editors' musings contributors links about back issues donate
tim horvath | poetry editor
in-progress, currently entitled Goodbye in Many Languages, involves conservatory musicians, goth kids, chemists, potters, alienated actors, and rhesus monkeys. His stories have been published or are forthcoming in pacificREVIEW, Seventh Quark, The Journal of Caribbean Literatures, Cranky, and The Abiko Annual. He can be found at www.timhorvath.com.Tim Horvath received his MA in English Education from Teachers College, Columbia University, and will soon finish his MFA in Creative Writing at the University of New Hampshire. He taught high school English for nine years, and currently teaches Creative Nonfiction at UNH. Tim's story "The Understory" won the 2006 Raymond Carver Prize sponsored by Carve Magazine, and has been nominated for a Pushcart Prize. His interest in cognitive neuroscience and evolutionary psychology has led him to give talks at various conferences, including ones with Jason Ronstadt on the dreaming brain and literature. His novel-
Evolutionary Tao?
Lise Carlson. Enso. 2006. Oil on canvas, 20x24.
When Alice coined the term “evolutionary tao” for this latest issue, my gut reaction was, Hmmm, catchy, but what does it really mean? I’m still not sure I know what it means, but as soon as I mouth the words, I feel them start to spar with one another, vying for something. What? A fundamental view of nature? Indeed, nature in an evolutionary perspective offers up a rather different template for joint-cutting than does Taoist nature. Randomness and natural selection are decidedly different forces from yin and yang, the dynamic tensions traced by Taoism. What they share is a perpetual flux, but the differences appear to be more salient than the common ground.
Still, maybe in spite of their foreignness to one another, maybe because of it, the juxtaposition of these words and ideas is worth pondering. Both terms are adept at mingling with other words, attaching themselves readily in the agora of ideas, altering whatever they come into contact with. Thus we get Evolutionary Politics, The Tao of Physics, Evolutionary Game Theory, The Tao of Sex, The Evolution of
read more
Goodbye in Many Languages
And that was what marriage was for, for the stuff you couldn’t get on your own, no matter how resourceful you were. A penis was too obvious and probably you could get one of those nowadays if you went through the proper channels; no, it had to be more than that. Matter was made from atoms clinging to others that had what they lacked. Lack and compensation: the fundamental driving forces of the universe. She’d think this way, and then she’d catch herself, thinking People are different. They’re not sulfur and chromium and vanadium. But, the internal argument would continue, it’s One Universe, not Two. What if people weren’t altogether different from the elements that, at some level, comprised every bit of their being? There were, after all, enough elements that sometimes she imagined you could find a version of every human relationship somewhere in there. Maybe even understand them. She’d pictured herself as the Chemical Astrologer, cranking out a weekly column. “How to Figure out What Element You Are,” and “What to Do If You Find Yourself Dating a Noble Gas." It made as much sense as the zodiac, and probably a lot more, although she was convinced too that one day some astrophysicist would become the world’s premier astrologer, citing arcane equations and the spectral properties of stars instead of just pointing to the sky and trying to feign conviction that twins, crabs, and scales dwelled there.
|
By Way of an Introduction
|
|
The Understory First prize-winner in the 2006
Carver Awards (Carve Magazine's fiction contest),
Anyone but Lear, Schoner
thinks. He hobbles across the pebbled path, toward the
periphery of the woods, where he can still plant the walker
almost flat. On he goes, “Let not…to true mind’s
marriages…admit…impediments.” Even as he pitches himself
forward on hard end-consonants, he senses the quote is off:
the right author but the wrong words, the right words, the
wrong play, maybe not even a play. Not only wrong but
ironically wrong. Anyone but Lear, he has vowed for a
long time, and he is none other.
As he pauses to survey the
woods, he feels them staring back, judging, rejecting his
desire for entrance. Like he is some illegal, trying to
cross a border without the proper papers. The sun catches
him as he curses the wood that he wants to be in. This is
the most devastating part of age,
judged by
Bill Henderson, president and editor of Pushcart Press.
alice
andrews |
editor/publisher |
|
A .
|
|
A Theory of Fitness
Musings for the 8th issue on 'love and power'
When I was putting this issue together and soliciting contributions and submissions, an oft-repeated response was: "I get 'sex and power,' but 'love and power'? " Yes, love and power. There are many relationships between these forces of nature, and "A Theory of Fitness" (among other things), explores one.
|
|
|
Alice is
currently working on a book based on this essay, to be published as part of
Imprint Academic's series:
"Societas:
Essays in Political and Cultural Criticism."
|
|
|
|
After reading H. Allen Orr's review of Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate in The New York Review of Books, a friend — political philosopher, Jeff Miller — wrote:
|
|
Being Brave:
In Defense of Naturalism and Essentialism
Often enough, and recently quite often, I hear (or hear behind my back) that someone has dismissed EP — and me — as ‘conservative’ or reactionary. The truth is, EP and its adherents probably cover the political spectrum quite well. But my guess is — contrary to the opinion of many—the majority of evolutionary psychologists will be found hovering somewhere in the center and on the left of the political spectrum. Peter Singer, who wrote, A Darwinian Left: Politics, Evolution and Cooperation is not alone! And frankly, I can't think of one evolutionary psychologist who is on the right (though I'm sure there are a few).
And here's Daniel Dennett in his latest book Freedom Evolves:
"Where I think they go wrong [detractors of naturalism] is in lumping the responsible, cautious, naturalists (like Crick and Watson, E. O. Wilson, Richard Dawkins, Steven Pinker, and myself) in with the few reckless overstaters, and foisting views on us that we have been careful to disavow and to criticize." [p.20] 1
This idea of the unjustified attack on naturalists from the left is a major theme in Pinker's The Blank Slate. And he explains that the essentialist/social constructionist battle during the 70s, where many sociobiologists were the targets of picketing, name-calling and water-dousing, was particularly rough.
A halfway serious piece about shoe shapes and what they reveal about personality.
|
|
Well, I must confess, I feel a little like Louise Bryant here. Alas, I have no Warren Beatty (Jack Reed) to rail upon me—but I have internalized him—and he’s angry! My writing about sex and shoes right now feels a little like Bryant writing about the Armory Show of 1913 when it’s 1916, about dead art in the wake of fertile revolution. |
Beyond Paradox
Alice's review of Colin Talbot's The Paradoxical Primate in Metapsychology.
At first it was hard for me not to be gleeful reading Colin Talbot's The Paradoxical Primate: here was Talbot, an ex-Trotskyist (I grew up the daughter of Trotskyists) with an evolutionary psychological view of human nature (a perspective he and I share) writing in a light and personal style (my favorite); telling me I was about to read a "creative synthesis" of many disciplines: management and organizational theory and research (his current field), public administration, economics, evolutionary psychology, chaos and complexity theory; about a topic that fascinates me--our paradoxical
Twenty years ago, while I was an undergraduate studying philosophy at Columbia, I wrote a paper for Arthur Danto and Herbert Terrace that entertained the possibility that ordinary folk intentional states and propositional attitudes could one day be replaced (in a somewhat eliminative materialist way) by a more scientifically informed lexicon, e.g., Biolanguage
"Do you remember what you said to her?" "Sorry, no, bad hippocampal day."
or:
How do you feel today?" "Oh, very low on serotonin and dopaminergically challenged."At the time it was fun and almost absurd to suggest that one day we might speak in such
read more
Meta Study: Reactions to a Study on Female Sexuality
Megan JZ. Muu Birth. 2007. Melted Crayons on Paper.On the Yahoo Evolutionary Psychology forum, I read that a study done at Northwestern University suggested a difference between female and male sexuality: "In contrast to men, both heterosexual and lesbian women tend to become sexually aroused by both male and female erotica, and, thus, have a bisexual arousal pattern." So I posted my reaction to this and soon found myself in a fairly heated debate with some pretty big and small fish in the field (pool), via private e-mails, as well as on the forum.
From: "Alice Andrews"
Date: Fri Jun 13, 2003 1:54 pm
Subject: Bailey backwards?
When it comes to these issues, I generally take an EPish view (with a
nod to 'Nurture' always); am pretty much of an essentialist, and
though sympathetic to a social constructionist position, basically
find some of SC's arguments flimsy....
However, isn't it possible that since Woman has been objectified
sexually, etc., that we as women have LEARNED to do it as well? That
is, because it is NOT in our nature to 'get off' on things VISUALLY
relative to men...that when it comes to the visual, we have learned
to adopt the male point of view?
John Berger, in WAYS OF SEEING writes:
"Men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves
being looked at. This determines not only most relations between men
ansd women but also the relation of women to themselves. The surveyor
of woman in herself is male: the surveyed female. Thus she turns
herself into an object–and most particularly an object of vision: a
sight."
It seems to me that when it comes to fantasizing with emotions,
stories, feelings, etc....most heterosexual women will not be able to
get sexually aroused about women. Is this just because we've been
socialized into these heterosexual patterns, and that, as Bailey is
suggesting, what in fact turns us on visually is our essential
nature? Or, again, is it that Bailey is a bit biased in his
methodology; that his method to understanding our essential sexuality
is really not appropriate because women's sexuality isn't about
visual stimuli in the first place? Perhaps he's really just studying
the affects of a dominant ideology/gender...and what happens to
certain systems due to plasticity
read posts____________________________
*The researchers, J. Michael Bailey, Meredith L. Chivers, Gerulf Rieger, and Elizabeth Latty have made their paper "A Sex Difference in the Specificity of Sexual Arousal" which is in press (Psychological Science), available.
Attention
Alice's letter responding to Jason Stern's 'Esteemed Reader' column in
Esteemed Reader of Our Magazine:I start by acknowledging and thanking Dennis Kucinich for the above quote and for making a sound that is extraordinary amid the clatter of the political noise machine. This is a man I would be proud to call my president.
And I proceed by addressing a related subject that has been much in my thoughts. Since it has been in my thoughts I assume that the subject has been making the rounds to the thoughts of others as well.
The subject is: relationship.
What is it to be related — to be in relationship?
Love is "one's ability, through demonstrative acts, to confer survival benefits on others in a creatively enlarging manner."
- Ashley MontegueLove is "a wonderful example of long-term focused attention."
- Lucy Brown“The aim is not to choose the right but to become the sort of person who cannot choose the wrong and who no longer has any choice in the matter.”
- G.M.A. Grube
Dear Jason,I liked your letter about relationships. It made me think. I think attention and attending to the other is what it’s all about. But here’s the problem.
Alice's letter to the New Paltz Times supporting the Board of Education's decision
|
|
|
|
O'Keeffe Flower
The only song Alice ever recorded; recorded at Funkadelic, NYC, 2000.