Winder Berry \'Between the Known

Winder Berry

'Between the Known and the Unknown Lies…'

One of the most difficult tasks in today's world is finding, and maintaining, a state of balance. If we were to attempt to find perfect balance in nature, say, a straight line, we would be hard pressed to do so. The job of achieving balance is further compounded when we attempt to find balance in something as elusive as perspective, which is bound to change over time, as well as within the course of a day. Both Alan de Button's essay, "On Habit" and Wendell Barry's essay, "God, Science, and Imagination" refer to a duality of perspective which people use. On the one hand, the authors (especially de Button), are persuading readers to not become trapped by the limits of familiar, comfortable reality (what Barry refers to as a stiff fundamentalist thought), and to use their imaginations to go beyond what is seen and known to experience a better understanding of the world and what it offers. On the other hand, however, there are certain dangers that are linked with too much imagination, which can be demonstrated in an analysis of each essay. Therefore, it becomes necessary to look at both the negatives and positive of each perspective in the respective essays, to determine if it is possible to balance these somewhat conflicting forms of perception, and to explore their results in a practical, reality-based fashion.

In certain ways, we may regard the difference between the known and the unknown to be opened by the doors of imagination. The value of imagination, and of looking at the world from an imaginary perspective, can be seen in the following quote from Berry. "…in the Bible the language of belief often falls short of the confidence of factual knowledge. It is most moving -- and, to me, it seems most authentic -- when it is honestly confronting its own inadequacy or the inadequacy or failure of knowledge. Far from the cocksureness of fundamentalism, the starting place of authentic belief or faith is not knowing" (23). This concept is echoed by de Button's essay, which also acknowledges the benefits of employing the imagination, and other such faculties of the mind, to aid in our daily value and understanding of life around us. In the following quotation, the author writes about the effects of room travel, which was largely pioneered by Xavier De Maistre. "And yet De Maistre's work springs from a profound and suggestive insight that the pleasure we derive from journeys is perhaps more dependant on the mindset with which we travel than on the destination we travel to. If only we could apply a traveling mindset to our own locales, we might find these places becoming no less interesting than the high mountain passes and butterfly-filled jungles of Humboldt's South America" (61-62). In both of these quotations, the authors are emphasizing that it is the power of the mind, and that of the particular mindset that is adopted by someone, that is important and essential to valuing one's life. De Button writes about using the mind's imagination to enhance daily life experience in surroundings and circumstances that may not otherwise be stimulating. Berry's quotation helps to explain the terms of the aforementioned duality of perception used by most people. Fundamentalism has a certainty of knowing, or knowledge. But in not knowing, one uses the imagination -- in a way that the author describes as both "authentic" as well as honest, and which is used to replace the "inadequacy or failure" of knowledge. It is clear that Berry prefers this perspective of using the imagination, of placing faith or belief in the unknown to comprehend the world, more than the scientific approach of knowledge which he disdains.

However, de Button's "On Habit" shows some of the dangers of adopting a point-of-view that is too dedicated to what we may refer to as selective sight or as an imaginative perception. Despite the fact that he certainly encourages readers to adopt a "traveling mind state" which will open them to new perceptions and perspectives that make for a greater usage of the imagination, the limitations of this perspective are demonstrated in the following quotation in which de Button explains the definition of a traveling mind state. "What, then, is a traveling mindset? ...We irritate locals because we stand on traffic islands and in narrow streets and admire what they take to be strange small details. We risk getting run over because we are intrigued by the roof of a government building or an inscription on a wall. (62)" These limitations may be evidenced from further review of Barry's "God, Science, and Imagination," which actually does a fairly good job of portraying a world in which such imaginative mind states are at best irrelevant, if not outright counterproductive. The following quotation, in which he describes the state of America today, certainly seems to imply as much. "Most of its surface water and all of its air are polluted. Its rural cultures -- the cultures, at their best, of husbandry -- have been annihilated… It is littered with wastelands, landfills, and, most shameful and fearful of all, dumps, industrial sites, and whole landscapes made dangerous virtually forever by radioactive waste. (27)" There is no amount of imagination, or of traveling mindsets, that can fix the sort of problems outlined in this quotation. Perhaps in earlier, more peaceful and ideal times, it may have been possible to stand around looking at flowers -- which could have been the best perspective at the time. But to cope with the issues outlined in the preceding quotation, even just to live in a land described as above, it is necessary for us to engage in a practical, rational thought process. This idea is shared with de Button's preceding quote, which warns of how impractical it would be to adopt an imaginative mind state on a daily basis. He mentions the "risk" involved with doing such activities, with the possibility of getting "run over" and getting residents who do not have this same state of mind (and who comprise the majority of people on the planet) upset at people who choose to use their time in such a leisurely fashion. Furthermore, it seems as though de Button is strongly suggesting that by overturning one rigid ideology (that is decidedly non-imaginative), that we run the risk of merely adopting its extreme opposite, which does not seem to be beneficial. If the new, imaginative-based ideology is just as narrow-minded as the other, then there is still no balance achieved and there has been little gained in the switch of perception.

As a result, it appears as though textual evidence indicates that humans can not live in a perpetual state of imagination. However, Berry goes on to illustrate what is perhaps his best point of his essay when he describes a fairly vital need for the importance of imagination -- which, in this particular context, refers to the concept of faith and a belief in something unseen yet shared amongst so many people that it has to be true. "The founders…stated in our Declaration of Independence…that…"all men" (which we now construe as "all people") are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights."…The possession of rights by divine endowment obviously is an article of faith, fir it has no objective or empirical standing…But, vulnerable as this principle may be, as an article merely of faith, I know of no other authorization of human rights that can adequately replace it. (28)" The compatibility of imaginative and non-imaginative mind states alluded to in this quote is perhaps illustrated best in de Button's "On Habit" near its conclusion, in which the author applies the philosophy of room travel pioneer (and champion of imaginative thinking) De Maistre to that of a dedicated realist, Alexander von Humboldt, to present a happy medium between these two men -- and their respective ideals. "It was this dichotomy, 'boring daily life', pitted against 'marvelous world', that De Maistre tried to redraw with greater subtlety. He would not have told Humboldt that South America was dull, he would merely have urged him to consider that his native Berlin had something to offer to. (64)" In both of these quotes, the authors are rectifying imaginative with realist ideologies. Berry's point with the preceding quotation is certainly well made, if not outright formidable. There are certain principles of government -- which may be the height of objective, rigid fundamentalist thought -- that are based on unseen yet widely believed "articles" of faith. It does not matter that there have been few times in the history of the United States that this principle was actually practiced; Berry's point goes beyond the flaws of man in enforcing his government. This quote still proves that there can be elements of political systems that can benefit from an imagined, belief system that has no concrete proof of existence (such as God). Therefore, it is not too hard to believe that there can also be other religious or scientific questions or lines of thoughts that can revolve around this principle as well. The key to utilizing such principles of faith and of imagination is to use them together with the known, the concrete sights and smells that can be touched and detected by the body. Doing so brings about a state of balance in perception that can help people tremendously throughout the course of their lives. This state of balance is implied in de Button's preceding quote in which the reader should be aware that von Humboldt left his "boring daily life" in Berlin to find a "marvelous" place in South America -- which is all a matter of perspective, and one which may be considered more stiff and rigid than De Maistre's imaginative conception of exploring his couch as though it were something new. Yet the reconciliation of both of these viewpoints indicates the balance that we have been looking for throughout this paper. Humboldt's viewpoint is not exchanged for De Maistre's; De Maistre's viewpoint is added to the former's which present a balance between the two, which is more than likely the best way for people to consider each viewpoint.