Letters From the December 27, 2021/January 3, 2022, Issue

Letters From the December 27, 2021/January 3, 2022, Issue

Letters From the December 27, 2021/January 3, 2022, Issue

Value proposition… Funny women…

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Value Proposition

In “Do We Need Faith?” [Nov. 15/22], Barbara Sostaita notes that the faith of many victims of injustice helps them to survive and emboldens them to confront the powers that be. Phil Zuckerman admits that religion sometimes serves social justice, but contends that reason, when “wedded to humanist values,” has produced results “better than what religion can muster alone.”

Both debaters make valid points, which is possible because they refer to different segments of the religious spectrum. Zuckerman apparently thinks of the religious right and those whose otherworldly faith shuns political engagement. His indictments of these groups are well-deserved, but his qualifying words are telling. Yes, religion alone is impotent—if we mean religion divorced from the realities of earthly existence. But in the Judeo-Christian tradition, the original function of faith was inextricably linked to social justice, as evidenced in the economic provisions of the Torah, the oracles of the Hebrew prophets, and Jesus’s solidarity with the poor. It is disgusting that this emphasis has been obscured by segments of the religious populace, but the values Zuckerman celebrates are demonstrably derivative of religious sources.

If religion alone is impotent, the same is true of reason alone, which is presumably why Zuckerman extols it when joined with humanist values. Reason needs both a starting point and a goal outside itself. Yes, it gave us the Covid-19 vaccines; it also gave us weapons of mass destruction. Because there is no logical path from “is” to “ought,” neither reason nor science can provide us with values, but that is precisely what religion seeks to do.

Russell Pregeant
Professor of Religion and Philosophy and Chaplain, Emeritus
Curry College
clayton, ga.

Funny Women

Re “People Watching” [Nov. 15/22]: In her engaging review of Mark Harris’s Mike Nichols: A Life, Lindsay Zoladz writes, “[Elaine] May was one of the only famous female comics of her time, which meant Nichols was virtually the only famous male comic with an ego sturdy enough to share the stage each night with a blazingly talented woman.” This is true only if one ignores television: Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz, Audrey Meadows and Jackie Gleason, and Gracie Allen and George Burns shared the screen. Solo female acts from that era include Eve Arden, Betty White, and Phyllis Diller. While these great female comics made fun of women’s subordinate role, they never explicitly rejected it.

May’s uniqueness in the late ’50s/early ’60s comedy scene lay in her being an independent, strong-willed comedienne, equal to her stage partner within the bits they performed. Her avant-garde status in the late ’50s was also unique. (Zoladz’s comparison to Mort Sahl and Lenny Bruce is apt.) She laid the groundwork for the generation of great female comics that came of age in the ’60s, including Lily Tomlin, Joan Rivers, and Goldie Hawn.

Merrill Goozner

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x