NEWS
Hoffer in Harper'sJoel Schmit l May 3, 2007
This hardly constitutes news, since the issue in question came out almost two years ago, but I haven't had the opportunity to update the site for some time, so it's worth mentioning here and now that Harper's Magazine published a collection of Hoffer's aphorisms in July 2005 that were compiled by Tom Bethell from Hoffer's notebooks. The title of the article is "Sparks" and it is subtitled "Eric Hoffer and the art of the notebook." Before the aphorisms proper, Bethell provides a nice introduction to Hoffer's life and an explanation of his practice of bringing a notebook with him wherever he went. If you haven't run across the article before, it's well worth your time to hunt it down, for there are some gems in it. Here, for example, is one:
There is no reason why the profoundest thoughts should not make easy and exciting reading. A profound thought is an exciting thing--as exciting as a detective's deductions or hunches. The simpler the words in which a thought is expressed the more stimulating its effect.
Someone should tell the philosophers, for the philosophy written today and published in academic journals is by no means easy to read or exciting. I only say that because it has traditionally been the function of philosophers to say profound things, but then I take it those days are past. To be fair, most contemporary philosophers would reject such a notion anyway. That is, they don't seem interested in wisdom anymore, but only knowledge. Such is the result of the professionalization of the discipline. Hoffer has something to say about this too:
I could never figure out--or probably did not take the trouble to figure out--what the great philosophical problems are about. The momentous statements I come across are at best a storm in a teacup. There are quite a number of people who have a vested interest in the stuff, make a noble living out of it, and they conspire with one another to keep it alive.
Hoffer often claimed not to be a philosopher, and I guess this passage constitutes as good an explanation as any of what he meant when he said such things. When compared with those self-professed philosophers in universities around the nation who busy themselves with the so-called great philosophical questions, such as "What is the mind?" or "How is knowledge possible?" he certainly was no philosopher. On the other hand, when compared with his own intellectual forebears, such as Montaigne and La Rochefoucauld, he fits in nicely with the philosophical tradition. The difference, I take it, is between those who concern themselves with problems that aren't really about anything, and those who concern themselves with problems that are.
Resource Redesigned
Joel Schmit l April 17, 2007
Welcome to the new Eric Hoffer Resource!
It was in the Fall of 2002, if I remember correctly, that I first put the site together, bought the URL, and put it up online. I've been meaning to redesign it for at least two years now, if not more, but I didn't get around to it until last Fall, and am only now putting it up.
If you remember the site as it was before, you will notice that this section is brand new. This is the one I'm most excited about. I'll finally have an opportunity to update the site with some regularity, and also to put my own thoughts online, in order, if nothing else, to generate more interest in Hoffer's books and other writings.
Hopefully, I'll be able to round up some other contributors as well, and we can turn this site into an active forum for the discussion of Hoffer's thought. In the meantime, enjoy the site, and by all means let me know what you think of the redesign, or anything else, for that matter. Here is my new email address:
hofferresource@gmail.com
