Ernie : Well, there is George and Laura Bush, apparently well adjusted and so forth, but even if their marriage is perfect, there IS George W, and not only did he make me sick to think about, my feelings were shared by maybe 2/3rds of the electorate. I like the mixed marriage example of Lucy and Desi Arnaz. and the ( unmixed )comedy couple in "Married With Children," but as exemplars ? John Roberts and Cokie Roberts maybe come close, but she so overshadows he that this isn't a good metaphor, either. I prefer a mixed marriage metaphor for obvious reasons, you have obvious reasons for your preferences, how can this be worked out ? My difficulty is too few mixed marriages to draw upon for examples. The big plus is inclusiveness. The counterpart difficulty is that unmixed marriages always exclude "others." The big plus is a lot of possible examples. Maybe an idea will occur sooner or later. Billy ------------------------------------------------------------------------- message dated 3/2/2010 2:17:59 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
Hi Billy, On Mar 2, 2010, at 2:08 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: Ernie : You are assuming universal agreement about the views of Obama , not exactly the current situation. Not at all. I am merely pointing out that as *representative* of healthy marriage, he is the best public image we've got. I agree, politically he is useless for our purposes, but it says something (unpleasant) about the the character of most of America's public figures. As a recent author on the 2008 campaign said, the most damning statement is the Clinton's were on the fourth-most dysfunctional marriage among the major candidates. :-( As for Bill Cosby, fellow UMass grad student ( a couple of years after I was there, anyway ). while his character on TV was all for the good, the problem is twofold, ( 1 ) it is fiction, so how can anyone be sure it is realistic ? ( 2 ) the "averageness" of the character. OK for some purposes, but what about aspiration to excellence ? MIA, unfortunately. Aspiration to excellence? I think you're trying to hang too much on one metaphor. What *I* think we need is a *marketing* image -- something that people can immediately and concretely grasp, that anchors our philosophical abstractions in something concrete and well-known. My invocation of the Huxtables was somewhat tongue-and-cheek, but I'm actually started to grow fond of it. Also, to your points: ( 1 ) it is fiction, so how can anyone be sure it is realistic ? The real-world Bill Cosby espouses a political philosophy of responsibility that I think most of us here would be comfortable with, which gives us _some_ (and perhaps _enough_) grounding in reality ( 2 ) the "averageness" of the character. OK for some purposes, but what about aspiration to excellence ? MIA, unfortunately. Huh? A doctor married to a lawyer, who raised four African-American kids and sent them to college? What's not excellent about that? Now, I'm not saying I want Cliff Huxtable to run for President as head of the Radical Centrist party. However -- as your really extenuated list shows -- he may well the best 'totem' we could use to represent our views this side of John and Abigail. Something to think about, at any rate... -- Ernie P. I can think of a perfect couple who never existed, well enough, Albert Schweitzer and Mother Teresa, say, but how does a never existing couple provide insight ? There is one obvious example but, alas, most people don't know much about them, the Curies. Best to rule out ( no pun intended ) QE 2 and Prince Philip because of the power disparity in the marriage. In religion there is Radha and Krishna, but, needless to say, no-one knows how historical that relationship was and, even if it was 100 % true ( highly problematic ) would it appeal to Christians or Jews or Buddhists ? The criteria I am working with include : Fame, the couple / family is well known has the potential to appeal to just about everyone is real, that is, in the modern world, or more-or-less recent history provides an example of serious achievement to aspire to Actually there is one example of note, but there are obvious problems as metaphor-- Bill and Melinda Gates Personally, I think of Sri Aurobindo and Mira Richard, but they were not a married couple, and there was no family. But as a couple they each made significant contributions to the spiritual movement that both were committed to. But how many people, realistically, can identify with them ? 1 % would be a stretch. Jean Paul Sartre and Simone de Bouvior ? Not counting their extreme Leftist sympathies, they might be an example, but they did have those views, and, besides, outside of France and US universities, who has heard of them ? John and Abigail Adams --too unfamiliar even if they otherwise mostly qualify. But how do you use the Adamses as an example without tacit endorsement of the Federalist Party ? This is a problem of threading a needle with ten eyes. Billy In a message dated 3/2/2010 1:32:50 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: Hi Billy, On Mar 2, 2010, at 1:28 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: Ernie: Point well taken. Now, speaking as an adman, how do you personalize the idea ? Gotta give people a "hook," you know. Abstractions rarely ( if ever ) sell anything. OK, maybe they are persuasive in departments of physics or philosophy, but for the hoi polloi --which is us, more often that we like to admit-- what is the best way to make the concept clear ? Needed, an example of a really functional family that is well known enough to summon an "aha" insight when their name is / are mentioned. I think it is safe to say that Bill and Hillary don't make the cut, or the Sanfords or, for the matter, Abe Lincoln and Mary Todd. Famous very functional couple.? Hmmmmm. Ironically, the Obama's are arguably the most functional high-profile couple in the world right now, at least in terms of marriage. :-0 There are better fictional figures -- in fact, Cliff Huxtable (aka Bill Cosby) is arguably the modern ideal of fatherhood for my generation. "What this country needs is a Huxtabelian government, with a strong balance of support AND responsibility". -- Ernie P. Any ideas ? Billy In a message dated 3/2/2010 12:53:49 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: HI Billy, On Mar 2, 2010, at 12:24 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: Ernie: If the two parties are mommy and daddy, suppose there was a Radical Centrist party. What would be the appropriate metaphor ? I think our friend Mark Satin nailed it pretty well with his (re)definition of "nurturing parentS" vs "strict daddy" and "indulgent mommy": _George Lakoff, Don’t Think of an Elephant!: A Critique_ (http://www.radicalmiddle.com/x_lakoff.htm) Moreover, Lakoff’s frames are hardly scientifically drawn. The counterpart of the strict father model is not nurturant parent. It’s what you could call the “anything goes” model, from which millions of youth are suffering today. The nurturant parent model (and how’s about plural -- nurturant parents) is the golden mean, with appropriate discipline and freedom both built in. Some dare call it the radical middle model. -- Ernie P. = _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) _http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ (http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) Archives at _http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/) _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) _http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ (http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) Archives at _http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/) = _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) _http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ (http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/ _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) _http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ (http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/ = _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
_______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
