Mr. S.: The thought occurred to me that context is everything.
Mr. H.: Sure, especially if you consider that the Universe is the context. Then, yes, context is everything. It’s all there is. Did you ever consider the corollary that everything is context?
Mr. S.: But I was thinking smaller than that. I know the Universe is the overriding context—and don’t even bring up that there might be other universes where the context is different; I was thinking more historically. Slavery in America, for example, existed in the context of a history of slavery, from ancient to modern times, or, in the case of America, until the Emancipation Proclamation abolished the practice. Of course, slavery still exists though many don’t seem to acknowledge it. In that historical context, however, I suppose most people who were born in the American South saw slavery as the “natural order of things,” maybe as a hierarchy of life they tied to their interpretation of the Bible. Slavery in America began in an era when many European Christians believed that both the distance from the mythical Garden of Eden and descent from Noah’s son Ham distinguished “humans” from “savages.”
Noah cursed Ham’s son Canaan. Hold on a minute…Let me look…yes, here it is in Genesis chapter 9: “Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers.” At the time of the voyage of the Beagle in the 1830s, that passage had come to mean racial differences determined a hierarchical human totem pole. Ham’s offspring were thought to be darker skinned and to live farther from that Garden of Eden.
Mr. H.: Sorry. Catch me up on that. It’s been a long time since I heard the story of Ham.
Mr. S.: Well, a good example of the belief lies in the story of Robert FitzRoy, captain of the HMS Beagle, the ship famous for carrying Charles Darwin around the world. FitzRoy held that concept of “inferior humans” before, during, and even after the famous voyage. For the bright, but fundamentalist captain, Noah’s outcast son spawned generations of savages, including the denizens of Tierra del Fuego, four of whom FitzRoy tried to “christianize” by taking them to England, dressing them in British clothes, and sending them to school. The proof of their innate savagery lay for FitzRoy when one of them, Jemmy Button as he was called, returned to his native land, where he immediately went back to his “primitive ways,” shunning the education and the fashion of the British. That attitude of condescension based on the context of Ham’s descendants was pervasive among 17th-, 18th-, and 19th-century Europeans. It certainly played a role in FitzRoy’s beliefs and actions.
Mr. H.: So, you are saying the context of both religion and culture was a driver of enslavement.
Mr. S.: Yes, but I really wanted to make a different point. I want to stress the significance of the context in which millions of humans lost their personal freedom. And I could point out other contexts that drove people to believe and act as they have.
Mr. H.: Makes some sense. Let me guess. There’s a lesson in all this.
Mr. S.: It’s not a difficult lesson to see. Context is everything. If I had been born in the American South in the early nineteenth century, I would probably have followed the belief of the day. Oh! I know. You want to tell me that anyone who was born then and there had a choice. But I would counter with today’s examples of gang members reared in inner cities without father figures, educated—or rather kept in ignorance—by failing public schools in economically depressed neighborhoods, and taught that they are victims. Sure, some of them break free from that context, but most don’t; thus, the many crimes and murders that disproportionately plague that inner city culture. It would be prideful of me to claim that I would have been the exception, the one who could break free from the context of southern culture in the era of slavery. And yes, I know that there were southerners who funneled people to freedom through the Underground Railroad. I just don’t know, given the context of the twenty-first century that I would have been one given the context of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in the South. Can I truly understand a context when I am inside it? Can I truly understand it when it is part of who I am?
Mr. H.: You have me thinking. I guess I could break down my own life into various contexts. I see that some people live almost exclusively in the context of political ideologies; some, in the context of religious beliefs; and others, in the context of some a like climate change or on rights based on identity. And I can’t go without mentioning the contexts of family, job, and health. I mean, look what some people do in the context of a chronic or terminal illness.
Mr. S.: I suppose you missed all those contexts associated with suicide, murder, and even war.
Mr. H.: I did, thanks. Plus, I failed to mention that contexts can be external or internal. Take all those riots in Minneapolis, Seattle, St. Louis, D.C., and…just take all those riots. People rioting in one place because of something or someone in another place—externally driven by the context of an event or a statement and internally driven by some need to loot and destroy. Look at what just happened in Iran, where women acted in the context of the “morality police” killing Masha Amini. Look at Russians leaving their country en masse because of Putin’s ill-advised war in Ukraine. There’s one, by the way! Look what Sweden and Finland did in response to the context of that invasion.
Mr. S.: Hmmnnn. Now that I think of it, telling children to see their lives in the framework of contexts might be a good move if they can be convinced that they are not victims of context. No doubt many teen suicides result from a belief that context is Everything; yet, the contexts of so many teen suicides are probably as limited in scope as mean girls shunning or shaming, bullies harassing, or a family member’s leaving or dying.
Mr. H.: Each of us could benefit every moment we understand the context of our actions.
Mr. S.: Where have you been? Isn’t that what mindfulness is all about, knowing the context of one’s thoughts and actions?
Mr. H.: I guess so. Mindfulness is context awareness now that I come to think of it. I’m going home to think about the contexts of my life.
Mr. S.: You’re welcome.