![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
Freedom on a Leash
I have to give credit to my friend John for this observation. I hope I’m not pre-empting anything that he was planned to write on the subject. But it’s just so good I can’t resist.
Anyway, I’ve spent a lot of time at John’s and he has a great little dog named Pumpkin. Since Pumpkin is a dog, she has a limited vocabulary, and she tends to get mixed up on some of the conceptual bits that you or I could handle with ease. For example, when you grab her leash off it’s hook in the kitchen, Pumpkin get’s excited. She jumps up in the air several feet, stands on her hind legs - you know the drill. It’s quite a challenge to actually get the damn thing on her. But she knows that once it’s on her, you’re out the door and the wider world awaits.
But here’s the weird part: when Pumpkin sees her leash, she thinks, “Freedom.” It doesn’t matter to her that the leash is actually sort of the opposite. Sure she gets to go outside, but she doesn’t get to run wild and free like she wants to. There are too many cars and things for her to get into trouble with, and who knows if she would ever even come back.
In any event, when John mentioned this to me, it seemed like an extraordinarily profound thing. And so simple. I guess what I’m interested in figuring out is: what are our leashes? What are the symbols that we think mean freedom or expansion, but really are little nooses around our necks to keep us from running off into the wild blue yonder?
July 7th, 2005 at 10:55 pm
Driver’s Licenses, social security numbers, passports, all those kinds of government documentation that facilitates some kind of process but puts you in a box with a code number… taking that a step further, some people might say government itself is a “leash.” And maybe certain types of religion?
July 7th, 2005 at 11:31 pm
Hah, synchronicity! My dog and I had some “issues” today. Every day I take her to a state park near my home, where she is allowed to roam free (sans leash) for most of the two mile loop that we walk/run. The deal is that she’s supposed to come when called, so that we don’t annoy the people that don’t like dogs. This morning she made the major faux pas of ignoring me and running to a guy I know is afraid of dogs. Needless to say I was pissed and she ended up on the leash for 3/4 of the walk.
Nothin’ deep here, just needed to share. Perhaps its wise to remember that leashes are sometimes necessary circumscriptions of freedom.
July 8th, 2005 at 12:19 am
Wilhelm Reich called it “freedom in the trap.” See his “Listen, Little Man.” Also related would be his “Murder of the Christ.” All his books fit well into what I’ve seen on this site.
July 8th, 2005 at 12:30 am
Yeah I need to check him out more. Thanks for the tip, loki.
Joan, I might also add to that list: jobs, giving the “freedom” of money
July 8th, 2005 at 12:48 am
i’d say “structured safeness” (sometimes but not always) … health insurance ?
i think a lot of the stuff we usually label as “entertainment” or “luxury” could potentially fall into this category.. ie; the SUV you’re still paying off, or the premium cable bill you have to keep up with every month.
July 8th, 2005 at 12:51 am
additionally, i think it’s weird when people are scared of dogs.
July 8th, 2005 at 1:01 am
i was when i was a kid, but it’s only cause i didnt understand how they operated
July 8th, 2005 at 1:08 am
yeah that’s different, i should clarify. i think it’s weird when people who aren’t children OR who have never had any kind of traumatic experience involving dogs are scared of dogs.
i guess it’s because i trust dogs so completely.. i mean i really have this deep reverence/respect/love for canines.
July 8th, 2005 at 1:20 am
the tibetan buddhist lama chogyam trungpa rinpoche, the one who was known for boozin’ it up among other things, wrote an entire book on this topic called “The Myth of Freedom”: basically about the ways we think we have free will but we end up making our own mind more and more habitual and ultimately don’t get what we think we’re getting.
in summary, we think that if we ‘just set things up right’ or ‘just play our cards right’ then everything will work out. my favorite example of this is if i ‘just get mad in the right way’ then i’ll get the situation to work out. but that game that we’re playing is basically trying to restrict the situation and ourselves, and then ironically things don’t generally turn out the way we want them, and we’re invested in a specific outcome instead of a wider experience.
July 8th, 2005 at 1:22 am
A big leash is probably just mental, i.e. the range of emotions or relationships we feel we can have with other people. Boundaries on potentially consensual interpersonal behavior, social conceptions about what’s “appropriate,” assumptions we make about the purpose of life. A big one: assumptions we make about leadership and power, i.e. we’re all supposed to follow the President, that our democracy = the only form of democracy, etc. etc.
July 8th, 2005 at 1:48 am
Ahhh… that’s brilliant. I can so relate to that
July 8th, 2005 at 8:22 am
Cars - Money - anything that has to be attained to attain freedom is a leash.
July 8th, 2005 at 10:03 am
i just think a lot of people are mixed up about what freedom IS in the first place.. so there’s bound to be a lot of confusion and misconception. i think the powers that be would have us equate “freedom” with their perverted idea of “security”… which is really distorted.
July 8th, 2005 at 10:30 am
Oh Laura, do not get me started on that!
I did a tally. During Bush’s speech from Fort Bragg he mentioned “freedom” a total of 32 times. That’s just 2 times less than he said the word “terrorists.” Keep in mind this was a 1/2 hour speech! And he mentioned “security” 14 times. The words they use don’t mean what they used to mean anymore.
But… it’s great for drinking games and Presidential Speech Bingo! >
July 8th, 2005 at 11:20 am
Freedom/Slavery is just another duality and not a very useful one at that.
All actions take place in a constricted environment – we are always leashed in some way. The wild wolf is limited by its instincts and the vicissitudes of its environment. The dog, by the leash of its owner. The difference is that one is limited by an ecological system, the other by human will. Which is better? (For my opinion refer to Crowley’s famous maxim).
Leashes can be good for people (I mean that metaphorically, although I do understand the BDSMers literal interpretation). Just as the dog has a pretty damn good life compared to the wolf in terms of creature comforts so some people are willing to trade “freedom” for “security.” Do they deserve neither as Ben Franklin suggested? Well, that sounds like it makes sense and allows “freedom-loving” individualists such as myself to sound morally superior, but at root the dichotomy is absurd. The freedom/slavery trade is a trade that occurs in any interaction, from romantic relationships to business partnerships.
Ultimately what matters is not freedom versus slavery but power versus impotence. Power comes from two sources: one’s genetic endowment and one’s accumulated life experiences or “wisdom.” (BTW, perhaps we should consider one’s genetic endowment the physical manifestation of natural wisdom). The dog is in a servile state because it has been genetically engineered (bred) and culturally engineered (trained) to be docile. This engineering was done by human will. The wolf has been genetically and culturally engineered by its environment (=Mother Nature, Gaia?) to be what we call “wild,” which is really just as restrictive as the dog’s life. One might say that the wolf is allowed to roam freely. No it’s not. If the wolf enters the house where the dog’s master lives, it will be shot. If the wolf breaks its leg it may very well die. In both situations the dog is allowed a measure of freedom that the wolf doesn’t have. The same is true of humans in varying states of “bondage.”
Therefore, our leashes are legion; they are what bind us together in effective society and society is what allows us to do things that Mother Nature (humanity’s master) would never permit us to do such as reading and writing blogs.
Notions of freedom have helped to obscure our true wills. They have had a particularly deleterious effect on political and gender relations.
July 8th, 2005 at 12:20 pm
I do like the question of which is living a better life: the dog or the wolf?
July 8th, 2005 at 1:12 pm
I think the answer to that question is beyond either/or logic because their natures are so different. Each is living a potentially good or bad life for its nature. I think human beings are the same way - thus the impossibility of developing objective measures of subjective concepts such as happiness or success.
July 8th, 2005 at 1:18 pm
I’m not saying it’s an either/or answer, I’m just saying I think it’s a great question as a starting point for discussion.
July 8th, 2005 at 1:41 pm
how about the very limited nature of sensory perception? lots of people think the senses give them their freedom, that the senses are the only things to rely on, but that ain’t always the case. i guess that leads me to also include ’science’ as a ‘freeing leash.’
lj–
man i agree completely! my dog is one of the coolest people i know.
July 8th, 2005 at 2:48 pm
jeremy, mine too !!
her favorite activities are playing, cuddling, eating, and following me around.