The Growlery (April 2004),
Essays by
Michael Gilleland
|
|
|
The Growlery (April 2004),
|
|
Olla Podrida
The New Barbarians
Licenses, Permits, and Fees
Most Recent Essays
Archives
The Spanish expression "olla podrida" and its French equivalent "pot pourri," translated literally, mean "rotten pot," a kind of stew composed of whatever ingredients are handy. Metaphorically, they mean any disorganized collection. The word "pot" is also hidden in English "hodge podge," a variant of which is "hotch potch," originally "hotch pot." It's curious that other synonyms of "hodge podge" also refer to food, such as Latin "lanx satura" ("full platter") and Italian "salmagundi" ("salad made of various ingredients"). All are apt descriptions of the following farrago of thoughts and quotations.
Ousted Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide's surname is the French form of the ancient Greek name Aristides, which was borne by a famous Athenian statesman, nicknamed "the Just." Both men were exiled from their homeland. Jean-Bertrand Aristide escaped from Haiti before his enemies could hang him from a lamp post. The banishment of Aristides the Just from Athens occurred in a legal fashion, as the result of an ostracism, a sort of unpopularity contest, described thus by Plutarch in his Life of Aristides:
Every one taking an ostracon, a sherd, that is, or piece of earthenware, wrote upon it the citizen's name he would have banished, and carried it to a certain part of the market-place surrounded with wooden rails. First, the magistrates numbered all the sherds in gross (for if there were less than six thousand, the ostracism was imperfect); then, laying every name by itself, they pronounced him whose name was written by the larger number banished for ten years, with the enjoyment of his estate.Ostracism is one ancient Athenian custom which it might be worthwhile for us moderns to imitate. Another is the practice of selecting citizens for public office by lot -- the composition of our legislatures could only be improved in this way. A third is the audit (euthunai) to which all office holders were subject upon the completion of their terms.
As therefore, they were writing the names on the sherds, it is reported that an illiterate clownish fellow, giving Aristides his sherd, supposing him a common citizen, begged him to write Aristides upon it; and he being surprised and asking if Aristides had ever done him any injury, "None at all," said he, "neither know I the man; but I am tired of hearing him everywhere called the just." Aristides, hearing this, is said to have made no reply, but returned the sherd with his own name inscribed.
The presidential election is over six months away, but even now you can't escape the sight of Bush and Kerry on the telly. Not only do they monopolize news broadcasts, but they've already started running commercials. It's hard for me to find any real difference between the backgrounds of these two -- both are sons of privilege, both were born with silver spoons in their mouths, both attended expensive prep schools, both graduated from Yale, both were members of the secret Skull and Bones Society, both are professional politicos who have little or no practical understanding of the problems faced by average citizens. It's enough to drive one into the arms of Ralph Nader.
But to return to their omnipresence on the airwaves. Bush and Kerry would do well to heed what King Henry IV in Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part I (Act 3, Scene 2, lines 72-86) said about his predecessor Richard II:
Being daily swallowed by men's eyes,I'm glutted, gorged, and full of the presence of Bush and Kerry, and I'll bet most of my fellow Americans are, too. I wouldn't cross the road to see either of them in person.
They surfeited with honey and began
To loathe the taste of sweetness, whereof a little
More than a little is by much too much.
So, when he had occasion to be seen,
He was but as the cuckoo is in June,
Heard, not regarded -- seen, but with such eyes
As, sick and blunted with community,
Afford no extraordinary gaze,
Such as is bent on sunlike majesty
When it shines seldom in admiring eyes;
But rather drowsed and hung their eyelids down,
Slept in his face, and rend'red such aspect
As cloudy men use to their adversaries,
Being with his presence glutted, gorged, and full.
A passage from Gustave Flaubert's Bouvard and Pécuchet (chapter 10, tr. A.J. Krailsheimer) reminds me of the pages I always turned to first in the children's magazine Highlights, the adventures of the well-behaved Gallant and the miscreant Goofus:
To catch his imagination Pécuchet hung on the walls of his room pictures showing the life of the good and bad character. The first, Adolphe, kissed his mother, studied German, helped a blind man, and was admitted to the École Polytechnique.
The bad one, Eugène, began by disobeying his father, had a quarrel in a café, beat his wife, fell down dead drunk, smashing a cupboard, and a final picture showed him in prison, where a gentleman, accompanied by a small boy, pointed him out, saying: 'You see, my son, the dangers of misconduct.'
Worthwhile advice from Lord Chesterfield's letters to his son, on a good place to study and on the importance of spelling:
I know a gentleman, who was so good a manager of his time, that he would not even lose that small portion of it, which the calls of nature obliged him to pass in the necessary-house; but gradually went through all the Latin poets, in those moments. He bought, for example, a common edition of Horace, of which he tore off gradually a couple of pages, carried them with him to that necessary place, read them first, and then sent them down as a sacrifice to Cloacina: this was so much time fairly gained; and I recommend you to follow his example. It is better than only doing what you cannot help doing at those moments; and it will make any book, which you shall read in that manner, very present in your mind. (Letter XXI, 11 December 1747 Old Style)
You spell induce, enduce; and grandeur, you spell grandure; two faults of which few of my housemaids would have been guilty. I must tell you that orthography, in the true sense of the word, is so absolutely necessary for a man of letters, or a gentleman, that one false spelling may fix ridicule upon him for the rest of his life; and I know a man of quality, who never recovered the ridicule of having spelled wholesome without the w. (Letter CXXXIV, 19 November 1750 Old Style)In the first passage, the necessary-house is an outhouse, and Cloacina is the Roman goddess of the sewers. As for the second passage, I know a former Vice President of the United States, who never recovered the ridicule of having spelled potato potatoe.
The Salt Lake Tribune newspaper recently ran a series of articles on the persistence of polygamy among members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS), headed by Warren Jeffs, who has tried to ban laughter among his followers:
People have been warned that laughter causes the spirit of God to leak from their bodies, amplifying an obscure tenet in Joseph Smith's Doctrine and Covenants.
"We tried not to laugh," Draper said. "We wondered 'How do we do this? Is there anyone who is going to make it?'"
Actually, there are three passages in Smith's Doctrines and Covenants which discourage laughter:
I say, beware of any religion that restrains healthy laughter. Psalm 126 opens with these verses: "When the Lord turned again the captivity of Zion, we were like them that dream. Then was our mouth filled with laughter, and our tongue with singing." And the Preacher (Ecclesiastes 3.1-4) says: "To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance."
God meant us to laugh, and I try not to let a day pass without at least a chuckle. Even the Governor of California recommends this -- in Terminator 3, the robot played by Arnold Schwarzenegger says, "Your levity is good. It relieves tension and the fear of death."
Just across the river in Minneapolis, on the east end of Lake Street, is a tattoo parlor named Leviticus Tattoos. The name refers to the Biblical prohibition in the book of Leviticus (19.28): "Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you." The owners are at least familiar with Leviticus, even if they don't take its injunctions to heart.
It used to be that you had to visit the freak show at the circus to see a tattooed lady. Now all you have to do is venture out in public, to the grocery store or church.
In ancient times, as a rule only the following classes of people wore tattoos:
Barbarians, savages, and primitive tribes ornamented their bodies with tattoos, a thing that a civilized Greek or Roman would never do. The inhabitants of Thrace were especially known for this barbaric custom:
The Greeks gave various reasons, none of them convincing, for the popularity of tattoos among the Thracians. The one most often repeated is that it was punishment for the murder of Orpheus by the women of Thrace:
Athenaeus, in his Deipnosophistae (12.524 D-E, tr. Charles Burton Gulick) offered a different explanation, equally implausible:
And their women (i.e. the Scythians) tattooed the bodies of the women in the Thracian tribes who lived near them on the west and north, injecting the design with pins. Hence many years later, the Thracian women who had been thus outraged effaced the memory of that calamity in their own way by painting the rest of their skin, that the mark of outrage and shame upon them, being now included in a variety of other designs, might efface the reproach under the name of ornamentation.
Besides the Thracians, other tribes encountered by the Greeks and Romans also practiced tattooing:
In modern times, criminals willingly undergo the disfigurement of tattooing, but in ancient times, tattooing was a punishment:
Ancient slaves weren't readily identifiable by skin color or other distinguishing characteristics (although in comedy they usually wore wigs of red hair), and so slave owners resorted to artificial means to mark the servile status of their human chattels.
Exodus, chapter 21, has rules for the treatment of slaves. They were supposed to be released after seven years of service, but it sometimes happened that they chose to remain slaves after they were eligible for freedom. In that case, according to Exodus 21.6,
Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.Some Roman slaves were forced to wear collars, like dogs:
But other slaves, especially those caught stealing or running away, were branded or tattooed.
Prisoners of war in ancient times, if they weren't killed outright or ransomed, were often enslaved, and a mark of their slavery was a tattoo or brand:
Tattoo removal is a lucrative business today, and was in ancient times as well. In the following poem by Martial (2.29), bandages hide the tattooed inscription on the forehead of a parvenu freedman, who was not so long ago a slave:
Rufus, do you see that fellow sitting in the front row?That is to say, you'll read the tattooed inscription on his forehead. Compare Diphilus (fragment 66 Kock, lines 6-8, tr. John Maxwell Edmonds): "He says his hair's kept long to satisfy religious scruples; that's not really why. It screens a branded brow." Here, too, "branded" might be better translated "tattooed." In a collection of medical recipes attributed to Scribonius Largus, court physician to the Roman emperor Claudius, there is one (231, p. 93 Helmreich) invented by Trypho and used to good effect in the case of Calvisius Sabinus' steward, who had been shipwrecked, imprisoned, and tattooed.
The one whose bejewelled hand is gleaming even at this distance?
The one whose coat has so often absorbed expensive dye,
And whose toga has been bidden to rival untouched snow?
Whose pomaded hair can be smelled throughout the whole theater?
Whose smooth, depilated arms are shiny?
On whose fashionable shoe a brand-new latchet rests?
Whose dainty foot red leather ornaments?
Whose starry brow several sticking plasters cover?
You don't know what it means? Remove the plasters, you'll read.
The cognoscenti will know that I culled many of the references for this essay from an article by C.P. Jones, "Stigma: Tattooing and Branding in Graeco-Roman Antiquity," Journal of Roman Studies 77 (1987) 139-155. But Jones didn't translate most of the references he cited, and I hope the translations here will prove useful. Materials available elsewhere on the World Wide Web include:
Bearing in mind the admonition "ne sutor ultra crepidam," I'm reluctant to go farther afield and discuss Jewish prohibitions against tattooing, but here are a couple of references I have found. The first is from the Talmud tractate Makkot (Lashes, or Stripes) 3.6 (tr. Michael L. Rodkinson):
MISHNA IV.: The culpability for etching-in [Lev. xix. 28] arises only when he has done both, wrote and etched-in with dye or any other indelible thing, but to one of them no culpability attaches. R. Simeon b. Jehudah in the name of R. Simeon said: He is not culpable unless he etched-in the holy name; as the above-cited verse reads, "and any etched-in writing shall you not fix on yourselves: I am the Lord."The second is from Maimonides, Idolatry and Idolators 12.11 (tr. Immanuel O'Levy):
GEMARA: Said R. Aha b. Rabha to R. Ashi: Does it mean unless he etch-in the words "I am the Lord"? And he answered, Nay! It is as Bar Kapara taught: "He is not culpable unless he writes the name of an idol, as the words "I am the Lord" mean I am the Lord, but not another one.
R. Malkhiya in the name of R. Ada b. Ahaba said: One is forbidden to put ashes upon his wound in the flesh, because it looks like a tattooing. [Said R. Papa: Throughout both Mishna and Boraitha, the name Malkhiya when mentioned is Malkhiyah, but in Halakhas it is Malkhiyoo]. R. Ashi, however, said: It does not matter, as the wound shows there is no tattooing.
Tattooing as mentioned by the Torah involves making an incision in one's skin and filling that incision with blue [eye-shade], ink or some other coloured substance. This is a practice of idolaters, who brand themselves for an idol in order to show that they are dedicated to its worship. Liability to flogging commences from the moment one fills any incision on any part of the body with a coloured substance, for it is written, "...nor print marks upon you". If one applied a coloured substance to one's skin without having made an incision one is exempt, unless one made a proper tattoo. This is talking only about tattooing oneself, but if one was tattooed by someone else one is only liable if one consented to it.
It's a sign of the degeneracy of modern life that tattoos have become so widespread. What used to be a mark of degradation (in the case of slaves and criminals) or uncivilized behavior (in the case of barbarians) is now commonplace and accepted in most social circles. In 1 Corinthians 6.19, we read "What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?" To tattoo the body is to deface this temple.
Last summer, those tireless guardians of the public weal, the License, Inspections and Environmental Protection (LIEP) Office of Saint Paul, Minnesota, cracked down on an illegal business operating near the state fairgrounds. Two sisters, Mikaela Ziegler (age 7) and Annika Ziegler (age 4), were the masterminds behind the criminal enterprise, which sold cold drinks from a sidewalk stand without a city license. Faced with unfavorable publicity, ridicule, and outrage, the mayor of Saint Paul issued a waiver exempting the girls from his department's regulatory oversight.
The Saint Paul LIEP Office distributes a 91-page document outlining what special licenses, permits, and fees are required for businesses operating within the city limits. I guess I should have checked this document a few years ago, when my daughter and a friend set up a stand in the neighborhood to sell rocks. They actually sold one for a dollar.
City licenses, permits, or fees are required for businesses engaged in the following pursuits:
The LIEP document is actually encouraging, because it lists a few business activities which don't require special licenses, permits, or fees, including:
Slaughtering animals is absolutely prohibited within the Saint Paul city limits. Saint Paul's neighbor, South Saint Paul, used to be filled with slaughterhouses, but most of them have moved elsewhere.
The Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development's web site has a list of State Required Licenses and Permits. It has over 475 entries. In the state of Minnesota you need a license or permit if you want to operate a business involved in any of these pursuits:
Thank goodness we're a litigious society, and people are fighting back against the need to get an official license or permit before they earn their daily bread. The Institute for Justice, a public-interest law firm, has litigated many of these cases, including those on behalf of:
There's an anecdote about Abraham Lincoln which pokes fun at government's obsession with regulating what people do to make a living. Before the Pendleton Act of 1883, which instituted the civil service system, office seekers constantly pestered United States presidents, taking valuable time away from more important concerns. In his biography Abraham Lincoln: The War Years, vol. 2 (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company), p. 57, Carl Sandburg tells how Lincoln got rid of one office seeker:
"So you want to be Doorkeeper to the House, eh?"
"Yes, Mr. President."
"Well, have you ever been a doorkeeper? Have you ever had any experience in doorkeeping?"
"Well, no -- no actual experience."
"Any theoretical experience? Any instruction on the duties and ethics of doorkeeping?"
"Um -- no."
"Have you ever attended any lectures on doorkeeping?"
"No, sir."
"Have you read any textbooks on the subject?"
"No."
"Have you conversed with anyone who has read such a book?"
"No, sir, I'm afraid not, sir."
"Well, then, my friend, don't you see that you haven't a single qualification for this important post?"
"Yes, I do." And he took his hat and left humbly, seeming rather grateful to the President.
The whole question of licenses, permits, and fees came into sharper focus for me recently with the arrest of the Ohio highway sniper, Charles McCoy Jr., in Las Vegas. It is not the FBI, or the Las Vegas police, who should get the credit for his arrest, but an unemployed car dealer, Conrad Malsom, described by USA Today as "educated in crime solving techniques from newspapers and television."
Malsom saw McCoy in a casino, picked up cigarette butts, matchbooks, papers, and food which the suspect left behind, and contacted authorities. But despite his help, the FBI still couldn't locate McCoy, so Malsom himself made the rounds of Las Vegas casinos and hotels. Finally on his own he located McCoy's car in a parking lot, and only then did the authorities move in and arrest McCoy.
Conrad Malsom's fitness as a private detective is evident from this episode. He proved that he has the intelligence and the dogged persistence required for the job. But he doesn't have a license from the Nevada Attorney General's Private Investigator Licensing Board. He hasn't filled in an application, or paid a fee, or passed a test, or undergone a background check. All of this foolishness is necessary before you can legally work as a private detective in Nevada. Why?
It's salutary to remember what Henry Fielding says in book 7, chapter 12, of The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling:
It is as possible for a man to know something without having been at school as it is to have been at school and to know nothing.
The present administration may end up being the first since Herbert Hoover's in which the United States economy lost jobs. Government agencies at all levels could help to create jobs by removing onerous requirements for licenses, permits, and fees to do business.