MOBILE PHONES & THE TIME-DEATH APP

 

INTRODUCTION

Mobile-phones save lives. They are probably the most efficient life-saving device ever invented. 

Efficiency = Work Done (Force x Distance)   /  Time taken.

The owner of a mobile-phone doesn't have to move an inch to call for the emergency services  - from a jungle, polar ice-cap or even the city park. 

Work-tasks and domestic chores, and all undesired-required tasks, can be speeded up using a mobile-phone. But desired-tasks and pleasure, by definition, involve a process and an experience that no one wants to hurry, interrupt or be distracted from, for that would be turn them into another required task in an endless to-do list. Attention and internalisation are the two highest gifts one human can give to another : they become utterly worthless if interrupted or diluted.

Alas, given the human capacity for volcanic impatience and oceanic indolence, many people do fail to protect their own pleasures: leaving planning until the last minute, and/or over-checking - by mobile-phone/text. 

Mobile-phones also murder a moment of attention & internalisation more brutally than any device ever invented. Most users quickly become utterly careless and guilt-free serial-killers. They rarely think what harm this object is doing.

I have written on this theme several times. The first and original piece below, was published in 2002, when mobile-phones and emailing were still considered newish. A couple of unpublished appendices follow.  

 

 

OUTWRITE

Journal of the Cambridge Society for Psychotherapy

Number 5  December 2002  

The Self-Removing Trousers

How the difference between therapist and patient, in their attitudes towards new communication technology, affects the therapeutic alliance.

 

Consider these stories, some from therapeutic work in a large medical practice in the Northwest during the mid-to-late nineties, some from the 'real world', whatever that means.

1) MY OLD MAN’S A DUSTMAN

A mousy young man enters. It is my first session with this pre-assessed client, a trainee accountant. He speaks softly. Very soon I feel this softness is exaggerated, and probably manipulative. "I found out that my father is having an affair. I was using the computer at home. I found these letters to his mistress, he'd deleted them: well, he thought he had. But they weren't completely deleted. He didn't know that. You can find out."

"Here's a New World !" I thought. Into my mind flooded the centuries-old clues of secret passions - lipstick on the collar, the 'wrong' coloured hair on the bed, the unusually delicate envelope not-quite-hidden in the deep inner-pocket of the jacket or handbag, diaries and address books left open, the smell of the other's sex in one's partner's hair. And now there was a new source.

At that point I didn't have a PC. Though now I do, I still don't know how to reconstruct deleted material. Nor would I want to. On this machine, the facility is called RECYCLE BIN. How technology sanitises our darker impulses. Compare this clean process — using keyboard and mouse on a pretty mouse-mat — with the daily life of X, the famous garbologist. When night falls he visits the backyards of the famous and the powerful and sifts through their bin-bags: with rat-like tenacity he seeks among the slimy refuse for any saleable bits of paper, whether incriminating or just tabloid-tat.

Now imagine my young man choosing to sift and steal from his own family bins: getting his hands dirty, having to disinfect the scraps of paper to make them presentable and then hiding them somewhere else. Isn't this the nadir of dignity? Why is it less so at the white and shiny PC? Here's an unexpected answer to the Microsoft Windows advertisement strap-line, "Where do you want to go today?"  "Inside my father's underpants!"

 I thought of Klein's conjecture that the infant is fascinated by the inside of their parents, and sometimes wants to scour them out - eat, internalise or just attack.

The client described here was clearly troubled by my ordinary questions, and after the third session he requested changing to a female counsellor. My guess was that this was stereotypical thinking: a woman will be less probing.

 

 

2) IT’S DIFFERENT FOR GIRLS

A few weeks later, I saw another pre-assessed client: fast-track Graduate-Scheme Retail Management. She was almost the first client's shadow: leonine and wired, her edginess betrayed her uncertain sense of strength.

"I thought my boyfriend was having an affair. I broke into his e-mail account. And he was. He doesn't know I know. You can know when someone is on-line. I've even used his email to write to her — as if from him."

Again, I thought that these people are living in a different world from me. I doubt she thought of herself as 'breaking and entering', or as a 'petty criminal'. I did, because I grew up with the reference point of these physical images: real windows and doors broken, and touchable objects taken. I thought of her at her desk, perhaps even with a laptop on a train or a beach ('You can email from the beach'- the Orange company advertisement strap-line), her nimble fingers tap-dancing across the keyboard, successfully performing these moves that she knows are morally, if not yet legally, wrong. Or maybe she doesn't 'know' such a truth as I do; she may not have internalised it in the same way. This virtual invasion of privacy, and virtual theft, is just something she is clever enough to do. There is a perennial moral puzzle - whether cleverness disables or at least suspends thought. If I can do something that is difficult or unexpected, surely it can't be completely wrong, or else I wouldn't have been able to do it? Such sophistry comes to feel like a reliable defence.

 

Technology realises, makes real, childhood fantasies - makes magical thinking true. What is the first line of communication? - umbilical cord and placenta. Then skin, then milk, then words. And words become the first virtual medium. One learns their separation from skin. This is another of the lessons Freud's lovely little fort-do baby is learning. His mother is in the other room: her shape is not see-able, but sometimes her voice suddenly falls into his ears. The baby adjusts to loss, but always dreams of reconnection. Even at nine-years-old, Mrs Gaskell's heroine, Molly Gibson, is still dreaming of being connected to her father by a string, invisible to others, which she can tug at when she needs him.

Those who've grown up with the telephone can recapture the wonder of the idea of the phone only by looking at young kids' fascination with toy phones. Until recently all kids will have had a childhood episode when they connected two tin-cans with string and tried to will sound to travel round corners. In these different times most children get mobiles long before they have had to eat the tins of beans and find the string.

3) PRESENT TENSE

 

This next client was such a modern child, at age 22 long familiar with the mobile phone. She was clever and attractive, a theatre-nurse, certain to do well.

"I've a big thing about presents, birthday and Christmas. I get very tense. Will I like what I've been given, by my mother or my boyfriend? Will they like what I get them? After some months I told my boyfriend how all this gets to me. He was surprised, but has been very considerate. But still it gets to me. Before we separated to go home to our families at Christmas, we swapped presents to be opened on the day. On Christmas morning I rang & texted him first thing, quite early, to talk about the presents. He said my present was nice. I said his was all right, too . We didn't talk long."

My first feeling on hearing this story was of immense pity for her. Then I thought of the familiar paradox, that the new media, designed to reduce distance in time and space, should cast such shadows on ordinary human connectivity.

 

4) GOOSEBERRY FIELDS FOREVER

This client was a bit older than the others described here: thirty-something, a successful architect, in work and mortgaged. His emotional life had always been manic and a little desperate. Having finally, after several messy attempts, come out of a volatile relationship, he was soon fascinated by another volatile woman. They had been seeing each other a lot, getting on wildly, but both had hesitated about articulating whether these meetings were actual dates and whether they were in some process with coupledom as a possible end. His nerve was beginning to go, and he suddenly seemed very anxious to know how much he was wanted, and in what way. 

When next he met her in a work group, he tried the strategy of coolness, and then was surprised when she suggested, "Come to my room tonight, after the meeting."  He is relieved.' I will know soon', he thinks. But when he gets there she has a small party going on. He feels miffed. So annoyed, in fact, that he can't think. At that point he is unable to think that even if she doesn't say, as she might, discreetly in the kitchen or the hall, "Stick around. The others will be gone soon ", he could take the initiative and say, "I'd like to stay when the others have gone: do you want me to?"

After a little while he feels so exasperated he announces that he's going. She accepts this.

It is the early hours, the deserted, rain-lashed Mancunian streets. He can feel his head bulging with frustration as he carries home his ignorance of where he stands. Then he thinks of his mobile phone. His mood lightens as he realises he can do something, now. He chooses not to ring but to text her: "What's going on?" Because she has her phone on, she interrupts her own party to exchange texts. The conversation is deferred. She rings him the next morning to ask if she can come over at lunch time to talk. He is more relieved than delighted. But even his attenuated joy disappears when she turns up with a friend.

As I am listening to this story, I try to keep in mind that the protagonists are not gormlessly excitable teenagers.

5 ) ALL ALONG THE WATCHTOWER  

An Asian man murders his wife. But he feels invincible, because he has a passport, and he's just bought a ticket out. He sits on the airport bus gloating with satisfaction and triumph. But even this is not enough. When the bus stops at Motorway Services, he goes to a pay-phone, and calls the police. "I've killed my wife. But Ha! Ha! You won't catch me: I'm flying out." He retakes his seat feeling fully pleased with himself.

When the Police arrest him at the airport, he is astonished.  

This was a true story from the late eighties. 'How could he have been so stupid?' most people would think. I had an idea. In his mind he still thought of time as perfectly correlated with space, as it is in agrarian cultures, pre-telecom. He was still in the Indian time-space-frame of his childhood. If he was ahead of the Police in one dimension, he was in all. Though he knew how to use phones he hadn't quite believed telecoms bring everyone into simultaneity; often, there is no ahead possible.

 

 

6 ) THE DAY HAS A THOUSAND EYES & EARS

The New Millennium, an ordinary High Street, Saturday morning. As I approach a thirty-year old woman, I see her take a ringing mobile-phone out of her bag. Just as I pass her, I hear her say, with an annoyed look and tone "I'm just going into Woolworth's! Why do you keep ringing to see where I am?"

Is this a rhetorical question? What is going on? What level of contact would be enough for her? What level of information would be enough for him? The Greek Goddess Juno jealously set hundred-eyed Argos to watch the priestess Io, of whom Jupiter was enamoured. But there is an African saying: Not even God is ripe enough to catch a woman in love.  

7 ) THROUGH A CAMERA GLASS DARKLY  

A scientific researcher in his late twenties was 'advised' by his Head of Department to see me. His multi-national company provided BUPA and brief therapy as part of the salary package. There was the possibility of his being pre-emptively deported by the company as a way of avoiding police involvement. He had lent his laptop to his supervisor who had, accidentally, found a file with images and film of young women undressing in the company's Residential Training Centre. The researcher admitted setting up secret cameras to film his girlfriend and a visiting friend of theirs who was using her room to change for dinner. This virtual voyeurism was for him a minor pleasure, and do-able because he had the skills. He hadn't been careful enough to hide the files.

This carelessness puzzled me. Unlike a dog frantically burying a bone, this task would take a computer whiz-kid a few seconds. I wondered how he expected to be seen by me, whether he thought I could put a camera inside his unconscious. He made noises of regret. It wasn't really an analytic session. Unfortunately, as he was not required to, he didn't return.

Electronic tagging arrived years ago. Geek-chic, fashion clothing wired with mobile phones and cameras, has been on the catwalks, and will be on the High Street one day. Those newly in love can never see enough of each other: those lovers who are merely suspicious will be able to see their lovers even more! Compare this with the beautiful speech from Jane Eyre:

" I sometimes have a queer feeling with regard to you - especially when you are near me, as now: it is as if I had a string somewhere under my left ribs, tightly and inextricably knotted to a similar string situated in the corresponding quarter of your little frame. And if that boisterous channel, and two hundred miles or so of land come broad between us, l am afraid that cord of communion will be snapt; and then I've a nervous notion I should take to bleeding inwardly. As for you, - you'd forget me."

These sublime pre-telecom words are not spoken by Jane but by Rochester. Between drafts of this essay I read of science, if not morality, marching on. At the height of the tragedy of Holly and Jessica, [the Soham girls murdered by their junior-school caretaker] The Guardian reported a father who had persuaded a researcher to implant an electronic tag into his 13-year-old daughter so that she would be traceable on his computer map. The poor girl was compliant. How deep inside her intentions does he want to be?  

 

8 ) SHOWING OFF TO ONE’S THERAPIST

My client enters. Familiar client behaviour - faffing with coat and jumper, handbag or briefcase, or the day's grocery-bag. Sits down. Then "Oh I'd better switch off the phone". Gets out mobile. Fumbles. "It's a new phone" — nervous, winning smile. Settles into the chair: shows 'ready' posture and another weaker smile.

Half of my clients this week have done this. I find it so wearying and annoying. I think, "Why do you do this right now? Why not in the waiting room? Why not in the five yards before you enter the building?"

Then, more spitefully, I think, "Oh you're so important, you must be connected and open to the Real World out there until the last possible moment before you enter the strange, detached, floating-world-space of therapy." Then, more sympathetically, "Oh you poor thing, so terrified of being unconnected to your little loop of knowledge and gossip, for a whole fifty minutes"   

Finally, the therapeutic thought: "What does it do to both of us, therapist and patient, knowing that you have shown me that you understand that your mobile can't be on during the session? Will you resent the rule and resent me? Will I feel annoyed that you dare to resent me?"  

Sometimes of course the phone goes off, its usually trivial tones piercing the session. Then, more fumbling and weak apology.

What kind of symbolic-object is the mobile phone when it is in the outside world, and what is it in the therapeutic space? Imagine a society where everyone wears trousers with zips-down, and couples at will: the ziplessfuck imagined by Erica Jong, or simply a kind of doggy-life imagined by Auden. Perhaps in this strange world there are places where it is required to be zipped up: imagine them coming in to the therapeutic space, and noisily zipping-up.

Young men and women cradle their mobiles like permissably showable penises. If the penis is the male's umbilical cord in and to the outside-womb world, the female's mobile is finally the longed-for phallus. The client's act of showing the phone being switched off and put away is a minor sadistic teasing of the therapist: You can't fuck me!  

 

9 )  A SHORT STORY BY DON DE LILLO

 

We may see magical thinking and the hope of sudden wondrous invitations bursting into the present as being allowable to teenagers, even twenty-somethings. But when does it become a failure of maturation, to let go of the string? As I was writing this piece I came across a new short story from Don De Lillo. Two middle-agers meet in an art gallery; they go to a snack-bar and then drift back to her flat. Neither feels much desire, though he is somewhat insistent. But his cellphone rings; he speaks briefly, then sits thoughtfully with the thing in his hand.

He says, "I should remember to turn it off. But I think, if I turn it off, what will I miss? Something so incredible. The total life-altering call. That's why I respect my cellphone."    

The man is not aware of what he has said, and the woman does not say, "Well, I'm obviously not incredible or life-altering enough for you", or, "How about some respect for me?"  

It is depressing to sense that such an older character, arriving in the therapeutic space, would be just as pathetic about the phone as a teenager.

 

COMMENTARY

My intention is to look at how recent developments in communication technology alter the experience of the therapeutic space for both the therapist and the client.

My argument will be grounded in three premises.

1) THE FACT OF INSTINCTUAL IMPATIENCE

This premise unites the elements of a crucial explanatory matrix — time, knowledge, action and pleasure. One always strives to reduce the time it takes to acquire the knowledge necessary to perform the action that one reasons and hopes will bring one pleasure. (The last element includes relief/cease of anxiety and pain, as well as ordinary joy and self-transcending release.)

a) Time

It is said that one's experience of the flow of time is related to the frequency of thoughts in one's most-frequent conscious waking-state, and that this ability to think is biologically facilitated by adrenaline. We are all aware of the two poles of this experience:  

i) The few moments just before losing consciousness in sleep, or the sensation on waking from the  'just five more minutes sleep'  after switching off the alarm-clock. As one is on the edge of consciousness, one's adrenaline-level is low, and thoughts are slow to form. So the sensation that one is having, or has just had, a few thoughts, prompts one to infer that only a few minutes have passed. Thus the shock of seeing that an hour has passed!

ii) The other pole is the time before an accident reaches crisis. Once one's consciousness registers the possibility of an accident, one's body is flooded with adrenaline, allowing one to think of all possible avenues of correction or flight. One becomes aware of an avalanche of thoughts filling one's head, most not registering. It seems hours or ages have passed. Usually it's barely seconds.  

b) Knowledge

How knowledge contributes to the possibility of conceiving and executing the action that will bring pleasure determines how the time of the desire and the pleasure are experienced. Other people are either the object of desire or the source of knowledge about the objects and persons desired: they may, of course, be both: Do you love me? One may acquire knowledge in three ways:  

i) By mutually negotiated open exchange: ask direct questions, answer truthfully. This is the definitive moral means.  

ii) By accident: overhearing, misdirected letters and emails and phone calls. A friend of mine shared the same initials as his father and brother. Absent-mindedly opening a letter, his father found out before him that his son was due in court.  

iii) By intentional deceit: invasion and trap, varieties of immorality.  

 

Childhood fable:  

Truth and Falsehood went swimming together. Falsehood got out early and sneaked off with Truth's clothes.  

Invasion:

Polonius & Claudius spy on Ophelia.  

Trap :

Hamlet feigns madness: Toby and Maria drop the letter for Malvolio.

   

c) Action  

One either makes time to act or one makes time to make excuses or even justifications for not-acting. It is a basic rule in the therapeutic space that the argument from logistics - I was too busy, couldn't get to a phone/computer/envelope, missed the bus, car broke down - is disallowed. One must excavate the desire or the anxiety that inhibited action.

 

d) Pleasure

The awareness of ordinary anxiety or of the possibility of ordinary pleasure, and sometimes the awareness of the possibility of pleasure, prompts anxiety, produces various levels of adrenaline and of thinking. Part of the pleasure is created by the reduction in adrenaline and the end of the task of thinking

 

 

2 ) THE PREVALENCE OF THE TECHNOLOGICAL FALLACY

If something can be done, it must be done - without thinking. A corollary of this might be, if something can't be done, one needn't think about doing it, one can live with it undone. Consider this illustration from the theatre. While waiting for Hamlet to begin, one doesn't see a ninety-second collection of snippets from A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Valkyrie and Run For Your Wife. It can't be done with live actors, except perhaps in a small repertory theatre. But why bother, what would be gained? And though a hologram presentation might be possible, it isn't attempted. Again, it's not considered worth it, and besides, a hologram is too filmic. But film trailers are do-able, so they are ubiquitous and inescapable. It is rarely thought that something precious is lost in having such knowledge.

 

3 ) THE ECONOMY OF THE HUMAN HEART

There is what I call an economy of the human heart. Even the happiest and most fulfilled, most kindly and likeable people have a limited amount of genuine intellectual attention and emotional sensibility available for their use each day. They work with zero-sum accounts. I am inclined to agree with the aesthetician Edgar Wind's scepticism about the possibility of attending two art exhibitions in two days. Of course at some level the task or pleasure is do-able. A critic might have to go to Tate Modem, MOMA and the Uffizi all in a week. A person might listen to several friends crying or celebrating. And a psychoanalyst might have an extraordinarily busy week. That's why I say 'genuine'. I am showing my colours by this!

The reader might wonder, and quite reasonably, why I didn't begin with the expected Marxist axiom: Changes in the means of production irrevocably alter social relations. Or the MacLuhan maxim: The medium is the message, which ignores Marx's axiom by a sleight of hand. It's not that I disagree with either, it is simply that I am entering the problem from a different direction.

 

GOOD TIME & BAD TIME

Here is a story I found deliciously shocking in adolescence. I read somewhere, that from the field of battle Napoleon sent his mistress a letter saying "Home in five days. Don't wash!" During those five days, he'd be on horseback, in a coach, on ship.... She'd be swanning between apartments choosing between velvet and silk.

I don't think I really understood until, five years later, an older Scottish Lothario to whom I told this story said, "Oh yes, I like it when a woman is as runny as brie down there".

Now imagine Josephine in the age of texting mobiles, Lear jets and power-showers.

Am I arguing that something more valuable grows in Napoleon and Josephine's cervical and cerebral cells than in Ivana and Donald Trump's cell-phones? But what! Aren't I merely showing the envious oldy's spite for the still-firm-fleshed young,

"You're getting too much, too soon! You must learn to wait, and enjoy waiting!"  

When I read recently of the teenage Hazlitt walking eight miles to hear Coleridge speak, and eight miles back, I was impressed and, most strangely, I felt happy for him. I thought of Pascal's 'rule': Respect means put yourself out! and of Spinoza's aphorism: All noble things are as difficult as they are rare. It is crucial to one's maturation to know that one can be arsed to make an effort. But then not every difficulty endured is either respectful or noble. Vladmir and Estragon are said to show dignity in their waiting for Godot. The elect in Purgatory show the most benign form of waiting. It is another maturation marker that one comes to understand that emotional understanding always lags behind intellectual understanding - by days if not weeks - and that even then, for the unified, emotional-intellectual understanding to become a new felt-disposition will take even longer.

 

THE EMOTIONAL HIGHWAY

The Highway Code introduces us to the concept of thinking-time in the action of braking. All of us carry a sense of thinking-time for requesting help. Here's a story:

My good friend lived within walking distance, but still too far. What does that mean? My criterion was that whatever I was thinking or daydreaming about when I began my walk, I would lose the thread before I got to his house: sometimes several threads. I could cycle, but one thinks differently on a cycle. When he said he might move to my street, I was delighted. I thought, "Good! He will be within thinking-distance. I will see him, his kids, and his wife differently. I will be part of their daily flow, even if I don't see them more frequently. I will be in their imagination as available within three thoughts - for popping in, or being called to look after the kids for a few minutes: less time than it took to get to the old house." Sadly, he got a better house even further away.

Such limited-thought, daily-availability of others was ordinary life for most people for centuries, in the country and even towns, until the advent of utterly atomised urban life. Perhaps we all carry a family-memory of that rhythm of availability. Is this why campus and collegiate universities are very popular?

 

FUTURE-LESS TIME

One of the most tragic consequences for a child brought up in the daily, even hourly crisis and chaos of a dysfunctional family, is that there is no emotional space to imagine a future. There is just the crisis of the moment; her body and mind are soaked in adrenaline, she thinks only of how not to be destroyed and how to get or steal some pleasure. What kind of talisman is the mobile phone to such a person?

 

THE WRONG TROUSERS

In a time of limited literacy and no telecoms, Shakespeare imagined Rumour as a many, Hydra-headed monster (Henry IV Part II). If Christ is the Word, the Good News, the devil is a gossip. And everyone loves gossip, as long as it doesn't show our dirty linen. But now we live in different times.

"In the nineteen-thirties Cordell Hull complained of print and radio that a lie went halfway round the world before truth had time to put its trousers on: nowadays it has been to Mars and back before anyone is half awake." Harold Evans, writing in The Times of recent propaganda in the second and third worlds, adds "[There is] an aura of authenticity provided by technology, by the internet. [People say] 'He got it from the internet.' They think it's the Bible. Here in our new magic is a source of much misery." 

This is a lovely quote. It has its roots in the old children's fable about Truth and Falsehood mentioned above. There are ideas of nakedness, the 'true' penis, magical speed and power, and ultimate Faustian disappointment.

 

THE TASK OF THERAPY

The title of this essay comes from a perfectly trivial simile by Ben Elton. He has the doltish Prince Regent say to Blackadder, "I'm as happy as a Frenchman who has invented a pair of self-removing trousers." Adolescents, like the Prince, want everything faster than they can imagine it!  Some Abbots won't consider young novices now because, they argue, modern adolescence lasts till thirty. I think new technology carries the danger of removing the Self faster than one can tell.

New technology allows one not to be alone in-this-­room-now; it allows one to be 'with' others, but not in the same space, in-this-room-now. It allows one to hurry others to respond; it hurries one's own thoughts faster than the psyche can understand and the heart can feel. Is the use of telecommunications mostly the Kleinian manic defence against an inability to be alone, against becoming the fort-da baby with a broken thread, the cotton reel flying into space - the next room - like a lost spaceship?

Is the highest gift the therapist can offer the gift of attention and the possibility of the strange experience of the benign dilation of time? Isn't Attention Deficit Disorder a misnomer: the failure in attention is the carer's, not the child's?

Is it the task of therapy to enable the client to think slowly, to reduce adrenaline levels, to be able to be alone, to be in the same space as others, to live with waiting for others, to live with uncertainty?   

Anti-gun lobbyists plead, 'Give up your guns.' Should therapists recommend abstinence from mobiles? Should they ask their Receptionists to say to clients 'Leave your mobiles in Reception.' (On the wall of the Interview Room in the Citizen's Advice Bureau there is a sign: "If your mobile phone goes off, you will be asked to leave!") What kind of nakedness would the client feel then? Who'd be wearing the trousers then!  

 

END of Original Printed Essay 

 

 

 ***************************************************************

 

           

 

APPENDIX 1 : Spring 2003 :  FURCOFF EESAKE  

The Self-Removing Trousers was written late Summer 2002, and published February 2003. Given that its subject is technology, it is obvious that further advances in telecoms will offer different examples of the pathological use of telecoms in human communication. I’d argue that these newer examples support my basic theses.

 

1 : NO WRONG WORD

What is especially horrifying is the entrenchment of what I call the  :

Technological Fallacies

TF1 : If it can be done, it must be done.

TF2 : If I can do it, it can’t be wrong.

TF3 : Even if new telecoms are ambiguous or inefficient, they must be preferred to old telecoms and even old coms.

Some of my clients can no longer see that it’s wrong to break into their friend’s or lover’s email or mobile phone : or that it’s rude to have the phone on in emotionally delicate situations. At best, they can see only that someone older would say so.  

A patient tells me that text messages are constrained by character-limits, so he has to not only use text-vocabulary, but sometimes he uses the wrong word because it’s shorter. I think this is more about instinctual impatience than his finances. When I suggest what to me is bleeding obvious – send two messages – he replies wearily that this sometimes means that the second message appears at the recipient’s end before the first. (Of course, the telecoms companies deliberately impose these constraints : profit is more important than true communication.) So even though he knows this telecom device has great capacity to confuse his communication, he won’t wait to phone-live or email or write a letter. The minor but frequent horror is hitting the Send-button before checking that the Reply-button, which was also hit with adolescent impatience a few seconds earlier, is for the correct recipient.

Mormons designed special underwear for their young missionaries: the hope being that because it took longer to undo than pagan or non-Mormon-religion garments, this might persuade, during those extra few seconds, the tempted missionary that a sexual position is one he/she ought not to be now taking.

Perhaps the task of finding an envelope or stamp might actually give the adolescent sufficient pause for thought.Before the era of the email and the text-phone, one had to find paper on which to write one’s reply. One either kept or threw away the sender’s letter.

It was very rare to write one’s reply on the sender’s letter and send that back. I am unsettled and vexed when a long significant email that I have sent is included in the recipient’s reply to me, sometimes from months ago. How hard can it be to delete my words before pressing Send!  

  

2 : THE RIGHT PICTURE

Everyone understands, don’t they, that “Would you like to come in for a coffee?”  spoken at the end of a date, by either datee, means “I’m inviting you to the next stage of relationship”  or, in plain speech, “This could be your lucky night”.  Very few people have the sublime confidence of Rod Stewart, to say honestly :  

“If you want my body,  

And you think I’m sexy,

Come on sugar, let me know.”

But at least everyone had to SAY the word ‘coffee’.  

A recent television advert shows a girl saying goodbye to her date on her doorstep, and then immediately wishing she’d SAID something else. As she is making coffee for herself, she sees her mobile, and decides to send him a picture-message of the cup of coffee. We then see the soon-to-be-lucky boy, who is  halfway down the street, stop, puzzle, perk-up at the picture and bound across the road.  

It is a developmental marker to know the different times & places for the uses of words & images in human communication. Is there a secular morally grand version of this old plea “Oh Lord I am not worthy, but speak the word only”   (my emphasis). How can I ask another person for the respect of clearly spoken truths?

 

3 : DANGEROUS WRITING

It is also a developmental marker to understand, intellectually & emotionally, the difference between information and communication. All telecoms increase the amount of information and the speed of its transmission. The moral puzzle is how and why one uses this information, what kind of communication do you want to be involved in with another human being.  

My point is not a mere reactionary rant against new telecoms. One ordinary difficulty is that one might not have had sufficient time, physical time but also emotional time to process the information one has just got (opened/noted), before more arrives. Of course one might read all the words of the second or fifth message, and one might be bright enough to formulate apt and even witty replies to each. But something is lost in the relationship with the sender if one gives their words only minimum time & emotional digestion  

The other great danger is that telecoms allows the legal gathering, and sometimes illegal gathering, of information and then its misuse – illegal and or/ immoral. Message-phones and video-phones will also increase the scope for snooping and cheating on people that one more publicly declares that one deeply respects and loves.

 

 

APPENDIX 2 :  Summer 2007  :   MOBY TRICK   

 

Consider these four remarks

 

1: “Everything is what it is and not another thing”         

2:  “Everything leaves its mark on something else.”     

3:  “The wheel is an extension of the foot.”     

4:  “Wot are you loik!”

This is the familiar philosophical puzzle of uniqueness and similarity. The first remark by Bishop Butler was cherished by Moore & Wittgenstein. Grissom, the CSI criminalist, makes the second and, a generation before him, McLuhan offered the third as part of his message. Finally, the old Norfolk expression captures the human disposition to find similarities. The two questions one can ask about any new object are:

a) What is it like?

b) What does it extend?

 

But first here is a joke from the 1970s.  

Walking down the street, a man bumps into an old friend who is carrying two huge shoulder-bags, the size of suitcases.

“Let me put these down”. He does. “How are you?”

“Fine. Been shopping?”

“Oh yeh. I’ve got this fantastic new watch.” He rolls up his jacket to show it. The strap is plain but it holds in place a 4square- inch LCD screen. He smiles proudly.  “This beauty can do so much. I gotta tell you. Listen to this:  (1) Telephone – aural exchange : (2) Email – visual text exchange : ( 3) Text  - faster text exchange :  (4)  Still Camera – visual record :  (5) Camcorder -  photo-phone/film : (6) I-pod – aural entertainment : (7) DVD – visual entertainment.. Amazing eh! Six weeks salary for sure. But can you live without something so perfect? Anyway, as Erin would say, must press on. Call me for a drink.”  

He wearily picks up the two huge boxes.   

“What’s in them crates?!”

“The batteries.”  

I heard it around the time digital watches first appeared. The joke-maker beautifully extrapolates from the mere-time watch of his day to a multi-tasking item. Alas, the joke doesn’t work today, for technology has produced the tiny long-life battery. And, as we all know, technology has also produced that fantasy multi-tasking object, the mobile-phone aka moby.   [I take the term ‘moby’ from Posy Simmonds’ drawings.]  

In this Appendix to the above essay, I wish to focus on what might be called the symbolic equivalences suggested by the moby and its uses. Other objects will be introduced as comparators. It would be valuable to (re-)define these so as to better foreground what aspect of them is being compared.  

 

1: MOBY AS JEWELLERY /engagement ring

Jewellery is an object made of material that may be cheap (plastic) or expensive (gold/diamond) that has been shaped artistically for the principal purpose of adornment and display. As a gift, it marks human affection: as a ring, it marks moral commitment: both gestures make this object the most emotionally valuable object on that person. It is also usually the most financially valuable object on the person, far surpassing the worth of their clothes: even the blue suede shoes that must never be stepped on. Couples imagine an invisible, transcendent thread connecting their two rings. Imagine a culture which had as the commitment-sign not a ring but a small, wooden matchbox each. One would expect to see couples carrying it in their hand, putting it on the table wherever they arrived, next to their keys.  

The moby is, after the ring/necklace, often the most financially expensive thing a person is carrying (wearing). They treat it with the care and anxiety appropriate to the superlative.   

2: MOBY AS DIARY/ADDRESS BOOK/LOVE-LETTER BOX  

People are very careful to find suitable & hideable containers for their private information  – formal details about themselves & people they hold dear: and informal, deeply personal thoughts – some to be seen by no other, and some which are part of an exchange of intimacies. The three objects named above perform these functions : and so have the highest ‘information worth’, as distinguishable from economic worth, of any object they may be carrying.

(If a person’s address contains the details of their stockbroker or drug baron, then it clearly has the highest financial value as well). These special containing-objects are guarded well, and revealed slowly. To lose them – or even the thought of having left one’s diary open to view - induces high anxiety instantly, even terror.  

Given its recording capabilities the moby comes to be used as the containers above. People won’t leave it near someone they don’t trust.

 

3 : MOBY AS LIFEBUOY  

A lifebuoy is an object (made, in fact, of a million straws) that will keep afloat a drowning person. It is the first hope of rescue from extreme danger. Then one might paddle to shore or be picked up by a helicopter. When one feels stranded in the ocean-of-life, one naturally hopes for rescue. The moby is given to teenagers as a rescue-requesting object. As children are often unrealistically daring, the gift is more to reassure the parents.   

What level of danger to children exists in society is a perennial topic of discussion. At the least, one can say that, except for the unfortunates in dire poverty or rich dysfunctional families, ordinary life contains very, very few possibilities of drowning: and some dealing with danger is necessary for maturation.

 

4: MOBY AS GUN  

A gun is a warning to others that you have the capacity to seriously harm or even kill them. The other may be innocent, in which case you are displaying a desire and power to harm & humiliate:  “I shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die”  [Johnny Cash].

If the other person was the first to signal to you a threat, of any kind, then in this extreme danger, your gun is your first hope of defence/escape (self-rescue). Here we have the gun as lifebuoy!  Again one must say that extraordinary danger – requiring guns - is rare, but the state/church can generate a false impression. In the midst of the annual wailing over the annual school massacres in the US, it is worth remembering the right to bear arms was enshrined to deal with the white colonisers’ anxiety that those they had dispossessed, the native Indians and the black slaves, would return in force to take back their rightful land and freedom.  

The moby can be used to display the power to harm and humiliate:  by the garnering of film-footage showing happy-slapping or bodily functions or sexual indiscretions, and by bullying & menacing text messages and emails. Here is a desire to kill confidence and reputations!

 

5: MOBY AS PENIS/DOLLY/COMFORT-CLOTH  

It is maturational task for infants and geriatrics to know how to self-soothe, to alleviate anxiety and to enliven oneself :“You gotta lively up yourself.” [Bob Marley]. Parts of one’s own body or other objects may be used. In the privacy of their home, some grown men like to sit with their hands down their pants, cradling their penis. Women might hug a cuddly toy. This is obviously physical (libidinous) but rarely aiming at sexual discharge and exchange.  

It is common to see men and women, cradling, patting, and stroking their moby in this way, in public! I guess a vibrating pager/moby has a different resonance for women than men.  

 

6: MOBY AS INVISIBILITY SHIELD/RING  

Young children have invisible friends. Later they read, in the classics and in fairy stories, of objects that can make a person invisible: allowing them to interact unseen with an individual or a group. A famous example is the ring of Gyges in Plato. Even grown-ups day-dream of such an invisibilising object  that would allow their Pleasure Principle to go prancing through the world.  

Some moby-owners, when in a group, seem to act as if the ring-tone and their taking the call has made them invisible/inaudible: they can withdraw from the group conversation, but still remain in the group-space. It is rare for people to leave the group. Often the group-conversation is significantly disrupted. Occasionally the call-taker gets the others to shout ‘hello’ to the caller, as a way of being accepted back into the group.

7: MOBY AS TIME-LORD’S DIAL

The fictional Time Lord can go back and forth in time, and can alter the speed of time. He can choose to be invisible in time viz atemporal. This allows him to endlessly revise preferences and plans. In the fixed-phone era, once a mutually satisfying, or at least acceptable, arrangement had been made, and one or both persons had left their respective houses, they were incommunicado until they met. One showed moral grace in turning up at the appointed time. Later, one might have second thoughts – and remember or devise a more satisfying plan – but one could not follow this without letting down the other person. Choice is a notorious concept in politics and a complex one in psychoanalysis. The worst insult in the world is when someone says : “You’re better than my previous partner, and you’ve given the strength to trade-up to someone else, even better.”    

Moby holders, like the man in the short-story quoted above in my original essay, fantasise about the wonder-call offering the unearthly pleasure. At a more mundane level, some even defer deciding between ordinary joys until the last possible minute – which in the permanent now of moby-space – can be whenever one chooses to make the call. As they desperately wait for GoodOh!, they manage to be late more often than in fixed-phone days.  

 

8: MOBY AS PASSIVE SMOKE

Passive smoke refers to the unintended, undesired and actually harmful sharing of (the residue of) someone else’s pleasure – your smoke is also going into my lungs, hair and clothes. Though the danger of smoke was scientifically established in the 1930s, by the Nazis, it did not start becoming part of social policy until the 1970s:  and the legal bans on smoking in public facilities were not enforced until the following century. For most of the past century smokers assumed it was all right, their right, to light up anywhere anytime. To a non-smoker like me, the occasional polite question “Do you mind if I smoke?”  never felt real: because one knew most smokers are only ever one-missing-fag away from getting unbearably ratty.

Moby ring-tones and the half-heard-half of moby chat feel like aural smoke that soon chokes one’s heart and mind. Just as in the assumed right-to-smoke decades, most moby owners still don’t (feel the need to) say “Do you mind if I take the call”.   

In the charming song People Like Us David Byrne remembers his childhood in the US of the 50s and early 60s. The chorus runs:

People like us

Are gonna make it because

We don’t want freedom

We don’t want justice

We just want someone to love.  

This affirms ordinary (familial) love as the highest human value. The various verses offer criteria, one of which intrigued me when I heard it:

People like us

Who will answer the telephone   

There is the ordinary goodwill of doing the secretarial duty of picking up the phone. But I wondered if he also meant another layer of goodwill. In England most people of those times who had phones had them in the hall, which was often unheated. So it was a kindness to leave the warm sitting-room to answer the family-phone.  

The advent of the (individual) moby has made such kindnesses obsolete. I am inclined to the view that now he would sing:

People like us

Who don’t answer the mobyphone.  

because they don’t want to disrupt the group conversation.

 

9: MOBY AS UNKICKABLE PRICK  

God floors the scoffing, Christian-persecuting, Jew, Saul, and says :

“Saul, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.”  

He takes this call, in all its senses, and converts, becoming Paul a fierce kicker of women and gays.  

Mark Twain’s great novel begins:  

"TOM!"  

No answer.

"TOM!"

No answer.

"What's gone with that boy, I wonder? You TOM!"

No answer.

He doesn’t take the call.  

Hearing one’s name called out, especially in a public space, instantly produces a complex emotion. One learns from early childhood onwards that it is spoken in many different ways, which produce a variety of emotions. But there is a primal response to respond, to not-ignore, when one’s name is called.

 

The individual moby’s  personal ring-tone is a kind of calling one’s name out. I’ve rarely seen a moby-owner, who has decided not to take the call, also refrain from looking at who’s calling. Even as they are switching it off, they sneak a look, they nod, and so further vanish from the conversation they were just having with you. They are clearly anxious to know the name of the person who was calling their name. They begin to imagine replying very soon and  they begin to formulate the reply.

 

 

10 : MOBY AS ORWELLIAN INTERRUPTION

 

Perhaps this is the secular version of the holy call. Big Brother might appear on-screen in one’s lounge or bedroom at any time and call one’s name. This is the State letting the citizen know that he/she can’t step beyond its eye or sway, can’t take their pleasures freely in an elsewhere.

 

The moby allows each person in a group, a family, to be such an interrupter. Nothing, no action, no pleasure, is held to be sacrosanct, nothing you do is  

not-interruptible. One senses a refusal by the other person to protect one’s pleasure, and the afterglow of that pleasure. The subject-matter of the call has the veneer of urgency, but it in truth is nothing such. It is rare for ordinary family life with its ordinary ups and downs to arrive at extreme danger requiring rescue within a few minutes. What the call is really saying is  “You’ve had enough fun. I’m stopping it now.”  

 

 

 

AN EXPLANATION

 

I could have put this section at the beginning of the Postscript but I wanted the Reader to reflect on the examples in their own way first. My suggestion is that the following simple psychological mechanism is in operation. Here is a line of argument.

 

1: The (personal) meaning of an object is given by the complex (matrix) of affects it induces/contains: both those consciously apprehended and those unconsciously apprehended. A simple example – just reflect what a breast means. One is so overwhelmed by the seemingly boundless aggregate of affects, one seeks an analogy from physics: any non-human piece of matter – well the human body too! – is the potential site of an imaginable volume of energy E=MC2. The naming of the apprehensions must have a social base (contra the private language argument) even if any individual mints personal nuances to such names.

 

2: At any given moment there is an established complex of affect attached to all known objects. There is some affect that is released by but not quite bound by that ‘old’ object.

 

3: A new object is apprehended. One tries to place it in its similarities and differences to already known objects. Among the apprehensions is of the new object as a possible container for the residue of affect attached to an old object.

 

4: The new object also induces a new nuance of established affect. This must be or else there really would be nothing new under the sun!

 

5: The present value of an object (new or old) is given by its ability to contain one’s instinctual impatience. It involves learning how objects (even other people as ‘objects’) facilitate, frustrate or exacerbate instinctual impatience.

 

6: Maturation is indicated by one’s capacity to master instinctual impatience. This is not mere self-denial. It is a mean between the pathologically disturbed positions of inhibitionism and exhibitionism.

 

7: The learning must involve understanding how necessary are waiting and boredom: and that it is possible to be overstimulated (too-many after-school activities) and thereby, paradoxically, retard instinctual mastery.

 

8: One must regularly remind and renegotiate those in one’s moby-loop that emergencies are very rare, that other people’s pleasures (and importantly after-pleasures) must not be interrupted: that one must deal with one’s impatience for at least a part-day, six hours : morning, afternoon, evening, night..

 

 

AD HOMINEM

 

I do believe mobile phones have their excellences: they are the best lifebuoys to date. I am not a Gandhian or hippy Luddite. I have chosen not to have one, for the same spectrum of reasons that I don’t watch film-trailers – that I feel they exacerbate instinctual impatience. My sociological observation is that most people use them most of the time in such a way as to weaken the necessary human project of mastering instinctual impatience. The extra information gathered by the relentless use of the moby and the time saved by not having to find landlines, hasn’t produced kinder, more empathetic people.  Reader, perhaps it has for you.

 

 

TALKING ABOUT MY INSTALLATION

 

I would take one each of the symbolic objects above, place them in a cunning gestalt and call it ‘Moby Trick’ : and see if the visitors to the gallery got it.  

 

 

 

 

 

=================================================================================================================================================

 

APPENDIX 3 : FEBRUARY 2018  

 

NON-SCREEN-TASKS as AN UNBEARABLE INTERRUPTION OF SCREEN-CHECKING

 

When I was a child,1960s, the three quietest places in the city, in the community, were the Public Library, any Church, and the Snooker Club. The people who ran these places recognised a deep human need for experiences of silence, and of being with others in a shared experience of silence, either doing something together, or watching others. The silence was also an experience of freedom from the burden of talking and listening : of not being obliged to talk, to explain oneself or to listen to other people talking to no necessary purpose or charm right now. You would watch your friend perform his/her snooker-shot. He/she would watch you do your shot. You both paid attention during your conversation, doing nothing else at the same time : except perhaps eat & drink.   

 

Today, at any social gathering, almost everyone has their phone on and in-hand or on-the-table : the pub, the restaurant, the church, the library, even the snooker-hall. People, kids and the elderly, only half-listen to the speaker, who may also be screen-checking as they speak. They find it impossible - even in the midst of their playtimehours - to leave their phone unchecked for even ten minutes.

I sense that they would feel genuinely distressed if they were prevented from checking : even when they know that there is no reasonable chance of an emergency among their loved ones happening in the next two hours or certainly the next ten minutes if they have just checked : and that cute pictures of cats or videos of goals and celebrity nudity will still be there in 90 minutes when they are home alone. Quite often I see them check their phones while their friend is making their snooker-shot.  A former champion of the Palio in Sienna remarked that the young man he was training, in 2015, was forever checking his phone as soon as he came off the horse : it being obvious that he was thinking too much of his desire to check his phone even while he was on the horse. There was no fallow-time during which he reflected on the riding exercise he'd just done. I've seen good players practising snooker with one hand holding their phone. A trainee vicar told me in 2015 of church meetings where everyone's phone is on and people text comments throughout the service and discussions. In news footage inside a French cathedral, of the congregants attending the funerals of their 'loved' ones murdered by terrorists, I saw middle-aged women checking their phones.   

 

Twenty years ago I met a judge-theologian who had been part of the Truth and Reconciliation Council in South Africa. In one of his books he insisted that the Christian message can be seen as emphasising two dispositions : not-to-kill and a bias to the poor. This is of course admirable. But a crucial injunction from Christ is missing : You cannot serve both God and Mammon. He pitied the arrogant stupidity more than the sinfulness of those who thought they could. 

 

What is easily forgotten is that Mammon will say - You can! The fundamental capitalist principle is that you can have everything simultaneously : so work even harder - or cheat others even harder with zero-hours contracts, faulty goods and lies - in order to get everything which can be bought and had simultaneously and you won't have to choose or wait : and perhaps not even share with others. Kierkegaard famously said "If you marry a woman for her money, you are marrying only the money."  Similarly if you bet on a sports-game that you are watching, you are in danger of losing more than your money. A few weeks ago it was said on the News that nine million people in the UK report feeling lonely. The tv-adverts for the gaming-site Tombola show average men and women, mostly aged 25-50,  organising day-outs to the countryside on trains and or to the beach, always with plenty of food and drink, and also various additional group activities such as fishing, dancing, lantern-making etc. If all, or even most, of the people proceed with ordinary attention and goodwill, that will be enough for all to have a memorably enjoyable shared experience. But into the visual frames of the advert are inserted holograms of bingo-cards and shots of people gambling merrily on their mobile phones : trying to persuade viewers that these activities will significantly add to your pleasures.   

 

I grew up knowing lots of adult smokers who would say clumsily to their kids "Don't smoke!". It rarely helped.  Consider these cartoons from the past two years.

 

 

 

 

Addictive behaviour can corrupt a person of any age who is - and this is the grim paradox - unable, for whatever psychopathological cause,  to to protect a range of pleasures for themselves, both solitary and shared: the latter being ruined for others too.  

   

The sane & socialist (and spiritual) principle is that certain experiences can't be had simultaneously : some, like fallowing and meditation and worship and prayer, must be done on their own (alone or with other-sharers) and can't be rushed. Even talking or playing snooker or dancing with your friend in a kind and emotionally fruitful way can't be done while paying attention - via the screen - to people who are not with you right now, and who you might not even know personally.

 

You might think you are successfully doing both - playing or praying and screen-checking  - that you are having double pleasures : but in reality you are having neither, not even half-each. Even screen checkers begin to sense the insufficiency and emptiness of such 'social' evenings : but after a while they are too too addicted to stop, or too frightened of other addicts to challenge them and to suggest negotiating 'old-style' screen-less shared pleasures for a whole evening or morning or day. 

 

For centuries, and even in some places today, stewards outside churches & temples prevented women with bare arms entering. Just for a second, imagine stewards outside churches, mosques, synagogues, temples, socialist-feminist meetings, philosophy seminars.... refusing entrance unless all screens were placed in the cloakroom before going into the 'good space'.

 

It's never going to happen. But don't wonder why!

 

 

****************************************************************************************************

EXTERNAL APPENDIX 

 

Reader, how many essays or articles about this topic have you read? Of those, how many shaped your thinking and personal habits and what good you tried to teach your children.

(Please can you send me the references.) 

 

My first brief essay The Self Removing Trousers was written in 2002, sixteen years ago! Many years after I'd written it, I came across a book with an even briefer essay by Umberto Eco written in 1991. It is the only essay on the topic that has impressed me. .

 

 

 

 

 

Several episodes of the US tv procedural Law and Order Special Victims Unit on these themes have been a brilliant fusion of the dramatic and the pedagogic.

Look, learn and weep!

 

 

*********************************************************************************

 

MORE OF OTHERS : ON TEMPTATION & PLEASURE

 

Here is Adam Mars-Jones, one of the very few illuminating literary critics alive, writing August 2018, in the LRB, on a historical novel.

Since it is both nourished by the vogue for Claude Cahun and feeds back into it, acknowledging the contributions of the leading researcher in the field, Never Anyone But You risks seeming like the narrative arm of an art historical enterprise, rather than a novel with its own power source. The difficulty of reading it innocently, without reference to the status of its central figure, is part of a more general difficulty faced by fiction in the information age. Novels set in the past now compete with the historical record in a way that has no precedent. Until recently amateur historians would be likely to have reservations (and professional ones would never be satisfied) but the common reader would happily skate over any amount of loose handling. The two ways of writing about the past weren’t expected to converge, but now books claiming to be non-fictional enter people’s heads as a matter of course, and fiction has to adapt in its turn. This isn’t anything as simple as a raising of standards in historical fiction but a shift in the definitions. Ford Madox Ford’s Fifth Queen novels, for instance, weren’t expected to withstand scrutiny in the way that Philippa Gregory’s books claim for themselves (to say nothing of Hilary Mantel): in fact the degree of waywardness on offer, the blur of Fordian impressionism, was the whole appeal of those books. When L.H. Myers set an immense tetralogy in the time of the Mughal Empire (The Near and the Far, 1929-40) it wasn’t because he was an expert on the period, but because it offered him a blank canvas on which to develop the themes that preoccupied him. One of the attractions for Gore Vidal of Julian the Apostate as the subject of a novel was the slenderness of the documentary evidence as late as the 1960s.

 Anyone with internet access can acquire in a minute or two the smattering of expertise that would once have taken hours in a library, in a way that supplements non-fiction but hollows out the experience of reading a novel. Look up the Wikipedia entry of someone mentioned in an article (Who is this Chana Orloff, sounding like a cross between a chickpea and an actor in horror films?) and you lose nothing, but look up Claude Cahun before reading Never Anyone But You and you sabotage your own possibilities for pleasure. The reader of a historical novel that features household names (a category that the internet has enormously expanded) is in the position of someone watching the recording of a sporting event while not wanting to know the result, safe in a bubble of voluntary ignorance. Early readers of The Blue Flower in the late 1990s didn’t need to resist digital temptation to stay in the state of mind that fiction requires and rewards, of occupying a world that is both true and not true. Fitzgerald did provide an Author’s Note explaining the novel’s basis in the life of Friedrich von Hardenberg, better known as Novalis, but it is a reader’s privilege and custom to skip such things. She also used a citation from Novalis as the book’s epigraph: ‘Novels arise out of the shortcomings of history.’ It’s not necessarily that history has excelled itself as a discipline, but an invading army of facts has set up camp outside the gates of the historical novel.

My emphases - obviously! My endlessly repeated point in this essay is that modern telecoms frustrate and almost completely prevent one of the necessary maturational tasks - the mastery of instinctual patience. The defining task of capitalist providers is of course to create irresistible temptation in this moment and every succeeding one : so that one never stops clicking the next possible link. Algorithms ensure that after you have been shown what you wanted to see, similar material is set to appear automatically - unless you make the effort - which they know to be Herculean for most mortals - to press 'stop' or 'exit'. They have no genuine interest in the clicker's pleasure - that he/she might in fact sabotage it with this next click -  it only matters that he or she keeps clicking and eventually buying. Alas, most users of telecoms - of whatever age, creed, culture - are no saner than the Fool in this old joke.

Sverich, a hapless but harmless village fool finds a lame rabbit in the road. He binds its twisted leg with dandelion stalks and is about to set it in the corn field, when the rabbit speaks: "I am a magical rabbit, of the kind you will have read about in childhood: and I offer you two wishes. 

Without a pause, Sverich says "I'd like a magical glass of beer : such that, after I have finished drinking, the glass refills: and again, and again for ever."

Without a pause, the full glass is in his hand. Sverich drains it, and it magically refills. He laughs triumphantly.

The good rabbit smiles and says "What is your second wish?"  

Sverich says " I'll have another one of these magical glasses. "

****************************************************************************************************