In late October 1970 my father died, age 83, in the Comanche
County Hospital near Lawton, Oklahoma.
Carol and I were in Kyoto, Japan, where I was codirecting a six-month
program for students from the University of Washington. Our sons Burke (age 9) and Reg (age 3) were
with us. I had said goodbye to my father
earlier in the year, before leaving the States.
When the news arrived of his death, Carol stayed in in Kyoto with Reg,
and Burke and I flew to Lawton for the funeral.
Today I received the typed eulogy I gave standing next to the casket,
from a friend of my parents. I had lost
track of what I said, so reading what I wrote brought tears to my eyes. I loved him very much.
MY FATHER
(In Memory of Robert Oscar Webb, by
Glenn Taylor Webb)
He talked a lot – too much, I
thought, until I understood a basic fact that he had driven home for me: words are magic costumes of seemingly endless
colors and designs, for ideas. Like
real costumes they reflect the reality behind the disguise; but more so, since
the reality of an idea is indiscernible apart from its disguise of words.
Ideas. He loved them and collected them even after
the age when most people close the mind-door and say, “No more ideas for me,
these are enough!” He knew that one
human being could never get enough of the ideas human beings have
had. (“Son, I figured out that it would
have taken me 969 years just to take all the courses offered in my field at the
University of Oklahoma back in 1928!”)
Of course, he didn’t approve
of every idea, in terms of its truth and usefulness, but I don’t think he ever
discarded any idea as insignificant, either.
Even the most repulsive idea was important to him as an idea, the
most immediate indicator of the human condition. For a man who believed earnestly in the truth
of the ideas attributed to Jesus of Nazareth and who belonged to a group of
dear people (the Church of Christ) who also believe in that truth but tend to
fear other ideas (or even the same ideas in unfamiliar word disguises), my
father’s respect for ideas seems especially remarkable. It made him appear strangely tolerant and
understanding among his friends.
That’s not to say he looked
around with a patronizing smile and didn’t criticize. He had a sharp tongue, and it stung. But anyone who felt that sting and still
thinks of him as a tyrant has missed the point.
He was smiling, and his love for you was not in danger of
being withheld just because he didn’t like what you did or said. (To the words “tolerant” and “understanding”
the word “compassionate” can be added to the disguise of this idea.)
I am pretty sure that nothing
irritated him more than a display of ego.
He himself was virtually without one.
He was not particularly introspective and there is plenty of evidence to
suggest that he thought of himself as little as possible. Again, it was ideas that interested him. I think he found it awkward to put bodies on
ideas. (“Thou shalt not kill,” as part
of a beautiful idea, was one thing; it was quite another to apply it to the
circumstances of living in a military town where the most devout Christians –
and the few Jews, in whose heritage the idea originated – were finding
justifications for killing.) His
solution was simple: keep the ideas and
circumstances separate – even the ideas of patriotism, anti-fascism,
anti-communism, etc., that lay behind the circumstances that justified
killing. In a word, my father was
polite.
It amazes me that he could
hold such strong beliefs (i.e., be deeply attracted to certain ideas over
others) and not force those beliefs on others (which most people do by denying
their love to a dissenter, saying, in effect, “You do not exist because you
have strange ideas.”) His path was
argument-without-the-slightest-loss-of-honor-to-my-opponent. Since for him ideas were longer-lived and
thus above the men who happened to play with them, I doubt if he ever thought
of himself as having honor, much less of losing any.
Equally amazing was my father’s
ability to maintain a relationship with a friend who professed the same beliefs
he did but behaved, as it were, contrarily.
The idea, for example, of “Seek ye not the things of this world …,” of
being actively un-attracted to material wealth, was a real favorite of his and
of most of his friends. He honestly
didn’t put “undue” store in things. But
friends who did can never say he criticized them for it; if anything, when they
expressed feelings of guilt for their love of money he tried to give them encouragement,
to find a way for them to be comfortable in both their belief and their
desire. His beloved repertory of ideas
made him a magician of reconciliatory powers.
Such powers no doubt enabled
him to have confidence in people in spite of everything. R. O. Webb seemed to be as sure of any person
as he was of himself. “Love thy neighbor
as thyself.” The Rock he built his life
on was the Christ, to be sure. It is
therefore no wonder that the human condition – seen through ideas as words –
was his passion. But as an epitaph my
father probably would prefer an un-dramatic “you can’t get along in this world
without friends,” or better yet, “I meant no harm.”
_________________________________________
P.S. I don’t believe
in horoscopes, but in the LA Times today, Feb. 15, 2015, my sign (Sagittarius)
reads as follows: “Your father. That’s where the day focuses. The things your dad did to influence you will
be apparent, for better and for worse.”
What are the odds of this prediction coming on the very day when I
decided to share and post this remembrance on Facebook and my blog? - GTW