Dear ybgirp,

Thank you for being prepared to consider my position on Suskind. 

I'm not claiming I have the correct take on his work rather I consider it a great book precisely because it allows people to come at it from different perspectives and explore so many aspects of the human condition, a few of which we have touched on through this thread. Besides which, as others have attested, it is a captivating read.

It was an incredibly brave for a first novel.

So hats off to Poirot for posting it in the first place and my apologies for taking more than my fair share of the pie. I hope Lexi's issue is not too serious.

As to Suskind having a jaundiced view of humanity will you forgive me for pointing out yours has a wee tinge too.

"I am not, however, convinced that civilization has modified the unsavoury aspects of human behaviour, indeed, it would seem to have exacerbated them when you consider the wars that rage unceasingly and the increasing misery and starvation of billions. "

I am not saying you are wrong however the tribes of which you speak, while leading very community orientated lives were probably not as inclusive of other tribes encroaching on their resources.

Perhaps the best we can claim for civilization is that it allows for the congregation of huge masses of humanity into workable mega-communities.

I would like to think it delivers more than that but I can see your point.

csteele and ybgirp,

I think csteele makes a valid point, for mankind has always been tribal and doesn't often extend the same egalitarian virtues in the direction of those he considers outside his tribe.

Man may have advanced intellectually, but is still beholden to his baser instincts. The biggest challenge for his intellectual prowess and his religious leanings is in the intersection that arises between those constructs and his carnal and corporeal reality. He is a beast like other beasts - and yet he possesses the intellect to cut a swathe through nature and keep her at bay (to a certain extent) and to create psychological paradigms in which to seek shelter....always, however, they collide with his baser instincts and expose realities at odds with his carefully crafted idea of "civilised" conduct.

Hi everyone - I'm back and all's well.
Dealing with elderly parents takes a lot of
patience and understanding and it's made all
the more difficult when for them -
dementia has well and truly set in.
Still - who knows what awaits us further down the road.
But I digress.

Dear Poirot, once again Thanks for this thread.
These are the type of discussions that really make
this Forum so great - thanks of course to people
like yourself and those who contributed so interestingly.
For me - it's run its course so I shall see you all
on another thread.

Well argued, csteele and Poirot. However, the words base and baser when applied to instincts have a pejorative cast to them that disturbs me. Would you object to calling them basic instincts... as they are the basis of human [and all animal] survival? As for tribal instincts that make people defend their territories, you both seem to see that as a fault. I'm not so sure. There has to be some way to keep populations at a sustainable level. If the whip bird family that I love in my garden didn't violently expel intruders, they would die. And that goes for all species in a finite ecological system such as this planet. Our failure to protect the viability of our territories has resulted in a plague of humans that are exterminating life as we know it.
I like this, csteele: "Perhaps the best we can claim for civilization is that it allows for the congregation of huge masses of humanity into workable mega-communities."
I have come to the conclusion that civilization equals slavery [for vast numbers of people] The European colonies achieved wealth on the backs of slaves. We are maintaining our wealth by moving manufacturing to slave economies. Modern slavery is, if anything, worse than the traditional sort. At least then the owners had to provide food and shelter and protection. Today's slaves are given a minimum wage then left to fend for themselves. The result being poverty, starvation, disease, crime, corruption and misery on a planetary scale. We are insulated here in Australia, but when we run out of the free resources under the ground, reality will arrive. Any author who warns us about the results of basic instincts becoming base behaviour, is to be applauded. But being a sensitive bloke, I still couldn't read past the first few chapters.

ybgirp,

I don't find much to disagree with on your take of modern insulated society. And I don't think that our basic instincts are a bad thing.I think it's just the way we are and that usually those instincts are found incompatible with our higher intellectual constructs. We inhabit dual universes when it comes to the physical and the psychological worlds - and the further we progress along the developmental path, the more problems we have integrating our carnal selves with our intellectual and metaphysical constructs.

I believe that once we isolated ourselves psychologically from the natural world, of which we are a part, we invited the sort of fracture and angst that we modern humans experience. I'm not so sure that the mega-conglomerations we call cities are all that compatible with a healthy psychological state. I think we managed well enough in such urban atmospheres as long as local communities grew and socialised orgainically. The problems begin when services are centralised and institutions take the place of neighbourhood interaction and guidance...this seems to be the contemporary way.

Thanks Lexi for your contributions - always a pleasure.

And now the circle is complete, dear Poirot. I find myself in complete agreement with you.
Poor Lexi. My parents succumbed to dementia in their late eighties-nineties. All one can do is try never to make them feel stupid for forgetting and repeating themselves and wandering off.
Cheers till next time.