At the beginning of October 1947, Josep Pla published it in the journal Destino. a violent tirade against an old friend Now it’s Joan Estelrich, which is collected in an interesting book called Periodisme i libertat. Cartes 1920-1950 (Ed. Fate). What bothers Pla about the Majorcan writer, dictator of Cambó and editor of the “Bernat Metge” collection of classics, is his public pessimism. Both survived two world wars, the rise of fascism and communism, a civil war, and the destruction of many of their youthful dreams. Pla – the quote is long – writes: «My friend Juan Estelrich became a gloomy and gloomy pessimist. In the field of candor, I don’t think Estelrich was a prude. On the contrary, he is a smiling and insatiable man who enjoys the pleasures of life. Estelrich has set up a platform of pessimism in the public sphere in the face of general problems. Despite the instinctive revulsion that prophesying beings evoke in every normal person, our author constantly talks about modern prophets. Enhance all aspects of catastrophizing. It constantly appeals to Divinity and Providence. It highlights each of the most stagnant and prehistoric problems. If I had one bit of personality, I think I would have done the opposite.: I would be a mourner in a particular field, and my models would be sane and sad poets. But in the public sphere I would always, constantly, advocate Panglossism and be a follower of Leibnitz: I would proclaim in cafes, taverns, and street corners that we lived in the best of all possible worlds. Optimism is essential for business to progress and for people to leave with as little taste in their mouths as possible.
Let us now set aside the disagreement between the two great Catalan literati and dwell only on Pla’s thesis: pessimism should be left to ourselves alone, whereas public projection should act within us – as columnists or writers or commentators, for example. common sense is partially right because we are or are becoming something very similar to what we believe (or what we think we believe). And yet, isn’t optimism naive? It will often be said yes. Think about the consequences of happy years, whether it’s the 1920s or the years before the subprime bubble burst. But Pla, I think, points to something different, he It is the responsibility of the author – or journalist – in the moral structuring of a period.. The duty to tell the truth cannot be confused with the intellectual assertion that leads to disaster.
Basically, what the Pla asks of us is to distance ourselves from ourselves, to maintain a balance that does not allow our emotions to be judged or judged too easily. Almost as if it were a Freudian projection, our failures become the failures of an era and a society: this is the great danger Estelrich perceived in his position. Writing prudently means cutting down on strong phrases, promoting reflection, and being as straight as the “fair adjective.” We should look to the future with hope, if not optimism.. Because hope goes further than pessimism. And – above all – fairer, more correct.
Source: Informacion
Dolores Johnson is a voice of reason at “Social Bites”. As an opinion writer, she provides her readers with insightful commentary on the most pressing issues of the day. With her well-informed perspectives and clear writing style, Dolores helps readers navigate the complex world of news and politics, providing a balanced and thoughtful view on the most important topics of the moment.