But perhaps a
statesman is not what we need at this stage of our
inquiry. A philosopher would be closer to our
mark! What substratum of endeavour does he descry
beneath the weltering chaos of disappointed
expectations, frustrated ambitions, misdirected
affections, ruinous loves, insuperable vanity, pathetic
ploddings, forlorn waitings, dejected wantings,
neglected cravings? Beneath it all (with apologies to
Larkin) desire for happiness runs.
Nor can we claim
to have chanced upon a discovery of Columbian novelty.
The ancients held to this ancient truth. It is a truth
more constant than the North Star, more dependable than
the speed of light. Aristotle arrives at it by a process
of elimination. Every pursuit, he begins, aims at an
object other than itself. All but the miser would find
in wealth a cul-de-sac for their desires; and even the
niggard's esoteric ecstasy is not altogether so
perverse as to be wholly unintelligible to, say, a
mother basking in the waxing manhood of her child. Every
object, then, is an instrument seized to complete
another object; happiness alone is desired for itself,
never for something other than itself.
In happiness we
reach the ultima Thule of human endeavour. But
wait! We hear dissenting voices. A chorus of protest
tells us that happiness cannot be snatched out of thin
air, that even the Ultimate must rest on material
foundations. Certainly, we would say, the
happiness-on-an-empty-stomach theory cannot pass muster;
nor can the no-roof-over-the-head-happiness - hippy
happiness - be sustained without a goodly supply of hasheesh.
But the hippy makes a point by
exaggerating it.
Their forebears
were the Cynics. (It is always a good strategy in
philosophical debate to locate your champions in hoary
antiquity. You are at least saved from the charge of
newfangledness. And where the hippies have once been
mentioned it is politic to choose a witness whose
historic fossils nearly require carbon-dating.) The
Cynics were the disciples of Diogenes - and we all know
that the only thing that Alexander, the most powerful
man in Europe, had to offer the mendicant in his
bath-tub residence was the sunshine his ample figure was
obstructing. Indeed, both guru and disciples earned
their sobriquet from cynikos., Greek for
dog-like. They were dog-like in their shamelessness, in
their simplicity, in their insolence. They were, in
short, the Hellenic hippies.
Infants in their
grown-up civilisations, they both insisted on puerile
simplicity. "Issues from the hand of God, the simple
soul," only to be sophisticated into worldliness. On my
way to Mymensingh, Bangladesh by train, I once met a
devout, young American. We struck up a conversation, and
our subject was simplicity. Though no hippy, he asked,
impressively, "When is enough, enough?"
Now, Aristotle had
queried thus, as well (I reintroduce my venerated
witness of venerable age). Only, the Stagirite had
brought a sharper scalpel to dissect the subject than
the obtuse, peremptory conviction of my travelling
companion - something which in his Americanism he would
no doubt have called 'gut feeling'. Well, Aristotle
(concurring with his mentor, Plato, for once, to verify
or falsify the old saw about the agreement of great
minds) anatomised the soul into a rational and an
irrational half. We moderns would benefit from
Aristotle's Anatomy as much as we do from Gray's - if
not more.
The irrational part is that which
responds to the advertisement for Coca Cola: 'It's
the real thing!' Now, we all know it's not the real
thing, and yet an acquaintance of mine has spoilt a set
of pearly teeth by imbibing 'the real thing'. Every
visit to her dentist, no doubt, cost her the real thing
- and caused him to exhibit his perfect set wider. Now,
Aristotle would have scolded her thus: "My dear girl, I
have nothing against you drinking the brown stuff, but
do it in moderation. When is enough, enough?"
I employ Coca Cola as a symbol of
modernity - the useless made indispensable. Where is the
Samson who is proof against the Delilah of her neon,
filigree, come-hither curves? Agoraphilia, of course, is
as antique as agoraphobia. "So many things I can do
without," Socrates used to claim at the emporia. "So
many things you cannot do without!" exhorts
with evangelic fury every advertisement today.
Economists claim
that our troubles begin at $10,000 per year. Even
Aristotle's scalpel would have balked at such precision,
but the fact is that that is when we start buying 'white
goods'. It is the astrological number which
multinationals hope the Chinese and Vietnamese peasant's
income will reach to augment theirs to astronomical
figures. The rational part of Chinese and Vietnamese
society - the state - had hitherto contained needs
within the pale of the sufficient, furnishing citizens
with health, education and safety. But the paradox of
civilisation begins where common sense and sanity end.
Civilisation rests, not on contentment, but on 'getting
and spending'. To envy the Jones's their new washing
machine, and Jones Junior his straight As, betokens
sensibility apparently far removed from the hyena
circling around the lion's lunch. Should we marvel then
at the Cynics and the hippies, the Rousseaus and the
Gauguins, sensitive souls that pilgrimaged towards
incorporeal spirit, but found the altar crowded with
genuflections before idolatrous matter? "We have given
our hearts away, a sordid boon."
Consequently, we
have to learn to be happy; which requires us to unlearn
some lessons inculcated by our elders and teachers, no
doubt with the best of intentions but the worst of
consequences. For who would not want his children to be
happy? Yet happiness, we have learnt, must always be
postponed, in grotesque confusion with money that must
be saved. The fridge we finally got last year; and
tomorrow we'll have that TV set; next year, the iPOD;
and - heaven of heavens! - a flat some day in which to
put all this detritus of the years. Yet behind the
painted veil of life lie 'Hope and Fear - twin
destinies, who ever weave/ The shadows the world calls
substance....' We sacrifice, first, the lining of our
stomachs to worry; next we dedicate an artery; we pay
homage to tomorrow by raising our blood pressure. We
have no time for solace, no time for
Horace.
Wisely the God enwraps in fuliginous night
the future's outcome, and laughs
if mortals are anxious
beyond mortality's bound.
Take care to deal equably
with what is present.
And to live only
for today requires us to rise up in rebellion against
the tyranny of material possessions. We rave about
democracy in public, yet live beneath a perpetual
despotism in private. In our obsequious devotion to
objects, we are hostage to the vicissitudes of the
transitory. Nay, we covet illusions, as though
covetousness were not vile enough. "Envy," observes
Bertrand Russell, "consists in seeing things, not in
themselves, but in their relations". Ozimandian
externals affirm in the derelict decrepitude of dead
things their Circean mastery. Few are the
rebels.
A happy life and mastery
over himself shall be his who daily
can say : 'I have
lived'...