"Hope is a thing with feathers..."

I took a walk in the rain tonight. Not necessarily on purpose, but sort of. I had to walk the ten minutes from the train to my door anyway, so I left my umbrella in my bag. (I don't really like the added encumbrance of an umbrella anyway. They're awkward and force you to hold your arm at angles it was never meant to sustain long term.)

The rain was glorious. Not too heavy, but not a light mist either. The low clouds lightened the dark streets of Brooklyn and the curtain of wetness softened the harsh lines of the dirty Bushwick streets I call home. It was a melancholic, moody scene: reminiscent of a 1940's romance flick. The sort of night that made you feel you could possibly meet the person of your dreams beneath a sputtering street light and then wander off, hand in hand, into the gathering fog.

I love the way my hair feels, hanging damply in my face... The startling contrast between a cold wet head and the warmth of my body wrapped in coat and pants and shoes. It feels timeless... like it always ought to have been this way: raw and unprotected and simple. Natural. The rain gives me hope that life can still occasionally be gloriously uncomplicated. Just two feet, walking home, in the rain.

These days, the word hope is being casually thrown around like a summer-time baseball. Obama supporters purporting that NOW they have hope. NOW their children have hope. NOW this country has hope. And McCain supporters swearing that all hope is gone... that they should just move to Canada or Europe... or that Texas should secede from the Union. Such big responsibilities thrust willy-nilly on such a little word. Do we even know what it means, this word hope? What is the origin of hope, and where should it be legitimately placed?

Hope means, in the simplest definition I can provide, a wish or desire coupled with the confident expectancy that it will come true. The ancient Hebrews, early Christians, and those of Muslim faith viewed hope as a virtue: a valuable individual characteristic that leads to communal well-being. To all three subgroups of people, it is a moral value, a habitual behavior and a spiritual truth. Buddhists, on the other hand, seek to reach a state of Nirvana, in which there is no desire or suffering. In this state, hope is unnecessary, since it is a key component of both. (Desire is synonymous with hope, and implicit in suffering is the hope that it will end.)

The ancient Greeks took a more ambivalent stance on hope. In Greek mythology, hope, or Elpis, is one of the "evils" trapped in Pandora's jar. (Not a box, that's a modern interpretation.) Pandora was the first woman, and, as many women have been portrayed before her, was seen as beautiful but cunning. She was created as a punishment for Prometheus, and was showered with gifts from all the gods. When Zeus sent her to earth she was given a jar that contained all the evils the world had never seen. Mythology is vague as to why she opens the jar, but whether out of curiosity or malice, open it she does. Evil is released into the world, the only thing remaining in the jar is Elpis, or, hope. Many stories stop here, but several later versions claim that she returned to the jar and let hope out, because man could not survive the despair of living without it. (Food for thought: Hope left the jar weakly, but it's power was more potent than any other evil.)

Many claim that Elpis was actually the greatest evil of all... That without it, mankind would have the strength to end his own suffering but that Zeus created it as a cruel sort of joke, to keep him living on in terrible pain. Others believed that without it, the despondency of life would be awful... a crippling despair, leaving them too distressed to keep going and too tired to seek an end. We can't be sure what Elpis's role was in the original mythology... what we do know was that it was contained in a jar of evils, and seen in that light, must not have been viewed as a definitively good thing.

I think it's important to look at hope in a two way mirror. To see the front and back, if you will... the good and the bad. Hope can spur us on to great things. The hope for a better future can create in us the drive to work hard, to be creative, and to lend a hand to our fellow humans. It can enliven our dreams, and give us the impetus to achieve them. Hope can form strong community bonds, by bringing groups of people together to reach for common goals. It can give the injured, depressed and desperate a way to do the hardest thing humanly imaginable: survive through grossly adverse conditions.

Hope at its worst can cause division and discord. If I hope to construct a new theatre in Columbus Circle, and you hope to construct an Ice-skating rink, our hopes will clash. Sort of like each side of an election hoping that "their" side will win, and believing they are right. But which is actually right? Which side should have the right to have their hopes realized? And if you pin too much on a false hope, a hope that is bound to be disproved or forfeited, what then? There is no worse feeling than that hope is lost. Maybe, some things are better not hoped for at all. Where do we draw the line?

In the middle is something that ranges from slightly lazy to truly evil. It is the form of hope that leads to inaction. "If I hope and pray for ___________ it will just happen without my having to do anything." In its simplest form it is the actress who goes to eat at a restaurant where directors dine, hoping to be discovered. At it's worst is the mass mentality that allows a group of people to stand by and watch as a person is murdered in broad daylight, each hoping that someone else will do something about it.

How do we know then, where our hope should lie, now that a new person has been elected to take charge of this country. The answer is simple: in God and in our ability to love. It really has nothing to do with Obama, unless of course you have the power to actually work with him to change things politically. Hope is as solid or elusive as we choose to make it. Obama cannot, essentially, give or take away hope. We are responsible for that in our own lives. If he inspires you to hope, fantastic! If not, then find something out there that does. But do not impart divine abilities to someone who is as human as you or I.

What we need to do is boil down our usage of the word hope. What do we really hope for? A better world or country? How so... through economic changes, social reform, a more peaceful coexistence? How can we achieve these things ourselves? Can I recycle more, or give some of my time or resources to those who have less? Am I in a position to get involved in a political way, or should I practice peace in my own home by yelling less and listening more? What do I hope for for my children? Good food and homes and a better education than I had? How can I provide this? What do they hope for? Don't just say that this person or that is giving you hope or taking it away... Define your personal hopes and channel them into action.

I can't answer any of these questions for you, I'm still asking them myself. In fact, my job as a writer is to give you more and more to question. You have to find the answers for yourself.

So... Don't pin your hopes on someone else. Find what or who inspires you and Be Inspired! Then use this inspiration as a way to go after your hopes and dreams yourself. And pray, a lot. God is in the business of hope as an extension of Love, which is the greatest virtue we can attain. Or, if you don't believe in God, seek Truth. You can never go astray in the earnest pursuit of truth... It is out there...

Oh, a sort of P.S. I have, in the past few weeks, figured out another, very important reason why it was good that I did not vote. It allows me the complete impartiality to write without bias about what I observe in the next four years of Obama's presidency. If say something good, no one can say it's because that's who I voted for. Contrariwise, if I say something not in support of him, no one can say it's because I voted McCain.

Love from your hopeful, impartial, (slightly subversive),
K