Essay Club: Essay Club by Dan Ackerfeld
"Boy, I sure am clever!"
Today we celebrate Essay Club’s one-year anniversary. What a great year! Over the past twelve months we’ve discussed fourteen different essays by thirteen different authors. We’ve discussed big ideas, tricky concepts, quaint observations, and personal reflections. We’ve bounced from psychology to politics to criminal justice to literary theory. I think the essay format is the most interesting and flexible format for non-fiction around, and after a year of Essay Club, my love for essays has only deepened.
Essay Club was born out of a desire to have more stimulating intellectual conversations with like-minded readers. I chose to focus on essays for a couple of reasons. The main reason was that I didn’t want to set the bar for participation too high, and essays are usually pretty short and accessible. Essays also tend to highlight just one or two key ideas, which helps to keep the conversation from veering too far off topic. Essay Club hasn’t exploded in popularity, but people seem to enjoy it, and I have a few regular commenters who can be counted on to share interesting insights. For those of you who recently expressed concern that I might stop hosting Essay Club, never fear—I plan to take this even further in 2025 (more on this later).
Let’s look back at some of the authors and ideas we've covered this year.
Authors and Essays
George Orwell
This year was bookended by two essays by George Orwell: Why I Write and Politics and the English Language. In Why I Write, Orwell reflects on the various reasons that writers write, and suggests that his own best works are those that were motivated by a political purpose. The implication is that any writer who wants to be successful should write with his or her own purpose (political or otherwise) in mind.
In Politics and the English Language, Orwell critiques the use of sloppy and fanciful writing in non-fiction, and links this sloppiness to a perceived degradation of contemporary politics. If we want to improve our politics, Orwell argues, we need to improve our use of language, because to write clearly is to think clearly.
C. S. Lewis
Lewis’ The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment is a compelling defence of justified punishment. He argues that the ‘humanitarian’ response to crime—which emphasises deterrence and rehabilitation—not only misses the point of criminal justice, but is actually far less just when carefully examined. Lewis concludes that reasonable, justified, and legally sanctioned punishment is necessary if we want to maintain a high standard of societal safety and personal morality.
B. F. Skinner
The Origins of Cognitive Thought was one of the tougher essays we covered this year, and it doesn’t lend itself easily to summarisation. I think I put it best in the original Essay Club post: “the origins of all human action, whether cognitive or behavioural (if such a distinction can be made), are to be found outside of the person, not within. Our sensations, perceptions, expectations, motivations, fears, desires, and the actions they generate don’t occur spontaneously. They are a product of our environment, conditioned into us over the course of our life.”
Vernon Lee
Vernon Lee’s essay In Praise of Silence is, as the name suggests, a spirited defence of the comfortable silence. She rejects both small talk and intellectual verbosity; to Lee, true connection is found in shared moments of quiet appreciation. I read this essay as a call to be more mindful in the presence of others, and to refrain from ‘filling the silence’ too much.
John Michael Greer
Myth, History, and Pagan Origins is a fascinating piece written by a pagan practitioner of occult magic. Greer encourages us to revise our personal definition of ‘myth’, and to reevaluate the importance of myths in our lives. In his words, humans are “incurably mythic creatures”, meaning we live by stories, not by facts and data. We would do well to acknowledge this so that we can understand (and perhaps even change) how these stories influence our lives.
Christopher Hitchens
Fragments From an Education is a surprisingly personal essay written by one of the ‘four horsemen’ of New Atheism. In this piece Hitchens shares numerous personal anecdotes from his time in an elite British boarding school, many of which highlight elements of cruelty and corruption in this old institution. He concludes that, while much of this cruelty was unjustifiable, it also forged him into the man he became. Perhaps we should not be so quick to tear it all down.
Roland Barthes
Barthes’ The Death of the Author is an important work of literary theory that challenges us to reconsider how we read literary works. He encourages us to go beyond interpreting these works merely by reference to the author’s life or intended meaning, and to consider other interpretations, including how the text relates to those works that came before and after it. This “revolutionary act” had a profound impact on the field of literary theory in its day, and its influence continues to be felt in classrooms today.
Simon Sarris
In In Praise of the Gods, Sarris argues that our overemphasis on ‘rational’ thinking has caused us to become disembodied, and to lose our sense of wonder. If we want to reverse this, we need to reject rationalism in favour of a “practical, embodied reasoning”, which Sarris believes can be cultivated through reading mythology, seeking out real experiences, and reconnecting with time-honoured rituals and traditions.
John Carter
Cryptocracy was the most overtly political piece we covered this year. It starts with a simple question: who or what is in charge? Carter’s answer is that no one is in charge, and that those who appear to be in charge are themselves slaves to a shadowy managerial bureaucracy that refuses to accept responsibility for its own actions. Carter proposes that the only way to break free is to ignore it—to flout the rules, refuse to comply. If enough of us take a stand, this “sentient miasma” will eventually fade away.
Carl Jung
Wotan is Jung’s controversial psychological analysis of Hitler and Nazi Germany. He suggests that the rise of the National Socialists was no ordinary event, and that it might be better understood as a possession by the Germanic pagan god Wotan. This essay offers an excellent, in-depth example of what Jung means by the concept of ‘archetypes’, and is well-worth a read if you want to learn more about Jungian psychology.
G. K. Chesterton
On the surface, A Defence of Heraldry is a lament for the decline of the noble art of heraldry. Of course, it’s also much more than this. Chesterton argues that even the humblest of professions and institutions are deserving of heraldic flair, but in our attempt to democratise the political playing field, we convinced ourselves that it was better to settle for less, and ruined everything in the process. His solution: “democracy must have a heraldry”. The average man must stop thinking of his superiors as no better than himself, and start thinking of himself as capable of the same greatness.
Andy Clark and David Chalmers
Clark and Chalmer’s The Extended Mind is an important work of late 20th century philosophy. In this essay they argue that the categorical distinction between the mind and the external world is an arbitrary one; if we look closely at how cognition actually works, it becomes clear that the mind almost always relies upon external tools, philosophical frameworks, and other people to function. Not everyone who reads this comes away accepting the strongest version of this theory, but it’s undeniable that Clark and Chalmers identified something crucial about the way that human cognition works in the real world.
T. S. Eliot
Our final essay was T. S. Eliot’s Tradition and the Individual Talent. Here Eliot argues that a poet can never be appreciated in isolation, that all works of poetry (indeed, all literary works) are necessarily a product of their time and place in the great literary canon. We are thus called not to resist this literary tradition, but to embrace it—in doing so, we might just claim our own seat amongst the Greats.
Themes and General Observations
A big theme that emerged out of this year’s essays was the importance of tradition(s). Chesterton and Lewis defended specific traditions—heraldry and legally-sanctioned punishment, respectively—and in doing so showed how each of these traditions emerged for specific reasons. They were not, and are not, arbitrary. Hitchens and Orwell, too—despite being explicitly anti-traditional in their general worldviews—seem to recognise that certain traditions, such as the strict British boarding school and the proper use of language, have their place. Eliot and Sarris took this a step further. While neither explicitly use the term in this way, they both seem to recognise a capital-T Tradition of canonical stories, rituals, and beliefs that, when pursued in the right way, have the potential to elevate one’s life, spirit, and creative output to an almost transcendent level. What exactly this Tradition is is up for debate (indeed, there may be more than one), but it’s interesting to note that many of these writers came to view Christianity, or some secularised version of it, as the correct one.
Another theme that emerged this year was the value of mythological thinking. Sarris and Greer addressed this from a more practical angle, suggesting that the reading of myths can help us to develop our intuitions or understand ourselves and our culture better. Jung took a different approach. His essay Wotan is a perfect example of how mythological thinking is actually done. Through his deep understanding of Germanic myths and the character of the god Wotan, Jung is able to intuit aspects of the German psyche that others could not. Even now, those who fail to understand this way of thinking simply dismiss Wotan as an attempt to glorify the Nazis, but to my mind there is a lot of truth in Jung’s analysis. In short, mythological thinking grants us deep wisdom and insight—insight into ourselves, others, the past and present, and sometimes even the future.
One of the subtler themes that emerged this year was the idea that there is more to the mind than we think. Consider the insights offered by Skinner, Jung, Clark, and Chalmers. First, much of what we assume is innate may in fact be learned, including abilities that we might see as largely cognitive, like language. Second, cognition doesn’t only take place in the brain—we clearly make substantial use of the external world for our mental processing. Third, our thinking is influenced by powerful unconscious forces. Once again, these forces may not always be found inside the skull, and we might even need to consider the possibility that these forces are not natural at all. They might be supernatural—they might be gods.
I’ll conclude with a few general comments on what these essays have taught me about essay writing itself. One thing I’ve learned is that great essayists know how to draw profound insights from everyday topics. Chesterton turns an offhand comment about the decline of heraldry into a profound statement on the nature of democracy; Greer uses an obscure debate about the origins of pagan religious practices to make a larger point about the West’s founding myths. The bottom line: a talented writer can find new material anywhere, and it will still be worth reading.
Another thing I’ve learned is that an essay should make just one or two key points. By narrowing your essay down to just one well-supported, actionable conclusion, your writing will be clearer, more impactful, and ultimately more enjoyable to read. Hitchens’ essay is a good example of what not to do in this regard—he writes well enough, but he undermined his own argument toward the end of Fragments From an Education, which for me made the conclusion unclear and unactionable.
Finally—and this may be more of a personal preference—an essay shouldn’t have too much ‘fluff’. One of the defining features of the essay format is that it can be read in one sitting, perhaps to facilitate deeper understanding over multiple re-reads. Too much fluff can turn an essay into a dissertation, defeating the purpose of the thing; so while there is always a place for wit and wordplay, generally speaking, I think essays should be clear and to the point.
Final Thoughts and Announcement(!)
That’s it for this year! I’m going to take a break from Essay Club in December, but I’ll be back in January with the first essay of 2025 (date and essay TBD—feel free to make suggestions in the comments).
Before I wrap this up, I have a big announcement. So far, Essay Club has been a text-only affair. We read the essay, I post my review, and we chat in the comments. This is fine—but don’t you sometimes wish you could talk to your fellow Essay Club members directly?
Well, soon you’ll be able to do just that! Starting in January, I’ll be hosting the first live video chat Essay Club. I still need to iron out the details—stay tuned for further updates—but my bare-bones plan right now is to host an open-invite video chat a week or so after each Essay Club post is posted (to give people a chance to read and gather their thoughts). This plan might change, I have no idea what video chat software I’ll be using, and I’m very open to suggestions on all of this—what do you all think? Is this even something you’d be interested in? Vote below!
I’ll post an update some time in December once I’ve figured out the details for this. In the meantime, please share your thoughts on the video chat idea, this year’s Essay Club picks, or anything else in the comments below. Like/subscribe/share, and have a wonderful Christmas break!