (and with the ground-breaking candidacy which he represents). And her sarcastic video response told the world that it was McCain who appeared "hare-brained" (or lightweight), when there is no reason otherwise to believe he is, in comparison to Obama and to her (and the likes of her) and in terms of leadership in general and the energy debate in particular.
Let me add: It seems to me that Obama's joining that select group of celebrated leaders has deeply disturbed Sen McCain; and his recent Grand Tour must have brought McCain's discomfort to a head. So what does Team McCain do? There is no speculation here, it is there for all to see: They rush to spray graffiti and throw other dirt on the most telling images of Obama's Tour. In doing so, they hope, they will have sufficiently polluted them to prevent Obama from even thinking of using them in his Fall campaign -- as widely anticipated.
What McCain's team forgot as they plotted this devious scheme was that Spears and Hilton -- this new kind of political graffiti -- were a kind that can fight back! In fighting back, Paris Hilton has achieved what seemed impossible: she has wiped off all the graffiti and all the dirt.
Mama Mariana's Relatives
Mama Mariana Odongo Othieno died at 78 years of age in the morning of August 8th, 2008. She died at Aga Khan Hospital, Nairobi, after a couple of months of illness. She should have lived another 5 to ten years. Alas, it was not to be!
More than one billion Chinese, and several billion more around the world, had looked forward to 08/08/08 with great anticipation -- that date marking, not coincidentally, the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics. But we, Mama Mariana's immediate relatives, had not thought for a moment that the date would turn out to be, for us, what it became. Yet that, as they say, is life. Beginnings and endings lap each other, and overlap.
She had many immediate relatives, some now gone but many very much around. Let me mention some, by relation (as listed in the August 11, 2008 issue of the Daily Nation newspaper):
Wife of Mr. James Othieno Olute of Ukwala, Ugenya, Kenya.
Beloved mother of: Charles Omondi Olute, the late Philip Othieno, Emma Mabachi, Joan Yambo, Anna Othieno, Scholastica Agutu, Beatrice Ahere and the late Benedict Othieno.
Mother-in-law of: Mary Omondi, Victor Mabachi, Prof. Mauri Yambo, Sam Agutu and Frank Ahere.
Sister of: Hellena Akoth, the late Joseph Okoth, Lucas Oduor, the late Theresa Okello, Cll. George Ouma Rarieya, the late Rosa Anyango, Luke Obok Rarieya, Amos Otieno Osur, Erustus Onyango and Marie Rarieya, among others.
Sister-in-law of: Tabitha Rarieya, Esther Otieno Osur, Margaret Akoth, Margaret Anyango, Maria Mbanda, Rosa Akoth, Anna Agola, Maria Osolo, Maria Asande, Clementina Ochieng', Debora and Anna of Gem, Ochieng Olute and others.
Grandmother of: Natabhona Mabachi, Nahama Mabachi, Grado Mabachi, Ochieng' Omondi, Sharon Omondi, Angela Omondi, Tina Omondi, Bella Othieno, Alex Othieno, Kwach Yambo, Chikka Yambo, Rege Yambo, Diana Othieno, Cindy Agutu, Robert Agutu, Lisa Agutu, Natasha Ahere, Tim Ahere and Martin Ahere.
Burial will take place on 23rd August 2008 at her Ukwala home.
More than one billion Chinese, and several billion more around the world, had looked forward to 08/08/08 with great anticipation -- that date marking, not coincidentally, the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics. But we, Mama Mariana's immediate relatives, had not thought for a moment that the date would turn out to be, for us, what it became. Yet that, as they say, is life. Beginnings and endings lap each other, and overlap.
She had many immediate relatives, some now gone but many very much around. Let me mention some, by relation (as listed in the August 11, 2008 issue of the Daily Nation newspaper):
Wife of Mr. James Othieno Olute of Ukwala, Ugenya, Kenya.
Beloved mother of: Charles Omondi Olute, the late Philip Othieno, Emma Mabachi, Joan Yambo, Anna Othieno, Scholastica Agutu, Beatrice Ahere and the late Benedict Othieno.
Mother-in-law of: Mary Omondi, Victor Mabachi, Prof. Mauri Yambo, Sam Agutu and Frank Ahere.
Sister of: Hellena Akoth, the late Joseph Okoth, Lucas Oduor, the late Theresa Okello, Cll. George Ouma Rarieya, the late Rosa Anyango, Luke Obok Rarieya, Amos Otieno Osur, Erustus Onyango and Marie Rarieya, among others.
Sister-in-law of: Tabitha Rarieya, Esther Otieno Osur, Margaret Akoth, Margaret Anyango, Maria Mbanda, Rosa Akoth, Anna Agola, Maria Osolo, Maria Asande, Clementina Ochieng', Debora and Anna of Gem, Ochieng Olute and others.
Grandmother of: Natabhona Mabachi, Nahama Mabachi, Grado Mabachi, Ochieng' Omondi, Sharon Omondi, Angela Omondi, Tina Omondi, Bella Othieno, Alex Othieno, Kwach Yambo, Chikka Yambo, Rege Yambo, Diana Othieno, Cindy Agutu, Robert Agutu, Lisa Agutu, Natasha Ahere, Tim Ahere and Martin Ahere.
Burial will take place on 23rd August 2008 at her Ukwala home.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)