Tuesday 22 October 2024

Social Eating

"The Snows of Ganymede."

"It was a shaking effort to nibble sedately at the food instead of wolfing it." (VIII, p. 199)

The dignity of the Planetary Engineers must be preserved even when they are guests of barbarian Ganymedean Outlaws. This is another sentence on which I will hang some remarks that are more about life than about Poul Anderson's text. But fiction is about life. In fact, I can make a comparison between the Order of Planetary Engineers and the Order of Buddhist Contemplatives. 

Brother Wilfrid told us that he refrained from eating sandwiches in front of other rail passengers because, being hungry, he might have eaten them hungrily. He was conscious of his public image. A monk should not seem to act from greed, hate or delusion - in this case, greed. 

Also, once again on the train, Wilfrid experienced hostility from a drunken football supporter whose team had lost a match. Wilfrid's monastic garb and appearance antagonized the drunk. Wilfrid decided, while travelling, to conceal his habit under an overcoat and his shaven head under a woolen cap because a drunken football supporter whose team has lost a match has a right not to be abruptly confronted with the fact of organized religion if he doesn't want to be.

8 comments:

Jim Baerg said...

"right not to be abruptly confronted with the fact of organized religion"

I would have to strongly disagree with that for that circumstance.
There are other circumstances where wearing your religion on your sleeve is grossly inappropriate.
Eg: if a judge prominently displays symbols of religion X on his person or in the courtroom, it casts doubt on his ability to be impartial in a dispute between a member & a non-member of religion X.

There is a dispute, mostly in Quebec about a law restricting government officials from wearing religious symbols while on the job. The argument for this law is precisely the appearance of not being impartial. The argument against is that it excludes members of certain religions from the government jobs in question.

I think the reason for this issue arising in Quebec more than other provinces is a reaction against the long period in which the political influence of the Catholic church in Quebec was almost theocratic. See 'Quiet Revolution' for the end of that.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul and Jim!

Paul: What I thought was that football hooligan's menacing behavior toward this Buddhist gentleman again reminded me of how flawed and imperfect al human beings are.

Jim: I disagree, because it looks a lot like the State being used to show hostility to Christians. Most of the instances I've seen of this kind of treatment seem to be directed against Christians, Catholics or Protestants.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,

All human beings are not flawed and imperfect.

Paul.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

And we all are, Christ and His Mother excepted, that is a self evident fact.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

It is not self-evident.

Jim Baerg said...

Sean:
Since Christian doctrine does not oblige Christians to eg: wear a cross, but some other religions do oblige wearing some sort of symbol eg: the Sikh turban. Such a law is not really a problem for Christians, but is for eg; Sikhs. Note: that such a law would also forbid the official from wearing an overt declaration of atheism.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Jim!

That clarifies your earlier comments, which I can now agree with.

That said, I know wearing turbans is a religious obligation for Sikhs, but it would not bother me if a Sikh judge wore his turban on the bench in Canada or the US.

Hmmm, turbans probably would not be practical for Sikh spacemen wearing space suits. And we see a Sikh naval officer commanding the remnants of the Imperial squadron which defeated the Merseians in ENSIGN FLANDRY.

Ad astra! Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Uncut hair is a sign of Sikhism. The turban is merely to hold it in.