http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl

Note, by the way, that there is still a weasel word in your synopsis of Sen’s argument: “correctly.” Apply the reasoning to global warming, and you should see what I mean. Even among democratic and independent countries with the blessings of a free press, the response to the evidence of global warming has been inadequate by almost any standard. However, whether or not a response is correct ultimately depends upon the outcome, which we shall not know until we get there.

I don’t think that Amartya Sen was trying to play semantics on the meaning of “substantial”. If I have interpreted him correctly, his assertions are as follows: (a) famine is often preventable (b) there are early signs (c) if people respond correctly to the signs then the substance of the famine can be averted.

I will look out for more comprehensive evidence.

This is something I have read before and often wondered about. Is it really true and what does it imply in cause/effect? What (if any) other factors are at play? We all know that human societies are complex and very little that happens can be reduced to one or two factors.

In any case, I always invariable think about the famine in the USA in the 1930s.

And you are dead right – the STATE was known to these tortured Russian aristocrats. It was the TRANSITION that was unknown. They all were developing different and conflicting paths on how to get from where they were to where they wanted to be.

I steadfastly agree that in this new technology world it is the TRANSITION that stumps us and about which we argue.

Here I want to try an analogy. Perhaps only someone with a career in media and film directing and production combined with tech consulting can succeed, What does a film director do but use visual media to tell complex stories of transition? Over the past 3 months I have gotten to know a bit about a man of my mail list. This person lurks. Hardly every says anything. He has a 40 year long career in film. I won’t name him until he gives me a green light. But if you were to put his name in Google a really impressive dossier emerges. And in California three weeks ago I heard from him a 20 minute or so portrait of the great transition we are in. Best portrait of this subject I have ever heard! Quite stunning and I am wondering if this framework that he has constructed could only have been arrived at by someone with such a visual artistic, story telling background.

So I ask can only someone with this kind of background stand a good chance of building and explaining and architecture of transition. Maybe – Just maybe.

http://www.complete-review.com/reviews/stoppt/coastofu.htm

The titles of the three plays say something about the author’s point of view: “Voyage,” “Shipwreck,” “Salvage.” You may have also heard that, after the first play opened at Lincoln Center, there was a mad dash to buy up copies of Berlin’s RUSSIAN THINKERS.

I think it is interesting to consider the analogy between Stoppard’s conception of a search for Utopia and your perspective of the search for identity. As you probably know, Berlin took a very dim view of Utopian thinking, not just from the Russians. This is best captured in “The Pursuit of the Ideal,” which is the lead essay in THE CROOKED TIMBER OF HUMANITY. His basic idea resonates very nicely with the sort of language we are inclined to use. The “tragic flaw” (if I may wax Aristotelian) of a Utopia is that it is a STATE, which means that it can never accommodate any “real world” context, since that context will always be in flux.

I think we can reflect this back on questions of identity. Trying to deal with identity as some kind of state will result in an equally tragic flaw. While it is true that, at an abstract level, we can always “freeze time” and “capture” at least SOME of the attributes and relations that would count for a “state description,” I would argue that where “the crooked timber of humanity” is concerned, our understanding of identity resides in the TRANSITIONS rather than any artificial “states” we construct, often just because they are more compatible with our databases!

The kicker, however, is that we really have not yet gotten our minds around the alternative. We know how to describe state; but our skills for describing transitions are impoverished, often reduced to saying little more than “what happens between these two states.” The last time I harped on this was in a discussion over the opensourcing of process:

http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2007/03/13/more-musings-about-the-opensourcing-of-process/#comment-113419

In another comment I suggested that the best way to confront the problem would be through a better understanding of the rich diversity in the grammar of verbs:

http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2007/03/13/more-musings-about-the-opensourcing-of-process/#comment-113463

This, in turn, reflects back on much of the life-work of Kenneth Burke and his efforts to develop a theory of “dramatistic” (as opposed to “scientistic”) thinking:

http://therehearsalstudio.blogspot.com/2007/01/narrative-of-outsourcing.html

Readers of the above link will see that I have also invoked Burke to address another one of JP’s favorite topics:

http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2007/01/22/tell-me-what-you-come-here-for-boy/

I suppose this all demonstrates just how tightly coupled the nature of identity is to so many other equally complex concepts!

Finally may I recommend Russian Ark, a 2002 film by Alexander Sokurov. Stunning – for me especially because I visted St Petersberg on 8 different occasions in the 1990s staying always in the apartment off the same Russian friends. The ermitage is portrayed therein as integral to the identity of the Russian nation. The ARK that preserved Russian culture.

I view 19th century Russian history as tragic outcome of the search for identity carried out by the russian nobility beginning with the conclusion of the napoleonic campaigns.