nasty

Nasty

by Bob on June 25, 2007

Nasty is not a good attribute. But sometimes things and people are nasty. Even the etymology of the word "nasty" is unclear, although scholars point to the Old French: nastre, bad, short for villenastre : vilein, bad; see villain + -astre, pejorative suff. (from Latin -aster).

I had a meeting today with someone who from the very beginning of our meeting was nasty. It was tormenting. Kind of like Sisyphus in ancient Greek mythology pushing that rock up the hill only to have it fall back, like later when brilliant Camus modeled his essay, "The Myth of Sisyphus" on this image, or Tantalus reaching down to try to get an impossible drink of water.

And it's worse when there is no leverage possible. Usually, when one has leverage, one can walk out, or say something bold or critical to the nasty person practicing his nastiness. But when one doesn't have any leverage in a situation, it's terribly and torturously painful. One must keep quiet and take the pain which is a very humbling exercise but excruciating. I wanted to walk out but the situation did not permit it. I wanted to scold the person, but it would have been awkward. So I had to bear the weight of this nastiness which made me feel terrible.

Sometimes we can dynamically modify the behaviour of the nasty person by our subtle nuances of conversational word choice and non-verbal communication if it is possible. Not in this case, today.

So, after the meeting, I walked around downtown Boston wondering why this had all happened, what the point was, and if there was a lesson to be learned.

I think there is always a lesson to be learned. But I had to try hard to find one here. I think ultimately I figured that the only lesson was to never have met the person at the meeting, but that felt like an easy way out. I really didn't want to ever meet the person again. But I could not come up with a lesson to be learned. Perhaps one hearkens to and remembers the work of Dr. Stanley Milgram at Yale in the 1960s with his experiment or Dr. Philip Zimbardo at Stanford in the 1970s with the Stanford Prison Experiment -- all about how people, if left unchecked, will be cruel to others, even if they are not cruel people to begin with.

I wondered if there was any hope. I still do wonder. Humans and human nature are both a very mixed bag of goodies and nasties. Bureaucracy has inherent nastiness built into it, especially with otherwise bored civil servants at their desks with nothing else but to be bored and frustrated. Some countries have had great success in ancient times with civil servants. In some countries, Civil Service was considered the highest of honour for one to do for one's country. Which is as it should be. These days, however, it seems to be on the wane.

Sly and the Family Stone in the 1960s sang about this at Woodstock: "I Want to Take You Higher". Sly prefaced the song with a statement which went like "it's all about ...". And I remember it was relevant to this topic of coping with someone's directed nastiness, but, in typical 1960s traditional memories fashioning, having heard it live with my own ears, and seen them from close up, I can't remember ! But I know it was relevant. It was only about forty years ago. So I should remember ! Hmm. Respect ? No, that was Aretha, but she wasn't at Woodstock performing. It was Sly's opening introductory remarks before the songs. On the tip of my tongue but can't get it. Dr. Freud would have said I am subconsciously blocking it out for a reason. Oh well. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar despite Dr. Freud.

So when all fails, let's turn to something I've been re-reading lately: "The Varieties of Religious Experience" by William James, p.233, in the chapter on "Saintliness", wherein James writes:

* * *

The transition from tenseness, self-responsibility, and worry, to equanimity, receptivity, and peace, is the most wonderful of all those shiftings of inner equilibrium, those changes of the personal centre of energy, which I have analyzed so often; and the chief wonder of it is that it so often comes about, not by doing, but by simply relaxing and throwing the burden down. This abandonment of self-responsibility seems to be the fundamental act in specifically religious, as distinguished from moral practice. It antedates theologies and is independent of philosophies. Mind-cure, theosophy, stoicism, ordinary neurological hygiene, insist on it as emphatically as Christianity does, and it is capable of entering into closest marriage with every speculative creed. * Christians who have it strongly live in what is called 'recollection,' and are never anxious about the future, nor worry over the outcome of the day. Of Saint Catharine of Genoa it is said that "she took cognizance of things, only as they were presented to her in succession, moment by moment." To her holy soul, "the divine moment was the present moment,... and when the present moment was estimated in itself and in its relations, and when the duty that was involved in it was accomplished, it was permitted to pass away as if it had never been, and to give way to the facts and duties of the moment which came after." *(2) Hinduism, mind-cure, and theosophy all lay great emphasis upon this concentration of the consciousness upon the moment at hand.

* * *

I just knew there was a lesson in my experience with a nasty person today. "Inner equilibrium" as Dr. James wrote. Yeah. Inner equilibrium. Hard to get, but good to get.

So, I can't remember what Sly said as he introduced the set of songs at Woodstock. I can remember what Sly said in Shakespeare's play, though. Most of it -- The Taming of the Shrew. And what the beggar said in the opening act and scene.

"Y'are a baggage, the Slies are no Rogues. Looke in the Chronicles, we came in with Richard Conqueror: therefore Paucas pallabris, let the world slide: Sessa"

Cool. Well actually, it would have been William the Conqueror. But we learn about dealing with nastiness, two things from Shakespeare's beggar:

1. "Paucas pallabris" -- likely meaning "few words" -- good advice.

2. "Let the world slide: Sessa" -- so chill out.

Got it.

Still haven't remembered what Sly said at Woodstock. I guess I was not meant to remember. Oh well.

Let the world slide. So it goes. Shakespeare certainly knew a lot about Alchemy and the quintessential human's condition.

So it goes. He would have said it better.