Lipton’s Journal/December 8, 1954/43 - Revision history

Grlucas: CE.

2022-08-02T13:30:26Z

CE.

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:30, 2 August 2022
Line 2:		Line 2:
	Talk with Rhoda L.{{LJ:Rhoda}} We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad), but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.		Talk with Rhoda L.{{LJ:Rhoda}} We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad), but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.

	So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic, middle-class-adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.		So, the lack-of-sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic, middle-class-adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.

	{{Notes\|title=note\|width=60em}}		{{Notes\|title=note\|width=60em}}

Grlucas: CE.

2022-08-02T13:29:41Z

CE.

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:29, 2 August 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{LJtop}}		{{LJtop}}
	Talk with Rhoda L.{{LJ:Rhoda}} We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.		Talk with Rhoda L.{{LJ:Rhoda}} We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad), but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.

	So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic, middle-class-adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.		So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic, middle-class-adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.

Grlucas: CE.

2022-07-23T13:16:14Z

CE.

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:16, 23 July 2022
Line 2:		Line 2:
	Talk with Rhoda L.{{LJ:Rhoda}} We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.		Talk with Rhoda L.{{LJ:Rhoda}} We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.

	So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.		So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic, middle-class-adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.

	{{Notes\|title=note\|width=60em}}		{{Notes\|title=note\|width=60em}}

Grlucas: Tweaks.

2021-07-15T11:38:56Z

Tweaks.

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:38, 15 July 2021
Line 4:		Line 4:
	So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.		So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.

	{{Notes\|title=~~Note~~\|width=60em}}		{{Notes\|title=note\|width=60em}}

	{{LJnav}}		{{LJnav}}
	[[Category:December 8, 1954]]		[[Category:December 8, 1954]]

Grlucas: Added template.

2021-04-24T15:47:21Z

Added template.

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, 24 April 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{LJtop}}		{{LJtop}}
	Talk with Rhoda L.{{~~refn\|Lifelong friend of {{NM}}’s sister Barbara,~~ Rhoda ~~Lazare (b. 1926) was introduced to her future husband, Daniel Wolf, by Mailer.~~}} We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.		Talk with Rhoda L.{{LJ:Rhoda}} We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.

	So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.		So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.

Grlucas: Tweak.

2021-04-24T14:17:27Z

Tweak.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:17, 24 April 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{LJtop}}		{{LJtop}}
	Talk with Rhoda L~~[azare]~~.~~<ref>~~Lifelong friend of {{NM}}’s sister Barbara, Lazare (b. 1926) was introduced to her future husband, Daniel Wolf, by NM.~~</ref>~~ We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.		Talk with Rhoda L.{{refn\|Lifelong friend of {{NM}}’s sister Barbara, Rhoda Lazare (b. 1926) was introduced to her future husband, Daniel Wolf, by Mailer.}} We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.

	So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.		So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.

Grlucas: Inserted from manuscript. Added ¶ break.

2021-03-05T14:03:14Z

Inserted from manuscript. Added ¶ break.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:03, 5 March 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{LJtop}}		{{LJtop}}
	Talk with Rhoda L[azare].<ref>Lifelong friend of {{NM}}’s sister Barbara, Lazare (b. 1926) was introduced to her future husband, Daniel Wolf, by NM.</ref> We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately. So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment.” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.		Talk with Rhoda L[azare].<ref>Lifelong friend of {{NM}}’s sister Barbara, Lazare (b. 1926) was introduced to her future husband, Daniel Wolf, by NM.</ref> We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately.

			So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment{{ins\|?}}” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.

	{{Notes\|title=Note\|width=60em}}		{{Notes\|title=Note\|width=60em}}

Grlucas: Created page.

2021-03-01T15:57:20Z

Created page.

New page

{{LJtop}}
Talk with Rhoda L[azare].<ref>Lifelong friend of {{NM}}’s sister Barbara, Lazare (b. 1926) was introduced to her future husband, Daniel Wolf, by NM.</ref> We agreed that psychoanalysts are perhaps the greatest socially accepted psychopaths. The thing which characterizes the twentieth century is its absolute lack of common-sense, common-sense being finally the matter-of-fact understanding of a society (which is of course bad) but also is understandable. It is worldly sense, but worldly sense is no longer enough because the communication between individuals and society, the interrelation, is now broken. Society goes one way; men go another—but privately. So, the lack-of sense of the twentieth century would never dream of asking what the common-sense of the 19thy century (as exemplified by my mother) would question immediately: “How can a man listen to another human being and be both completely involved and attentive, and yet personally unmoved, capable of shifting his attention in the next hour to some other human and performing the same involvement and detachment.” The answer is that only a saint or a psychopath could do this. And since saints are not interested in their position in the world, which analysts most assuredly are, the answer I suspect with the most perfect glee is that the psychoanalyst is a psychopath masquerading as a quiet restrained “sensitive” mildly neurotic middle class adjusted human being. No wonder they get nowhere.

{{Notes|title=Note|width=60em}}

{{LJnav}}
[[Category:December 8, 1954]]