Will I learn from their afflictions? Have I learned from my mistakes?

[sovay]

My poem "An Obedience Experiment" is now online at Rattle as this week's Poets Respond. There are notes included.

I am honored that the poem is being published in this fashion; I wish there had been no occasion to write it.

In 1961, Stanley Milgram found that 65% of his subjects complied all the way to the final supposed 450 volts. The percentages on a re-run in 2006 were nearly identical. Either we change the numbers or that 35% is going to burn out fast. I prefer Option A.

Comments

[rinue]

Very nice! Obviously, I read the poem earlier in the week, somewhat in progress, but it's wonderful to see it again in this context, with explanatory notes. I had no idea about the Milgram-pomegranate connection (even though melograno, the Italian, is very close to milgram/milgroym). And congratulations - I love Poets Respond.

[thistleingrey]

Very cool publication!

[sathari]

Here from my network page to tell you about... well, he's Milgram's opposite number, in a sense--- the guy who made his research about that other 35%: Kasimirez Dabrowski. (I can expand on this as someone who connected intensely with his work over 20 years ago when that connection was more about intensity of lived experience across various domains rather than resisting authoritarian cruelty. But the short form is... we're made for this. We do as individuals need breaks to recharge over time because this is a marathon relay-race, not a single-runner sprint. But you've reminded me that this is what I'm built to do.)

[nineweaving.livejournal.com]

Language as edged tool. I didn't know that "Milgram" meant pomegranate, or the seeds/mitzvot equivalence. So you've given me beauty with anger. Thank you.

Nine

[gwynnega]

Congratulations on the publication at Rattle!

[heliopausa.livejournal.com]

Congratulations on the poem.

Re: the (horrifying and desolating) Milgram experiment this article (https://theconversation.com/revisiting-milgrams-shocking-obedience-experiments-24787)offers some light:
"According to our analysis, the most powerful factor was whether or not the experimenter directed the teacher to administer the constantly rising shock levels. In conditions where the teacher was free to choose the shock levels, very few proceeded to the maximum voltage."