An Infinity of Interpretations: A Bit of Social Commentary on and a Philosophical Examination of Life in These Times

An Infinity of Interpretations

A Bit of Social Commentary on and a Philosophical Examination of Life in These Times

Copyright © 2009 by Ronald E. Kimmons, Ph.D.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the publisher except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

iUniverse

1663 Liberty Drive

Bloomington, IN 47403

www.iuniverse.com

1-800-Authors (1-800-288-4677)

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any Web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid.

ISBN: 978-1-4401-7663-0 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-4401-7665-4 (dj)

ISBN: 978-1-4401-7664-7 (ebk)

iUniverse rev. date: 1/25/2010

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Ronald E. Kimmons is a retired educator who spent almost four decades in the field of education. He received his doctor of philosophy degree in 2002 from the University of Chicago. He was born in Chicago. He now lives in Chicago with his wife, Beverly, and his youngest daughter, Cydney.

DEDICATION

To

Professor Benjamin D. Wright

Who offered initial encouragement on a topic central to this book

The late Professor Jacob W. Getzels

Whose brief note on the cover of my essay several decades ago was the impetus for me to believe I could expand my ideas into a book

The late Professor Herbert A. Thelen

Whose classes provided insight and inspiration as to how I wanted to be in the world—personally and professionally

Professor Susan S. Stodolsky

Chair of my dissertation committee and the first person to offer real encouragement on my final efforts to complete my doctorate

Professor Edgar G. Epps

Member of my dissertation committee and the first person to suggest that my writing had literary qualities

Vicki and Cydney

My daughters and the true loves of my life

Erin and Arthur (III)

My grandchildren and the other true loves of my life

Arthur, Jr.

Their father

My parents and siblings—Bertram, Donald, Wally Rose, Wayne, Frank, Mildred, Herbert, Exzene, Talmadge, Eugene, Jr., Eugene, and Alberta

Always there to support me in whatever I was doing—what a great family

Beverly

My friend, lover, companion, and wife

Betty

Who read, edited, and provided feedback on a very early version of this book

Max

My godson

Marv and Kim Dyson

His Parents

Contents

Acknowledgments

Preface

Introduction

Chapter One—The Thesis

Chapter Two—The Origin of the Thesis

Chapter Three—Freud and White

Chapter Four—Oprah: Part One: Transparency in Another Queen of

Soul

Chapter Five—Oprah: Part Two: Transformation and Truth

Chapter Six—Oprah: Part Three: Perpetuation and Transcendency

Chapter Seven—Dr. Phil: Superhero

Chapter Eight—Viktor Frankl: A Past Referenced

Chapter Nine—President Bill Clinton: A Future Preference

Chapter Ten—President George W. Bush: A Past Preference

Chapter Eleven—Barack Obama: Part One: Balancing Act

Chapter Twelve—Barack Obama: Part Two: Home Squared—and

Cubed

Chapter Thirteen—Context Matters

Chapter Fourteen—Rosa Lee: Bound and Unbound

Chapter Fifteen—Andrew Carnegie: Origin of the Species

Chapter Sixteen—Spike Lee: Part One: The Revolution of a Man

Chapter Seventeen—Spike Lee: Part Two: The Evolution of a Man

Chapter Eighteen—Robert Cooley: Part One: The Deviant Among Us

Chapter Nineteen—Robert Cooley: Part Two: The Deviant is Us

Chapter Twenty—Conclusion

Epilogue

Notes

Bibliography

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am indebted to R. C. Gorman, a famous Native American painter. In doing research as a writer for a television show called Know Your Heritage, I read an online article about Gorman where he talked about his work. He said, "Women are a constant challenge because their infinite variety invites an infinity of interpretations. I have preference for the ample woman. Her figure occupies space softly—with a kind of monumental fullness."¹ The emphasis on an infinity of interpretations is mine. When I first read those words, I thought to myself, What a great arrangement of words to express such elegant ideas. When I read them a second time, I realized that I had a title for the book that I had been thinking about writing for several decades.

I am also indebted to Leon Dash whose generosity related to his book, Rosa Lee, was unexpected but very important to me in trying to keep with the focus and method for writing this book.

I am also indebted to an actor, Donald Sutherland, whose work over the years has offered me enjoyment and thought-provoking images and ideas. Sutherland provided a focus for my own work after I read an interview published in the Chicago Daily News back in 1970. In that interview, Sutherland said, In order to give out information about life, you’ve got to take it in, assimilate it, and use it in your work.²

Finally, I want to acknowledge here—collectively and individually—friends and colleagues in a dissertation support group called PhinisheD. Most of these individuals I met as I tried to for a final time to complete the requirements for my doctorate at the University of Chicago. After I received my doctorate, I decided to stick around and see who I might help to get finished or PhinisheD.

In my efforts to try to practice some of the things I had learned in the classes of Professor Herbert A. Thelen, I decided to ask the PhinisheD group to give me feedback on various chapters of this book. They did, and I know this book is all the better because of that feedback. So, here’s to you: Professor Edgar G. Epps, fearless and totally unselfish leader of PhinisheD; Fred Hutchinson; Erik Ponder; Millicent Conley; Rose Jackson; Linda Ford; M. L. McKinney; and Pat Haptemichael.

PREFACE

Part of the central thesis of this book is that life has no meaning beyond what we assign to it. As I started to write this book, I realized (based upon that idea) that I could open myself up to a storm of criticism from a variety of sources for a variety of reasons. After all, how could such a simple thesis address the richness, beauty, vagaries, and subtleties of life? My reply is, it doesn’t. It also does not address the superficiality, the ugliness, the orderliness, and the obviousness of life.

The thesis addresses none of these aspects of life directly. Indirectly, however, what it does do is to tell us that any position we take on a variety of subjects ought to be a tentative position. It tells us that there are few if any absolutes in this world. It tells us that we must find reasons for our actions other than the notion of absolute truth or right or some similar justification. It tells us that one life or life form is no more important than another life or life form. It tells us that one individual, group, culture, or religion is no more important than another individual, group, culture, or religion. Above all, this simple thesis tells us that we should proceed carefully in this life lest we offend life itself.

AN

INFINITY

OF

INTERPRETATIONS

INTRODUCTION

This has been a difficult book to write, but it also has been a task that was intellectually stimulating and a lot of fun to do. The book is not a typical non-fiction book in that not only is the chronology not linear but the content is not always continuous, in the usual sense of that word. I had ideas for a book from a long time ago, and I have added chapters to the book almost whimsically. In adding chapters, I have not always completed them in sequence. I may have started a chapter and returned to it several years after subsequent chapters had been started and completed. That approach has worked because this book is not about the individuals highlighted in the book. It is more about a philosophical thesis that I proffer, with the individuals being used to illustrate the thesis.

The real time writing style in relationship to this approach results in leaps in time (backward and forward) and the interjection of materials not seemingly and immediately connected to what preceded and followed a particular section. One editor of the manuscript for the book has made suggestions about how to help the reader adapt to this peculiar format, and this introduction is one of her recommendations. Her other recommendation is for me to put at the beginning of each chapter the time frame covered by that chapter in terms of when the writing occurred. In this manner, the reader will not be shocked by the reference to times seemingly already passed and referenced in previous chapters or time references within a chapter that are not chronological. Thanks A. J. I wish we could have had a face-to-face exchange around many of the issues you raised as you edited the manuscript. I am sure that it would have been spirited!

This brief introduction points out only one of the peculiarities of this book. I was fortunate to have another editor (whose name I do not know) of this manuscript point out some other peculiarities. The other peculiarities are mentioned early enough in the book for them not to be a serious distraction, so I will stop here and let you get into the book.

I thank both editors of the manuscript for making this a much better book than what I initially offered.

CHAPTER ONE—

THE THESIS

Time Frame: 2002-2003

I am, by training and experience, an educator who has spent more than three decades in the field—a field not yet fully appreciated or respected for the contributions it has made to America’s present position in the world’s geopolitical configuration. Yet, I have no hard feelings about those slights generally shown to the field of education in general and to teachers in particular. I feel that way for a variety of reasons but mostly because It is easier to recount grievances and slights than it is to set down a broad redress of such grievances and slights.³

As an educator who has served in a variety of positions within the field (teacher, counselor, administrator), I think the role that I have most enjoyed and that was constant across time and positions was that of learner. I have had the good fortune of being educated at a variety of excellent institutions located in Chicago, but I must confess that the place I most enjoyed was the University of Chicago. The University of Illinois-Chicago, Roosevelt University, and Chicago State University gave me wings, but the University of Chicago is where I was able to soar.

At the University of Illinois-Chicago (a two-year undergraduate program located at Navy Pier on Chicago’s lakefront when I attended), I had a marvelous time being introduced to some of the great ideas in the liberal arts curriculum of the undergraduate college. At Roosevelt University, the same was true. I would sometimes be on a natural high after a class discussion or the completion of a paper or of a final exam in a course.

By the time I was in graduate school at Chicago State University, this began to change. I became deeply concerned that even in my major fields (education and history at that point) there was a wide range of interpretations for essentially the same facts and phenomena. In the field of education, I was especially anxious because I felt that I had not acquired a knowledge base of sufficient substance to carry on with my work as a teacher. That anxiety would stay with me for my entire tenure as a practicing educator.

When I entered graduate school at the University of Chicago, I was still not at peace with the range of interpretations of the world that I found in books and the media of the day. At that institution, however, my unrest did not appear to be a problem for anyone. In fact, the atmosphere at the university was one that seemed to perpetuate an infinity of interpretations for just about everything. Over the years I came to understand that that atmosphere is what defines the general notion of a university—at least, a modern-day university.

I was officially enrolled at the University of Chicago four different times over several decades before completing my doctoral studies in 2002. Early in my first stay, I took several courses in the area of educational psychology. The first course was titled Psychology of Becoming a Teacher. The course was taught by Benjamin D. Wright, a professor in the field of education. In that course, Professor Wright used the theories of Sigmund Freud and Erik H. Erikson to explore the psychological processes by which individuals become teachers.

In an essay written for that course, I tried for the first time to explore the notion of what individuals really want to accomplish when they try to consolidate an identity through the work that they do. Even now, the concept of consolidating an identity does not have the kind of clarity many would like, including me. In general, however, I have always thought about the concept as somehow involving an integration of selves into an authentic entity distinguishable from surrounding or other entities. As the reader will see, that notion is a key concept in the philosophical thesis offered here.

Anyway, after writing that essay, I was not sure that I had made any sense, but Professor Wright wrote a brief note at the end of the paper saying, Dear Ron, I am glad you took Educ. 349. I enjoyed this paper. Keep writing and good luck.

During the following quarter, I took a second course in the area of educational psychology, taught this time by the late Jacob W. Getzels, a professor in both the field of educational psychology and the field of psychology. I again explored the question of what individuals really want to accomplish through whatever vocation or avocation they choose.

Once more, I struggled to make real sense out of these ideas, and I was elated when I got the paper back from Professor Getzels with the comments, What a nice essay on a pretty idea! I wonder if you are going to do anymore with it; I would elaborate the motive in some detail, i.e., both the comparison between Freud and White, and the relation of both to your concepts of the Finite and Infinite. But maybe by doing more you might kill the evocative quality of what you have done. In any case, I enjoyed reading the paper.

I kept both of those papers (written in December of 1971 and March of 1972), and I have periodically used some of the basic ideas from those papers in other essays written for other courses that I have taken at the university over the years. In spite of my efforts to understand better and to extend some of the basic ideas in those early papers, I was never able to move much beyond what I wrote several decades ago, and I often wondered, as Professor Getzels had suggested, if doing anything more with the ideas in those essays was even possible. As you are reading this book, you already realize I have at least attempted to do more with the ideas from that second essay.

I am not able to tell you definitively whether or not I have really extended and clarified the ideas from that second essay in any significant way, but I have many more real-world examples that I can use to illustrate the points I made with just two examples in that early paper.

Let me give you a sample of what I mean. Have you thought about writing a book? If you have not, you are in the minority here in America. Somewhere I read that almost everyone thinks about writing a book, but only 2 percent actually do it.

Now, if only a fourth of the people who have thought about writing a book actually did so, what do you suppose all of those books would be about? For the most part, I would bet, they would be about the life of the authors. Specifically, they would represent each author’s attempt to put in perspective his entire life or some parts or part of his life. I am not just talking about autobiographies. I am also suggesting that many of the books would be about subjects that, on the surface, you would think had little to do with the author’s life. Upon closer examination, however, you would see that the author is really offering his perspective on a slice of life taken or shaped mostly from his own experiences. This book is no exception.

That notion takes us to the major thesis of this book: Life has no meaning except what we assign to it. And what we really want to accomplish when we assign meaning to life is to understand, justify, and perpetuate our life.

I can dramatically make the same point with some real world examples. I have just finished the Sunday Chicago Tribune (February 23, 2003), and from the Books section, here are the top-ten, national best sellers in nonfiction:⁴

1.Atkins for Life by Dr. Robert C Atkins (A comprehensive diet guide from the noted nutritionist.)

2.What Should I Do With My Life? by Po Bronson (A career guide from the author of The Nudist on the Late Shift.)

3.The Savage Nation by Michael Savage (The radio talk-show host on patriotism, family, and American values.)

4.The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle (A spiritual guide to living.)

5.Who Moved My Cheese by Spencer Johnson (Dealing with life changes.)

6.Body for Life by Bill Phillips and Michael D’Orso (A 12-week weight-lifting program.)

7.This Just In by Bob Schieffer ("Veteran TV journalist and moderator of Face the Nation shares behind-the-scene stories of the news business.)

8.Bush at War by Bob Woodward (An in-depth look at the first 18 months of the presidency of George W. Bush.)

9.The Right Man by David Frum (A presidential speechwriter’s look at the Bush White House.)

10.Good to Great by Jim Collins (Profiles of successful companies.)

I have not read any of the above books, but I am certain that at least seven support the thesis of this book; and there is the possibility that all of the books on the list support the thesis. I would like the reader to know that I have chosen these books solely on the bases of chance and convenience: They were in a paper that I happened to be reading at a time when I happened to be writing this chapter of the book. I am not suggesting to the reader that these books are a good sample or sampling of the universe of books that exist. However, I do believe that these books are possibly a good sample or sampling.

What I have described as the way these books were chosen is also true of the individuals I chose to use as examples of the thesis in this book. These people are randomly chosen individuals, selected solely on the bases of chance and convenience. In one way or another, they were in my life and purview at a time that I happened to be writing this book. Unlike what I said above about the selection of books, here I am suggesting to the reader that these individuals are a good sample or sampling of the universe of individuals that exist. I believe that is not only possibly the case, but also probably the case.

Before you continue reading, I want you to take a moment and reread the thesis of the book. I have written it again here for your convenience. Life has no meaning except what we assign to it. And what we really want to accomplish when we assign meaning to life is to understand, justify, and perpetuate our life. Initially at least, don’t try to process this thesis with your intellect. See if it first resonates with you at some other level or levels of your being. Then process it again with your intellect. (I don’t believe that there is any real separation in various aspects of our being, but I do believe we can only focus clearly on one aspect at a time.)

I have already suggested to you in part how I came to formulate the major thesis of this book as a way to handle a number of ideas and social phenomena from a variety of sources. What I would like to do now is offer more details on how the thesis may look in terms you may already hold as part of a current schema for understanding life and for processing its constant exigencies.

CHAPTER TWO—

THE ORIGIN OF THE THESIS

Time Frame: 2002-2003

I have already told you a little about myself, and I want to tell you a little bit more—mostly about the exigencies of my own life during a particular period of time. From my late teens through my early forties, I went through many changes as I sought love, fortune, knowledge, professional standing, and a general sense of well-being. Most of what I sought I did not find—not on any permanent basis at least. But look I did. And like many of you, I sought those things in books, other people, religion, alcohol and drugs, sex, work, and a variety of other means.

During this period, I read almost every self-help book on the market. I also read a large number of books on a variety of topics and issues of the times. I was also in and out of graduate school exploring other ideas, mostly related to the field of education. The self-help books were interesting, but none worked for me directly. The other books I read during this time were also interesting, but I must admit that I had difficulty integrating them into some perspective of life that made sense to me.

As you might expect, at some point I stopped trying to understand the content of the books and started to wonder about the motivation of individuals to write the books. In graduate school, I even tried to go behind the scene of theories on motivation to look at the motives (motivation) of men to write such theories. And from the variety of conceptual schemes on motivation (and other subjects) offered to me by a variety of men, I concluded that each conceptual scheme was