I feel wacky these days. Good, but wacky. Like something is changing, like something is giving, opening, shifting.... The past few nights, sleep has been very patchy. In bed before midnite, I am usually awake a few hours later (or less, and always at 4am), realizing that it's futile to lie in the darkness and fight. So I jump up, eat a snack, write an email, call Mom--- eventually I go back to sleep, but it hasn't been the whole night through. Not the past few nights.
And yet I am not tired throughout the day. Just feeling a little wacky. Different. Out of it, and yet in it. Today I got a haircut. More on that later. During the haircut, I drank some Arak from last summer (a Sefardi Jewish version of Sambouca or Ouzo). Later, in class with Rav Daniel, I asked a question on this deep, complex discussion we've been having for months about blessings, wisdom, questions, knowing and not knowing, relating to God, etc... As I asked the question, and he looked at me and smiled, I started cracking up. Not stupid laughing, but a sort of elated, profound laughing that was connected to the questions, which itself was profound, and yet needed no answer. (does this make sense? told you i was feeling wacky). He laughed. Then other people in the class laughed, then I told him that I didn't need an answer, that it was enjoyable enough just to ask.
Uh-huh.
I am excited about my trip. For many reasons. One of them is because I want to see my STUFF. Sweaters and socks and books and comics and- well, mainly sweaters and socks and books and comics. And I am excited, actually, to eat kosher food with Esta. And to eat kosher Indian in Manhattan. And I am excited to see you. And you. And especially YOU (ahem).
HAIRCUT
So I cut my hair today. Actually, Aaron Braun (bottom of this post) cut my hair. The point is-- I now have PAYOS. Payis. Peyos. Payot. Sidelocks. Sidecurls. Whatever-- those funny horns that religious (frum) Jews wear. CLICK THIS. Mine are little right now, and silly-looking (thus no picture yet). But I got 'em. Payos and earrings. Rock n' Roll. It's a great way for a balding guy to have long hair. But a certain person said it's not cool for guys to play with their hair, which could be an issue. I was debating for a while IF I would cut them into my hair, and WHEN to do it-- before the trip to America or after? At first I thought to do it after, so I didn't look too weird, or freak out people I was meeting for the first time, like at Jay and Sarah's wedding. Then I realized, since the last time I left Israel to go home for a wedding, I ended up moving to California with a Catholic waitress I'd met in a Taco joint, maybe it would be better, for me, at least, to be a little funny looking, to remember the deal, and where I'm at, and what I'm up to. Just like I keep the earrings on to not lose the other side of me while I'm here, now I got the 'locks, so I can remain an honest orthodox heretic.
Or something like that.
Okay-- it's Fish n' Chips night upstairs, so I'm gonna run. Below are a selection of photos I came across when trying to Google "payis." (payot sidelocks payos, etc...)
And THIS I discovered in the process. Haven't explored it yet, but it looks odd enough.
And yet I am not tired throughout the day. Just feeling a little wacky. Different. Out of it, and yet in it. Today I got a haircut. More on that later. During the haircut, I drank some Arak from last summer (a Sefardi Jewish version of Sambouca or Ouzo). Later, in class with Rav Daniel, I asked a question on this deep, complex discussion we've been having for months about blessings, wisdom, questions, knowing and not knowing, relating to God, etc... As I asked the question, and he looked at me and smiled, I started cracking up. Not stupid laughing, but a sort of elated, profound laughing that was connected to the questions, which itself was profound, and yet needed no answer. (does this make sense? told you i was feeling wacky). He laughed. Then other people in the class laughed, then I told him that I didn't need an answer, that it was enjoyable enough just to ask.
Uh-huh.
I am excited about my trip. For many reasons. One of them is because I want to see my STUFF. Sweaters and socks and books and comics and- well, mainly sweaters and socks and books and comics. And I am excited, actually, to eat kosher food with Esta. And to eat kosher Indian in Manhattan. And I am excited to see you. And you. And especially YOU (ahem).
HAIRCUT
So I cut my hair today. Actually, Aaron Braun (bottom of this post) cut my hair. The point is-- I now have PAYOS. Payis. Peyos. Payot. Sidelocks. Sidecurls. Whatever-- those funny horns that religious (frum) Jews wear. CLICK THIS. Mine are little right now, and silly-looking (thus no picture yet). But I got 'em. Payos and earrings. Rock n' Roll. It's a great way for a balding guy to have long hair. But a certain person said it's not cool for guys to play with their hair, which could be an issue. I was debating for a while IF I would cut them into my hair, and WHEN to do it-- before the trip to America or after? At first I thought to do it after, so I didn't look too weird, or freak out people I was meeting for the first time, like at Jay and Sarah's wedding. Then I realized, since the last time I left Israel to go home for a wedding, I ended up moving to California with a Catholic waitress I'd met in a Taco joint, maybe it would be better, for me, at least, to be a little funny looking, to remember the deal, and where I'm at, and what I'm up to. Just like I keep the earrings on to not lose the other side of me while I'm here, now I got the 'locks, so I can remain an honest orthodox heretic.
Or something like that.
Okay-- it's Fish n' Chips night upstairs, so I'm gonna run. Below are a selection of photos I came across when trying to Google "payis." (payot sidelocks payos, etc...)
And THIS I discovered in the process. Haven't explored it yet, but it looks odd enough.
21 comments:
Have a sweet trip, and try not to do anything stupid this time, okay?
I hope you don't mind not knowing whether or not you know me. It's going to be a secret for as long as I can keep it.
Are you sure that your new sidelocks will be sufficient protection against wasting your time with Catholics?
Maybe you'd better bring along a few photos of the pope to rip up, in case of emergency. That should keep those Catholic succubi at bay, and insure that you only mingle with the right kind of people.
Is this strictly an East Coast visit? Dates please.
To that earlier anonymous comment, why so negative?
Since when is it "negative" to encourage a person in his use conspicuous religious acoutrements, for the purpose of self-segregation from people of differing religious affiliation, i.e. the Goyim?
It was his idea to begin with. I just offered an additional device.
Focusing the encouragement as a "purpose of self-segregation" seemed negative to me, particularly in the context of wasting time with the wrong kind of people.
Agreed there is a whole lot about the tradition (and more or less in other traditions as well) which pushes others away (such as can't eat your food, can't do this or that, overt belief in being chosen, etc), and history is of riddled with groups acting out against those notions. I imagine this line of thought can get all chicken and egg, but nevertheless both are there, one group drawing a line in the sand, one group not happy about it.
But people who know the wanderer, or just those who read his blog are sure to recall his efforts directly opposed to the line in the sand, see August 2006 and the Yellow Submarine event as just a recent example. That fundraiser was for people effected, not the "right kind of people."
Just be supportive of Stuart and he will do what he do what he must do. It's all his in his hands.
the deeper you goes
the longer it grows
so play with it and ponder
but if you choose to wander
among the goyim and the freaks
the journey lasting several weeks
you will discover what it was all about
whether or not you grow the payot out.
cdb
"Then I realized, since the last time I left Israel to go home for a wedding, I ended up moving to California with a Catholic waitress I'd met in a Taco joint, maybe it would be better, for me, at least, to be a little funny looking, to remember the deal, and where I'm at, and what I'm up to."
"Focusing the encouragement as a 'purpose of self-segregation' seemed negative to me, particularly in the context of wasting time with the wrong kind of people."
It seemed negative to me as well, and that was precisely my point. I appologise if I, somehow, misinterpreted your mention of the girl's religion, but I thought it unlikely to have been a random or meaningless detail, especially in the explicit context of your wanting "to be a little funny looking," in order, ostensibly, to avoid attracting such people again (or, even, to purposefully repulse them).
If however, I did, in fact, misinterpret your meaning, perhaps you would disabuse your readers of my misaprehension, by revealing the actual significance of the girl's religion, and, what you really meant by the original statement.
Your effort in the fundraiser is certainly commendable.
Dear Anonymous and Anonymous:
First of all, I just mentioned the fact that she was Catholic because everyone knows that Catholic girls are foxy. The actual negative impulse to self-segregation was the gig at the Taco joint. I'm far beyond that now.
Honestly, Anonymous, I think that the first comment by Anonymous was more tongue in cheek then straight out negative. Although, once you, Anonymous, made your initial statement, Anonymous did seem to get much more serious about the issue. And yet now, Anonymous, even YOU seem to be saying that there was a negative insinuation in the essence of my post.
It's all gotten so out of hand (thank God).
Anyway, the whole self-segregation idea is neither as stark as you seem to imply, Anonymous, nor as negative as you do , Anonymous. Bottom line is that, since I have "bought in" to the life of a religious Jew, it does not behoove me to have intimate dealings with foxy Catholic girls. It has nothing to do with the idea of "the wrong kind of people" or some elitist view of chosenness. I love Catholics. I mean, just as much as I love any other group of people in a vague, universalist way.
I love black people a little more, and am obligated to love Jews, although they sometimes grate on me.
I am exhausted and rambling.
I didn't intend to say that the payot will repulse unwanted races, rather that they will hopefully keep me cognizant of the fact that, unlike my last trip to America, I do not want to break Shabbes, eat pork or get busy with a Norweigian woman.
Or, even if I DO want to, I have absolutely no intention of doing so.
Hope i cleared up something here.
by the way-- it's great fun when folks debate here on the blog. that's the reason these things exist, right? keep it up.
and come one, play nice-- who ARE you two???
(also- nice poem, dr. b)
One final thought...
Imagine that you were reading the blog of an Amish woman who'd written:
"...I'd been wondering if I should wear modern clothing, so that I didn't look too weird, or freak people out, but, since the last time I left the commune to go home for a wedding, I ended up moving to California with a Jew, maybe it would be better for me to be a little funny looking."
As a Jew, what would your gut reaction be? Favorable, unfavorable, or, no particular reaction?
(Be honest, now.)
Self-segregation by means conspicuous religious advertisement, i.e. wearing one's religion on one's sleeve - Is it a good thing, a bad thing, or neither?
"Self-segregation by means conspicuous religious advertisement, i.e. wearing one's religion on one's sleeve - Is it a good thing, a bad thing, or neither?"
Its up to you (th self segregator). You'll never be a fly on the wall and so if your an observer, you just tainted the water...
It reminds me of the old SNL/Eddie Murphy skit where he dresses up as a white guy to see what life is like. Granted, that was race, and it was a joke (no, my dark skinned brothers, they don't give away money for free at the bank), but the point is that as soon as you choose to self segregate, people are going to react or at least be aware of what they should not say, think, or do while in the presence of this person. Sadly, this sort of dec(l)oration will distance you from another world. But, if it makes the world you want more pleasant and meaningful, then, its a good thing.
Stu's a man who will try it all so of couse its a good one to give a shot. Maybe it'll keep and fulfill him with all that was lacking before. Who knows, unless you try. Or, the Payos will end up died purple sealed inside of a ziplock bag under his bed.
Either one will be some fun.
Hm. One problem with the whole "self-segregation" issue is that it is seen by a large sector of the American populace as abnormal, which then opens the behavior to being seen as rude. And because we live (or lived, in my case) in a society that prides Universalism over everything (including Quality, Soul and Integrity), anyone who chooses to erect boundaries in their lives is seen as being elitist, racist, snobbish, isolationist.....
And then people react strangely to us, either with judgment & gross generalizations or undue caution. Just a small example-- in my world, I am a pretty darn liberal guy, as far as Orthodox Jews go. Even the more conservative (small "c") guys here are pretty liberal in the context of Orthodox Jewry (any observant Jew who listens to secular music, for example, is no fanatic). And yet people in my peer group are constantly referred to as "Ultra-Orthodox" in the press. Why? Because anyone who has ANY external structural framework in their life is seen by Western society as a fanatic, an extremist.
Usually, people's assumptions of what to do or not do, think or say in my presence have been slightly off the mark. I look forward to exploring these issues during this upcoming trip.
Ah, so much more to say on this..
Uh, Anonymous, I'm sure my African-American and Ethiopian-Israeli and Liberian readers appreciate your clarification. They won't hang around those banks no more.
Meanwhile, if you are gonna reference secret purple hairs, you obviously are inner circle enough to damn well identify yourself. If you want to keep it secret from the unwashed masses, at least send me an email-- a polite request from your Tour Guide.
"And because we live (or lived, in my case) in a society that prides Universalism over everything (including Quality, Soul and Integrity), anyone who chooses to erect boundaries in their lives is seen as being elitist, racist, snobbish, isolationist....."
But, by suggesting that you need to "erect a boundary in your life" - to wear a uniform that is exlcusive to your religious sect - and, thereby to keep non-affiliates at a distance, in order to have "Quality, Soul and Integrity," aren't you basically affirming peoples' perception of you as "elitist, racist, snobbish, isolationist?"
I mean, what you seem to be saying is, "I'm dressed this way in order to communicate to non-affiliates, who would dilute the quality and integrity of my religion/lifestyle:
I'm not like you, and, you're not like me. I will respect you, but I want to make sure that you know that I am different than you are."
And, what is the implication therein? Isn't it that you consider yourself not only "different," but, "better" in some capacity?
I mean, I can't think of any religions that pride themselves in being inferior. As far as I know, it's a given that every religion considers itself to have the best answers to the unknowable mysteries.
And, isn't this why most people in the West tend to play down their religious affiliations: there's already an everpresent, underlying potential for conflict and tension between faiths and sects, due to each of them thinking that it is they who are right about the most important matters conceivable?
And, when certain affiliates wear their sect on their sleeve, in order to make sure that everyone who sees them knows who they are, and what they believe - Evangelicals, for example - how does it make non-Evangelicals feel?
The obvious difference there, however, is that Evangelicals, like all Christian sects, have the M.O. of always seeking to absorb more members. One of their primary goals is to INCLUDE you (sometimes, whether you like it or not).
So, if you feel some resentment or annoyance at the brash imposition of the Evangelicals, at least, you don't feel yourself to be excluded by an elitist clique. You can resent them for how they try to change you, but you can't resent them for being exclusive, "elitist, racist, snobbish, isolationist," as they're literally bending over backwards to try and add you to their group, as opposed to trying to keep you out, that you would dilute their quality and integrity.
It's an intense proposition that anything anyone does is for the sake of all the outsiders to know the deal. My whole point in mentioning the payot was as a reminder to ME that I am engaged in a certain project with my life, to give me a reminder for strength to keep my structures intact.
It's a real conceit to imagine that I wear a Yamicha or that a Sikh wears a turban for the sake of publicity to other people. We do these things because we have found (or were born into) a culture that includes various symbols as part of a religious system. Part of that is personal spiritual work, part of that is cosmic stuff I don't understand, part of it is about one's relationship to the world at large.
For certain people USE their religion to promote elitist attitudes that probably feel good because they boost the ego, but it's not so different than other outward symbols-- modes of dress, displays of wealth or allegiance to a certain subculture.
Who sends more of a signal that says "i am different and not part of YOUR world"--- a cute little Yid with a yamicha on his head, or a scornful metal kid with metal spikes around his wrist, greazy hair and a filthy T-shirt featurning a picture of a bleeding fetus eating a sexy woman?
It's not just in the realm of religion...
...but, there's little chance of anyone thinking that "scornful metal kid with metal spikes around his wrist, greazy hair and a filthy T-shirt featurning a picture of a bleeding fetus eating a sexy woman" believes himself, and the organisation of which is a member, to be holier than thou.
By his uniform, that metal kid is communicating his group affiliation, and, even, that he rejects the societal staus quo; but, he's not communicating exclusivity or "elitist, racist, snobbish, isolationist." And, he's certainly not communicating that he's got the best answers to the mysteries of life and the universe.
"It's an intense proposition that anything anyone does is for the sake of all the outsiders to know the deal. My whole point in mentioning the payot was as a reminder to ME that I am engaged in a certain project with my life, to give me a reminder for strength to keep my structures intact."
Perhaps it is an intense proposition, but that doesn't mean that it's a false proposition. And, "being a little funny looking," in order to keep certain people at a distance, was part of the reason that you, yourself, originally stated.
If the real reason that you need to dress in uniform is to "give you strength to keep your structures intact," then I can't comment, because it really doesn't make much sense to me.
If your religious lifestyle is serving you well, and, making you content, then I don't understand why you would need strength in order to maintain it. I would think that the good feeling that you derive from its benefits would serve as strong motivation for you to keep on truckin'...
Unless it's a situation where you're forcing yourself to do the hard, painful, unpleasant work, in the short term, in order to achieve long term benefits and gratification. In that case, I could understand you needing a constant reminder, on your person, to assist you in forcing yourself to not stray from the path...
and/or, to stave off the temptation to stray, rather like a recovering drug addict might advertise that he's a member of NA, in order to keep away people who might tempt him into a short-term pleasure, with unpleasant long-term consequences.
Eggman. You said:
And, "being a little funny looking," in order to keep certain people at a distance, was part of the reason that you, yourself, originally stated.
___
No it wasn't. That whole take on things came out during the anonymous debate. I said: "maybe it would be better, for me, at least, to be a little funny looking, to remember the deal, and where I'm at, and what I'm up to.'
From the get-go I said that it was for me to remember-- not to keep anyone away-- if that Catholic waitress thinks my Payot are sexy and wants to twirl them-- all the better. The question is, how will I respond? And will I respond differently now than I did in 1999.
No lifestyle is easy-- you should know that, friend. Does yours bring you great satisfaction? Is it where you ultimately wish to be in life? Hard work and struggle for the sake of a future pay off is part of it, but it's surely more complicated than that.
As always, more to say on all of this, but...
I may or may not be sufficiently satisfied, at the moment, but I'm not wearing a uniform and adhering to an arbitrary set of lifestyle rules, in order to give me the strength to maintain an insufficiently satisfying lifestyle, so it's not a fair comparison.
And, looking back to your blog entry, your sentiment was that you might choose to be "a little funny looking," as an implied preventative measure against your previous behavior of, "moving to California with a Catholic girl."
You expressed that you would not like to repeat your previous behavior, "moving to California with a Catholic girl," and, implied that being "funny looking" might be a remedy.
Whether the specific aim of the Payot would be to visibly repell certain people, or, only, to remind you to not get too close to them (which, in itself seems a little odd, considering that you posess what appears to be a reasonably good memory), the end result would be the same, and the intention would appear to be, as you said, "elitist, racist, snobbish, isolationist."
So, I don't see how any of what's been said about that has changed, or that anyone's misinterpreted your original statement.
If you'd like to re-state it, because your original phrasing was ambiguous or misleading, then, by all means...
Gotta love how Stu's statement about the unaccepting nature of Western Universalism immediately brought a reply which proved his point. Lovely. Equality is an ultimate, unquestionable value, with which nothing can compare. Perhaps some exploration of the Western Universaoitst underlying, societal assumptions (enthymemes) would be more fruitful than attack mode.
That's it for my two cents.
I should mention some good characteristics about the "self-segregationists," in my neck of the woods, lest I leave the wrong impression...
The Hassidic kids are remarkably well behaved, that's for sure. And, the Hassids are good about giving alms to homeless guys on the street. It's a regular part of their day. Every day at noon, or whatever, I see the same homeless guy walk up to a Hassidic guy, and, without missing a beat, the Hassid reaches into his pocket, and gives his loose change to the homeless guy.
And, you never have to worry about getting mugged by a Hassid. They're certainly a peaceful subculture, even if they are a self-imposed "seperate, but equal" landlord class, as it were.
Post a Comment