Beauty of the Word - Chapter 3

I am summarizing and sometimes commenting on Stratford Caldecott's Beauty in the Word.  Last chapter focused on "Remembering" as the cornerstone of the grammar stage.  This chapter is called "Dialectic - Thinking - Logos - Knowing the Real" is tough philosophically - he talks about history of philosophy, the church view on evolution, what "I am" means, etc.  His thoughts do become more "practical" at the end and are well grounded.

First he makes the point that

The three arts are not "left behind' as one moves up the educational ladder, but they remain foundational, and each of them can color one's whole approach to learning. 

Basically he is arguing for balance between these three areas and understanding them in relationship to each other - not as steps on a ladder.  From there he traces the development of logic in philosophy.  Although some of the history shows a "fight" between remembering and logic he considers this an unnecessary dichotomy - they are both necessary to fully understand our world.

The next point he focuses on is especially important in our current situation

To 'think' is not enough: you have to 'think about'; you have to ponder, rather than just flit from one image or phrase to another.  This is the second of the major concerns of our revised Trivium. We need to educate people to think coherently and independently - to take responsibility for their own thoughts. 

The section goes on to discuss how teachers should provide an orderly environment, guiding students towards topics worth learning and then helping students understand the connections within and between subject areas.

From here he refers largely to Chesterton as one who has truly thought things out.  He supports Chesterton's argument that

But man has no alternative, except between being influenced by though that has been thought out and being influenced by though that has not been though out. 

Obviously, Caldecott is in favor in helping our students follow lines of thought that are well considered.  He agrees again with Chesterton that "clear thinking is one requisite of freedom".  Caldecott also highlights the role that assumptions play in our thinking and that this is one of the difficulties of our current thought system - we have faulty assumptions - often not even understanding what they are or why they might not be complete.  I cannot do this section justice so you should probably read it for yourself.

Next Caldecott begins to pursue the search for truth and here he makes the astute observation that

in fact the scientific method does not even aspire to truth, only to hypothesis, always open (in principle, at least) to revision or replacement by something better.  Part of the process of thinking is to learn how to set all these different types or approaches to truth in the right order, to see how they combine to give a more complete image of reality as a whole - to make it perfectly plain that we need poetry as well as science, imagination as well as reason, empathy as well as mathematics.  

From there he argues that in our modern world we try to detach thought from memory and see it as something separate - which leads to confusion.

He also quickly the tackles to connection between reason and faith and this sums up his thoughts here

Without the assurance of faith that the truth is somewhere 'out there', reason would stop short on the journey, it would give up.  

He references Pope John Paul II's works and then reaches back in time and talks about the difference between the Cartesian "I am" and the 'I am" of the Bible.  This is a fascinating look at how grammar (literally) plays a role in thinking and identity.

Only 'I am,' he says, is 'both verb and noun at the same time.'  And of course 'I am' is the name God gives himself in the context of sending Moses to the sons of Israel.  

Later

Decartes did not begin with memory, with 'Grammar':  he went straight through to Thinking before going through Remembering.  (remember he says 'I think, therefore I am.")

From there he explains some of the issues with Cartesian thinking.  He moves into trying to find foundations for logic and we come to a place where I can regurgitate but I don't fully understand what he is exploring.

Finally, we come to his conclusions on its impact in the classroom

And because thinking is dialogical, the best way to encourage it is by dialogue, debate, conversation.  

Some key points he draws out are that without others our thinking often 'runs in circles',  that expanding our thoughts often requires a community and that development of thinking also "involves the refinement of imagination and feeling".  He sees courtesy and empathy as the two necessary pieces for this thought in community.  From there he returns to Chesterton who says that "thanking is the highest form of thought".

Caldecott proposes that

Through Dialectic, or conversation, conduced in courtesy and thus in gratitude and respect, we ultimately arrive at the summit of human thought and discover that up there it is the same as prayer, or of that kind of prayer that is perfected in the liturgy of the Church. 

He ends with this thought

Liturgy is the consummation of education and the ultimate school of our humanity.  

Which brings us back the Desiring the Kingdom and the role of worship in our lives as formative.  Later this week I will add some of my reflections on this quick overview of his thinking.

Beauty in the Word - Chap. 2, Part 2

I am so glad that I am re-reading Beauty in the Word by Stratford Caldecott.  We are in chapter 2 talking about remembering and I constantly need to be reminded what I am doing and why.  I get easily distracted! This chapter is essential to understanding what it means to be in on track with a young child's education.

At the beginning of the chapter he discusses our origin and naming.  This section is dense, as one should expect, so I will just pick up the few threads that I need to remember.

Tradition 

The collective memory of the society to which we belong has the name 'tradition'.  We cannot be truly 'at home' without one.  The word derives from Latin - trans - 'over' and dare 'to give'.  In every society or civilization, a process takes place that can be called a handing over of the stories, the knowledge, the accumulated wisdom of one generation to the next. 

He further discusses why this giving over is a gift and how it impacts the giver and the recipient. One thing that I have enjoyed about Desiring the Kingdom is that it has helped me better understand the richness of what I do have to give over to my children.  Often I have felt that I have a fairly small story to tell to them because I don't know much of our personal history and it isn't too exciting anyway.  But to help my sons grasp the big story - the Christian tradition - that's a story worth being a part of.  Caldecott does address our current dislike of tradition and feels it is a sign of what ails us - not something that shows we have risen above.  What traditions are you handing over?

Caldecott recommends

If the spirit of tradition is to be preserved and revived, liturgy is going to be the key, for this is the school of memory, the place where we recollect ourselves, where we learn how to relate to each other in God. 

I think this is why we all enjoyed chapter 5 of Desiring the Kingdom - it points to how liturgy reveals who we are as God's people.  We all sort of knew it - but this gave us a clearer picture of it.

Against Writing

The next section is a defense of memory and it first addresses the fact that

Also, it is true that a reliance on the technology of writing eventually empties the human soul of much of its content.  

He discusses Plato's dialog about the topic.  He also addresses how the Internet compounds this problem. When we just write it down or can look it up - we don't remember it and it doesn't become a part of us. (Here is a great resource for memory work).  But Caldecott is not interested in just 'rote' memorization (although that plays a role) instead he calls for "an organic assimilation and appropriation".  He is talking about knowing things by heart.  Memory is so key that he claims

Thus by speaking of Memory or Remembering, we are really speaking of the foundations of attention, of integration of the personality and of the road to contemplation.  We are also speaking of 'conscience'.

Without a received tradition, remembering who we are, we get lost.  Often when we think of the verse "Train up a child in the way he should go . . . " we think of discipline or maybe nurturing talents, which both make sense.  But what if part of it is just making sure our children know the story - the story that reminds them they are a child of the most high God who is dearly beloved.   If he knows that this is his true story then he always has a way to return home - whether he's the prodigal son or the older brother.  Tell them the story, find others to tell them the story; bring them up in it so that they will not depart from it.  If they know the story they will know the way to go.

Song and Memory

Caldecott begins to talk about the story and poetry of Tolkein and the richness of poetic knowledge.  He asserts

Here prose is subordinate to poetry, and poetry to song.  

In my education I didn't get much song (did I tell you I wrote essays instead of competing in the 6th grade choir competition) or poetry.  I am an essayist - I still remember my first in class essay in fourth grade.  Although our culture touts the essay, all of my recent readings are showing the limitations of this education. It's not the pinnacle, it is the base of thought.  I was duped.  Here, Caldecott makes me think of Kern as he explains

We unveil the meaning of the world to ourselves by comparing one thing with another,  by getting the 'measure' (logos) of it, by seeing one thing as 'like' or 'unlike' another and so by learning to dwell in the mysterious space that is formed between them.   

I think that is a pretty good definition of what Kern is discussing when he talks about "analogic" versus "analytic' thinking.  The analogic thinker is telling the story, seeing things as wholes and comparing.  The analytic thinker is tearing things apart and seeing the pieces.  Which is more inviting?  Which do your kids do naturally?

I like Caldecott's reflection on music

Music is the wordless language on which poetry - the purest and most concentrated form of speech - is built. 

I have A LOT to learn and I am so glad that I get to do it with the most important people in the world to me. I am glad that I am finding my tradition and the stories, poetry and music that go with it.  I pray that by repeating things, creating a liturgy of life, that my kids will know that these stories and God's ways are their true home and grow up in it.  I need to know that too.

Last week we took a break and my oldest built with legos and listened to Edith Nesbit stories from librivox. After listening to Caldecott - that may not be a break - that may be the best way to nurture his soul.

The first lesson of the 'Trivium' is therefore the vital importance of crafts, drama and dance, poetry and storytelling, as a foundation for independent critical thought.  Through doing and making, through poesis, the house of the soul is built.  

Beauty in the Word: Chap. 2, Part 1 - Power of Names

Although the unofficial study of Beauty in the Word has been put on hold at Ordo- Amoris, I still want to spend time reflecting and connecting this work with others.  Although I am not as seasoned nor witty, I have found that blogging through books helps me to think more clearly about them and provides an easy record to return to about thoughts and links that came up through them.  

To the book.

Caldecott calls the first stage - remembering - as opposed to the more traditional grammar.  The first part of this chapter is a look at the role of remembering and naming as found in Genesis.  As he says

Memory then, is the mother both of language and of civilization.  This is what gives us our link between Remembering and language.  

After watching the tour of Wes Calihan's library, I decided to check out his new series of studies for high school students.  In that series he references a C.S. Lewis speech.  In that speech, Lewis discusses naming historical eras and how he believes that he was living through a truly watershed moment in history - in part because an old way of thinking was passing away with the coming of machines.  It is a short and interesting read and it indirectly speaks to how language impacts our thinking.  Caldecott made me think about this quote from Lewis

In the individual life, as the psychologists have taught us, it is not the remembered but the
forgotten past that enslaves us. I think the same is true of society. To study the past does indeed liberate us from the present, from the idols of our own market-place. But I think it liberates us from the past too. I think no class of men are less enslaved to the past than historians. The unhistorical are usually, without knowing it, enslaved to a fairly recent past.

Over Christmas I got into a debate with a friend who teaches middle school social studies.  She mentioned that most of the world really focuses more on geography than history as the basis of their studies (if you follow Montessori that is true - which is one of my personal difficulties with her program).  In a public school you can't really teach history well (any longer) because it requires you to put value on the memory of something.  If someone is a hero than obviously another person is not - and we can no longer make those distinctions as a society.  Thus goes civilization.

Enough of the tangent. From general reflections about language, Caldecott begins to talk about naming in particular.  Some of what he says reminds me of Andrew Kern's lecture A Contemplation of Creation which talks about what naming truly is and how it connects to the fundamental elements of an education.

Caldecott brings out an aspect I had not heard before

In Greek, the word nomos contains the meanings of both 'name' and 'law.'  It may be that what Adam is doing by naming the other creatures is simply ruling, as he was intended to do: ruling not for his own selfish aggrandizement, but in accordance with the reality of things and with the wisdom of God. 

Basically, naming well seems to be right ordering and ruling.  So teaching our kids to name rightly is giving them the ability to steward well.  Caldecott also ties naming into being a good observer of the world around us. Drawing attention to the details and helping them know their world.  (CM quotes are in my head here as well).

Are words that powerful?  Is naming is ruling?  

Caldecott also shows the difference between naming as ruling and how naming helps us come to know ourselves in community.

According to the Genesis account, the move from language as naming to language as interpersonal communication is marked by a cry of joy addressed to God: "This at last is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh, she shall be called Woman [ishshah], becuase she was taken out of man [ish]" (Gen. 2:23)  . . . In naming her, and therefore himself (ish), he also becomes aware of the necessity to govern himself.  

Caldecott points out that only God knows our true name - the one that describes our nature as he made us that He will give us in the end.  So, in some ways, without our true name we can't fully know ourselves - but through relationships with others and with God we come to know ourselves better.  In older traditions, he points out that naming was tied to mission.  I would also say for many it is tied to history and remembering as we name children after grandparents, etc.  It is a powerful thing to name.

Finally, Caldecott talks about the one who cannot be named - God.  He is being as the name "I am" demonstrates.  So powerful!  His many names help to show aspects of who he is, but no name is sufficient nor should it be, because naming properly is ruling and we are not to rule God.

Unfortunately, I am concerned that some might see this idea of naming = ruling to mean that we should try to cram as many facts into small children as possible so that they know more.  That is not Caldecott's position - AT ALL.

All of this suggests that the earliest stage of education is not simply the learning of words, of names, of vocabulary, but the learning of how to name.  This is the art that the poet re-learns, and so it can best be taught by teaching the power of poetry, and of poesis, in general - both by learning and by doing (though we will come back to poetry under the heading of Rhetoric later).

Everywhere I go people are talking about poetry.  I learned to dissect poetry well in high school but I never learned to love it.  I am trying to go back and re-learn how to enjoy the images and ways of expression poets have.  This is also why Wright's book on the Psalms - speaking about how they are truly God's book of song and poems, is so crucial.

I do believe that there are times for jingles and songs - but not if they displace poetry and literature.

So naming truly is a fundamental piece of your child's education. This is often overlooked as people rush into arts and crafts and other projects - but just giving them vocabulary and time to play with words is essential.

Beauty in the Word: Chapter 1

This is part of the continuing informal look at Beauty in the Word by Stratford Caldecott with Cindy at Ordo-Amoris.

I have read this book before and, as with all good books, a second reading provides totally different thoughts and insights.  I won't attempt to cover all the territory he does.  I'll just say that I have spent a lot of time looking into educational philosophy and I think he does a good job of putting these different approaches into a nutshell.  I am going to pull just a few quotes that really struck me as I try to homeschool my kids - and convict me about my own attempts at education.

Purity

To be pure is to be simple, in the sense of undivided.  For every sin sets part of me against the rest.  Impurity involves a loss of integrity, of integration; it is a dissonance, a crack in the mirror of the soul.  

Equating purity with simplicity and focus opens up a whole new realm of sin in my life. It is one that I have been wrestling with recently - but it was unnamed - which made it even harder to "pin down".   I am often divided in my attention - in my thoughts, conversations, readings, organization systems, etc.  I recently had a friend join me in an effort to de-stuff my house of all the things that I really don't need.  She was shocked at how many "organization" type things I have - that I don't need - because it holds stuff that I just need to get rid of!  My physical surroundings are reflecting my inner state and it has really been brought to a head these past few weeks.

I live up to my name - Melissa, honey bee - so I do collect ideas and thoughts, stuff and even friends. However, if it isn't submitted to him then I begin to get very chaotic, lost and frustrated.  Everyone around me feels it as well.   I do think that there are areas where I need to do less or get rid of things that aren't mine to carry.  But much of it is reminding myself who my audience is - am I focusing on what God is calling me to do or am I listening to all of the other voices around me?  It is when I start dividing myself in an effort to appease others that my purity of heart is lost - that life gets "unsimple" and sin creeps in.

As I enter into planning for next year this purity of heart and purpose needs to guide my thinking.

Attention

She (Simone Weil) almost goes so far as to say that the subject studied and its contents are irrelevant; the important thing, the real goal of study, is the 'development of attention.'  Why? Because prayer consists of attention, and all worldly study is really a stretching of the soul towards prayer.  

I read the essay and she does come close to saying that - but not quite.  In her own words

So it comes about that, paradoxical as it may seem, a Latin prose or a geometry problem,
even though they are done wrong, may be of great service one day, provided we devote the right kind of effort to them. Should the occasion arise, they can one day make us better able to give someone in affliction exactly the help required to save him, at the supreme moment of his need. 

Basically, she is reminding us that the mastering the content is not the only lesson learned in our studies. Failure teaches as much as success - and extended attention - regardless of outcome, has merit.   In fact these things are "subordinate to the orienting of the soul to God, implicit in the act of attention." 

Are my children able to pay attention to things that I don't consider "academic" but do show that they can focus (LEGOS anyone)?   Can I trust that this is developing their ability to pay attention?  Do I give them time in their schedule to really pay attention to things or do I keep them moving at a steady clip?  

This actually gets to a key difference between Montessori and CM.  Montessori maintains that kids will get absorbed in their learning and pay attention for extended periods of time once they are "normalized".  CM, encourages short lessons so that you don't lose a child's interest, gradually lengthening their focus time.  I think what Montessori observes is more along  the lines of what what Csiksezentmihalyi calls "flow". 

Authority 

The teacher must therefore be the one who submits first.  He must submit to God and to the objective truth he hopes to teach.  It is only in the name of that prior obedience, and the limitations it implies, that the teacher has a right to demand obedience of the student.  It follows from this also that genuine authority must grow in proportion to humility. 

So, it is about my submission prior to my child's obedience and submission.  This goes back to purity of heart and attention.  Am I submitting to the task that He has given me or making up my own projects, interests and diversions?  Am I under his authority or letting someone else hold more sway?   This is the only way, especially in the long run, to help my sons understand proper authority and obedience.  The Godly use of authority should lead to humility - but does it?  Am I trying to Lord my authority over my children or am I demonstrating what humble submission looks like?   

Finally,

To make the content of the curriculum relevant to the everyday life of the pupil, it is essential not to shrink the content to match the pupil's present experience, but to expand the life of the pupil to match the proposed curriculum. 

This reminds me of the feast metaphor that CM uses often.   So, in the first chapter we see three key ideas - purity, attention and authority - that could easily guide our schooling.  That's not even the point of this chapter! 

Beauty in the Word: Introduction

I was thrilled to see the invitation to read through Beauty in the Word by Stratford Caldecott with Cindy Rollins over at Ordo Amoris.  It is not quite a book study but more of a blog through.  In other words she won't be adding links but the conversation will occur in the comments.  Please join us!

Here are some key ideas that help set the parameters for the discussion to follow.

The liberal arts are a golden thread that comes from the Greeks, from Pythagoras and his successors both Islamic and Christian, especially St. Augustine; a thread that weaves its way through the history of our civilization.  These arts were intended for the cultivation of freedom and the raising of our humanity to its highest possible level.  

I appreciate that Stratford realizes that at one point this was an education for the elite, but with changes in societal structure this should be an education accessible to all.

This book focuses on the grammar stages,  his earlier work Beauty for Truth's Sake focuses on the quadrivium.  He uses this definition of the parts of the grammar stage:

According to Hugh of Saint Victor, summarizing this tradition in the High Middle Ages, 'Grammar is the knowledge of how to speak without error; dialectic is clear sighted argument which separates the true from the false; rhetoric is the discipline of persuading to every suitable thing. 

Honestly, the way he re-labels these concepts is one reason I love this book:

That is the reason you will find the chapter on Grammar headed 'Remembering,' the one on Dialectic headed 'Thinking,' and the one on Rhetoric headed 'Speaking.' 

He also reminds us that

The seven liberal arts were in any case never intended to constitute the whole of education. They were embedded in a broader tradition of paideia or human formation, which included 'gymnastics' for the education of the body and 'music' for the education of the soul (terms that have changed and narrowed in meaning over the centuries).  

(If you want more on these other concepts you might want to check out The Liberal Arts Tradition by Clark and Jain.)

Here is the key question I wrestle with - he states it so clearly

But what kind of education would enable a child to progress in the rational understanding of the world without losing his poetic and artistic appreciation of it? 

Later he explains that he believes

It must be possible to use this intrinsic connection between reason and imagination to overcome the alienation between the humanities and the sciences. 

In the end, the crux of the current problems with education are that

Too often we have been not been education our humanity.  We have been educating ourselves for doing rather than for being.  

In order to Be we must remember our origin and our end, the grammar of our existence.  This is the beginning of all communication - communication from God, who loves us before we love him.  We come from the Father.  

He also sums up the stages as

Be! (Grammar)     Think! (Dialectic)   Speak!  (Rhetoric)

There is more about the mission of a Catholic school in particular which essentially discusses the need for transparency so that the life of Christ can show through our lives - which I think should apply to any Christian setting.  In the future I will comment more on his thoughts but here I think it is appropriate to start by allowing him to define his topic and scope.