The Art of Bernard Langlais

If you drive from Thomaston, Maine, down River Road toward Cushing, you will very likely see this large (my guess is around 10-15 feet high) horse on the side of the road. It’s a sculpture by Bernard Langlais, who lived on the property where the horse stands.

I first became aware of the artist Bernard Langlais around 40 years ago, when I worked at the Bancroft School, in its residential program for children and adults with developmental disabilities. One of the advantages of working at Bancroft was spending summers at the camp the school owned in Owls Head, Maine. Sometimes on a day off we would ride by Langlais’ home in Cushing. His front yard held a number of large wooden sculptures that always fascinated us. Sometimes we would ride past very slowly, to better enjoy those works of art, unaware that we could have stopped and gotten a closer look at not only the ones we could see from the road, but others that were located on the property. During one of those summers, my wife, Pat, and I purchased a small print done by Langlais that hung in our home for many years. It now hangs in the room of one of our grandchildren.  Here’s a photo of it.

During our most recent trip to Maine this summer, we visited the Langlais property again. Our friends, Jeff and Linda, whom we were visiting, told us that they had read that the property was open to the public. We learned that the property and his works had been donated to Colby College by his widow. Colby College donated 3,000 of his works to the Kohler Foundation, which is working on restoring some of the pieces. (Yes, this Foundation is related to the Kohler company that makes bathroom fixtures and faucets, etc.) During a discussion with a Maine artist who is assisting in the project, we learned that many of the works will be given to facilities within the State of Maine (e.g., museums, colleges, high schools) at no cost to them. One stipulation is that, if the facility no longer wants the piece, it must be returned to the Kohler Foundation, which will find a new home for it.

Many of the larger outdoor sculptures will remain on the Cushing property, which will be turned over to the Georges River Land Trust of Rockland, Maine. The Land Trust will maintain the property as a sculpture park, which will be accessible to the public. During our visit in August, we were able to walk the trail and see the outdoor sculptures, as well as some smaller pieces which are kept indoors. Here are three pictures from that tour. You can see more pictures on my Facebook page.

I’ve been wondering why I like the Langlais sculptures.  One reason, I think, is that they are unexpected. You’re driving down a country road past houses, barns and fields and, all of a sudden, here are these large sculptures. Currently, from the road, you can see the horse and the football players pictured above.  Some of the other sculptures that were visible from the road forty years ago are now hidden by trees that have grown up.  Another reason I like the sculptures is their simplicity and accessibility. Their subject matter is frequently things we don’t come into contact with in our daily lives (e.g., elephants, bears, lions) but the finished pieces seem very down-to-earth. A description of Langlais’ work for an exhibit at the AlexandreGallery in NYC earlier this year referred to his “rough, folk-inspired animal carvings”. An article in the Portland Press Herald in March 2013 described his “oversized, whimsical wooden sculptures". I think the whimsicality of his work is another aspect that makes me appreciate his pieces. (If you look at the photos on my Facebook page, you’ll see the outstretched arms of Richard Nixon, making the victory/peace sign with his fingers. The sculpture is from the torso up and grass has grown up around him, like he has sunken into the swamp.)

You can learn more about Bernard Langlais from the links in this blog and from googling his name. Enjoy the experience!

Big Brother Is Watching

When I was a 22-year-old, involved in protests against the Vietnam War and in meetings of the local Vietnam Moratorium group in Trenton, NJ, I wondered whether I had my own FBI file. There was talk about the FBI keeping files on Vietnam War protestors. We later found out that these rumors were true. The fact that I obtained conscientious objector status from my draft board probably increased the likelihood that there was an FBI file on me. However, I thought at the time that I was not important enough to warrant one. I’ll probably never know if I had one.

But that seems like small potatoes compared to what we’re hearing now about U.S. government surveillance of its citizens. Our home phone provider is Verizon, so information about all our phone calls is being collected.  Through the government’s Prism program, information is being collected from what we do on Google, Facebook and Skype and through our use of Microsoft products.

On the Common Dreams website, I just read an article by Alfred W. McCoy, entitled SurveillanceBlowback: The Making of the U. S. Surveillance State, 1898 -2020. It’s a long article but I think worth the read.  It’s scary to think about the amount of information being monitored and collected, the large number of government employees involved in this activity and the advances in technology that make it easier and easier for information about us to be collected and analyzed.

There seems to be increased attention in the media to all this surveillance. And, in a poll conducted by The Guardian newspaper, 66% thought that the NSA’s activities need to reviewed by Congress and 56% agreed that the NSA needs more Congressional oversight. Also, 50% of those polled disagreed with the government collecting metadata (e.g., date of a phone call, duration, phone numbers of two parties involved). The poll numbers seem to show a majority opposition to the continuing collection of such data.  However, we’ve seen many instances where the President and/or Congress ignored the popular will of the people. I’m inclined to believe that the people’s outrage will die out over time and the extensive surveillance will continue (and likely increase).  Maybe it’s time to break out that dog-earred copy of Orwell’s 1984 – as a reminder of what could happen.

New Year's Eve - 2012

Last night we celebrated New Year’s Eve by going to New Year’s by the Bay in Belfast, Maine.  I remember when I was in my early 20’s spending some New Year’s Eves alone and doing thought-provoking reading.  In preparation for the New Year, reading these things encouraged me to ponder what life was all about and how I might approach the New Year.  Many of the things I read had a spiritual slant, such as the writings of Thomas Merton.

I was reminded of this last night, as we began the evening listening to Hawk Henries play his wooden flutes.  I thought this was a great way to begin the preparation for the New Year.  Hawk Henries is a member of an Algonquin tribe called Nipmuc.  He has been making and playing flutes for over 20 years.

I appreciated being able to close my eyes, clear my mind and listen to the beautiful, mellow sounds coming from his flutes.  It was a meditative experience.  Mystics, including Merton, talk about contemplation as being open to God and experiencing the Divine presence without words.  It seems to me that music is a similar experience.  The right music, that is.  And to me, Hawk Henries’ flute music is the right music.  Here’s a sample of it.  This YouTube clip includes some pictures that complement the wonderful sound of the flute.  The shoreline pictures appeared to me to be from Mid-Coast Maine.

Enjoy the YouTube clip and have a wonderful New Year!

Putting Christ in Christmas - 2012

If you were to ask me “What was your favorite month of Epistle readings at Sunday Mass?”, I would immediately answer that it was September 2012.  During that month, the second readings at Sunday Mass were from the Epistle of St. James.  Here are some samples:

“Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their affliction and to keep oneself unstained by the world.”

“Did not God choose those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom that he promised to those who love him?”

“Come now, you rich, weep and wail over your impending miseries.  Your wealth has rotted away, your clothes have become moth-eaten, your gold and silver have corroded, and that corrosion will be a testimony against you; it will devour your flesh like a fire.  You have stored up treasure for the last days.  Behold the wages you withheld from the workers who harvested your fields are crying aloud; and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts.”

“What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone says he has faith but does not have works. … If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, keep warm, eat well,’ but do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it?  So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.”

The second readings at Sunday Mass usually don’t get a lot of attention during the homilies.  Typically, the first reading (Old Testament) and the Gospel reading share a common theme and it’s easier to focus on them in preparing a cohesive homily.  But I think the readings from St. James include very important messages.

During the Christmas season, we focus on God taking on human form, in the person of Jesus.  We celebrate that the Almighty came to earth and lived among us.  But, we can also look beyond that to a key theme of Jesus’s life.  God could have chosen to come among us in glory and majesty, born into a wealthy and influential family.  But he did not.  He was born in a manger, to a carpenter and his young wife.  The Holy Family fled to Egypt, to avoid the wrath of Herod.  During his public ministry, Jesus reached out to the poor and needy, healing the sick, the blind, the lame, the lepers.  He preached about feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting those in prison and said that, when we have done this for the least of his brethren, we have done it for him.  He told the wealthy young man that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.  Certainly, as God and as a charismatic preacher, Jesus could have built an earthly empire and acquired much wealth, influence and power.  Instead he chose to give his life for us, dying on a cross between two common criminals.  He was a King, but his Kingdom was “not of this earth”.

At a time when the income gap between rich and poor keeps widening, when politicians argue about whether to cut social safety net programs that needy folks rely on (unemployment, Medicaid, heating assistance, the Women, Infants and Children program, etc.), let’s remember how our Savior lived his life and the things he preached about.  In thinking about how we deal with the problems of our society, let’s ask ourselves “What Would Jesus Do?”.

Have a very merry and blessed Christmas!

Voting for President in 2012

On November 6, I will cast my vote for Barack Obama for President of the United States.

There was a time when I thought I wouldn't do that.  What I'd really like to do is write in Bernie Sanders for President.  Do you know Bernie Sanders?  He is the Independent US Senator from Vermont.  He supports progressive ideas and is a great advocate for the middle class and the poor.  Both Pres. Obama and Gov. Romney say in their speeches and debate statements that they want to make the middle class stronger.  But their policies would continue to advantage the wealthy more than the middle class.  But, for Bernie Sanders, support for the middle class is more than election rhetoric.  

On December 10, 2010, Sen. Sanders spoke for 8 hours and 37 minutes on the Senate floor in opposition to a 2 year extension of the Bush tax cuts and the deal that had been agreed to by Democrats and Republicans to continue tax breaks for the wealthy.  That speech has now been released as a book, titled The Speech: A Historic Filibuster on Corporate Greed and the Decline of Our Middle Class.

In my opinion, Bernie Sanders is a statesman, not just a politician.  I believe he is sincerely concerned about the best interests of the American people, not just the wealthy and powerful.  Here's a link to his appearance on Moyers and Company, which gives a small taste of what he is like:

Bernie Sanders on Moyers and Company

If you decide to keep watching after the Bernie Sanders segment, you can hear the Green Party Presidential candidate, Jill Stein, talk about the Green Party platform.  For a while, I thought of voting for her.

However, in the end I have decided to vote for Barack Obama.  I could probably get away with voting for Bernie Sanders or Jill Stein without affecting the outcome in New Jersey, which is expected to be won by Obama easily.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think that Pres. Obama's policies, as a whole, are horrible.  And they are certainly much better than Gov. Romney's and the Republican party's.  But, I think he has been too willing to compromise with Republicans and not willing enough to fight for the middle class and the poor.  He has gotten us out of Iraq but is not getting us out of Afghanistan quickly enough.  He is too committed to using drones and too willing to accept the civilian casualties that result.  He is too beholden to Wall St.

I read a couple columns recently that encouraged people to vote for Pres. Obama in order to register votes against Gov. Romney.  I guess that's where I am in this election.  I believe that a Romney administration would be a disaster for the country.  I believe Romney would be heavily influenced by the extreme right wing of the Republican party and I couldn't live with the results of that.  So, I think it's best to try to put as many votes in the Obama column as possible, to send a message that he is preferable to Romney.

What I would really like to see is a third (progressive) party that is not reliant on wealthy individuals for its campaign funds and that would represent the interests of the people of this country.

P.S. - Network, a Catholic lobbying group, has created an election guide that compares Pres. Obama's and Gov. Romney's positions, in relation to Network's framing of the issues according to Catholic Social Teaching.  Pres. Obama seems to be more in line with Catholic Social Teaching than Gov. Romney.  Although I think they do not include some of Obama's negatives (e.g., the drone strikes), I agree that Obama's policies are more in line with Catholic Social Teaching.

Click here to see Network's Election Guide

Individualism - Some Consequences

Last time I wrote about the extraordinary emphasis in our country on individualism.  I think this focus on the rights of the individual versus the responsibilities each of us has to promote the common good results in a number of things that do harm to the world we live in.  Here are some examples:

·      People throwing cigarette butts, empty plastic bottles and paper cups, papers that food was wrapped in on the ground or out of the car window.

·      Bumper stickers and car decals that include curse words, crude comments and pictures, e.g., a decal of Calvin peeing on the Ford logo.  I recently saw a decal on the back of a mini-van that had a father, mother and kids, with names underneath.  The family was labeled “The Ass Family” and the names underneath were “Smart Ass”, “Wise Ass”, “Stupid Ass”, etc.

·      The greed of bankers, hedge fund managers, CEOs and other corporate executives, who believe there is nothing wrong with making millions of dollars a year while others earn only minimum wage and millions of children live in poverty.

·      The belief among many Americans that taxes need to be decreased over and over again so they can pay less and less, regardless of the impact it has overall on the society.

Can you think of others?

I've Been Wondering ...

I’ve been wondering whether the shooting in the Pathmark store in Old Bridge, NJ, which killed two employees, is related to the extreme emphasis on individualism in America.  Also, the shooting in a movie theater in Aurora, CO; and the one in the Sikh temple in Oak Creek, WI.  Certainly, we can’t identify a direct link between the specific shootings and the individualism phenomenon.  The gunmen in these situations most likely had some sort of mental health problems that could be pointed to as being a more direct cause.  But, could the focus on each of us as an individual, with individual rights that others can’t abridge (as opposed to seeing us as part of a larger community) have played a part?

When I was growing up, people talked about the common good.  It meant that, as individuals, we should act in a way that promoted the common good of the communities we lived in – our town, our state, our country, and our world.  It meant seeing ourselves as part of a larger community.  I don’t hear many people talk about that very much these days.  It seems that, for many people, the focus is on the individual person.  Some people act as though they have made themselves everything they are.  As though they didn’t have parents who acted as models for them and taught them their basic values.  As though they weren’t influenced by the teachers they spent hours a day with for 12 or 16 or more years.  As though they weren’t affected by the friends who listened to them, argued with them, played sports or musical instruments with them, supported them and hugged them when they needed it.

Our society and many of our leaders emphasize the importance of each of us standing up for ourselves and taking care of our own needs, instead of relying on others.  George W. Bush advocated for America to become an “ownership society”, in which individual Americans would take more responsibility for themselves and depend less on government programs.  One of the keystones of this “ownership society” would be people’s investment of their money in the stock market for their retirement, instead of contributing to the government-run Social Security system.  Theoretically, it sounds good.  But it can be a risky venture, as recent years have shown.  Ayn Rand, the philosopher whose ideas Paul Ryan espouses, believes that people should act on “rational self-interest.”  She believes that each of us has to act in our own best interests, that what we achieve by our efforts is ours and that government’s role is to make sure no one takes it away from us.  Again, this puts the focus on the individual, and doesn’t acknowledge the societal supports we have throughout our lives.  The two examples I have given are of Republican politicians.  But Democrats have been all too willing to go along with emphasizing the responsibilities of the individual and cutting programs that support those who have fallen on hard times.

The message is that each of needs to be self-reliant.  That we should not depend on others and others should not depend on us.  Does a society that emphasizes this message so much encourage isolation of its citizens?  Does it make it more likely that individuals will feel they are disconnected from others?  Does it make it more likely that an individual who could benefit from the support of others will not see reaching out to others as a viable option?

How would it affect our country and our citizens if the message coming from our leaders was that we are connected to one another, that each of us is part of a community that cares about us?  If that message permeated our society and our lives, would it make our society a more supportive one and help prevent the mass violence we saw in Old Bridge and Aurora and Oak Creek?  I’ve been wondering …