THE LONG GOOD-BYES AND BELLS

Madison made it into the national news twice today: for the pile-up of 60 cars on the interstate due to snow, and for the foot-ball game victory which was, apparently, against all odds. For me, the week-end was centered around SC’s departure: watching the rituals of packing on Saturday, the cancelled flights on Sunday, delays and reroutings on Monday. I can’t believe I have to go through this again in a few days. Ca, whose winter break is longer, is still home. That’s the good news. The bad side is the anticipation of standing around the airport AGAIN next week-end, trying to fain interest in the permanent 50% sale of giraffe bags at the gift shop-- anything to distract from an imminent departure. The giraffe bags, BTW, have to go. Anyone who has been at the Madison airport in the last three (possibly more) years will know what I’m talking about.

This week-end I read a sentence about the agricultural standards set by the European Community (yes, in one of the 4 books). Having just written something about Poland’s accession to the EU, I had a moment of panic. Does everyone now typically speak of the EC rather than the EU? Has the common vernacular switched, so that I am using passé terms belonging to another era? Resolution no 2: request several more news services with international updates to appear in my morning dose of emails.

So what was the best international story of the day? The Bells one of course. For those not yet clued in to the linking capabilities of the blue words, let me just say that it is about monks in Russia (the old Russia), ancient bells and Harvard. It struck me that the piece challenged a way of regarding principles of ownership. Now, I am fairly immersed in the laws governing property ownership, especially in my work on divorce and family dissolution. I am used to a world where ownership is set by legal standards which in turn are governed by principles of fairness, efficiency, and perhaps some antiquated value-ridden notions of rightful transfers. I get that. But the Bells issues set me spinning. What seems obviously fair (for Harvard to disgorge the blasted bells) has no legal basis whatsoever! It could only be grounded in the idea that in art (and elsewhere?) there is a “true” owner, which supercedes the “rightful legal” owner. If that idea shifts the bells into the hands of the monks, then should every item of art (or non-art) be placed in the hands of the “true” owner?

Yes, sure, you legal types are reminding me that there is nothing new in exploring what an object was intended for in setting rules of ownership. If, for example, a person receives an item as a “gift,” then it is kept out of the cartload of divisible goodies at the time of divorce: it was INTENDED for the individual, and there it shall stay. But the world of bells meant for religious observance somewhere in the mountains sheltering Russian monks – that’s something else altogether. Here (or rather there, in Russia), you are examining what an object was originally created for, and this premise then blasts away the legal rules that frustrated that original intent. Imagine how differently we would treat each object around us if we were to fashion theories of “true intent” for everything in sight.

Nonetheless, I say give it back to the monks. Harvard claims it has a wider audience for the bells. Come on, Harvard, asserting rights of ownership based on a populist appeal: “we want to share them with the masses!” they say. It just rings false to me.

MOVIES and BOOKS and POLISHNESS

We watched a DVD last night: a favorite around here—Shakespeare in Love. It’s cleverness charms, and it is a satisfying kind of charm, you don’t have to say things like “It’s dumb, but I liked it anyway” since it isn’t dumb, it’s quite clever.

But the reason we watched a DVD is that we have been having trouble finding a movie to go to. Having waded through the sugar of Something’s Gotta Give, Love Actually, Under the Tuscan Sun, and suffered through the darkness of the remaining shows (does anyone NOT agree that it’s been a somber movie season?), there wasn’t anything that grabbed.

I suppose NOT seeing a movie is an option, but SC was supposedly on her last night home (I say supposedly because the weather did make it impossible for her to make the connection today after all; all her flights got cancelled and so now we have her for one more day: more movie v. DVD dilemmas for tonight!), and it seemed the frivolous thing to do. And, there is, in January and February, a sense of urgency: let’s see as much as possible because of the imminent Academy Awards (showing off linking abilities again) – note early date this year! We’ve been tracking the Awards faithfully for 28 years (those here that are old enough to say that), and everyone except for me is extremely good at Academy trivia. To me, the Awards are sort of a periscope into the future: this is what dementia will feel like when I’m 95 (note the inherent optimism in that clause): I’ll look around and not remember the names of people in the room. Currently, I only don’t remember the names of people associated with the movie industry.

Anyway, “reading a book” is not a great option. I am in the middle of four. But I have issues with some aspects of all of them. There seems to be a randomness there, but in fact, each book does have its reasons for sitting with a Borders book mark stuck in the middle:
1. How To Be Good by Nick Hornby is one of my book club’s selections. It is darkly humorous. The dialogue (thus far) gives you a good taste at what it feels like to live in a querulous relationship. It must be an eye-opener to the few (do they even exist?) who manage not to be repeatedly nasty to their partners, friends, or family. Kind of depressing, on the other hand, if, by page 3, you think to yourself, for the tenth time no less, “sounds like something I would say…” [A NEW YEARS RESOLUTION to myself: use less of Hornby’s dialogue in daily life.]
2. From Here, You Can’t See Paris by Michael Sanders. This is one of those endless titles that I pick up just so I can brag that I have read EVERYTHING on the shelves about rural life and artisanal food production in France or Italy.
3. The Lady and the Monk by Pico Iyer—I’ve been on this forever! And also his newer book, The Global Soul, which I only just started. I actually do like The Lady etc, but every once in a while it has to go into a state of repose, because Iyer is so slow in his reflective meditations about Kyoto and Zen Buddhism, that my interest stagnates.
4. Listy Albo Opor Materii by Stanislaw Lem—ahhhh, the other side of the ocean wakes up. I picked this up in Krakow last month. It seemed like a great way to keep me focused on things Polish. The trouble is that when I am here, Polish things there are like faces in the Academy Awards – very very vaguely familiar, but I can’t seem to remember why I had this pressing need, while there, to keep them vibrantly alive. Anyway, Lem, for those on this side of the Atlantic, writes commentaries on politics, society, etc. This book is a collection of his letters—written in a sardonic tone to bureaucrats, to acquaintances, other writers. I don’t really admire sarcasm in writing, but I do admire Lem’s wit. It’s very Polish (whatever that means: note my latest story on this topic, forthcoming, as they all are, someday somewhere).

If blogging should entertain or inspire, then my post should have at least some elements of one or the other. However, absolutely nothing funny passed through my head the entire day. The inspirational theme is more subtle. You could think-- if she, who has no ideas, can do this, so can I! If I may allow a prediction: I foresee that blogging will eventually replace email as a form of personal communication. There is something more adventurous about sending out a blog. The risk, however small, warrants a greater care in what you write, which is a good thing.

One goal I have for right now (in addition to reading 8 exams, which is not going to happen) is to try out linking. The site that I've been in and out of all day has to do with snow --it's a visually pleasing rendition of regional weather patterns. According to the site (okay, CNN, NYT, etc as well), we are to have our first snow storm tomorrow. SC is wondering if that means a cancelled flight back to Connecticut.

Still, weather is neither inspiring nor funny. Better think great thoughts (law related?) before I blog again.

I first thought about blogging last week. I thought it would take me a year to decide to try it. I changed my mind. I have many who think this is a terrible idea. But I see real possibilities of profit: do this, or I'll write menacing truths. I'm hooked. If I can figure out how to make this work.

Reasons to blog:
1. I don't have to write long personal emails to friends who may or may not want to hear about why I haven't finished grading exams yet.
2. I can do this instead of grading exams
3. I can be added to my daughters' lists of "favorites" -- that just feels so good!
4. I can experiment.

Reasons not to blog:
1. Cs has grave reservations
2. I have mild reservations
3. I most certainly will regret at least 51% of my postings
4. I will feel compelled to write about legal things since this is what I am trained to do. But it will be tempting to write about non-legal things more.

Okay, let me try posting.