Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Setting the Abbott Family's Reality Record Straight
Not reading Chinese, I must approach the Tao Te Ching in translation. I'm curious what versions people here prefer.
I was first introduced to the Tao Te Ching by Stephen Mitchell's version. He refrains from calling it a 'translation' because he worked from other, more literal English translations and freely reinterpreted as he saw fit. It's still the version I'm most familiar with.
I know that the Abbotts use the DC Lau translation. To me, the language of this version (and some others I've looked at) is not as satisfying. It seems important to me that the TTC functions as poetry as much as philosophy.
What thoughts do you have about literalism vs poetic license in translation? Those of you who have a preferred translation - what about it do you prefer?
I was first introduced to the Tao Te Ching by Stephen Mitchell's version. He refrains from calling it a 'translation' because he worked from other, more literal English translations and freely reinterpreted as he saw fit. It's still the version I'm most familiar with.
I know that the Abbotts use the DC Lau translation. To me, the language of this version (and some others I've looked at) is not as satisfying. It seems important to me that the TTC functions as poetry as much as philosophy.
What thoughts do you have about literalism vs poetic license in translation? Those of you who have a preferred translation - what about it do you prefer?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Update: This was written shortly after the Abbotts' episode of Trading Spouses aired. If you've not yet read The Abbott Family's Trading Spouses Page, that would be a better place to begin, rather than the posts below.
There's been a gossip trail following the Abbott family around of late. Some of it petty, like we don't have TV and that we all sleep in the same bed. Some nasty, like the father, Carl, has 'brain washed' his kids and keeps them 'chained down'. Alas, once rumors get started, they take on a life of their own. Nevertheless, we'd like to set the record straight for those interested in fact over fiction...
Principle Issues and Facts:
And now, if that's not enough, here is an attempt to consolidate the experience into the broadest perspective possible...
Why take a chance?
After all, [chref=16]woe to him who wilfully innovates... [/chref]Well, we didn't want to at first; we expected to come off looking like just some 'nutty Californians'. Neither did we go looking for this 'opportunity'. 'Opportunity' came knocking on our virtual door, literally. We finally agreed on the chance that it would help promote family music. Our view being that the family that plays music together stays together - and families need all the help they can get these days.
Moreover, we believed we would be represented as we really are. That meant lots of family music and down to earth living.
To those who support us... and decry the misrepresentations made about our family and church. First, we are uplifted by your support. Many of those who make quick judgements are also likely people who laugh at epileptics or bullied their classmates, and pick on anyone they perceive as exposed and vulnerable. Why do they do this?
I feel that Christ's comment, "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven" shines light on that question. Their unkind judgements are a reflection of the inner anguish they experience. Self hate begets hateful action. A tormented soul acts accordingly, some self destruct while others lash out. A happy soul likewise reflects their inner peace through their thoughts and actions. Another of Christ's observations, "Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit." A tormented tree bears bitter fruit. They are helplessly expressing the anguish they feel through lashing out at us today, and perhaps you tomorrow. Our compassion is all that they deserve, for they are us... and we know not what we do.
And finally, a puzzle...
It puzzles us why there aren't more 'whistle blowers' among inside groups involved in underhanded activity. How can a morally decent person not object? Are all these people simply unethical $%##[email protected]!... No! That can't be; true 'scum' is rare. Most folks are decent. Something deeper must be at work. Is our culture's ethical rudder broken? Unlikely, for history records millennia of hapless human behavior.
I'll speculate on the cause... Being animals, instinct lies at the foundation of what we do. It even drives the notion that we're 'above' animal instinct. Groups, even those involved in sleezy activity, are members of a team... a tribe. The urge to conform induced by the human tribal instinct is enough to account for everyone seeing a more 'rosy' picture of the group's activity than is warranted by the facts. Under such social pressure, the deep subconscious fear of banishment would inhibit team mates from seeing 'outside the box' of the team's 'rosy picture'.
The testimonies of emotional anxiety felt by people before they 'blew the whistle', certainly support this hypothesis. Our impulse to conform is overwhelming.
For related comments on the Abbott family, visit:
The Abbott Family's Reality Page
44. Defamation is effected by either of the following:
(a) Libel.
(b) Slander.
45. Libel is a false and unprivileged publication by writing,
printing, picture, effigy, or other fixed representation to the eye,
which exposes any person to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy,
or which causes him to be shunned or avoided, or which has a tendency
to injure him in his occupation.
45a. A libel which is defamatory of the plaintiff without the
necessity of explanatory matter, such as an inducement, innuendo or
other extrinsic fact, is said to be a libel on its face. Defamatory
language not libelous on its face is not actionable unless the
plaintiff alleges and proves that he has suffered special damage as a
proximate result thereof. Special damage is defined in Section 48a
of this code.
46. Slander is a false and unprivileged publication, orally
uttered, and also communications by radio or any mechanical or other
means which:
1. Charges any person with crime, or with having been indicted,
convicted, or punished for crime;
2. Imputes in him the present existence of an infectious,
contagious, or loathsome disease;
3. Tends directly to injure him in respect to his office,
profession, trade or business, either by imputing to him general
disqualification in those respects which the office or other
occupation peculiarly requires, or by imputing something with
reference to his office, profession, trade, or business that has a
natural tendency to lessen its profits;
4. Imputes to him impotence or a want of chastity; or
5. Which, by natural consequence, causes actual damage.
48a. 1. In any action for damages for the publication of a libel in
a newspaper, or of a slander by radio broadcast, plaintiff shall
recover no more than special damages unless a correction be demanded
and be not published or broadcast, as hereinafter provided.
Plaintiff shall serve upon the publisher, at the place of publication
or broadcaster at the place of broadcast, a written notice
specifying the statements claimed to be libelous and demanding that
the same be corrected. Said notice and demand must be served within
20 days after knowledge of the publication or broadcast of the
statements claimed to be libelous.
2. If a correction be demanded within said period and be not
published or broadcast in substantially as conspicuous a manner in
said newspaper or on said broadcasting station as were the statements
claimed to be libelous, in a regular issue thereof published or
broadcast within three weeks after such service, plaintiff, if he
pleads and proves such notice, demand and failure to correct, and if
his cause of action be maintained, may recover general, special and
exemplary damages; provided that no exemplary damages may be
recovered unless the plaintiff shall prove that defendant made the
publication or broadcast with actual malice and then only in the
discretion of the court or jury, and actual malice shall not be
inferred or presumed from the publication or broadcast.
3. A correction published or broadcast in substantially as
conspicuous a manner in said newspaper or on said broadcasting
station as the statements claimed in the complaint to be libelous,
prior to receipt of a demand therefor, shall be of the same force and
effect as though such correction had been published or broadcast
within three weeks after a demand therefor.
4. As used herein, the terms "general damages," "special damages,"
"exemplary damages" and "actual malice," are defined as follows:
(a) "General damages" are damages for loss of reputation, shame,
mortification and hurt feelings;
(b) "Special damages" are all damages which plaintiff alleges and
proves that he has suffered in respect to his property, business,
trade, profession or occupation, including such amounts of money as
the plaintiff alleges and proves he has expended as a result of the
alleged libel, and no other;
(c) "Exemplary damages" are damages which may in the discretion of
the court or jury be recovered in addition to general and special
damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing a defendant
who has made the publication or broadcast with actual malice;
(d) "Actual malice" is that state of mind arising from hatred or
ill will toward the plaintiff; provided, however, that such a state
of mind occasioned by a good faith belief on the part of the
defendant in the truth of the libelous publication or broadcast at
the time it is published or broadcast shall not constitute actual
malice.
No contract would have a clause that would allow one party to violate State Law.
While there are a number of people who have found your website and discovered what amazingly intelligent and sensitive people you really are, there are unfortunately many thousands of people who are content to believe that what they saw portrayed on Trading Spouses was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And while everyone is entitled to their own opinions, it is not right if those opinions unfairly describe real people as being something they are not.
I am sure that your hands are legally bound and that there is probably nothing you can now do for yourselves other than to continue to show through this website who you really are, and to hope that the word will slowly spread from one person who visits this site to another who doesn't. I wonder, though, if something can't be done to prevent this from happening to other innocent families?
It's great to hear from you! Thank you for your encouragement and kind words. It's very helpful.
We wish you and your family the best. Cheers, Leslie Abbott
That is what we think too. Frankly though, it?s hard to get worked up about this situation when I find this whole experience priceless and would not change a thing... even though I feel the TV producers should get informed consent from future families. We just did this thing as an adventure. It's turned out to provide more ?adventure? than expected... well actually, we didn't know what to expect. That's what makes something an adventure, eh?
We would only resort to litigation if they tried to silence us. Our society has become so litigatious, I?d not like to add to that! What?s more, our crusade is to help people, especially families with young children, play music together. That?s more than enough to chew on.
You're late... you missed the fun! We've moved on from the show, so have nothing more to say about it. Well... one thing: I'm a little surprised that you have no problem with how they denigrated our faith in as much as you are Jewish. Your people have suffered much in that regard.
Now to the larger issue you invoke...
My point, personally speaking, would be that WE ARE ALL DUMB AND IGNORANT. It just took me 60+ years to realize it. And each day that passes I realize it more deeply. It takes time to know that I don't know.
I don't, however, hear many folks out there admitting their/our own ignorance. I see us little 'monkeys' as mostly just throwing rocks at each other. We rest secure in our elite 'goodness' and 'righteousness' and chastize dumb 'them' for causing the 'problem'. For example, Republicans blaming Democrats for 'the problem' (and visa versa, of course).
Now, in pointing this out, am I being elitist? I suppose so for having the impertinence to open my mouth. Of that, I'm often guilty. Am I being more aware of reality than most people? Well, if you agree with my observation, you will say "Yes, and so am I". Now, if you disagree with my observation, and actually believe that Republicans are wiser than Democrats (for example), then you will think I am terribly 'out of touch' with the reality.
:?: Reality sure is fluid, isn't it... and thus a little scary :?:
I am a friend of Barb Gates, and learned of your website through her. I'd never seen the TV show Trading Spouses before she was on and didn't see your episode. I applaud your courage to post the truth as you see it on this web site. Hopefully this is the beginning of public awakening to the monstrous lies on 'reality' TV. If you ever end up in court, Ms. Gates would make a terrific wittness. Meanwhile, you have all my best wishes for a speedy recovery from your trauma. That which does not break me makes me stronger. Peace be with you,
NH
After reading your posts on Trading Spouses, is it correct to say, Fox actually discourages diversity?Taoism is something alien and therefore demonised?
If Fox discourages diversity, then it destroys the core value of America.
Would you say ever since Fox comes to be number one, America has become a less open society and together with Bush pre emptive wars, it is no coincidence that USA has recently become the most hated nation on Earth?
Just always fun finding what comes up when I type 'abbott' into a search engine...
The main reason I came to this website was to see what I could learn and am a little surprised to see so much space devoted to Trading Spouses. Its understandable that you feel the need to defend yourselves but at the same time try to keep in mind that your appearance may have offered "shokabuku" (I hope I'm spelling that right!) to a some people as well.
I'll probably offer my .02 about the subject, but will spend more time actually talking about Tao. Looking forward to "meeting" everybody and hope folks can get some peace out of this soon.
Check out the article.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051024/news_1c24reality.html
You know if we exposed my whole life to the nation, minus the creative editing which is a whole separate issue, there would be plenty of people objecting to this and that and making a case against the way I live my life. Who cares? I am happy. And if my children don't like the way I chose to raise them, they can go another way when they are adults.
Those that can, do. Those that can't, criticize.