Chatting with Callie today brought up a number of issues in my mind that are tonight's journal topics.

First, she has discovered that reclamation projects are almost always doomed to failure.  Without going into too much detail, I'll just say that she has this longtime friend and sometime past suitor who, frankly, is willing to settle for mediocrity (her words, not mine actually!  I'm not entirely sure I agree, but that's another topic) and has been willing to do so since she's known him.  Apparently in a conversation today, he got a little testy with her precisely because she IS NOT willing to settle for mediocrity!  Now, as good Objectivists, I think many of us have often run into this -- people who could be SO great, if one just helps them a bit, just shows them the way, just pushes them along.  Ultimately, what I mean by a reclamation project is not someone who's right on the verge of being that great person -- but someone who's not even close, who could be great but will never be willing.  Those persons can't be turned into great people despite how much we would like to infect them with our energy and passion for life.  Our time and energy are too valuable -- and we have to recognize that and just be willing to let some people go.  I think Callie learned what I mean when I say that today. 

Second, she noted that this same person -- and another acquaintance of hers as well -- found it entirely puzzling (and "ARROGANT") that I maintain an online journal!  I think that says something about a person's premises, that without knowing me at all, without visiting the journal, without having considered my stated reasons for doing this, a person can condemn it -- or even worse, not condemn it (because at least one utilizes rhetoric in condemnation), but just use the snide reference, Rand's "art of the smear."  Reclamation projects indeed! 

Third, thoughts of the journal after that discussion as well as an email exchange with Don earlier have prompted me to lay out my thoughts on journal content in general.  Hanah rightly pointed out the other day that my own journal is less personal than hers (probably than most).  I use this daily journal for a number of things:  to make myself write daily, to record thoughts I've had about ideas any given day so I can keep track of them, and lastly to record personal thoughts.  I'm less inclined to record intimate personal thoughts that involve other people.  I've mentioned in previous journal entries, for example, that's why I don't write as much as one might expect about Callie -- for the simple reason that while I'm open about keeping a journal, others involved in my life haven't necessarily agreed to the same level of openness.  If I do decide something has been too important personally not to write about it, I tend to make the reference esoteric (ahh... the Straussian in me!) enough that I will know years from now what I was talking about and what happened, but a common stranger reading it wouldn't have enough information to engage in, say, stalking the person I'm writing about!  *smile*  It seems to me this is a good policy.  I've not yet had anyone complain about the degree to which I refer to them in the journal, but undoubtedly that day will come.  It will be an interesting issue with which to deal, actually.

Final thoughts re the journal for upcoming trips I'll be taking, first for the Float Trip, second a possible business trip to Calgary, and third a definite trip back to London in June:  I'm going to drag along my minicassette recorder for all of them, and drop those entries into the journal via realaudio upon my return, if it works out okay technically.  I think that will be quite amusing actually, and a lot easier to do than the handwritten journals I've kept (and usually lost at some point) after traveling in the past.  Speaking of that last, I decided after visiting with Callie that I'm going to put up the written journals I kept on the last two London trips -- that is, if I can find the damn things!  After reading some more Kaplan tonight, I just decided that would be a good way to record the interesting things I see -- and think -- on my travels.

I did a bit of dissertation work at the coffeeshop tonight -- I needed to do far less than I had anticipated to wrap up completely Section One of Chapter Two, which pleased me.  Tomorrow I will start doing the research for Section Two, which will go quickly.  It is the heart of the political theory backing my thesis:  that the Progressives were united by their historicism, leading their political theory to reject the natural right basis of American constitutionalism.  This section will analyze various Progressive thinkers and demonstrate their progressivism -- and how it led them subsequently to reject the Declaration and Constitution, as understood from the Founding.   Fun stuff!

Copyright (c) 2000, Kevin L. Whited