Explore
Gaia Soulmates
 Advertising keeps Gaia free! Interested in sponsoring us?

Integral Review's editor reviews my novel The Seeker Academy

Posted on Jun 3rd, 2008 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin
The reflective bi-annual Integral Review is out with a new issue, which contains a 2,300 word review of The Seeker Academy by editor-in-chief Jonathan Reams. He appears to like the novel a lot. "There is realism to the writing," he writes, "grounded in both the actions of the characters and Grace's reflections on and perceptions of them."

Best that you read the review and Ream's discussion of Grace's time at her retreat; I'll only add his musings on how the story concludes: "Grace steps back into the world at large, having found in herself a confidence and awareness that many sought at The Seeker Academy. She finds that this is not something new or strange to her, but that she has simply not focused her attention on it before."

With his Integral orientation, Reams ends his review by asking why so many New Age/ holistic/ Integral leaders refuse to review the novel. I hope you will read what he says. He sums up: "while these reasons may have contributed to the lack of reviews Gussin's novel has received, they stand out for me as the strengths that make it a compelling piece of literature."

Again, the review is here. The book's homepage on Amazon is here.
Access_public Access: Public What do you think? Print views (339)  

Why Won't Holistic/Integral Leaders Review My Novel (post 3/3)?

Posted on Mar 23rd, 2008 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin

Two Bright Maps and a Broken Mirror

(Note: the context for this post are the first two posts in this cycle, below)

As my novel came out, in April 2007, Oprah was helping to make Rhonda Byrne’s The Secret the best-selling U.S. book. Now she does the same for Eckhart Tolle’s A New Earth: Awakening to your Life’s Purpose. The New York Times doesn’t even stop to sneer at these authors; up the Hudson River, The Omega Institute gushes over them.

The demand for these books shows a moral and spiritual hunger in the land, but it is dismissed by the critical elite as unimportant. They instead seem content with description and irony: with describing the forces in our lives as out of reach to us, and with showing us (e.g., The Daily Show) the inherent gallows humor. So the fact is that many people laugh bitterly at our sense of helplessness, while some people look for a way out.

With a late-Roman quality, the guidance of the critical elite starts to look like mostly the advice to be stoic.

And so, before saying what I oppose, and why I think the ironic elite and the elite among those trying to escape avoid my novel, I’ll try to say what I’m for. Writing, I have, first, a point of view: I share in this hunger too much to be artistically impartial. Poking around, I have something in mind to build, to fortify, to  mend. What that is is the counterculture, a Western movement of several centuries (now global along with its host), which opposes the acquisitive rationalism embodied in science and business with a very open-to-interpretation humanism. How, the humanists ask (stripping it down) in varied ways,can we make the society we live in feel good to us.

Right off, we see disputes, and an ambiguous relation to technology. Ike builds our roads just as Kerouac takes to the road to feel good. We carry grand, personal recorded music collections in our pockets. Yet with another shake of the kaleidescope we are reminded of how stuck out on the margins we feel.

In the 19th century this counterculture begot socialism and communism, which for a time gave followers a sense that they could make life better. Yet as these movements fell, often becoming evil, their members and next generation newcomers who might have been members were left without a plan. It was then that this tribe or elements in it lost its political thread and turned inward. And, a few decades later, these wanderers, now calling themselves new age, holistic or Integral, are guided by two bright but dangerous maps. The maps are bright in offering directions and solutions, and dangerous, I think, in leading a movement of rebels away from both direct experience and civic engagement.

The first bright map is mysticism. To use Oprah’s blockbusters as guides, the mysticism ranges from mechanistic to contemplative. The Secret promises a code that lets us get what materially we want from life: a top notch car or spouse or job. Less attached, A New Earth tells us to become detached from flesh-and-blood life. Both views have long legacies. Jesus uses mechanistic mysticism (loaves and fishes) to light up his crowds. Contemplative mysticism (finding experience richer than what everyday life offers) runs deep in human history. But each type turns from matter to mind, a journey few people make on their own. So mystical traditions focus our thoughts, and are in this way, I believe, highly rational. Also, entrepreneurial mapmakers and readers abound.

The second bright, dangerous map I see is theory, when it sets aside sense and experience. One can gain a head wind around a set of ideas and sail farther and farther into them, especially if a teacher urges the voyage on as a flesh-and-blood substitute. However thoughtful Integral Theory, for example, the guru-led movement it anchors often creates a cerebral, sheltered, close-minded experience, blinkered by codes.

I think the counterculture today is over-influenced by mysticism and theory, and so forgets or ignores its heritage and (with contemplation) its greatest resources. I also see its critical work as the reviving of these resources. Yet the movement’s momentum and its money-making seems to lie, instead, regrettably, with mysticism and theory.

Which brings me to the broken mirror. Studying the catalogs of Omega, Esalen, etc., I find pride of place given to an art called mystical, transcendent, visionary, fantastic or Integral, but not realistic. That is, the movement with its present mystical and theory-ridden influences wants an art that watches people fly through a world of ideas. It soon gets pedantic, I think: the art, driven by attitudes of self-help, tells people what to see and what to feel.

What this self-help art can be contrasted to is realism, the great thread of Western culture, the showing of people half-uncomfortable in flesh-and-blood life. Yet the mirror realism uses has been splintered by history and rarely shows us much we believe. We are also saturated with narrative entertainment, depleting drama, a crucial realistic form, of its force. We are hungry, and the realism we know of doesn’t seem to be very nourishing.

Most regrettably, what this omits from the picture are people. And so, when I began, fascinated, to write about the counterculture as it is now, I based my story not in the ideas of the many factions, but in the people who were involved. They all have backgrounds and passions that while driving them to the movement, exceed it. With my personal artistic inadequacies, and with a broken mirror that reduced me to using a jagged-edged, thin shard of glass, I set out to show these people, these seekers, encumbered by social forces in their flesh-and-blood lives.

The culture’s critical elite hate the journey, and so are unwilling to read the novel. The journey’s elite—the retreat leaders, gurus and self-help publications—having gotten into the habit of providing answers, are now too theory-driven to like mirrors, and so are unwilling to read the novel.
Access_public Access: Public What do you think? Print views (217)  

A Brief Delay, And A Subtitle

Posted on Mar 15th, 2008 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin
I am too low in spirit today to write the third and final post of this cycle (see below). I write by compression, rather than in the conversational tone good bloggers achieve, and I don't have that sort of stone-and-chisel work in me now. I think I know what the post's subtitle will be, though: "Two Bright Maps And A Broken Mirror."

So I'll postpone, substituting the anniversary of one spring Roman political killing for another: rather than publish, as promised, today, on the Ides of March, I'll publish on Good Friday.
Access_public Access: Public What do you think? Print views (76)  

Why Won't Holistic/Integral Leaders Review My Novel (post 2/3)?

Posted on Mar 2nd, 2008 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin

In the first post in this cycle, printed below this one, I pointed out that, while The Seeker Academy has so far received sixteen mostly very positive reviews on Amazon, some that run 700 words, Holistic/Integral/New Age tastemakers won’t review it.

Independent Amazon reviewers, most of whom review many other books, say the novel “reflects on extremely relevant issues for today and for the future,” has “parallels with the classic Zen And The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance,” “while delving into cultural philosophy, never loses the sweet flavor of storytelling,” and “shows real ambition for spiritual adventure.”

And yet, sixty of the sixty-one editors, retreat leaders and academics who address Holistic/Integral/New Age themes, and got review copies of The Seeker Academy, have been unwilling to--have refused to--review it. Why? Do they think it threatens them? In a post I’ll mull over before writing, and publish March 15th (the Ides of March), I’ll give my best answer to that question.

Meanwhile, I hope you will read the Amazon reviews and three editorial reviews, and look at the list of the unwilling I provide below. If the novel is judged by its Amazon reviewers to mindfully and with “ambition” address the Holistic/Integral/New Age movement, why won’t the movement’s leaders review it?

As a reminder, the one leader in sixty-one who did review the novel, Nancy Slonim Aronie, author of Writing From The Heart, who teaches every year at all of the major retreats, and lectures at Harvard, said of The Seeker Academy: "With exquisite facility of language, L.D. Gussin takes us on a very real spiritual journey; the ups, the downs, the all around. I've been there. L.D. Gussin nails it!"

UNWILLING EDITORS

 

Editor in Chief, Shambhala Sun Magazine

Editor in Chief, Yoga Journal

Book Editor, Alternatives Magazine

Editor in Chief, What is Enlightenment? Magazine

Managing Editor, Tricycle Buddhist Review

CultureWatch Editor, Sojourners Magazine

Managing Editor, Foreward Magazine

Editor at Large, Utne Reader

Editor in Chief, Tiferet: A Journal of Spiritual Literature

Prose Editor, Tiferet: A Journal of Spiritual Literature

Editor, UUWorld Magazine

Managing Editor, Yes! Magazine

Editor, Communities Magazine

Managing Editor, In These Times

Editor in Chief, Beliefnet.com

EVP Content and Community, Beliefnet.com

Publisher, Conscious Choice Magazine

Book Review Editor, Conscious Choice Magazine

Editor in Chief, Whole Life Times

Editor, Ascent Magazine

Editor, Insight Journal
Culture Editors, Spirituality and Health Magazine
Managing Editor, Shift: At the Frontiers of Consciousness

UNWILLING RETREAT ADMINISTRATORS

I sent review copies to twenty managers and trustees representing Kripalu Center, Esalen Institute, Omega Institute, Breitenbush Hot Springs, The Crossings, Hollyhock Centre, Spirit Rock, and Chautauqua Institute. Not one has been willing to review it.

 

UNWILLING RETREAT WORKSHOP LEADERS

I sent review copies to a dozen authors who teach workshops every year at one or more of the retreat centers listed above. Only Nancy Slonim Aronie has reviewed it.

 

UNWILLING SCHOLARS

I sent review copies to ten scholars of this movement, whose academic associations include California Institute Of Integral Studies, Wisdom University, Goddard College, Rice University, JFK University, The Graduate Institute and University of Oregon.. Not one has been willing to review it.

Access_public Access: Public 1 Comment Print views (241)  

Why Won't Holistic/Integral Leaders Review My Novel (post 1/3)?

Posted on Feb 24th, 2008 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin
POST 1 of 3

 

Nine months since publication, and, like most any novelist who gets a book out, I’m on to something else, to earning money and not by writing novels. You won’t likely be the “one in a thousand”: we all know this.

For me, the four years of drafts, hand-to-mouth living and then book-promoting, all while trying to stay true to the page, has given way to new work, in technology. I’m again on that river where business and science provides the current. The journey has a logic but it leaves out (or buries, perhaps) a lot of human experience.

All of us who know this about life in the world realize that there is a weakening of perspective, just when it is most needed. In my case, this week I’m reading about synthetic biology—a topic that sounds scary and yet promises (in a context of climate change and biofuels) hope.

What do I think about the growing human power to alter nature? Am I willing to join in? What is my spiritual anchor, from which I might form a moral point of view?

Meanwhile, I age, while people I love are older still. A hike I took yesterday I’ll find too hard in ten years. All my gathered musings stay with me… needing only memory triggers to emerge. What I affirm (adding up what I’ve said and implied) is that I, a writer with a novel out, again feel the spiritual and moral hunger and doubt that led me, upon spending July 2001 at the Omega Institute, to begin The Seeker Academy.

The book, to date, has sixteen Amazon reviews and three editorial reviews. Some are brief, a hundred or so words; others are six or seven times longer. I will leave it to readers to form their own views of the reviews and the reviewers, but I’ll assert that there is now a body of reviews that finds the novel compelling, important and accomplished. Important also or first, I’ll add, because the subject is important.

Two reviews by Zaadz/Gaiam members.

And yet, the leaders of the secular spiritual (or holistic, mind-body-spirit, integral or new age) movement refuse to review the novel. This even as twenty independent reviews affirm it as a respectful, gripping story about a subcultural they are devoted to. I sent copies to over sixty leading editors and retreat leaders and teachers; of these, only ONE has read the book and given comments. Her name is Nancy Slonim Aronie; she owns the Chilmark Writing Workshop, is a Harvard instructor and teaches every year at Omega, Esalen, Kripalu and other major retreats. This is what Aronie wrote:

“With exquisite facility of language, Gussin takes us on a very real spiritual journey: the ups, the downs, the all-arounds. I’ve been there. L.D. Gussin nails it! ”

Despite this review from an insider, and the engaged comments by Amazon reviewers, movement leaders won't review the novel. Why is this? I'll approach this question in my next post. I may also publish the names and affiliations of the 60+ gatekeepers who won't give my novel a chance.

Access_public Access: Public 1 Comment Print views (138)  

Is New Age Power Mysticism Just Positivism In New Clothes?

Posted on Oct 22nd, 2007 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin
I reproduce here a personally-rewarding exchange I had with the blogger Mushin. I offer an argument encapsulated in the title of this blog post; Mushin responds with a different take.

Mushin writes (picking up a thread):

A quotation by Murray is widely misattributed to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe [1]. The following passage occurs near the beginning of Murray's The Scottish Himalayan Expedition (1951):

““'Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back, always ineffectiveness, concerning all acts of initiative and creation. There is one elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself then providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforseen incidents and meetings and material assistance which no one could have dreamed would come their way. I have learne a deep respect to one of Goethe's couplets: “Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!' ”

The “Goethe couplet” referred to here is from an extremely loose translation of Faust 214-30 made by John Anster in 1835:

We want to drink strong drinks
so start brewing right away!
What isn't happening today, isn't done tomorrow,
An one shouldn't let any day pass away.
What's possible should by decision
coureageously be begun.
Then he won't let go of it
and keeps on working, because he must.

I reply:

I read an Enlightenment positivism in Goethe's lines, amplified to a dangerous extreme by Murray's notion that Providence actively helps the doer. Isn't this just the attitude (replacing new age mysticism with establishment Christianity) that gave rise to Western colonialism, materialism and, ultimately, our present crises of climate change and social injustice? It's indeed a Faustian bargain–there is nothing in this attitude of traditional (e.g. sustainable) cultures, or of the conservatism and caution about hubris that lies in Western tragedy.

Many people (Lenin, Mao, George W. Bush, the entire scientific community) seeking accomplishment have believed that they were working hard, doing good, and, most horribly, had god or history on their side.

Maybe we should lay off Goethe's coffee and stare at Goethe's possible and preceed our decisions with reflections on hubris. And maybe we should believe that when we act it is without knowing if Murray's providence is on our side.

Mushin:

A couple of thoughts on that L.D.
It is my experience that some of us need that kind of encouragement (providence helping) when we're climbing huge mountains or starting great things.
One cannot worry about hubris if one feels there is really something to be done, and one feels called to do it - especially if the idea or vision is pretty much different than the Zeitgeist, and/or is facing opposition from the outside (or 'sabotage' from the inside).

I don't think it is the attitude or the spirit that is at fault here it is the adaption and the use. It's good to have a long stick if you want to leverage your lifting power - but surely you can use the same stick as a weapon.
So you can certainly use the attitude that speaks from Murray's quote to encourage yourself or others when 'down', or use it to do some heroic nonsense, or even start a whole movement - like communism, for instance - that is fantastic in the beginning (Proudhon, early Marx, Rosa Luxemburg etc.), and then turns into a major tool for suppression.

I don't think that watching out, guarding against hubris is something that will be of use here - as much as it might help people like me at times to 'take themselves back' and listen to others.
It's an evolutionary thing - humans tend to learn from their mistakes much more then from their successes.  If you want to get diversity (which seems to be one of evolution's drifts) than you need parasites, adverseries etc. The thing that talks to the Lenin's, Mao's and - not such a big figure - Bush's is powerful adverseries; and I guess in his own wierd way Bush might even believe that he is humble…

And I absolutely agree that we act best when we do not care either way, if providence is on our side or not… when we care about dialogue, with people, living beings, environment and our deepest heart

Me:

I think the attitude is just what is at fault, to go aggressively after the possible, and think it is god's work because you feel it is, and believe god or history will actively help. I think the Zeitgeist has been that precisely for centuries in the west, which new age mysticism (“if you know what you want the universe gives it to you”) amplifies rather than opposes.

So I think practices that help to guard against personal and cultural hubris are of use and very important–a big part of that cliched phrase “be the change.” Decades back, anyway, on Israeli kibbutzes (or collective farms, socialist creations), kibbutz presidents were assigned full time kitchen duty during the year after their terms ended.

Mushin:

So you think it's the attitude that is at fault, and I think that if there is anything at fault here it is how one uses such an attitude (“Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!')

So we differ. And we do so, I think, becaause we have a different view of what the attitude is  This is, if we want to see where conflicts come from and what might need change, probably one of the 'natural causes' - people believing they differ, when it isn't even clear what they differ about.
So rather than making that clear I would like to go another way as it isn't important to me what the role of hubris is… especially not in a discussion. Hubris and humility are two poles of a field that is quite abstract to me, except in clear situations.
Putting presidents in kitchens might be an interesting exercise - but it says more about the valuation of kitchen work than about the valuation of humility. It can be regarded as the “wrath of the little men”, it could say a lot about forced labor - there was a period in China when intellectuals where forced to do manual labor.

If I meet a person and am truly interested in her or him, I don't see him/her as a consumer, capitalist - to pick up the thread of this original post here - and I don't even care about their ideologies and opinions, neither do I care much for if they are humble… I open up to them unquestioning, letting them deeply in to me, feeling them, tasting them, listening to them - and then seeing what wants to bloom between us.
Therefor an analysis of their altitude, their moral ideas (and practices) etc. is something we usually will not touch upon unless we've come to deeply trustfully listen to each other.
In my experience, whenever I do judge people's attitudes or opinions, it is a movement of separating myself from them - and putting myself in a sure place (above them).

So being the change is a nice cliché, and people believing in that cliché (or acting according to it) are culturally closer to me than people believing in the greatness of the American Way of life, for instance. Nevertheless that only plays a role when we're not meeting but playing around with concepts (which I like to do at times as well).

Me:

I applaud (and really listen to) your attitude of openness when engaging with individuals.

Yet I believe that what we think together (in a social network, an opposing counterculture) has concrete importance, and that to talk about those thoughts is not conceptual jousting.

In that context, the idea of cultural hubris and and its relevance to our social crisis is not, I believe, an abstraction. And I guess my overall point is that the new age idea that one can get the universe actively on one's side is such (in your words) a clear situation. I view it as the damaging mainstream zeitgeist dressed in new clothes.

Mushin:

Well the idea of cultural hubris that is attached to the “American Dream” might be - well, not so great anymore, or as it is being used by the present govt. but it helped create democracy in Germany (West) after freeing us from what we brought upon ourselves and through WW2 on a large portion of the world.

Japanese Zen-Buddhists - enlightened masters, by their own and present day standards - blessed Kamikaze pilots before they took of…
Enlightened Tibetan Lamas took 15 and 16 year old girls from around the monastries for their Tantric rituals without much consent from these girls…

There is a long tradition of what we presently would consider very humble spiritual people who committing atrocities in the name of their spirituality in history.
Humilty is not necessarily a characteristic that goes a lot beyond being a personal trait - a way of being one shouldn't brag about or 'push' as a medicine. Not in my view, anyway.

But if I would feel that hubris was a key problem (challenge) of our culture then - what would be a real cure?
Conscious capitalism as painted in the Z3 is one angle that needs to be covered, and many other ones.

As a person who doesn't believe that the universe takes sides, and actually that it doesn't even have sides as it has no center, I've always seen that people who are on a different developmental stage are sorely in need of someone or something to be on their side, and they'll believe whatever it takes to feel comfort in a huge universe out of their control.
I mean, no intelligent person after having given it a thought or two would seriously believe that some thing/process as big as the universe could care about them personally or even this planet… (Just look where we live!)
And even if you think/believe that God is in you as a very personal (to you) presence - and I've had quite a few experiences suggestive of that - than It/She/He is Everywhere also… and again, an intelligent person knows that this is a very, very big also.

So really if we take hubris to be the problem, we must ask intelligently what strengthens/motivates hubris - and I would look for the answer in emotional and intellectual and bodily education. Then hubris will disappear out of the sheer sense of magnitude we are faced with as individuals…
Access_public Access: Public 1 Comment Print views (325)  

I Learn of and Begin to Question "2012"

Posted on Sep 28th, 2007 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin
Just before a bookstore reading I attended by Daniel Pinchbeck, author and the founder of the online magazine Reality Sandwich, Pinchbeck had fought (during a radio interview) with Whitley Streiber. Pinchbeck's current book is "2012: The Return of Quetzalcoatl"; Streiber, who writes best-selling horror novels and who claims to have been abducted by aliens, has written "2012: The War for Souls." I'd not heard of 2012 or Streiber; I'd found Pinchbeck via his magazine (its coda: "Evolving Consciousness, Bite by Bite"), whose themes include Psyche, Eco, Tech, Commons and Art. The reading packed the bookstore with people.

It was the kind of crowd where everyone despised the current government, for the best of reasons. The world is a mess and Dubya is at best the King of Fools.

2012 refers to the year prophesied for an apocalypse by the old Mayan priesthood. In the fight, Streiber says that the prophecy must lead, by or on Dec. 21, 2012, to mass human "die-offs." Pinchbeck says that this prophecy is really a metaphor, and we can let the insight of the spirit world provoke us into saving the physical world.

Pinchbeck cross-posted a piece about the fight to his Amazon Blog and to Reality Sandwich. The latter has received over a hundred comments and the back and forth has sometimes been nasty. There is a consensus belief that the prophecy sees what is real--perhaps because it comes from a culture other than our own. A faction looks toward a sudden end, the other toward a sudden change.

Commenting on Daniel's post, I pick at this 2012 consensus, which scares me as it seems a big waste:

I base this criticism on two points of agreement I have with you. One is your call for a sustainable society, another is your belief (as I sense it) that the Western liberal world view must be re-spiritualized. And I criticize not your argument with Strieber about evil spirits (it doesn't interest me), but two of your underlying assumptions.

1. "We in the West are obsessed with free will - with individuality... free will on an individual egoic level is not possible"
2. "...we are now learning that consciousness and intention have actual effects on physical reality"

Individuality is a Western tradition that sprouted nervously in Greek and Hebrew societies, flamed out amid Greco-Roman cynicism, and then after 1000 years reappeared (in a beautiful, integrated way, to the people witnessing it) in Dante and Giotto, etc. It is a tradition, and only secondarily an obsession; and it is to be approached with wonder and caution--not dismissed as impossible using pseudo terminologies that date to the last century, a period of high confusion we obviously remain in now.

Claiming knowledge that mind effects matter directly, instead of through human activities, may or may not misuse or even misunderstand the quantum model in physics. It does, though, unleash a wide platform for fantasy. To say that negative thinking can breed negative outcomes and so be harmful in itself is to forge a chain of fantasy. It argues ultimately for a kind of mandated happy talk that Orwell illustrated in 1984. It argues against the kind of "Jeremiad" or harsh criticism and warning that began with the Hebrew prophet Jeremiah and extends in the romantic reaction to William Blake, Dostoevsky and Orwell himself. See what will happen (these Jeremiads say) if we keep BEHAVING this way. Here's some negativity:

Mock on, mock on, Voltaire, Rousseau;
Mock on, mock on; 'tis all in vain!
You throw the sand against the wind,
And the wind blows it back again.

Here is Pinchbeck's post on his Amazon blog, with his reply to me; here is the extended discussion (including other comments I make, and reactions) on Reality Sandwich.
Access_public Access: Public What do you think? Print views (198)  

Two Tests Of A Gaiam-Zaadz "Conscious" Capitalism

Posted on Aug 30th, 2007 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin
I'm sure there are more, and I can't think about this deeply now, but I see two tests of some consciousness, by which I mean ecological-social justice sustainability (Paul Hawken's integration), with regards to Gaiam-Zaadz as a for-profit business.

The first, that advertising can enhance an ecosystem, instead of being only manipulative, I think is a lesson of the Google-led 2nd generation Internet. This is new! Gaiam means to deliver eyeballs, and if it can more effectively than its competitors gather a pod of hot yoga enthusiasts that sellers of hot yoga add-ons, etc., etc., can reach precisely, I see no harm. Thus it's a freebie for the company: niche marketing enhancing an ecosystem, in a Whole Earth Catalog sort of way.

The second, far harder test of conscious capitalism relates to the holistic edge of our “world changing” equation. Gaiam calls itself a “lifestyle” company, within a market termed LOHAS (lifestyles of health and sustainability). I think it's no coincidence that “lifestyle” refers mostly to one's choices as a consumer. Yet lifestyle is a downstream paradigm, first from spiritual identity, and then from moral choice. Deciding to work for ecological sustainability or social justice is a moral, not a lifestyle decision, just as deciding to study Buddhism is a spiritual, not a lifestyle, decision. And then a spiritual or a moral effort usually leads to difficulties, to contradictions, to falling flat or getting stuck. I think many people visit Zaadz seeking a way forward. I also think the LOHAS marketing engine wants naturally to define this seeking in terms of individuality and lifestyle (some Zaadz members agree). Whether this will lead Gaiam-Zaadz away from the moral and social struggles of our journey is the question.
Access_public Access: Public 3 Comments Print views (228)  

My Discussion Piece At Libraries For The Future

Posted on Aug 14th, 2007 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin

Some work I do other than writing and (now) promoting The Seeker Academy, my novel about the liberal counterculture, concerns physical place and community in relation to the Internet. I’m proud to say that Libraries For The Future, a national advocacy group, has begun to publish on its blog, here, a discussion piece I wrote for them early in 2007. It is titled “Public Libraries In The Internet Age”; they are posting weekly installments and inviting comments.

If you favor value-based uses of technology, with the many predicaments this position entails–and if you believe in the institution of public libraries–check the paper out.

Access_public Access: Public What do you think? Print views (386)  

A Reading Group Guide for The Seeker Academy

Posted on Aug 1st, 2007 by ldgussin : Writer, mostly ldgussin
 My Amazon landing page, here, now has eighteen substantive reviews--almost all of them positive, and written from different perspectives.

The reading group guide will evolve, and readers are encouraged to submit questions for inclusion. Periodically, I’ll add to or reorganize the questions–or I’ll have Grace do it, as she sometimes likes to do sorting.

1. The central character, Grace Hudson, is shown realistically as a mother, wife, aunt, teacher, friend. Yet she is also a symbolic figure. How do we know this, and what does she symbolize?

2. How does the author try to lead readers to identify with Grace? How important is this indentification to The Seeker Academy’s impact?

3. Grace brings a burden of sadness to the academy. What is she looking for? Does she find it? What else does she find?

4. Why do you think people attend the kinds of classes and retreats known variously as holistic, mind-body-spirit, new age? What do they seek? Are their questions identifiably political, or social, or psychological, or physical, or spiritual? Or are they hard to classify? Do the teachings they find truely help them?

5. At an important turn in the story, Grace tries body work. Does it help her? How? If you’ve had similar body work experiences, did you find yourself open to them, and how did they effect you?

6. Is Grace a consistent character even as the nature of her journey changes? Which of her concerns carry over from her life at home to the Academy? Does Seeker distract her, or deepen her sight?

7. The Seeker Academy unfolds, in a mostly linear fashion, through Grace’s eyes. The linearity, single point of view, and evocative chapter titles all break with postmodern relativism. Why is the story told this way?

8. Why does the author use literary realism, when holistic centers prefer spiritual fiction and fantasy? Why do they prefer these genres? Do certain story elements require realism? And in what sense is The Seeker Academy also a fable?

9. Grace sometimes worries that, with so much going on and the time short, she’s hardly getting to know her new friends. Do you come to know them sufficiently? Does Grace, despite what she feels?

10. Monk, in late middle age, sees himself living in a piecemeal way in a liberal counterculture. How would he define mainstream culture? How his counterculture? Does his worldview have meaning or authenticity for you?

11. Anton, a dentist who uses holistic techniques in his practice, tell Grace that awareness and purity are the guiding if at times contending spiritual themes explored at Seeker. Grace on her own decides that another guiding theme is fear. Do you very often grapple with spiritual awareness, purity or fear in your everyday life?

12. The Hudson River setting is resonant in the novel, further accented by other details of place being kept vague—with local markers unnamed or having invented names. Is this a local story? Why does place matter?

13. The novel’s philosophical journey is explored through conversations, performances, and meditations. Why did the author ground these ideas in the characters and plot points of a story, instead of writing a nonfiction book on the holistic movement?

14. Two contrasts frame the story: life in the mainstream versus at the Academy, and being middle-aged versus being young. How do these contrasts effect Trumpeter? Moira Kathleen? Grace, herself? How do they resonate with you?

15. The story ends in midsummer. What might our characters’ lives be like in another half year, and what of their Seeker experiences might they retain? Who would you most like or least like to find yourself sitting beside on a train?
Access_public Access: Public What do you think? Print views (214)  
Page 1 of 3123
Showing 1 - 10 of 22 Results