Sustainable Goals

Sustainability is the ability to exist constantly. In the 21st century, it refers generally to the capacity for the biosphere and human civilization to coexist. It is also defined as the process of people maintaining change in a balanced environment, in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of technological development and institutional change are all in harmony and enhance both current and future potential to meet human needs and aspirations.

-- Wikipedia: Sustainability

"Sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."  I've always thought that Democrats and Republicans all want the same things, but our disagreements arise from how we go about achieving them.  Democrats seem to throw nonexistent money at an issue until the money runs out, while the Republicans prefer to find the money first and determine a sustainable solution.  Neither of them uses money based on anything tangible, however.  The problem with sustainability is that it takes a firm and tangible foundation in order to have any guarantee of success, and that takes significant time to put into place, which is tough in a society that wants everything... right now.

In the realm of reality, one has to consider ideas in the context of what we know, and knowledge is usually based on history.  With what we know, what are the odds that a particular idea is sustainable?  Philosophically, we can agree that socialism as a system of government, regardless of its appeal, simply isn't sustainable; it doesn't work.  Why?  Because, sooner or later, other people's money simply runs out.  There is an old adage which I find valid in most circumstances:  It takes money to make money.  In the larger picture, you must have the sustainable raw material to continuously produce a product, otherwise, the product is just a "flash in the pan."  If the individual has little or no expectation of bettering their station in life, then they are simply another cog in a closed system.  When a cog wears out, another takes its place, kind of like slavery.  You exist only for the good of the whole, but that will, sooner or later, leave the "cogs" wondering who is in charge of the whole?

For many in the field, sustainability is defined through the following interconnected domains or pillars: environment, economic and social, which according to Fritjof Capra is based on the principles of Systems Thinking. Sub-domains of sustainable development have been considered also: cultural, technological and political.

-- Wikipedia: Sustainability

Socialism is not a complex adaptive system.  Socialism, regardless of youthful thinking, exists for the good of the whole, not the individual.  Unfortunately, people are complex adaptive systems.  We have to be in order to survive.  Complex adaptive systems are defined as systems "in which a perfect understanding of the individual parts does not automatically convey a perfect understanding of the whole system's behavior. The study of complex adaptive systems, a subset of nonlinear dynamical systems, is highly interdisciplinary and blends insights from the natural and social sciences to develop system-level models and insights that allow for heterogeneous agents, phase transition, and emergent behavior."

While sustainable development may be the organizing principle for sustainability for some, for others, the two terms are paradoxical (i.e. development is inherently unsustainable). Sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

-- Wikipedia: Sustainability

"Sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."  We have socialist politicians who seem to have no concept of "sustainable development."  They seem to be more concerned with the needs of future generations than with the present.  In reality, if we pay no attention to the needs of the present we will ignore sustainable development and purposely endanger  the future by "compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."  This all amounts to a concept of intelligence we no longer teach; its called being smart.  What's the difference?

"Smart" is about having good sense and making good use of it along with any intelligence you have.  A person without good sense probably suffers from "artificial" intelligence.  They're nothing more than a computer without the sense to use what they know... or, to know when not to.    

Considering all of this, can free-thinking and civilized societies ever have expectations of sustainability?  Well, maybe we have to accept, first, that human beings are probably the only life on this planet who have the capability to define expectation in a robust manner.  This freedom to have robust expectations is something nobody can take from us.  The freedom to expect something better, the ability to rise up and be better than we are and to have an expectation of reward for attaining our goals, can only be truly recognized and enjoyed in free-thinking and civilized societies.

"Nearly half of American millennials would rather live in a socialist society than in a capitalist one, according to a YouGov poll. That said, only 71 percent of those asked were able to properly identify either."

-- David Harsanyi, editor, opinion columnist, author

(Millennials would benefit from reading H.G. Wells, followed up with a good dose of George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, Kurt Vonnegut, Ray Bradbury, and any other authors of dystopian fiction who show up on "banned books" lists.  Personally, I find their writing both enlightening and frightening, but I digress... or, do I?)

The socialist view that your reward for life is life itself, or that any pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness is the purview of the "state," and not the individual, crushes the free will inherent in the complex adaptive system of the human mind. This governing system sounds like a "dictatorship" even before it becomes one. Socialism dictates what your expectations are to be, what freedoms you are permitted, and how far you are allowed to rise. Socialism dictates your present and your future.  Socialism is a closed system which dictates to its parts.  It is only sustainable as long as there is fuel to run the engine. When the fuel runs out it doesn't matter how many cogs make up the whole, the engine either ceases to dictate or ceases to dictate optimally.  The engine begins to rebel as a way of indicating problems concerning sustainability.  If outside maintenance isn't forthcoming the engine will, as historically evidenced, die a painful death.

Are we currently on shaky ground with sustainability?  I'd have to say, yes.  Our complex system of interconnected parts has forgotten that we are a complex system of interconnected parts.  We have become too wrapped up in nonsustainable philosophies of "do for me" and "it's my way or the highway."  I am all about living in the "now," but living for today is not a philosophy of selfish desire.  We need to live for the betterment of ourselves, yes, but we must also consider those around us to ensure they have the opportunity to better themselves, as well.  Choosing not to help yourself is a choice with consequences.  Consequences can be the best of life lessons.

We had fed the heart on fantasies,

The heart’s grown brutal from the fare;

More substance in our enmities

Than in our love; O, honey-bees,

Come build in the empty house of the stare.

-- "The Stare’s Nest by My Window," William Butler Yeats (1865-1939), poet 

What we do today, as an individual or a society, has great bearing on generations yet to come.  The only way we can ensure a better world in the future is to make sustainable decisions in the "now."  Making sustainable decisions now will help us attain sustainable goals and ensure a free-thinking and sustainable world for future generations.

If you haven't grasped the philosophical idea, here, I'll repeat it one more time: SUSTAINABILITY.  

It's a concept.

"Many of us worry about the situation of the world . . . We need to remain calm, to see clearly. Meditation is a means to be aware, and to try to help."

-- Thich Nhat Hanh, Buddhist monk, global spiritual leader

Editor's Note

(Re: disclaimer cum "get out of jail free" card)

Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint. 

It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and while engaging in peaceful and constructive discussion, in an arena of mutual respect, concerning those opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.

We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.

Pastor Tony spent 22 years with United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with the premier, world renowned, Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects involved in pharmaceutical research. Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, and wages his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteers as lead Chaplain and Chaplain Program Liaison, at the regional medical center.

More Things in Heaven and Earth

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy"

-- William Shakespeare (1564-1616), actor, poet, playwright, "Hamlet" (I.5)

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." So says Hamlet's ghost, anyway. And, perhaps, Shakespeare was making a point when he wrote the line but, then, I'm not a professor of Medieval and Early Modern Literature in the very country in which this line was written.  God knows, we Americans seem to go out of our way to butcher the "King's English."  But this quote was the impetus for the post which follows.

Jem Bloomfield, who is a professor of Medieval and Early Modern Literature at the University of Nottingham, says this about the quote from Hamlet's ghost:  "If Hamlet is rejecting the limits of philosophy as a discipline, it may well be a reassertion of theology’s sovereignty as Queen of the Sciences. This would make it sound much more like a call to return to orthodoxy."

“Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”

-- George Orwell (1903-1950), novelist, "1984"

Orthodoxy, by definition, "is adherence to correct or accepted creeds, especially in religion. In the Christian sense, the term means "conforming to the Christian faith as represented in the creeds of the early Church."  And, with this, I find Mr. Bloomfield's statement confusing.

I do not see how this sounds "much more like a return to orthodoxy" if he is, in fact, "rejecting the limits of philosophy as a discipline."  I think that assigning limits to philosophy as a discipline sounds more like "adherence to correct or accepted creeds, especially in religion."  I read Hamlet as doing exactly what Mr. Bloomfield initially begins to state, that "Hamlet is rejecting the limits of philosophy as a discipline."  We need to accept, as Plato and Socrates might advise, that the only thing we know is that we know nothing, and we should never be certain we know even that.

I see inner conflict in Shakespeare which, through his writing, he tries to give meaning.  Years of historical, scholarly, debate concerning his religious beliefs may just come down to being spiritual when the dust settles.  I claim to be Christian, for no other reason than the majority of precepts which Christ puts forth I find to foster righteousness, yet I claim membership in no "organized" church.  I believe each person is responsible for finding their path to whichever version of God they choose.

“The creative members of an orthodoxy, any orthodoxy, ultimately outgrow their disciplines.”

-- Irvin D. Yalom, existential psychiatrist, emeritus professor

Perhaps this is all Shakespeare is trying to convey.  Let not your heart be troubled, as life is not as difficult as others would have you believe.  Question everything, even the limits we put on our philosophies.  I think he saw the limits which organized religion placed on civilization, how it dampened scientific inquiry and, therefore, discovery.  I think he realized that not being able to question everything was stifling not just science, but the arts as well.  After all, he lived in a period when Christian philosophy was in turmoil.  

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."  Perhaps he realized there was more to spiritual belief than following precepts even the Christian church couldn't agree on.  Faith is defined as a belief in something for which there is little or no proof.  As humans, we can't help but struggle to understand our reality, and yet we shackle ourselves to a system of faith when our very definition of faith itself rejects a system.  If we are to place our faith, our belief, in a "God" then, perhaps, we should base that belief on our faith in the only "WORD of God" written in stone; the Ten Commandments.  Or, was it thirteen, or seventeen?  We can't even agree on the order, much less the number, even though it is set forth in the Old Testament (an interesting read:  10 Commandments).

“Orthodoxy is idolatry if it means holding the 'correct opinions about God' - 'fundamentalism' is the most extreme and salient example of such idolatry - but not if it means holding faith in the right way, that is, not holding it at all but being held by God, in love and service. Theology is idolatry if it means what we say about God instead of letting ourselves be addressed by what God has to say to us. Faith is idolatrous if it is rigidly self-certain but not if it is softened in the waters of 'doubt.”

-- John D. Caputo, philosopher, Professor of Religion Emeritus

My mother simplifies this for anyone interested in listening:  We all know what is right.  God gave all of us the ability to differentiate right from wrong.  Life is really that simple, just do what is right.  Treat each other right.  Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.  You shouldn't have to justify actions which everyone knows are right because, well, the actions are obviously right.  Obvious in that the actions do no harm.  

Do no harm.  My "go-to" when explaining this idea of doing no harm, of doing what's right, is how we handle the abortion issue.  We all know that murder is wrong and, yet, we continue to make excuses for looking the other way when it occurs.  Women excuse the murder of their own by declaring it as "freedom of choice."  Their argument seems to use womanhood as an excuse to murder their unborn children, just because they don't want them.  Our actions should speak for themselves, to anyone who isn't locked into being perpetually offended at those doing no harm, that is. 

“But first I want you to tell me this: do you know the power of love? Christ passed over all the marvellous works which were to be performed by the apostles and said, "By this shall men know that ye are my disciples, if ye love one another.”

-- St. John Chrysostom (349-407), author, theologian

There are choices for when abortion is considered valid, I suppose, like rape, the safety of the mother, or health and well-being of the baby in question.  But, simply assuming you have a right to screw like rabbits and damn the consequences, is a fundamentally flawed premise; the consequences of this may very well lead to the murder of innocence, again, and again, and again.  I like to think there is a special place in hell for those who knowingly murder the innocent, especially without conscience.  Whether you commit the act, are complicit in the act by excusing the act or by turning a blind eye to it, a good sense of right should tell all of us the obvious - wrong is wrong, no matter your complicity.  But I, as usual, have digressed.  Or, have I?

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy physics, reality, or any legal interpretations which allow us to excuse what we fundamentally know is wrong in order to ease our collective conscience.  

If what we have defined as our reality isn't all there is, then what else is there?  Karma?  Perhaps, but karma is also placing belief in something for which there is little or no proof, like a Supreme Being, anti-gravity, time travel, faster than light travel, and the like.  Maybe we need to open our minds to the possibilities.  

We just don't know all the answers... yet.  Maybe we never will, but it won't stop most of us from looking.

“Every man has forgotten who he is. One may understand the cosmos, but never the ego; the self is more distant than any star. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God; but thou shalt not know thyself. We are all under the same mental calamity; we have all forgotten our names. We have all forgotten what we really are. All that we call common sense and rationality and practicality and positivism only means that for certain dead levels of our life we forget that we have forgotten. All that we call spirit and art and ecstasy only means that for one awful moment we remember that we forget.”

-- G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936), writer, philosopher, theologian

Editor's Note

(Re: disclaimer cum "get out of jail free" card)

Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint. 

It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and while engaging in peaceful and constructive discussion, in an arena of mutual respect, concerning those opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.

We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.

Pastor Tony spent 22 years with United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with the premier, world renowned, Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects involved in pharmaceutical research. Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, and wages his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteers as lead Chaplain and Chaplain Program Liaison, at the regional medical center. 

   

Things That Go Bump in the Night

Note to the reader:  You might find it beneficial to save the photograph, above, and open it in a separate window so you can magnify it in order to study the anomaly closer.

I've been taking photographs for most of my life.  My dad was a photo equipment technician, back in the day.  He owned his own shop and I would be able to use some of the equipment people never came back to claim.  From large format box cameras to 35mm and easily concealed smaller micro-format "spy" cameras, I used them all.  Black and white, color, and slide film would soon earn me a blue ribbon award for experimental photography.  I still dabble, though not enough to call it a hobby.  However, when photographing the paranormal caught my attention, I just couldn't resist the challenge.

I learned those minute anomalies occasionally show up in digital photographs.  I'll buy that, but it should show up occasionally everywhere, not just at the small cemetery I go to.  The examples I've seen online look nothing like what I photograph.  So, is it a spirit?  I don't know, I just find it fascinating to consider the possibility.

I happened to be in a local home turned antique store, recently, and passed through a heaviness at the top of a back staircase.  I retraced my steps several times to ensure it would come and go in the same spot.  I've always had an affinity for feeling and seeing odd things.  I could always feel a cold spot in an old Victorian home, and I still catch a glimpse of the occasional orb or "shadow" person in my parents home as well as my own.  And, that's not even taking into account the voices I hear, but then, that's a whole nuther story.  

As usual, I have digressed in order to give you a bit of my background before discussing the photo, above.

“Now I know what a ghost is. Unfinished business, that's what.”

-- Salman Rushdie, author, novelist

I went home to research the property and found the daughter of the 1848 original owner, was a special needs child relegated to the upstairs rooms.  She died at thirteen, in her upstairs room, from yellow fever.  This research, along with reports of sighting on the property, indicates the possibility of two more "entities" also inhabiting the house.  I should be so lucky.  The owners, upon my request, gave me permission to take photos and use a voice recorder upstairs.

This photo was the second to the last of 25 shots around the house.  I advised whatever supposed spirits present that I was taking only two more photos before packing it in to leave, and the photo shown above was the result.  It looks as if I took the photo through a material, a gel or oil, which would bend the light of the images behind it.  If I'd been using an old single-lens reflex camera, I'd say a greasy finger touched my lens but, no, this was a digital unit with a shutter which closes over the lens to protect the optic from wandering fingers.  Being digital, I have a clear view of the subject on the screen and can readily tell if the lens isn't clean.  This strange evidence earned me an invitation from the owners to return and continue my investigation.  I will, again, be taking this small Olympus camera as well as my larger format Nikon, with the tripod, and the voice recorder.

With my continued odd experiences in this supposed paranormal realm, I have been looking into an electromagnetic field (EMF) meter to add to my equipment and an infrared (IR) video camera with which to capture anomalies which may cause unusual temperature changes.  A modest investment of several hundred dollars for this extra equipment might be worth it.  If all fails I can always hire out as a photographer for birthday parties and bar mitzvahs.

So, what happens if the electronic voice phenomena, the EVP I capture, tells me to get out or die?  Well, I get out, of course.  I am a firm believer in not antagonizing something I cannot see that is threatening to do me harm and, besides, I already have the threatening EVP recorded, so mission complete.  It must be time to go have a bourbon... or three.  It's also time to call in one the ghost hunter groups from television's primetime who have less common sense and a shorter life expectancy, than I.  These idiots seem to get some thrill antagonizing, daring, or threatening entities which have been reported to mean people harm.  I get much satisfaction when the supposed spirits exercise fulfillment of their ignorant wishes. 

As far as the threat against my person is concerned, I'm all about a bit of payback, so sending a copy of the EVP to an exorcist will tickle my heart.  I much prefer research, confirmation, communication and, if possible, assistance in finding "spiritual" peace so the supposed entity can move on, especially if the supposed entity is a child, a special needs child, who might be confused about what "going toward the light" is all about.

You will have noticed I always try to refer to the "goings-on" as supposed entities or spirits.  Nothing is proven in this realm of pseudoscience, so I don't think anything should be referred to in a definitive manner, regardless of my personal belief.  My beliefs are based on my faith in the balance of the universe.  The light must be balanced by dark, life by death, good by evil, this reality by another, and so on.  Are there ghosts?  We seem to have much "evidence" to sway our opinion, but there is nothing definitive to tell us exactly what it is we have evidence of.  My faith tells me there must be something after this existence, as I believe our existence continues after we shrug off this physical shell.

Is what we see and hear, these ghostly phenomena, simply reruns of past drama, playing out in a neverending loop?  Possibly, but it doesn't explain supposed interactions between the living and whatever or whoever haunts us.  It doesn't explain the clearly heard recording from an aircraft crash site; a voice asking, "Did we crash?"  It doesn't explain a pilot, in the cockpit of a parked passenger jet, who watch numerous passengers at the next passenger boarding bridge (PBD) as they deplane from... nothing; no aircraft had just arrived, nor was one attached to the boarding bridge (See Video).  Nor does it explain the "shadow" people seen and/or recorded by so many credible people, including yours truly (See Video).

Gullibility seems to be a part of our nature.  Our ability to question what we see, hear, and feel, is also in our nature.  Having faith is understanding you are leaning into a belief in something for which there is little or no proof.  It is the ability to separate fact from desire, even though you hope your desire is well-founded and not misplaced.  Gullibility tends to take advantage of the closed-minded, those with an inability or lack of desire to question everything.

Things that go bump in the night?  They don't much bother me, but I do take notice.  Being an intelligence analyst, I try to make sense of them before determining my opinion.  Until the heater comes on and makes the same noise, it isn't the heater.  By the same token, if I'm the only one at home and I know I put the black cat outside, then, when I see a low black form wander across the living room... I know it isn't the cat and, yes, I'm torn between fetching a walking staff, a 9mm semi-automatic pistol, or a rosary and a Bible, before running the critter to ground.

“How do you plan to scare people tonight?" asked a hollow-voiced spector. "I'll wait until they sit down to supper, then scream whenever someone sticks his knife in his meat."

I'll haunt the bedchambers," said another. "A bloody ax at midnight always gets a good reaction."

A ghost with a purplish tinge to his aura spoke next. "I can top both of you. I'm going to dress like a guard and haunt the privy. I'll hide in the hole and when anyone sits down I'll wail, 'Who goes there? State your business!”

― E.D. Baker, children's author, "Once Upon a Curse"

Editor's Note

(Re: disclaimer cum "get out of jail free" card)

Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint. 

It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and while engaging in peaceful and constructive discussion, in an arena of mutual respect, concerning those opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.

We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.

Pastor Tony spent 22 years with United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with the premier, world renowned, Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects involved in pharmaceutical research. Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, and wages his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteers as lead Chaplain and Chaplain Program Liaison, at the regional medical center.

A Lonely Hunter

“The heart is a lonely hunter with only one desire! To find some lasting comfort in the arms of another’s fire … driven by a desperate hunger to the arms of a neon light, the heart is a lonely hunter when there’s no sign of love in sight!”

-- Carson McCullers (1917-1967), author, "The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter"

I think it was my freshman year in high school when I was assigned to read an American classic of my choosing, but not be a genre I would normally lean toward.  We were tasked to broaden our horizons.  Oh, joy!  I went totally off the rails and chose "The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter," a 1940 first novel by a young Carson McCullers.  If you haven't read it, or been treated to the 1968 film adaptation, starring Alan Arkin, and debuting Sondra Locke, you should do either but if you love to read, get the book.

My critique of those who critique comes with some evidence. Taylor Jasmine wrote a review of the film for the Literary Ladies Guide in 1997:

Strong performances, especially by Alan Arkin as Singer and Sondra Locke as Mick (her film debut) earned them both Academy Award and Golden Globe nominations — for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress, respectively. The film received numerous other nominations and awards, and was generally favorably reviewed.

Still, the film fails to capture the sweep and emotional impact of the book, so I’d recommend reading it before considering the film.

For those of us who understood it, or read the book first, it was excellent.  And, yes, as usual, and despite efforts to render a "faithful adaptation," the film "fails to capture the sweep and emotional impact of the book."  Taylor included the review of the film written by Frank Daley of the Ottawa Journal, Friday, October 4, 1968.  I've included excerpts from that review:

Alan Arkin plays a deaf-mute named Singer in a small southern town. He has moved there so that he could be near another deaf-mute who is in the hospital. The film is a rambling story of how John Singer meets the Kelly family with whom he boards as well as several other respected and not-so-respected members of the community.

Singer is desperately alone in his silent world and as he makes his way during his time in the town he touches many people’s lives momentarily and always for the better, but he never succeeds in establishing enough rapport with anyone so that then can help him when he needs solace.

Okay?  Ready for his critique?  The following would explain the nomination for "Best Actor," I suppose:

Alan Arkin displays a marvelous sense for the quiet moment; he is particularly adept at indicating the loneliness of a man unwilling and unable to shout to the people he is helping that he needs help more than they.

  And, this would explain him getting just the nomination:

Sometimes Arkin uses mannerisms that seem too restricted for the character. Because a man cannot speak must he be impoverished in action?

And this last leaves me confused as to why the film received so many other nominations:

Direction by Robert Ellis Miller is never quite tight enough; there is always a flaccid feeling to the scenes and this combined wit the speciousness of some of the scenes involving the peripheral characters makes The Heart is a Lonely Hunter a weaker film dramatically than it might have been.

Remember what Taylor Jasmine wrote, above?  "Strong performances, especially by Alan Arkin as Singer and Sondra Locke as Mick (her film debut) earned them both Academy Award and Golden Globe nominations — for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress, respectively. The film received numerous other nominations and awards, and was generally favorably reviewed."  And, then, Frank Daly politely rakes it over the coals.  Frank, how many movies have you seen that try to depict a "faithful adaptation" and actually end up being better than the book?  Uh-huh.

But I think I enjoyed book and movie so much because I identify with the character of Singer.  Frank Daly doesent seem to identify as well:  "Because a man cannot speak must he be impoverished in action?"  Depends on what personal hell a man's been through, Frank.  Have you walked a mile in that man's shoes?  Have you not read your own critique?  To refresh your memory, he is "desperately alone" and he possesses "the loneliness of a man unwilling and unable to shout to the people he is helping that he needs help more than they."  And yet, he helps others.  How sad is that, you sanctimonious critic?  Have I said how much I dislike critics?

As for me, I heard reality in Singer's letter to his hospitalized friend, Antonapoulos, “The way I need you is a loneliness I cannot bear.”  But, the sentiment was incomplete until you read further, "I am not meant to be alone without you who understand."  Singer is surrounded by strangers.  In his mind, he sees himself a stranger in a strange land, surrounded by people who don't know him, don't understand him, or won't take the time to.

Don't believe everything you read from a critic.  What you personally enjoy, or understand, is money well spent.  Critics, paid or not, spew opinions like they deserve to be believed.  Kind of like network news, the Times, or the Post.  Be smarter than those around you and separate someone else's "truth" from the facts.  Find support for your own truth.

Our sense of confusion and loss may not be anchored in this reality.  We may be feeling the haunting emotion of lives past.  Someone we loved and lost.  Perhaps a sense of guilt for not being able to save them; a failure of our sense of responsibility to them.  Love transcends time and space; it transcends even death.

The heart is truly a lonely hunter.  What one person finds temporarily amusing, another cannot envision living without.  Some have a need to find their heart's desire; to find it, and then keep on finding it, each and every life, so they can hold it, and hold it again; to quench the need, the sense of loneliness, they cannot bear.

The heart is only a lonely hunter until the hunt is done.

Editor's Note

(Re: disclaimer cum "get out of jail free" card)

Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint. 

It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and while engaging in peaceful and constructive discussion, in an arena of mutual respect, concerning those opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.

We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.

Pastor Tony spent 22 years with United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with the premier, world renowned, Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects involved in pharmaceutical research. Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, and wages his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteers as lead Chaplain and Chaplain Program Liaison, at the regional medical center.