{Love, Charity; Care?}[6th December 1988]

[Redbook6:63-64)][19881206:1713c]{Love, Charity; Care?}[6th December 1988]

.1713

[continued]

This*is connected with another** chilling experience: when discussing with my younger brother [B], a few months after we arrived here – or was it on his second visit, early this year? – a little of why I had trusted my parents and why I now find it impossible to accept what had happened as a result – to be monstrously patronised by him, with not a little schadenfreude I suspect, in the unexpected and repeated form of: ‘But [Hunter], your problem is that you care.’*** Perhaps because we had no television in [I, in Scotland], and I had not watched much before or since, this was unfamiliar; but since then I have come across variants of the phrase [sic] in smart review-pieces[,] song[s] by cynical young men, and now, today, in a children’s cartoon**** which [d] was watching: where Love also came in for the same yukky [sic] treatment. This particular piece made the connection very clear: with the meaningless over-use of the expressions (‘care’ and ‘love’) typically by [sic] American-style charm-school positive-thinking manners: ‘We do care.’ ‘We love you.’

I like to think that Care, like Charity (both in their specialised meanings)# is the application of Love: Love the Quality at r~, Charity the Virtue at g~, Care a practice there or at j~. The battle-lines have never been more clearly drawn, between the shallow unreality of cynical self-interest, which after it has destroyed everything else destroys itself; and the near-perfect, dynamic, independent reality of Love, whose sacred duty it is to bring the selfishness of the Self to Self-destruction.

*[See last 2 previous entries]

**[See last previous entry but one]

***(I may have mentioned this before) [ref not found]

(His emphasis)

****ITV, c1645? (Count Duckula)

#ie not Dull Care; & certainly not Mrs Thatcher’s charity of possession and dispossession.

[continues]

[PostedBlogger24for26072019]