This will hurt me...

Jen looks out to sea. Binalong Bay, Bay of Fires, Tasmania. July 2021. Catch-22   by Joseph Heller Catch-22  is one of the rare books that I have returned to and re-read several times throughout my life. The first time was as a young and impressionable 17-year-old, and I delighted in the confidence Heller displayed in flourishing his love of language and deployment of marvellous words. After reading the novel, I am sure that I was willing to open up and use the full vocabulary available to me under the English language (and a few others to boot). It was darkly funny, and I took delight in the absurd wordplay and ingenious structure. The second time I read it, I was in my mid-20s and neck-deep working in a large, bureaucratic institution (a university). The complexities and absurdities that didn't strike me during my first read suddenly had more resonance. I came to appreciate the author's skill and cunning in replaying the same incidents repeatedly and the art beneath the nons...

Sometimes you get a very dull morning, and the lights on 'the shed' are on and seem brighter than they should be. This was one of those mornings. Rather than bore you with my writing this morning, I want to revisit a moment early on in one of my all time favourite reads, Catch-22 by Joseph Heller. It concerns an argument between Yossarian (the hero of the tale), and Clevinger (one of the hero's foils), about the risks invloved in daylight bombing missions: “They’re trying to kill me,” Yossarian told him calmly. ”No one’s trying to kill you,” Clevinger cried. ”Then why are they shooting at me?” Yossarian asked. ”They’re shooting at everyone,” Clevinger answered. “They’re trying to kill everyone.” ”And what difference does that make?” I'm with Yossarian here, and think that the point translates well into other spheres of human interaction. That's not to say that I dislike Clevinger though. I've always liked him as a character. That said, as a similarly pragmatic...

I had to explain the concept of a 'catch-22 situation' to someone the other day (and wishing that I could devise such a rule for my own benefit), I was reminded just how much I love this book. So I thought I that I would post Yossarian's full explanation on the blog. So I have: "There was only one catch and that was catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle." "That's some ...