Philosophy | CW Hawes

My Favorite Things

The Sound of Music has so many fabulous songs in it that the musical has to be one of Rodgers and Hammerstein’s greatest productions.

The song “My Favorite Things” exudes positivity. A training exercise for the children on how to get over the speed bumps of life. It also works for adults.

I simply remember my favorite things
And then I don’t feel so bad.

At its base, “My Favorite Things” represents an Epicurean approach to living day to day.

When the dog bites, or the bee stings, or when I’m feeling sad, all I have to do is remember my favorite things and at least some of the pain goes away.

This is the Epicurean approach: happiness via pleasure is already ours, we just need to reduce or eliminate the pain to realize it.

If you look at the things that Maria says are her favorite things, they aren’t even things she owns — they are things that simply bring her pleasure.

Rain drops. Kitten whiskers. Girls in white dresses. Snowflakes. Cream-colored ponies. Silver-white winters that melt into spring.

Life is full of pleasurable things we don’t even own. They just exist. It’s pain that prevents us from seeing them. Reduce or eliminate pain, and the pleasure is ours.

How do we reduce or eliminate pain? By remembering all the good things we have that aren’t even ours. But we have to force our minds past the pain to remember them. That is the work we must do to achieve the good life. A life of pleasure that brings us happiness.

Nothing happens without work. There are no magic wands. In the midst of pain and sadness, remember the good things, the things that bring you pleasure — and happiness will be yours.

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, happy reading!

CW Hawes is a playwright; award-winning poet; and a fictioneer, with a bestselling novel. He’s also an armchair philosopher, political theorist, social commentator, and traveler. He loves a good cup of tea and agrees that everything’s better with pizza.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider buying me a cup of tea. Thanks! PayPal.me/CWHawes

Justinia Wright Private Investigator Mysteries on Amazon!

Magnolia Bluff Crime Chronicles on Amazon!

Share This!

2024

Today is the second day of the new year. I trust yesterday was a day of feasting and good cheer. It certainly was for me.

This year I’m not making any resolutions. I don’t think I’ve ever completed a single New Year’s resolution. So this year – phooey. I’m not making any.

In fact, I’m not even setting any goals for myself. Not a single one. I’m tired of goals. They remind me of work and I’m retired.

I have projects I’d like to complete:

- - - Set up a Kickstarter campaign for the ninth Pierce Mostyn book.
    - Write a new Justinia Wright mystery.

And that’s it. Anything else I do, will be done for the joy of doing it. No more goals for this guy.

You see, last year was fairly momentous. I had a significant shift in my thinking. Namely, that the chief end of man is to pursue pleasure and avoid pain. In doing so, he achieves what we all want: happiness. And I want nothing more than to be happy throughout all the days that remain to me.

So no schedules. No goals. No resolutions. None of that stuff. It’s don’t worry, be happy. Il Dolce far Niente. The sweetness of doing nothing.

More and more I’m finding how sweet doing nothing truly is.

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, happy reading!

CW Hawes is a playwright; award-winning poet; and a fictioneer, with a bestselling novel. He’s also an armchair philosopher, political theorist, social commentator, and traveler. He loves a good cup of tea and agrees that everything’s better with pizza.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider buying me a cup of tea. Thanks! PayPal.me/CWHawes

Justinia Wright Private Investigator Mysteries on Amazon!

Magnolia Bluff Crime Chronicles on Amazon!

Share This!

Inflicting Pain — We Love It

This post is going up on Halloween. So happy Halloween to all who celebrate.

And if you’re catching this post the day after Halloween, then a blessed All Saints Day to you.

One thing that seems to be ingrained in us, part of our DNA, is a desire to inflict pain. And if we aren’t inflicting it, we love to watch someone else or something else dishing out pain to another.

I think that’s why the small screen, the big screen, and video games have become so violent. It is our love of dishing out copious amounts of pain to others. We love doing it and we love watching it.

Our indifference to others who are suffering is part of this human trait to inflict pain and suffering. It’s the flip side of the coin, so to speak.

Over on the Threads that Bind blog, I posted an article describing several rather nasty methods of torture. Torture being nothing more than our desire to inflict pain taken to the next level. Take a look at the link below:

Oh, the Pain! The Pain!

The article makes for good Halloween reading and could be a resource for writers.

Epicurus believed eudaimonia (the good life, a life of well-being, a life of living and doing well) was a life of continuous pleasurable experiences that was free from pain and distress.

In other words, according to Epicurus, reducing or eliminating all pain and distress from our lives goes a long way to our achieving that ultimate state of pleasure which is the good life.

And isn’t that what we seek each and every day? The absence of pain? Of course it is.

We take painkillers; over-the-counter and prescription.

We might use illegal drugs to kill pain and induce a temporary state of euphoria.

We buy things to give ourselves to lift our spirits.

We may even inflict pain on others because we get a little high watching them suffer.

Where people get Epicurus wrong is that they miss his point that virtue is an intrinsic part of achieving the state of happiness, which is a life of pleasure and an absence of pain. For Epicurus, pleasure is only good if it doesn’t bring about any pain.

For that reason, he didn’t advocate marriage or having children because both too often bring pain into a persons life. The same with having sex. It isn’t bad, it just results too often in pain. So it’s best to avoid it.

I believe Epicureanism is a fitting philosophy for Western first world people seeking meaning and purpose in life. It fits well with our sensibilities. We want lives free from pain and filled with pleasure. Epicurus shows how to get the good pleasure that never produces pain.

A pursuit of Epicurean pleasure might also eliminate, or at least diminish, our love of inflicting pain on others. And that just might make this world a little better. Who wouldn’t want that?

Comments are always welcome. And until next time, happy reading!

If you enjoyed this post, please consider buying me a cup of tea. Thanks! PayPal.me/CWHawes

Justinia Wright Private Investigator Mysteries on Amazon!

Magnolia Bluff Crime Chronicles on Amazon!

Share This!

Happy Birthday George!

Today is the 336th birthday of German/British composer George Frideric Handel, according to the old Julian calendar. March 5th is his birthday according to our current calendar.

In my opinion, Handel was one of the greatest composers ever. His music was impressionistic before there was any Impressionism movement. In an age of patronage, Handel was a businessman and his own boss for most of his career. In the course of his life he made and lost several fortunes, and died a millionaire by today’s standards.

David Vickers has given us a colorful synopsis of the great composer’s life and you can read it here: https://www.gramophone.co.uk/features/article/the-mysteries-myths-and-truths-about-mr-handel

However, what is not generally known about Handel is that he was a consummate philosopher. He wrote one philosophical treatise: his last oratorio, Jephthah. The musical drama was a rebuttal to Alexander Pope’s An Essay on Man.

An Essay on Man, published 1733-34, is a poetic philosophical treatise vindicating the ways of God vis-a-vis His interactions with humans (line 16). The poem presents the natural order of things that God has decreed for human beings.

Pope goes on to argue that since it is impossible for finite humans to know the purposes of the infinite God, human beings have no right to complain about their lot in the Great Chain of Being (lines 33-34). Instead of complaining, people should simply accept the premise that “Whatever is, is right.” (line 292)

An Essay on Man found great acceptance and admiration throughout Europe. Among it’s admirers were Rousseau, Voltaire, and Kant. In fact, Kant used to read the poem to his students; and Pope’s philosophy was an important contributor to Kant’s own philosophy of religion.

While an early admirer, Voltaire later rejected Pope’s deterministic optimism and lampooned it in his book Candide.

However, Handel beat Voltaire’s rebuttal by 8 years — publishing, in 1751, his own rejection in the form of the magnificent oratorio, Jephthah.

In Jephthah, Handel questions, with biting sarcasm, that is brilliantly portrayed in the musical interpretation of the text, Pope’s assertion that “Whatever is, is right.”

The Biblical account of Jephthah is fairly short. He sets out to fight Israel’s enemies and vows to God that if God honors him with victory he will sacrifice to God the first thing he sees upon his return from the battlefield.

Foreshadowing is nothing new, writers and readers. And low and behold, what is the first thing Jephthah sees? Why, of course, his only daughter. The Biblical account clearly implies Jephthah kept his vow, after allowing his daughter a year’s reprieve.

However, such an interpretation wouldn’t fly in 18th century London. So the librettist, the Reverend Thomas Morell, took a page from the story of Abraham and Isaac and had an angel spare Iphis, Jephthah’s daughter, from death — but to honor the vow, she could not marry and had to remain a virgin her entire life.

And of course, Iphis has a lover, Hamor. Talk about star-crossed lovers!

Through the musical interpretation of the text, Handel roundly damns Pope’s sentiment, “Whatever is, is right.”

Whatever is, is not always right. The punishment for Jephthah’s misguided and witless vow falls squarely on two innocents: Iphis and Hamor, the young lovers who have their whole lives ahead of them. And according to Handel, that is definitely not right. Those two should not have to suffer for Jephthah’s misguided zeal.

It’s as if Handel was saying, no loving and fair God would ever commit such a travesty of justice. Spare Iphis from death, but commit her to the lifelong death of separation from the one she loves? Bah! Humbug! And no father should have to honor such a vow based on belief in religious duty that flies in the face of religious common sense. Jephthah had just defeated the followers of Moloch — who practiced human sacrifice!

Pope and his absurd position be damned!

You can listen to the oratorio here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N0N-o3KAsk

The performance is 2 hours and 40 minutes of some of the most poignant and sublime music you will ever hear. Never has philosophy been so easy to enjoy!

George Frideric Handel was and is a giant among composers. He wrote French music better then the French, Italian music better than the Italians, and German music better than the Germans (although some would cite JS Bach as the exception). No British composer until Ralph Vaughan Williams could even come close to Handel.

Handel was a great musician and a great philosopher. Happy birthday, George!

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, happy reading! (And listening!)

Share This!

On Anger

Let’s be kinder to one another. After all, we’re just wicked people living among wicked people. Only one thing can give us peace, and that’s a pact of mutual leniency.
—Seneca, in “On Anger”

Seneca’s treatise, On Anger, even though written 2,000 years ago, is very much an essay for today.

Over the last 4 years, I’ve observed anger and hate and vitriol on a scale that I’ve not witnessed in my lifetime. Not even the 1960s were as bad.

What the left has done during the Trump administration, I’m afraid has set a precedent for the right to follow during the coming Biden administration. A spiraling cycle of anger and hate and vitriol no matter who is in the White House or who controls Congress.

I’ve seen people publicly say that they no longer wanted to be friends with anyone who supported Trump. And those who publicly said they weren’t friends with anyone who didn’t support Trump.

Politics is a pretty small reason over which to destroy a friendship.

Just think about this: name 10 presidents from before you were born. Presidents are here today and gone tomorrow. Can you name 5 speakers of the house, or 5 Senate majority leaders. Or 10 vice presidents?

Why destroy a friendship, that can last a lifetime, over something so evanescent as politics? In my mind, that is just plain stupid. But then we are living in an age of stupidity.

In the above quote, Seneca hits the nail on the head. We the people are all the same: wicked. Or to be more contemporary, flawed. Not perfect.

If we are to have any hope of living together, we have to extend to everyone — whether we agree with them or not — a pact of leniency.

What does that mean? Leniency is “the fact or quality of being more merciful or tolerant than expected”.

If we exhibited mercy and tolerance in a greater degree than the person we’re extending it to expected — then we are being lenient. And in being lenient, we aren’t saying, I agree with you. We’re saying, I will be your friend even though I disagree with you. Our friendship is more valuable than the individual views we hold.

We are currently at a place where intolerance is destroying the fabric of our society. There is no longer a place for civil disagreement. When in fact we cannot but help disagreeing with each other over something. No two people ever agree 100% on anything.

I’ve become over the years essentially apolitical. After observing the political process for the past 50+ years, I’ve come to the conclusion that it matters little who is in power. President A does things, and then President B undoes them. It’s a case of 2 steps forwards and 2 steps backwards.

But what I do find alarming is the amount of anger I am seeing freely expressed by people in public and on social media. No society can survive if people do not extend leniency towards each other.

Seneca knew this. He was involved in Imperial Roman politics. He had to endure and survive the anger of emperors. Anger that meant instant death if it turned on you. His wise advice regarding anger is something all of us need to heed today.

You can find Seneca’s excellent treatise in a new translation on Amazon.

There is, in addition, a fine abridged version geared more towards practical application, also to be found on Amazon.

I have both, and both are good. They are highly recommended. And who knows? Perhaps we all can become less angered by what is happening all around us and with events in our daily lives, and find a little peace. And who doesn’t want peace?

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, may you enjoy peace in your life!

Share This!

On the Shortness of Life

A little over a week ago, I learned of the death of a fellow indie author. I did not know Laila Doncaster, except in passing. We exchanged a few words now and then on Twitter, occasionally retweeted each other’s tweets, and that was that.

Her first book of a projected series was published on May 1st. Her bio on Amazon speaks of looking forward to an early retirement. And now she’s dead.

I am saddened. Very much so. A person looking forward to the future, an exciting future, and now there is no future. She’s gone.

Every now and again someone will chasten me for my attitude towards my writing. The sense of intense urgency I have to put pen to paper.

I am driven to produce as much as I can, as fast as I can, and get as many copies of my books into as many hands as I can.

I’m told I shouldn’t feel so driven. I’m told I shouldn’t be looking over my shoulder for the Grim Reaper, while my pen is scratching out page after page of words.

All I can say in response to these well-meaning folk is to quote Seneca: “The whole future lies in uncertainty: live immediately.”

Or to paraphrase: I might die tonight — I need to write today. After all, only I can write my books; and I have many score begging to be written down.

Seneca’s essay, On the Shortness of Life, needs to be required reading. It is the antidote to the carelessness with which most of us approach life and live life — which is the most non-renewable of resources.

I’m 67 years old, and I’m somewhat ashamed to admit I’ve wasted most of the time given to me in this thing we call life.

Ever since I can remember, I’ve wanted to be a writer. However, it wasn’t until I was 37 that I actually, in all seriousness, began to act on my desire instead of just dabble. And it was another 11 years before I began to see the fruit of that action.

According to the actuarial tables, I have another 10 years to live. That’s not a lot of time. And anything can happen between now and then to shorten those 10 years.

Seneca wrote:

It is not that we have a short time to live, but that we waste a lot of it. Life is long enough, and a sufficiently generous amount has been given to us for the highest achievements if it were all well invested. But when it is wasted in heedless luxury and spent on no good activity, we are forced at last by death’s final constraint to realize that it has passed away before we knew it was passing. So it is: we are not given a short life but we make it short, and we are not ill-supplied but wasteful of it… Life is long if you know how to use it.

There’s some comfort in that advice, yet how many of us know how to use our time and not waste it? I confess I’m still struggling with that one. But here, too, Seneca has some advice for us:

No activity can be successfully pursued by an individual who is preoccupied … since the mind when distracted absorbs nothing deeply, but rejects everything which is, so to speak, crammed into it. Living is the least important activity of the preoccupied man; yet there is nothing which is harder to learn… Learning how to live takes a whole life, and, which may surprise you more, it takes a whole life to learn how to die.

In other words, it is unproductive busyness, unproductive worry and anxiety, unproductive lack of focus, unproductive preoccupation with things that don’t matter that rob us of the one thing that does matter — irreplaceable time.

It is the life lived deliberately that is the fruitful life. It is the focused life that is the productive life. As Rainer Maria Rilke advised the young poet: once you’ve decided you must write, then you must structure your life so that nothing gets in the way of writing. Harlan Ellison put it more cryptically: “Writers write.”

I might beat the actuarial odds. My mom was 80 when she died. My dad is 87. His mother died in her 90s, although the last few years she was debilitated by a stroke, and his father died a month shy of his 103 birthday. But I can’t bank on it. Which means I have to write today.

As Seneca noted:

…the man who … organizes every day as though it were his last, neither longs for nor fears the next day… Nothing can be taken from this life, and you can only add to it as if giving to a man, who is already full and satisfied, food which he does not want but can hold.

Living deliberately is the key. And when we do, life — no matter how long or short — is time enough to accomplish great things.

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, happy and productive living!

Share This!

George Frideric Handel

This past Sunday was the 335th birthday of German/British composer George Frideric Handel, according to the old Julian calendar. March 5th is his birthday according to our current calendar.

David Vickers has given us a colorful synopsis of the great composer’s life and you can read it here: https://www.gramophone.co.uk/features/article/the-mysteries-myths-and-truths-about-mr-handel

While an early admirer, Voltaire later rejected Pope’s deterministic optimism and lampooned it in his book Candide.

However, Handel beat Voltaire’s rebuttal by 8 years — publishing, in 1751, his own rejection in the form of the magnificent oratorio, Jephthah.

In Jephthah, Handel questions, with biting sarcasm, that is brilliantly portrayed in the musical interpretation of the text, Pope’s assertion that “Whatever is, is right.”

And of course, Iphis has a lover, Hamor. Talk about star-crossed lovers!

Through the musical interpretation of the text, Handel roundly damns Pope’s sentiment, “Whatever is, is right.”

Yes, indeed, Pope and his absurd position be damned!

You can listen to the oratorio here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N0N-o3KAsk

The performance is 2 hours and 40 minutes of some of the most poignant and sublime music you will ever hear. Never has philosophy been so easy to enjoy!

Handel was a great musician and a great philosopher. Happy birthday, George!

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, happy reading! (And listening!)

Share This!

Pierce Mostyn in The Medusa Ritual

Pierce Mostyn, that intrepid foe of the things that go bump in the night, last appeared in Van Dyne’s Vampires, published October of last year.

Next week he will appear in a new adventure, his fifth: The Medusa Ritual.

The germ of the idea for Mostyn’s latest adventure can be found in the Hazel Heald and Lovecraft collaboration “The Man of Stone”. Collaboration, though, is a generous term; for, according to ST Joshi, Heald seems to have contributed virtually no prose to the story — based on textual evidence.

Thus, Heald probably only provided a story idea for Lovecraft to run with. Which he did, and that story then provided me with the idea for The Medusa Ritual. So thank you Hazel for that original idea!

However, while “The Man of Stone” got the wheels turning for The Medusa Ritual, there is nothing of the earlier story in the later one other than people being turned to stone.

While Van Dyne’s Vampires focused on what is essentially a mad scientist and his monsters, in Mostyn’s new adventure we return to the world of cosmic horror. That world where the terror originates from the realization that in the big picture we are completely and totally insignificant. A realization that can easily drive us to despair, madness, or self-destruction.

Nietzsche’s answer to achieving this awareness and its accompanying despair, was for the person to become a creative individual. To become as a god, in other words, for gods create; and in creating, the individual can thereby bring meaning to his or her otherwise meaningless life.

Nietzsche’s answer was essentially an existential one. We are in command of our fate. Counter the meaninglessness of existence by creating your own meaning.

Lovecraft, on the other hand, retreated into antiquarianism, and racial and cultural identity. The old days are good. The old ways are known and comfortable. My own kind are known to me. The foreigner is unknown, a mystery, and therefore suspect.

In Lovecraft’s fiction we see his philosophy play out in his vision of our world having been invaded by alien monster beings who have no regard for us. In strange, swarthy, and dark foreigners who do the bidding of these monsters. And in the insignificance of us Westerners and our science in the face of these ancient beings and their magical rituals. HPL’s conclusion is that it’s best if we don’t know too much of what is really out there, or know any of it at all.

When I come away from reading Lovecraft, I have the feeling that ignorance is bliss. In being ignorant, I can live my life in the delusion that this is a world of meaning and purpose. That I have essential meaning and purpose.

In “The Shadow over Innsmouth”, the narrator comes face to face with the horror of the curtain being pulled aside to reveal what truly is. He has looked into the abyss. In the end, when he realizes that he too will eventually join those monstrous denizens of the deep, rather than end his life, he resigns himself to his fate. For Lovecraft, once we know the truth, we either surrender to it, or go mad, or destroy ourselves. There is no Nietzschian optimism in Lovecraft.

Pierce Mostyn, knowing the truth, doesn’t go mad or destroy himself, but he is weighed down by the understanding that in the end all of his actions are futile. He resorts to duty to keep on going. Much like the ancient Roman Stoics. Duty gives him purpose and meaning in what is an otherwise meaningless and chaotic universe.

Now all of the above is a heck of a lot of philosophy. But don’t worry. It’s all in the background. The Medusa Ritual is not a philosophical treatise. It’s a tale of cosmic horror with plenty of action, adventure, monsters, and daring do. Just what we want to read. Right?

And it will be available, Amazon willing, on July 29th for your reading pleasure.

Comments are always welcome; and, until next time, happy reading!

Share This!

Nietzsche, Lovecraft, and Cosmic Horror

Nietzsche and Lovecraft. Supposedly both were nihilists. But were they? Let’s take a brief look at both, in the light of cosmic horror.

Cosmic Horror

What do we mean by cosmic horror? Cosmic horror is the horror subgenre that focuses on the fear we feel when we are confronted by phenomena that is beyond our ability to comprehend.

Lovecraft wrote that the only thing saving us from death or insanity was our inability to correlate all known facts into a cohesive and understandable whole.

Nietzsche wrote about being nauseated by the truth after peering into the abyss.

Cosmic horror chills us, at least good cosmic horror does, when the story forces us to come to grips with our insignificance in the universe. Cosmic horror is the abyss which nauseates us with the truth. Cosmic horror is the bringing together of knowledge that should drive us insane.

Lovecraft

HP Lovecraft was 10 years old when Friedrich Nietzsche died at the age of 55, and as far as we know he did not read Nietzsche.

Lovecraft was not a philosopher, per se. Although he did spend much time thinking about realities, science, and religion. Through his fiction he worked out a philosophy of sorts, which is embodied in his creation of cosmic horror as presented in his Cthulhu Mythos.

For Lovecraft, the species homo sapiens is not at the apex of anything. In a very real sense, human beings are merely a form of advanced simian on a tiny planet, orbiting a pretty insignificant star in one of many thousands of galaxies in the vast universe.

Compared to the cosmos we are nothing.

Lovecraft would undoubtedly have agreed with Silenus’s answer to Midas’s question. What is the best thing for humankind? To not to be born. And once born, the best for us is to die soon.

For Lovecraft, at least as seen in his fiction, there is no real hope for us. We are, as it were, going into battle armed with pea shooters, when our enemy has machine guns and rocket launchers.

We are hopelessly outclassed by the universe. And the universe will ultimately win. I think that is the message of “The Call of Cthulhu” and “The Shadow Over Innsmouth”.

I think Lovecraft was essentially a nihilist. Life is meaningless and we have no intrinsic purpose.

Nietzsche

In The Birth of Tragedy, Nietzsche lays the ground work of his philosophy, which all of his subsequent books build on and expand.

Nietzsche, by means of the myth of Midas and Silenus, posits the essential meaninglessness of the human species. He goes on to tell us that when we actually comprehend Silenus’s message, when we look into the abyss, have our dark night of the soul, we come away nauseated — nauseated because we’ve believed a lie and now know the truth.

However, he does not leave us in despair. He reminds us that we are creators and it is through art — our creativity — that we find meaning in life. We are our saviors. The god out there is dead. What is alive and well is the god within us. Or perhaps better stated, the god that we are — because gods are creators, and we are creators.

What we see in Nietzsche is proto-existentialism. Nietzsche was not a nihilist. His is not a philosophy of despair. It is a philosophy of hope and life for modern humans.

Conclusion

Cosmic horror would never have come from the pen of Friedrich Nietzsche. Because for him there was always hope.

The closest Lovecraft comes to a sense of hope is in the conclusion of “The Shadow Over Innsmouth” where the narrator embraces his future as one of the monstrous denizens of the deep.

For Lovecraft, our only hope is to join that which will destroy us. And that is true horror.

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, happy reading!

Share This!

The Rocheport Saga-Part 2

Last week I talked a bit about my post-apocalyptic series The Rocheport Saga. I said it was part philosophy, part family saga, part satire, part libertarian thought, part action/adventure novel, and all post-apocalyptic speculation. I also noted that the series is written in epistolary form; that is, as diary entries. I’m very fond of the epistolary format because of the intimate picture it can give us of the main character’s thoughts. Provided of course he or she is a reliable narrator. If not, then we enter a mystery world of trying to figure what is real and what is not. Either way, the epistolary novel is an ideal vehicle.

The Saga is written in story arcs, not unlike television writing, and the first seven novels form the first arc. The arc itself is divided into three parts.

Part I comprises the first two books: The Morning Star and The Shining City. And might be called “Beginnings”. This is where the story begins. Where we learn about Bill Arthur’s dream and how he intends to go about it. His dream of creating a libertarian utopia and of returning to the 21st Century’s technology.

Love Is Little, The Troubled City, and By Leaps and Bounds form Part II. The little community of Rocheport faces enemies from without and within. Our hero, Bill Arthur, is struggling to hold it all together and to do so faces the ugly reality that he will have to betray a few of his most cherished beliefs.

Nevertheless, in By Leaps and Bounds we begin to see that it does indeed look as though the community has turned a corner and will in fact survive.

Part III comprises Freedom’s Freehold and the soon to be published Take to the Sky. Whereas Part II might be titled “Conflict”, Part III could be called “Hope”. The corner has been turned and Bill Arthur feels confident the people of Rocheport will usher in a new era of peace, freedom, and technological advancement.

While The Rocheport Saga is many things, it is all post-apocalyptic speculation. The series is a realistic attempt, I think, at speculating how civilization might come back from a massive catastrophic event — and come back better than it was before the disaster. Therefore there are no zombies or other monsters in the story. Nor are there aliens from space. This is a human story of human dreams and aspirations.

The Marquis de Sade wrote philosophy in the form of pornography. And pornography was a suitable format for him to present his philosophy.

The post-apocalyptic cozy catastrophe, I found, was the most suitable format for me to express my philosophy and social views. Because, at base, the cozy catastrophe is about building a better world.

Which makes it a vehicle by which the author can criticize the current world in which he or she lives and present a model of how the problems can be solved.

S. Fowler Wright used Deluge and Dawn to portray the legal injustices against the labor class and to challenge certain social assumptions. John Wyndham used The Day of the Triffids to hint at the dangers associated with bio-engineering and to point out the dangers of military weapons orbiting the planet. In Earth Abides, George R Stewart points out how a poor black rural working family would be much more capable of surviving, than a white urban couple in New York City. Pointing out how fragile our urban worlds are. Stewart also pointed out that when push comes to shove, we are all equal by having his white protagonist marry a woman who wasn’t white. All that in a book written in the late ‘40s.

The cozy catastrophe is the perfect vehicle for world building. For creating our utopias. I’m surprised that few writers see this and utilize this form. For in the end, all writers are philosophers. Our books are either our ideal worlds or a graphic picture of what we think is wrong with the current world.

And so, in The Rocheport Saga, I present my version of what utopia would be like. No government. Sovereign and self-responsible individuals. Family centered. Social and intellectual freedom. A place where people follow the Golden Rule, respect each other, and help each other. I think it’s a vision that is very appealing and attainable.

As always, comments are welcome! Let me know your thoughts. And until next time, happy reading!

Share This!