Hunter Dansin https://blog.hdansin.com/ Home for my words Sat, 04 Apr 2026 13:15:44 +0000 https://i.snap.as/tOjrfVcT.png Hunter Dansin https://blog.hdansin.com/ April 2026 Update https://blog.hdansin.com/april-2026-update?pk_campaign=rss-feed <![CDATA[ "Thank you" would die on your lips If you knew, What pride and ambition and hate I have had to fight in myself, To earn it. a photo of my desk, which has my notebook and books on it. March has ended and I am not quite sure where it went. Did I write? Yes I did. Did I make music? Yes I did. Did I do either of those things as well or as much as I had planned? No. If there are 'creatives' out there whose output is steady and controlled, I am certainly not one of them. I have worked hard to develop 'bare minimum habits' that help me maintain some consistency, but on top of those habits my output has always been stormy. Sometimes it overflows, sometimes it dries up, and I have to dig a deep well with my fingernails to find anything. Lately the music well has been much more productive than the writing well (at least in terms of fiction). I do not think this is unnatural in the sense that humans are not machines, but it would be nice to have an even keel. Ultimately though, I can rest because I believe that my life is Not My Own, and there is freedom in that. I just have to remember it, and endure it. !--more-- Writing I wish I could banish the guilt I feel when I think of how little progress I have made on the book. I did write a pretty long essay, but for some reason I just can't shake a sense of failure when I don't work on the book. E.B. White once likened the impulse to write something as having a storm cloud over one's head until the thing is written, and I resonate with that very much. I suppose I should stop feeling guilty and just recognize that these works that seem to appear over my head are just manifestations of the creative process; but I push back on that phrasing "just manifestations of the creative process," because I feel that it cheapens the work. I will say that the Manliness essay was a cloud that had been hanging over me for years, and it felt good to finally dispel it. Writing is a fascinating process. Control over it (for me) is both a responsibility and an illusion. Music A photo of my "studio" I have been playing and practicing quite a lot. I bought a new acoustic guitar, which I have 'needed' for a while. The neck on my old one is somewhat rough, which means it taught me a lot about proper technique and finger position, but come showtime was really limiting and nerve-racking. The new one, an Orangewood, is very nice for the price, and I am liking it more every day as I break it in. I almost immediately started recording (semi-officially) the Lit Songs album with it. I think I have gotten good enough with my microphones and production process that I can make very nice sounding demos, complete with drums! The challenge is really just finding time when the house is quiet (which is not often, with two young kids). I mostly record at night instead of playing video games, which is good, but also I need to sleep. I need to pace myself. Reading I read a lot for the podcast, namely Piranesi and That Hideous Strength and Borges (still editing those recordings). For fun, I have picked up Robinson Crusoe and The Divine Comedy. I have enjoyed That Hideous Strength and Robinson Crusoe the most out of those. I have also decided to try and revive my Latin. For language learning, my main goal is usually just to be able to read. To that end I have been reading 死神永生 (Death's End) by 《刘慈欣》(Liu Cixin) for over about a year. I try to read one page a day, writing down words I don't know, then adding them to Pleco's flashcard function. I do think my comprehension is improving, but it is still far from where I want it to be. For Latin, I am restarting Gustatio Linguae Latinae. My wife is a Latin teacher, so I've got a pretty good motivational head start, and it has really been a lot of fun. It is really amazing to me how video games have the power to inoculate so many of my life-giving impulses. I think it is because video games offer a facsimile of what they promise: skill building (learning a musical instrument), exploration (reading about a new place), immersion (learning a new language and reading primary sources), self-expression (writing). Please note, I do not think video games are evil, it is just that they can be easily abused out of all moderation. I have also been fasting from breakfast to dinner for Holy Week, and it has helped me realize just how many impulses for consumption I have, and how little I deny them. Those little snacks and cookies and glasses of milk add up, even though they are not harmful in themselves. And it seems to me that the modern adulthood our culture strives for is less about self control, and more about working ourselves into the ground for a life that doesn't require it. So many of the things we buy are for pure convenience and organization, so that we don't have to think or be responsible. AI is no different in this regard, and the commercials for it emphasize the fact that it can automate tasks that we have already striven to automate, so that we will just become Dostoevsky's "General Humans" or C.S. Lewis's "Men Without Chests." Well, until next time. [1]: If I do not cite a poetry source, you can assume that I wrote it. #update #April #2026 --- Thank you for reading! I greatly regret that I will most likely never be able to meet you in person and shake your hand, but perhaps we can virtually shake hands via my newsletter, social media, or a cup of coffee sent over the wire. They are poor substitutes, but they can be a real grace in this intractable world. !--emailsub-- --- Send me a kind word or a cup of coffee: Buy Me a Coffee | Listen to My Music | Listen to My Podcast | Follow Me on Mastodon | Read With Me on Bookwyrm ]]>

“Thank you” would die on your lips
If you knew,
What pride and ambition and hate
I have had to fight in myself,
To earn it.[^1]

a photo of my desk, which has my notebook and books on it.

March has ended and I am not quite sure where it went. Did I write? Yes I did. Did I make music? Yes I did. Did I do either of those things as well or as much as I had planned? No. If there are 'creatives' out there whose output is steady and controlled, I am certainly not one of them. I have worked hard to develop 'bare minimum habits' that help me maintain some consistency, but on top of those habits my output has always been stormy. Sometimes it overflows, sometimes it dries up, and I have to dig a deep well with my fingernails to find anything. Lately the music well has been much more productive than the writing well (at least in terms of fiction). I do not think this is unnatural in the sense that humans are not machines, but it would be nice to have an even keel. Ultimately though, I can rest because I believe that my life is Not My Own, and there is freedom in that. I just have to remember it, and endure it.

Writing

I wish I could banish the guilt I feel when I think of how little progress I have made on the book. I did write a pretty long essay, but for some reason I just can't shake a sense of failure when I don't work on the book. E.B. White once likened the impulse to write something as having a storm cloud over one's head until the thing is written, and I resonate with that very much. I suppose I should stop feeling guilty and just recognize that these works that seem to appear over my head are just manifestations of the creative process; but I push back on that phrasing “just manifestations of the creative process,” because I feel that it cheapens the work. I will say that the Manliness essay was a cloud that had been hanging over me for years, and it felt good to finally dispel it. Writing is a fascinating process. Control over it (for me) is both a responsibility and an illusion.

Music

A photo of my "studio"

I have been playing and practicing quite a lot. I bought a new acoustic guitar, which I have 'needed' for a while. The neck on my old one is somewhat rough, which means it taught me a lot about proper technique and finger position, but come showtime was really limiting and nerve-racking. The new one, an Orangewood, is very nice for the price, and I am liking it more every day as I break it in. I almost immediately started recording (semi-officially) the Lit Songs album with it. I think I have gotten good enough with my microphones and production process that I can make very nice sounding demos, complete with drums! The challenge is really just finding time when the house is quiet (which is not often, with two young kids). I mostly record at night instead of playing video games, which is good, but also I need to sleep. I need to pace myself.

Reading

I read a lot for the podcast, namely Piranesi and That Hideous Strength and Borges (still editing those recordings). For fun, I have picked up Robinson Crusoe and The Divine Comedy. I have enjoyed That Hideous Strength and Robinson Crusoe the most out of those.

I have also decided to try and revive my Latin. For language learning, my main goal is usually just to be able to read. To that end I have been reading 死神永生 (Death's End) by 《刘慈欣》(Liu Cixin) for over about a year. I try to read one page a day, writing down words I don't know, then adding them to Pleco's flashcard function. I do think my comprehension is improving, but it is still far from where I want it to be. For Latin, I am restarting Gustatio Linguae Latinae. My wife is a Latin teacher, so I've got a pretty good motivational head start, and it has really been a lot of fun.

It is really amazing to me how video games have the power to inoculate so many of my life-giving impulses. I think it is because video games offer a facsimile of what they promise: skill building (learning a musical instrument), exploration (reading about a new place), immersion (learning a new language and reading primary sources), self-expression (writing). Please note, I do not think video games are evil, it is just that they can be easily abused out of all moderation. I have also been fasting from breakfast to dinner for Holy Week, and it has helped me realize just how many impulses for consumption I have, and how little I deny them. Those little snacks and cookies and glasses of milk add up, even though they are not harmful in themselves. And it seems to me that the modern adulthood our culture strives for is less about self control, and more about working ourselves into the ground for a life that doesn't require it. So many of the things we buy are for pure convenience and organization, so that we don't have to think or be responsible. AI is no different in this regard, and the commercials for it emphasize the fact that it can automate tasks that we have already striven to automate, so that we will just become Dostoevsky's “General Humans” or C.S. Lewis's “Men Without Chests.”

Well, until next time.

[1]: If I do not cite a poetry source, you can assume that I wrote it.

#update #April #2026

Thank you for reading! I greatly regret that I will most likely never be able to meet you in person and shake your hand, but perhaps we can virtually shake hands via my newsletter, social media, or a cup of coffee sent over the wire. They are poor substitutes, but they can be a real grace in this intractable world.

Send me a kind word or a cup of coffee:

Buy Me a Coffee | Listen to My Music | Listen to My Podcast | Follow Me on Mastodon | Read With Me on Bookwyrm

]]> https://blog.hdansin.com/april-2026-update Thu, 02 Apr 2026 13:41:40 +0000 I Am Not a Gun https://blog.hdansin.com/i-am-not-a-gun?pk_campaign=rss-feed <![CDATA[Reconstructing Manliness with The Iron Giant and Mr. Darcy Notes taken while watching The Iron Giant "What is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me." — Hamlet, Act II, Scene 2. When I was in college I decided to start a faith-based discussion group for men, about well, being a man. For some strange reason, I felt that it had to be very early in the morning, because getting up early was manly. In my campus-wide emails I also resorted to tasteless jokes about going out to chop down trees and break rocks with heads. Whatever this says about my social development is less relevant than the question that I was attempting to answer, however foolishly, with that group and those jokes: What does it mean to be a man? This is a question that has tortured me since my adolescence, and tortures me still. Whether this essay will provide any relief remains to be seen. My small group, unsurprisingly, was not very popular, even with my Christian friends. Not many undergraduate guys were willing to get up for a discussion group that started at 6:30am on Friday mornings; or if they were willing, the flesh was weak. This does not mean that the group was a failure, because I had one regular attendee who I was able to talk quite deeply with, and I still think about him today. I was also told by a few people that they would have attended if it was at a less inconvenient time. This showed me that I was not the only one tortured by the question. So, what does it mean to be a man? We will find out together, dear reader, whether I am any better equipped to answer this question than I was over a decade ago. But first I must define exactly what is meant by it. We could try to answer it by taking a survey of the men in our lives, and saying, "These examples show what it is to be a man." But despite confounding us with wildly different conclusions, this method also reveals to us our bias. I think that most of us, consciously or unconsciously, have already taken a survey of the men in our lives, and the results have made us uneasy. That the question occurs to us reveals an insecurity about manhood that cannot be assuaged by the simple truth that no men are perfect. We would not be asking if there wasn't something resembling a real crisis. What I believe we really mean to ask is, "What does it mean to be a good man?" !--more-- In order to save myself and my readers a great deal of confusion and time, I will confine myself to defining "good manhood" in the context of two relationships that a man forms in his life. The first is a man's relationship to society, and the second is a man's relationship to women. I must also point out that my perspective as a straight, white, Christian man shapes this conversation, because in these great gray social topics, it is only our own examined experience that counts, as flawed and subjective as it is. If you would like to discount the application of the following words because of that, go right ahead, this is just one man's attempt to deconstruct and redeem his gender, and keep it interesting. I must also note that these two relationships leave a great deal of territory open and unexplored. This openness of the question is partly why it is so torturous. The feeling a man gets, when he surveys his life and the lives of the men around him, is that we have all been pushed out into a roiling sea with no map. If we have been given compasses, they all point in different directions, because postmodern society, in destroying (perhaps rightly) the traditional framework of manhood, has not troubled itself to supply a replacement. If we take data about social outcomes and measures of happiness as a compass, we may end up 'better' in life, but we will have no way to describe why it is, in fact, 'better' to be socially and economically stable and happy about it. And we must be very careful to know what we mean when we talk about social and economic success. Is that stable job with a good income, in fact, ethical? Is the stability it provides in allowing you to give a comfortable life to your family worth more than the lives that the corporation or company you work for may or may not be destroying? If you do have an ethical job, are you hacking at the leaves of evil or the root of it? Does it pay well? Are you sacrificing your own well-being and time with your family to be a justice hero? Why are teachers paid less than lawyers? Are you involved in the lives of your kids? Is that involvement positive or negative? What about your wife or partner? Do you still cherish and value them? Do they love you? When was the last time you looked at porn? How wrong did it feel? Even if you have never looked, when was the last time you fantasized about another partner? If you are not the breadwinner, do you do your share of chores? If you do, does your partner have to remind you to do them? Do you do them well? Could you sleep easy at night if you were not the breadwinner? If you are a bachelor, do you clean your room? Can you cook? Do you care? When was the last time you volunteered for charity? Why is that relevant? Does anyone take me seriously? What makes life worth living? Do you feel lost yet? This spiral of rhetorical questions is an example of the spiraling questions that torture me as a result of the first question. It feels almost impossible to say anything definitive, because any of the positive statements I might derive from the men that I admire—"Real men are patient." "Real men are humble." "Real men restrain their violence." "Real men use their strength for the good of others." "Real men sacrifice themselves for others."—can also be applied to women. Is there anything gendered about patience and humility and strength and sacrifice? Indeed, if we take an honest look at the roles women have been forced to play throughout history, a patient and honest man should be somewhat overawed by the patience and humility and strength and sacrificial love of women. And even if we admit that men are, in general, physically stronger than women; how does that help us? Please do not misunderstand me. I believe that there are key differences between men and women, but I do not believe they are as easily defined as I once did. I do, in fact, do chores differently than my wife. One can tell the difference between how I fold laundry and how she folds laundry. But those differences are irrelevant. What is relevant is that so far from men and women changing, it is our society that is constantly shifting and changing around us, so that we must define ourselves in the face of the claims it makes. Society is the "atmosphere" of which Virginia Woolf speaks in Three Guineas: "Odour then—or shall we call it 'atmosphere'?—is a very important element in professional life; in spite of the fact that like other important elements it is impalpable. It can escape the noses of examiners in examination rooms, yet penetrate boards and divisions and affect the senses of those within [...] It is true that women civil servants deserve to paid as much as men; but it is also true that they are not paid as much as men. The discrepancy is due to atmosphere" (Woolf 95). For Virginia Woolf in 1938, atmosphere was denoted by the resistance that women faced when trying to enter the the professional spheres from which they had traditionally been denied access. As a straight white man in 2026, I cannot fully understand that atmosphere, but I will be bold enough to say that the bewilderment I tried to illustrate with so many rhetorical questions is how I perceive the atmosphere that men live in now. It is perhaps not as potentially damaging to the mind and body as the atmosphere that people of other genders live in, but that is not for me to say, and I do not think a competition about who has it worse would be productive. All metaphors have limits. We would do well to keep those limits in mind as we move from this long, confused preamble, to the body of the essay. Man Vs. Violence: The Iron Giant The Iron Giant is a 1999 animated film about a robot who crash lands off the coast of Maine during the Cold War. The Giant suffers damage to the head, and is diverted from its original purpose of destruction. The principal human character, a boy named Hogarth, discovers the Giant near his house and befriends him, but the military comes to investigate the crash landing, and Hogarth finds himself trying to hide the giant. We are given two men (other than the Giant and the general) to compare in this movie. Dean, a beatnik junkyard sculpture artist; and Kent Mansley, the government agent investigating the crash. Hogarth's father died before the start of the movie, so it can be said that he is searching for a father figure. He is also living in an atmosphere of fear. The students are 'educated' in class with a film that superimposes a mushroom cloud over a peaceful town. "Suddenly," the narrator says. "Without warning, ATOMIC HOLOCAUST." From Kent, the rude, take-charge, slugger/bucko/chief/champ, we are shown the 'manly' response to fear of the Unknown Other. He says, "Who built it? The Russians? The Chinese? Martians? Canadians?! I DON'T CARE! All I know is we didn't build it, and that's reason enough to assume the worst and blow it to kingdom come!" This quote reveals that Mansley's fear, masquerading as bravado (he steals cars and ogles women and threatens to separate Hogarth from his mother in the name of national security), is based on the fear of losing power. This is the familiar demon that drives competition among men and the basis of that buzz-phrase, 'toxic masculinity.' Whether based on the violence of our ancient past or not, I have observed that, in general, boys are groomed to train in violence. And if not violence, some skill or specialization that can be used to gain or defend power. This, I believe, is why so many video games (most of which, in the early days, were made by men), involve fighting and big boobs. Why were atomic bombs built? To defend power. What justifies cruelty in conquest and racist policies? The defense of power. Viewed from this perspective, it is no surprise to me that white men have been the main perpetrators of the toxic male defense of power, because they have been the principal beneficiaries of that power. This is what I believe is driving the cruelty of Trump's politics, as well as the complicity that allowed him to get where he is. James Baldwin once pointed out that the majority is not the group that is most numerous, it is the group that has the most influence . In other words, white men are afraid because our influence is eroding, and our cruel and cowardly politicians are desperately trying to hold onto it. When I watched this movie with my wife, she commented that Kent Mansley is a little unbelievable. After all, he disobeys direct orders after the general realizes that the Iron Giant only reacts to violence, and orders a nuclear strike on his own location. But having observed men throughout my life, and having observed the self-destructive impulses in myself, I can easily (sadly) imagine a Mansley. "I can do anything I want, whenever I want," says Kent. This is the unspoken belief that drives the actions of even the most gentle of men. The fear of losing the license to do whatever a man wants is what leads to complicit passivity and self destruction. It is only by confronting and defeating this fear, over and over, that a man can walk the path to true manhood. I must also take time to point out that so many of the movies and video games and books that we imagine to be found in man caves are full of heroes who are defined by their ability to commit violence. Heroes like John Wayne, John Wick, John McClane, John 117 and all the other non-Johns that are really various incarnations of Odysseus would not be in our media if they didn't have some violence to commit. The noblest of them use their violence to protect the innocent, and there is certainly nobility in putting oneself in harm's way, but it bears pointing out that it would not be necessary for them to do so if men were not so violent in the first place. Haley Bennet's character in Antoine Fuqua's The Magnificent Seven would not have to say "These men are here to help us," if there were not already hundreds of men there to kill and rape them. I like watching Denzel Washington dish out justice as much as the next guy, but we must not lose sight of why that dishing out of justice feels so cathartic, and where it might lead us. In fact we can see where it has gotten us. The cowards who find their way to power spend trillions of our tax money on instruments of murder and death that they can drop on people from three thousand miles away. They are not putting their lives on the line when they can buy a Rolex and pretend to be James Bond. And so far from having a just cause like Sam Chisolm's, their cause has mostly been money. Perhaps, because I cannot muster enough empathy to understand their actions, the root cause of it is a Mansley-like terror that the great stolen horde they are sitting on could one day be stolen back, and they are willing to do anything to keep it all to themselves. What a pathetic way to spend one's life. What a pathetic failure of manhood, which ought to be marked by a willingness to sacrifice power for the beloved community. The other man we are given to examine is Dean. He owns the town junkyard, is something of an artist, listens to jazz, drinks espresso, stays up late, has a cool bathrobe, lets Hogarth and the Iron Giant hide out at his place. He's cool, man. Dean is a counterpoint to Mansley, and as a white man on the lower echelons of privilege, he is able to show a better reaction to the threat of violence and the loss of power. When Hogarth spills his insecurities after drinking Dean's espresso, Dean responds with decent advice, "Who cares what those creeps think, you know? They don't decide who you are, you do. You are who you choose to be." This advice is more relevant to the Iron Giant's journey, but it also reveals the all-important fault in the Mansley way of life, which is that a man does have a choice. As Steinbeck so gloriously represented in East of Eden, "Thou mayest" is the antidote to sick fear and cowardice. Yes, confronting the fear of losing power means confronting the fear of death, but we must all face death whether we want to or not. "Ultimately," wrote Martin Luther King, "One's sense of manhood must come from within him.". But Dean is not the most heroic representation of this confrontation because he is not the hero of this movie, the Iron Giant is. When we first meet the Iron Giant he is devouring a power line near Hogarth's home. Hogarth is home alone because his mom has to work late, and hearing the noise, the boy picks up his BB Gun and goes to investigate the noise. The Giant gets tangled in the lines and seems to be in pain. Hogarth starts to run away but decides to help him by flipping a lever to turn off the power station. In the scuffle, Hogarth drops his gun and the Giant stomps on it before passing out and waking up. This crushing of the gun is symbolic for the Iron Giant, because the Iron Giant, quite literally, was supposed to be a gun. He comes from an alien planet and later in the movie he decimates the US forces with futuristic weaponry. But because he was damaged, and because of his relationship with Hogarth, the Iron Giant realizes that he can choose who he wants to be. Perhaps the most affecting scene that explicitly confronts violence is the scene in which Hogarth and the Iron Giant meet a deer in the woods. The Giant is moved by the deer's beauty, but a few moments later we hear a gunshot, and the deer is dead. Two hunters come and are terrified by the Iron Giant. One of them drops his gun as he runs away. Hogarth explains that the deer is dead, that he was killed by a gun. Later that night Hogarth and the Giant have a heart to heart about death: HOGARTH: I know you feel bad about the deer. But it's not your fault. Things die. It's part of life. It's bad to kill. But it's not bad to die. IRON GIANT: You die? HOGARTH: Well... yes, someday. IRON GIANT: I die? HOGARTH: I don't know. You're made of metal...but you have feelings. And you think about things. And that means you have a soul. And souls don't die. IRON GIANT: Soul? HOGARTH: Mom says it's something inside of all good things... and that it goes on forever and ever. It is the Iron Giant who is confronted with the choice between violence or death. His programming tells him to destroy, and he is ultimately the strongest 'man' in the world of the movie. He could, if he chose, completely conquer the world. But Hogarth convinces him to reject his violence. The climax of the movie then builds, as Mansley disobeys orders and tells the ship to launch the nuke, and the Iron Giant chooses to collide with it in the air in order to save the town. Shortly before this climax, Hogarth and the Iron Giant are playing in the junkyard. Hogarth is pretending that the Iron Giant is Atomo (a robot sent to destroy earth). Hogarth uses a toy gun and it activates the Giant's weapons, and he fires a laser. Dean saves Hogarth and yells at the Iron Giant, calling him a "big gun." The Giant tries to refuse, but he is scared of hurting Hogarth and runs away. We cut to two boys on a roof on the lookout for the giant metal man. The railing breaks and they fall. The Iron Giant makes a diving catch to save them in the middle of town. When Hogarth and Dean find him, the Giant smiles and says, "I am not a gun." I cannot tell you exactly why this line stuck in my mind for so long after watching the Iron Giant for the first time as an adult, but I think I can now. As I envision what happens immediately after the Iron Giant says this (he is shot in the back by a tank), I feel as though I am watching a vision of what it feels like to be a man with good intentions. The world, as much as we would wish it were not so, does not exist to validate our dreams and best hopes. The world of men is mostly indifferent and randomly hostile. Moved by my better angels, I have made declarations of intent, only to be shot in the back and induced to reach for my weapons (for me, some plan to be profitable and the comfort of video games or worse).