Beach Haven

LEVIATHAN AND THE AIR-PUMP
HOBBES, BOYLE, AND THE EXPERIMENTAL LIFE
By Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer
Princeton University Press, 1985, 391 pages
Review by Michael Beach

This history covers an important time in the history of scientific thought. Many scholars consider the 17th century as the ‘scientific revolution’. Many famous discoveries took place around this time. The history under review here speaks to a major debate of the time. Represented by Robert Boyle were those who believed in experimentation as the basis of knowledge production. Thomas Hobbes, on the other hand, questioned experimentation, preferring philosophical debate as the basis for coming to understanding. Boyle argued that we should believe our eyes, yet so much of experimentation is ‘managed’ that even today debate over knowledge construction versus knowledge discovery continues.
 
The reading claims that “many aspects of the programme that he (Boyle) recommended continue to characterize modern scientific activity and philosophies of scientific method” (p. 341).  Yet the pump experiments varied in both makeup and outcome. Theories also varied from pump to pump and outcome to outcome. Did facts created by experiments explain the various theories, or did the various theories serve to explain the facts noted in the experiments? When one interprets facts, are they interpreting whether something is a fact, or are they interpreting the meaning of the fact itself?
 
There also seems to be an interesting power balance issue. Hobbes had a connection with the king. You’d think that would have caused his arguments to carry more weight. Yet Hobbes was not accepted into The Royal Society (a prominent British scientific association). The authors offered a long set of examples of speculation by others as to why that was.  Some of the arguments surrounded Hobbes’ personality, yet Shapin and Schaffer show how some accepted members were perhaps more surly than Hobbes.
 
It may have come down to the fact that Boyle had members of The Royal Society act as witnesses to his air-pump experiments and even sign affidavits to the effect. At the same time Hobbes questioned the need for repeated experiments, or at times any experiments. By questioning the intellectual approach of the use of ingenuity (p. 130), which for Hobbes and his detractors was understood to be a slant, he put himself at odds with what amounted to be much of the collective thought leadership at the time. Reliance on the mechanical ‘tricks’, as he put it, was to denote something less than true philosophy.
 
Hobbes wrote a treatise on knowledge and science published in 1651 which he titled Leviathan. Aside from Hobbes’ negative portrait of experimentalists, most members of the Society looked at Hobbes as too dogmatic, including this publishing.
 
Whatever one believes to be the ultimate issue, the authors clearly state, “The rationalistic production of knowledge threatened that involved in the Royal Society’s experimentalism” (p. 139). Hobbes made an interesting assertion that many would still argue today. He depicted Boyle’s experiments as being based on his own assumptions about the nature of air. Likewise, it’s clear that Hobbes also had preconceived ideas. In fact, both Boyle and Hobbes came to what today would be thought of as false conclusions about what was happening inside the vacuum created by the pump. One could argue Boyle pre-decided the outcome of the experiments, the matters of fact, based on his ideas around the nature of air. Likewise, Hobbes essentially argued to ignore the experiments since the interpretation of the outcome was not proven, only conjectured. Yet Hobbes put more stock in his own ideas without any consideration of any matters of fact. As I see it both were socially constructing their perceptions pre- and post-experimentation.

THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS
4th Edition
By Thomas S. Kuhn
The University of Chicago Press, 2012, 217 pages

In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (original 1962) Thomas Kuhn sheds doubt on the cumulative nature of scientific knowledge, and offers an alternative explanation of how scientists’ views change over time. Kuhn describes the source of his inspiration as coming from historiographic cyclical patterns leading up to and following major shifts, or “extraordinary episodes” (p.6), in scientific thought; noting the pattern as normal science, puzzle-solving, an established paradigm, discovery of anomalies, crisis, and revolution. The author’s “most fundamental objective is to urge a change in the perception and evaluation of familiar data” (p. xliii), here he is referring to historiographical data, in order to advocate a “reorientation” (ibid) of how we understand the nature of scientific change.

Kuhn appeals to both historians of science, and communities of scientists, in an effort to show value in both disciplines, and how the ideas of each influences the other. His argument is strengthened through use of multiple specific examples of scientific revolutions (extraordinary episodes both large and small) to show how events followed the proposed historic pattern.

The author points to weaknesses in his argument in a postscript added to the 1969 edition, having ignored other influences on paradigms (which he referred to as a 'disciplinary matrix') such as metaphysics, values, and shared commitment (p. 185-186). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions has become canon in the field of Science and Technology Studies (STS), as it raises significant questions in history, sociology, philosophy, and policy; all core concerns in the STS discipline.

​LEFT FOR DEAD
MY JOURNEY HOME FROM EVEREST
By Beck Weathers and Stephen G. Michaud
Bantam Books, 2015, 292 pages
Review by Michael Beach
 
At first one could assume this was another account of the tragedy that has been documented in a number of works including books and movies. Although the authors reference occurrences of the 1996 Everest attempt, this book focuses more about how mountaineering, and other obsessions, took Weathers away from his home and family. As a result, he nearly lost his family. On Everest he nearly lost his life. He did lose physical parts of himself. He documents both the physical rescue and recovery, as well has the changes he made in himself to become a part of his family again. Although there is adventure in the book, this is more a self-assessment and philosophical journey.
 
Beck Weathers was among climbers from several adventure tour organizations who paid for guides to help them summit Everest. Unfortunately, a series of physical problems kept him from reaching the goal. Worse, bad weather swept in on summit day and trapped many of the climbers out in the open, including Weathers. He and several other climbers were eventually left behind as other climbers felt unable to help them, and judged that helping them back to camp would not stop the inevitable. Death did come to the other stranded climbers around Weathers, but for reasons even he does not understand, he wondered alone, blind, and severely frost bitten eventually stumbling into camp.
 
Having read a few of the other accounts, this telling adds perspective. It is also very applicable to many who obsessively take on goal achievement as a method to stave off depression. That is Beck Weathers’ assessment of himself. His family suffered to the point that his marriage was on the brink of divorce. Coming home physically after Everest did not stop the potential of divorce. What saved his family was his willingness to understand the real issues he faced psychologically and get help in approaching something like normalcy in himself. He had to take this step first before he could work with his wife to reconstitute the family unit. Though this reviewer was not as obsessed as the primary author, yet some of those same tendencies are noted, making this work of the author’s introspection one also for this reader.

SPACESHIP IN THE DESERT
ENERGY, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND URBAN DESIGN IN ABU DHABI
By Gökçe Günel
Duke University Press, 2019, 256 pages
Reviewed by Michael Beach

Success or Failure?


This book recounts the history of an entire community created in the deserts of Abu Dhabi based on renewable energy approaches. The idea was to create a campus in which new energy technologies could develop to help the country become less dependent on petroleum revenue. The name of the new city is Masdar.

Günel notes how Bruno Latour referred to technology as a system (p.139). Where most of us see only the portion we interact with, that portion is supported by an entire network of interconnected parts. For example, at Masdar people in general noted the pod cars of the Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) system as if they were one and the same (p.142). In fact, the pod cars are of no worth without the supporting system known as the undercroft, the controlling software, and an army of maintenance crew, often made up of workers from Asia. These workers were not allowed to live in the city, nor even use the pod cars once up and running.


How does one describe project success or failure? Exactly! The fact that this is even a question points to how criteria (official and unofficial) varies with every beholder’s eye. 


The PRT was not successful in that it could not handle large numbers of passengers efficiently. It was not cost effective. The undercroft requirement caused increased indirect expenses for the buildings which had to be lifted by 20 feet to accommodate the required space. One could simply walk the short distance the PRT served. It went not faster than a bicycle. Eventually, when a new executive took over the Masdar facility, the PRT was cancelled.


Despite the pessimistic view, others saw how people who came to visit the facility lined up to ride the PRT despite the availability of a shuttle bus during large events. Even jaded academics who pointed out issues still used the system because it was fun, making functionality a secondary consideration (p.142).


Günel makes the point of how the Masdar PRT is just one in a string of PRT projects that all end essentially the same. Although the system in West Virginia is still in use, it does so with a $120M price tag and an annual cost of $5M, and has stayed essentially small scale. It only goes between  West Virginia University (WVU) campuses and downtown Morgantown. 


In his 1994 book  The Anti-Politics Machine: “Development,” Depoliticization, and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho, Jame Ferguson argues whether or not original project goals are realized, something is accomplished. The project goals represent an entry point of development efforts, but whatever effect comes about, stakeholders think of some outcomes as desirable, and others as undesirable. 

SAINTS 1846 – 1893
NO UNHALLOWED HAND
Numerous editors and writers
Intellectual Reserve, Inc., 2020, 833 pages
Reviewed by Michael Beach
 
This is the second volume of history published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints under the Saints name. It opens during the interregnum period after the martyrdom of the prophet Joseph Smith. In this opening period the church was led by the quorum of twelve apostles, and more specifically by Brigham Young as president of that quorum. The history continues through the exodus to the Rocky Mountains, post US Civil War efforts against the church surrounding the practice of polygamy, and the eventual dissolution of the practice. The review ends with the dedicatory events around the completion of the temple in Salt Lake City.
 
Professional historians meticulously researched and wrote the sections of this work. The approach they used combines traditional historical narration intertwined with personal stories of some of the specific people involved in key events. Stories of individuals help the reader better understand how thought trends were shaped both within the church and within political and journalistic circles. There are plenty of examples of abuse of power by civil authorities. One also finds tensions around the issue of polygamy both within subgroups of church members, families, and even individuals.
 
Another thread the historians follow includes relations between church members settling in the west, and native peoples who were already in situ. Some of those interactions were amicable, but often the contrasting culture led to conflict.
 
Major historical events become more understandable through personal stories. Actions by church leaders, civil authorities, and widely recognizable individual people are more understandable, if not always sympathetic to the reader. 

​

THE SYNTHETIC AGE
OUTDESIGNING EVOLUTION, RESURRECTING SPECIES, AND REENGINEERING OUR WORLD
By Christopher J. Preston
The MIT Press, 2018, 195 pages
Reviewed by Michael Beach

The Singularity

Among the many threads in The Synthetic Age, Christopher Preston refers to a book by Ray Kurzweil. In The Singularity is Near, Kurzweil defines this event as when artificial intelligence (AI) gets ahead of human intellect. Preston characterizes results of this theoretical event as “a future in which artificially intelligent machines gain a runaway intellect that exceeds anything the human brain can counter” (157).

This theme is a common thread for Preston. Earlier in the book he expresses concerns over other synthetic proposals run amuck. Nanobots that self-replicate, biobots acting as bacteria, genetically created bacteria acting as bacteria, and unforeseen effects of approaches to cooling the earth are some of the examples Preston points to where technical solutions to natural concerns carry their own risks.

Why the ethical backlash to the idea of genetically-created humans, for instance? Dubbed the Human Genome Project 2, some organizations want to take technical lessons learned with genetic recreation of simpler life forms and apply them to the more complex genetic sequences of humans (154). The singularity of AI described by Kurzwail considers software as a servant of humanity, even if the risk of so many sci-fi movies of the machine taking over exists. Creating human life synthetically for purposes such as harvesting organs or experimentation raises reasonably grave concerns. For instance, would a genetically created human be a human? If so, then human rights would apply to them, and would preclude their use as test subjects or organ farms. If not human, then one could argue the ‘experiment’ would have failed. This ethical area hearkens back to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.

One of Preston’s base arguments shows how concern over human interference with nature is not avoidable. In fact, humans have always interfered with nature. Preston points out how some argue that humans are a product of nature so human acts are acts of nature. The difference between human acts and natural acts gets blurry when humans intervene in natural processes as simple as moving butterflies north in England to help them migrate fast enough to avoid perceived global warming effects, or as complicated as seeding sulfuric acid in the stratosphere to lower sunlight penetration. Human history and natural history begin to merge (149).

EBOLA: HOW A PEOPLE'S SCIENCE HELPED END AN EPIDEMIC
By Paul Richards
Zed Books, 2016, 180 pages
Review by Michael Beach

Just the Facts?

Among the arguments Richards makes, I'd like to examine the area of messages originating from official channels.

Is it possible to be factually correct and still misunderstand? Perhaps it is if one only has (or shares) some facts, or if the facts come too late to have any real meaning. In his book on how ‘people’s science’ helped end Ebola in three countries, Paul Richards makes this case in terms of messaging by international and state organizations attempting to ‘educate’ residents in upper west Africa. Richards does not make the case for or against Ebola origination through eating or handling of ‘bush meat’ (zoonotic spillover). He does make the case that once transmission was obviously moving person-to-person (nosocomial and family care), continued public messages about bush meat did more to increase mistrust than to curb the disease (25).


People in the forest border area were particularly targeted with bush meat messages. Likely this would be due to assumptions that these areas were where hunting was most likely to occur. Despite this, even when Ebola moved along roads and began to display in urban areas messaging was slow to change. Villagers, and later urbanites, quickly lost faith in messages coming from official sources in part due to this dissonance. As messages shifted toward person-to-person transmission, highlighting danger in caring for the sick and handling of bodies, mistrust was still lingering. Facts about people not adopting safe practices lead to untrue assumptions by official decision makers about culture as a route cause of Ebola spread (51).


People in affected areas had already figured out on their own health how care and body handling were risky behaviors, but again the messaging from official sources was dissonant. Authorities offered centralized care and body removal, but were often not available when actually called. People were not able to see their family once removed either for care or burial. Many decided if death was inevitable it would be better to just die at home among family. Despite assumptions that locals were unreasonably resistive, growing cries to train people, supply the tools, and allow for more dispersed care and body removal using ‘safe burial’ practices resulted in a quicker drop off of cases. Once people understood the disease (transfer limited to contact with body fluids, hydration focus) many figured out how to improvise protective gear through use of things like trash bags and raincoats. One might ask the question, is unfamiliar different than uninformed?


As regular people and respected local leaders understood the nature of Ebola, use of those facts lead to incorporation of new social adoption of care and burial. Once local trusted social leaders incorporated relevant facts to actual experience, the link of science and society, ‘people’s science’, all three countries reviewed in the book became strong examples of effective disease control.

THE WINTER WIND OF RELATIONS
From AS YOU LIKE IT
By William Shakespeare
Review by Emily Coates
​
In the forest of Arden, a member of the exiled Duke Senior sings a song about the winter wind in comparison to friendship and relations. The song not only speaks of the winter weather, but also of relations both imagined and very real. I will explore how the lines of the second half of the song measure up to the real-time relationships of the Duke Frederick and Duke Senior and Oliver and Orlando. After that, I will look into the language Shakespeare employs in the use of the words “bite” and “warp”; they were chosen specifically for their imagery. I will seek to understand why he chose those words, in connection to the imagery of water and the wind. To conclude, I will analyze why Shakespeare chose end the song with “this life is most jolly”, although the entirety of the song is about the betrayal of someone who was once held in esteem (2.7 181).

I would argue that Orlando and Oliver’s relationship can be seen as the same wind that Duke Senior and Duke Frederick are on, and bound to follow in the same pattern if something does not change. The winter wind is characterized as being “not so sharp as a friend remembered not” (2.7 198). When winter winds blow, it starts as being incredibly sharp. As the gust continues, it invades any and all pockets of warmth. The imagery this creates for the audience can show the pattern of the relationships. In Orlando and Oliver’s case, the crevasse between them has taken shape by biting words and envy; it is heavily driven by emotion.  The passion of youth cuts into their relationship like the winter wind, and creates the unremembered friend.  True to the song, any and all loving is “mere folly”, and not to be trusted (2.7.181). Both men allow for their emotions to determine how they feel about one another. For example, Oliver tries a couple of times to banish or seriously injure his younger brother Orlando. However, this instantly goes away when Oliver falls for Celia, and realizes that it would make her sad for him to follow through with his fiendish schemes. The winter wind can also be like this. In the course of an instant, wind that was once harsh dies down and remains calm.


Meanwhile, Orlando takes the passion that he has and focuses it towards Rosalind, to whom he writes love poetry and sighs the day away for. It almost seems as if he has completely forgotten his brother, and any ill feeling that may have occurred between the two; the seen and the unseen. Orlando’s turn of passion is symbolized by the line that says “most friendship is feigning” (2.7 181). It’s ironic that Rosalind is feigning to be a boy, but another way this line can apply to Oliver and Orlando’s relationship is seen when the two are speaking to each other. At the beginning, we see Oliver and Orlando exchanging a few words. Although he is clearly displeased in having to deal with Orlando, Oliver seems cordial. However, Oliver sends Charles to dispose of his little brother, which is unsuccessful. If anything, in his act of anger, Oliver actually starts the ball rolling on Orlando’s relationship with Rosalind, helping his little brother out. Both bodies of passion are set on a course that neither brother would have seen coming.


Had their emotions not led the foolish brothers to love, it could be argued that Oliver and Orlando might have ended up in the same position that Duke Senior and Duke Frederick have found themselves in at the beginning of the play. Their strong passions have since subsided with the onset of age, but the winter wind that they are represented by is far from being quelled. Duke Fredrick especially seems to find any reason to add fuel to the fire of his hatred towards Duke Senior. Just as a winter wind can sometimes cut you deep enough to blow away any warm pockets of air, so is Duke Frederick. He is looking to anything that will keep the quarrel going. This is exemplified when he banishes Rosalind simply for being related to Duke Senior, who states “treason is not inherited, my lord” (1.3 57). Her argument falls on deaf ears, however, and she is banished as a result of Duke Frederick’s anger. 


On the other hand, not all winter winds are harsh and cutting. Duke Senior seems to be doing quite well for himself in the Forest of Arden.  If we compare the winter wind to the anger throughout the relationships, then Duke Senior would be one of the ones that moves the snow and covers the plants with white frost. Having Duke Senior accept the banishment beset by Duke Frederick is done intentionally, to show how letting the wind blow around you excessively can take effect. What I mean by this is that while Duke Frederick lets his anger fester into hatred, thus making his wind fierce and fueled by a forgotten Duke Senior, the very man has let go of any ill feelings and quelling a potential oncoming storm between the two. Instead of nursing his own hate in being wronged, Duke Senior has let go of those violent emotions and become as adaptable as the wind. As seen in his cheerful hunting, the Duke has truly found a way to make “life most jolly.” (2.7.183)


As I have been describing the wind and its relationship to some of the main relationships, I have pointed out the use of harsh words such as sharp and fester. Two that Shakespeare uses that I have not touched on much are included in the second half of Amien’s song, namely ‘bite’ and ‘warp’. Now, going back to the relationships as stated earlier, Orlando, Oliver, Duke Senior and Duke Frederick represent wisps on the same breath of wind. The latter pair however, is a bit further down the line, showing how age can and does play a role in the relationships that we choose to focus on. Shakespeare uses Amiens to describe these two using the words I have mentioned. When talking about the word ‘bite’, it is tied to the imagery of wind in the song. Using wind is appropriate when comparing it to Orlando and Oliver’s relationship, as they are still young and full of gusto in their emotions for one another. They are also opposite of one another, just as Duke Frederick and Duke Senior. One of the two is more vehement in his feeling (Duke Frederick and Oliver), while the other allows for the space between them to cool the flames of feeling. Duke Senior and Orlando fit the bill here perfectly. Now, back to Orlando and Oliver; the wind imagery fits because of the way it can blow gently or cut you down seemingly to the bone.  


The word ‘bite’ suggests the anger and jealousy found in Oliver, who is the brother more vocal in his anger and hatred. He is more affected by the winds that he feels, and so then puts those feelings into actions against Orlando. It is interesting to note how the song states that the bite is not so close in measurement of “benefits forgot”, which is what Orlando comes to talk to Oliver about in the first scene with them together (2.7 186). Those forgotten benefits, which Oliver does not see fit to bestow upon Orlando is the straw that breaks the camel’s back.  From then on out, Orlando is both chased and forgotten by his brother, as the mood strikes him. Much like the winter wind does not last forever; Oliver’s hatred is not always causing Orlando pain.


While the younger two characters may be seen as the wind, Duke Senior and Duke Frederick’s relationship can be likened to the water that warps. Going back to the idea of their emotions having subsided and cooled a bit in time, the relationship between these two fit into the imagery of a stream or river with Duke Frederick being the current and Duke Senior being a stone that is warped and broken down by the relentless buffets of the water’s current. Duke Frederick plays the part of water well. He is never stopping in his reminder to the court who is Duke and who is banished. Any time he has a chance to speak ill or tarnish the name of Duke Senior, he will do it. Though Amiens sings that being a forgotten friend is worse than the water’s warp, he may not understand that the water does not need to sting sharply in order to be effective. Duke Frederick has been angry and hurt over Duke Senior for a long time. His sharpness has left him, but his endurance has not. The language that Shakespeare employs allows the audience to understand that unless something big can happen to make Duke Frederick change course, he will continue to barrage Duke Senior with his hate and anger from all of these years. It takes the unity, love and trust between Celia and Rosalind to open Duke Frederick’s eyes to his foolishness.


Meanwhile, Duke Senior is a perfect example of that rock sitting in the middle of the stream. He remains steadfast in his position of banishment and lets what mean words come his way that do. Duke Senior denounces the court life and appreciates life in the way it has been dealt to him, with the freedom of the trees and the wild. Like that rock, he does not let the waters of Duke Frederick’s hate warp him for evil. He is warped, to an extent, as any rock in a stream would be. However, it has been a change for good. Duke Senior has been given a chance to live in a realm where conning advisers are far, and he can focus on his men, to take care of them. In the darkness of an ‘uncivilized’ society, Duke Senior sees the true joy that comes from the forest, the animals and the “holly” (2.7 182).


Finally, through this analysis, I have come to understand more of why Shakespeare chose to end the song with the lines “this life is most jolly” (2.7 183). Throughout my essay, I have focused mainly on how negative feelings from Oliver and Duke Frederick have played a role in relationships and the language used in a song by a simple man. I have also explored the personality traits of Duke Senior and Orlando, being a foil for the aforementioned others, and how their patience and endurance have changed what could have happened into happily ever after. But the answer of the irony in the last line has been there the whole time. I would go out on a limb to suggest that it is because of those winter winds of anger and hatred that life can be “most jolly” (2.7.183).


Most of the answer comes from the famous speech that Duke Senior recites in the forest, shortly after this song is sung. He states “And this our life exempt from public haunt, Finds tongues in trees, books in the running brooks, Sermons in stones, and good in everything. I would not change it.” (2.1 35-7) While the winter wind Amiens sings about can be interpreted as the loss of one once held dear due to harsh feelings, Duke Senior comes to understand it in a different way. In the combination of the quotation used and Duke Senior’s role as the softer winter breeze, it’s clear to see that Shakespeare was wise to end the song in such a phrase. There is good to be found everywhere. This is a lesson that Duke Senior learns during his time in exile. He learns that although we face hard times, we will have a rough life if we miss the forest for the trees. While Duke Frederick has focused so much on his singular hatred for Duke Senior, Duke Senior has spent his time focusing instead on what blessings lay around him.


In the same manner, it takes a major hardship in order for Duke Frederick to learn about true happiness. When Celia leaves him to remain with Rosalind, he is infuriated to say the least.  Not only has his enemy, Duke Senior, stolen away what Duke Frederick deemed his, now Celia was choosing the exiled Duke over her own father. Celia is the only child to Duke Frederick, and he cares for her very much. He wishes to expunge Rosalind so that his own Celia will shine much brighter. However, he completely misses that the daughter of the man he loathes is one of the reasons Celia can shine so bright. Having grown up together, they have grown into their current personalities because they had each other. Duke Frederick, in his need to have everything done according to his wants, has completely missed out on some of the greatest moments in his daughter’s life. He refuses to acknowledge the holly in his life because he is too busy complaining about the snow and ice that has covered it.


On the other hand, we can see how the final lines of the song also apply to Oliver and Orlando. Oliver on his own has a very hard time finding joy in a life that is burdened with a responsibility like Orlando and this adversity seems too much for him. Oliver struggles with this, and instead of confronting it, he takes out all of his anger on his brother. It is not until he meets Celia and falls in love that he can let go of this anger and resentment. For him, holly would do nothing but be a bother. There would be no beauty in it, or any value for that matter. Upon meeting his future bride, however, there is a change of heart. For once, Oliver can focus on something good and wonderful, as opposed to his weightier feelings of hatred. From there, he chooses to see the good around him and forgive Orlando for everything. The past is buried, and together, they start anew. The theme of reconciliation not only allows for them all to marry the ones they love, but also make amends with blood relations.


Orlando, on the other hand seems to have an easier time understanding adversity as Duke Senior does, as he tortures himself with courting Ganymede. There is nothing stopping him from going to where Rosalind might be and courting her instead. In his own way, he has echoed the line stated by Duke Senior, “Sweet are the uses of adversity” (2.1 12). He courts Ganymede until he can no longer bear the idea of being away from Rosalind. He has become so enraptured with her that it is painful. This pain, however, is one that he learns to tolerate, as the hope of meeting with his beloved becomes ever closer. When Rosalind disguised as Ganymede announces that the object of Orlando’s affection will be with them the next day, Orlando is not sure if he can believe the news. However, he is willing to put his heart out on the line one more time. He chooses to be positive and trust this boy who speaks so civilly. This plays back into the notion that Shakespeare writes in his lines “Then heigh-ho, the holly! This life is most jolly” because of the meaning carried in the words heigh-ho (2.7.182-3). In Elizabethan times, the line could be used as an expression of boredom or sadness. It could also be a cry of hope or encouragement, which I would argue is the desired usage in Amien’s song. 


By implementing those two words, Shakespeare leaves a question for each of us to solve for ourselves. It is the question that ties all of the analysis together. As we figure out the answer to the question, then we will also be able to find the holly of life beautiful despite the weather. It can change us for the better if we let it. The characters in the play As You Like it have found the answer to this question for their personal lives. The question in question is this: look at the things around you; will you choose to be happy?

DEMOCRATIC DESIGNS
INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION AND ELECTORAL PRACTICES IN POSTWAR BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA
By Kimberley Coles
University of Michigan, 2007, 297 pages
Review by Michael Beach

Democracy is neither natural nor intuitive (5)

For those of us who lived our entire life in a country based on democratic principles, the idea that democracy would be thought of as unnatural and counter intuitive seems itself to be counter intuitive. Coles makes a compelling case when one considers all the thought and effort it takes to create an election. An election is really three separate processes, voter registration, voting, and results tabulating. All are complex. Each are made up of many actants (people, objects, processes).

Parts of the international community have a fundamental belief of democratic society as the best power to bring about peace (237). Bosnia-Herzegovina seemed to outsiders as somewhere that could be improved through the imposition of democratic principles since in the 1990s it suffered from war, authoritarianism, and communism (33).

Coles argues rather convincingly how the need to create complex labor-intensive processes, and a perceived need to impose democracy through negotiation and external experts (or even internal experts) would seem to question naturalness. So many places along the election path are fraught with both innocent and intentional process ambiguities and deviations. Many options along the planning and execution paths are open to design and interpretation based on assumptions by system architects and implementers.

Since democracy was a new approach to Bosnians, fears of unfairness or interference led to a desire for transparency. This transparency was bodily symbolized in form of the (sheer, mere, peer) presence of international experts (88). This is similar to the point made by Rist about the need for technical measures including scientific (or expert) knowledge.

Coles argues not only a need to use experts, but also how these experts are knowledgeable about processes that are used in virtually any setting using a cookie-cutter approach (16). The agencies seeking to facilitate the democracy machine approach argue that using ‘standard’ practices makes the effort apolitical or acultural (77) much as Ferguson describes. Technicality equates to depolitization (152).

The intent of holding an election is to translate voter will into political authority so long as those imposing democracy deem the outcome as desirable. The process has to be perceived as valid, but who’s perception matters? Whoever judges validity, in Coles argument the process and outcome needs to be perceived as free and fair. The election is not discretely either free and fair or not free and not fair, rather processes need to be free enough and fair enough to create confidence (155). Mathematically, that is more likely if there is some level of transparency (though total transparency is not really possible). How transparency is measured is another ambiguous concept. So long as the difference between winners and losers is well outside the margin of error perhaps there is more trust. When races are more closely contested then trust is probably more an issue.
​

HIV EXCEPTIONALISM
By Adia Benton
University of Minnesota Press, 2015, 176 pages
Review by Michael Beach

Kabuki Theater?

Benton sums up the heart of her findings as “…the aggregate of HIV programming techniques has given rise to new forms of social relations based on biological status and further entrenched AIDS as having exceptional status” (143). Among many supportive threads of this summation one link to other similar published works is the concern over aid colonialism (139).

A number of behaviors and attitudes link HIV/AIDS development in Sierra Leone to colonial perspectives similar to other forms of global development efforts. In general, infected among the poor are most dependent on the healthcare and food aid offered through sponsored support groups. These programs prescribed patient behaviors based on models used in other parts of Africa for the good of the people. HIV-positive people who have independent means were not subject to the demands of such groups and ultimately received the best care.

For example, patients were often grouped into program-prescribed identities such as “HIV-positive,” “former combatant,” “vulnerable woman,” “bush wife,” and “traumatized” among others (140). Within these roles, infected people are expected to display behaviors which are sometimes contradictory in order to show they are deserving of assistance. How does one demonstrate vulnerability and self-sufficiency at the same time?  One should look good to show the effectiveness of treatment. In this case looking good is equated with looking well. At the same time, if one does not seem vulnerable then perception may be that the person does not need the help. The help recipient must then navigate a sort of theater that requires shifting appearance based on circumstances and audience.

Benton points to how the poor must be accountable to development agencies. Metrics such as showing up on time to group events, participating in public events such as marches or parades, making public acknowledgement of their status of being HIV-positive show complicity.

Not only development agencies expect compliance. So does the state. Government leadership want to appear competent to those same development agencies to keep the funding coming in. One approach is an appeal to moral conformance in the most private of human activities. Benton raises the issue of ownership of patient bodies. Clarifying the concept of ‘sexual citizenship’ she notes how the state expects people to abstain or practice ‘safer sex’ in an effort for both care for the state and care of the state. The more extreme version of this argument depicts personal sexuality as a resource of the state (130), the argument being some behaviors lead to the spread of illness and an increased demand on healthcare resources. This seems not unlike how actors’ behavior is prescribed to complete a successful Kabuki performance, but with play directors changing throughout.