here is a fundamental difference between bitterness and righteous indignation, although as with a great many subtle distinctions it is possible for an individual to be mistaken about which sentiment is actually operating in her or his life.  Thus, a person might think that he displaying only righteous indignation when in point of fact he is displaying pure bitterness.  It is, I suppose, possible for person to think that she is displaying bitterness when in reality she is displaying none other than righteous indignation, though this latter scenario seems far more rare.

For what it is worth, these remarks are inspired by a query from a former student regarding some observations about my personal experiences as a professor.  I shall, by the way, use Al Gore to illustrate what it is like not to be bitter.

Whether or not bitterness can ever be justified, there are two things to be said.  One is that it certainly can be understandable why a person is bitter.  The other is that bitterness tends towards self-destructive behavior. 

An example of the first would be the following: Suppose that you and I are competing for the opportunity of a life time; and I gain that opportunity by using every corrupt means in the book.  You might very well become bitter over his, simply (i) because nothing else you might go on to do well ever come even close to giving you the standing that you would have had were you to have obtained the opportunity in question and (ii) because you know that I attained the opportunity by very corrupt means.  Whether or not your bitterness is justified, it is certainly understandable.

But bitterness, no matter how understandable, is very, very corrosive, being rather like rust to mettle. 

The corrosive side of bitterness lies in the fact that one is invariably looking at things in a negative way, even when a much more positive interpretation of events is readily available.  Thus, a bitter woman might take the slightest compliment from a man as a sign that he is hitting on her, even though: (a) she was most elegantly dressed on that occasion and (b) the man is happily married and absolutely dotes on his wife to such an extent that other wives often intone “Why can’t you be like him?” and (c) the man only said "Why, you look most elegant this evening".

A certain kind of bitter woman can be so busy distrusting men that she oftimes makes things worse for herself. 

Now, if the woman in question had been raped twice by two different men, we might very well understand her bitterness towards men.  But this understandable bitterness that she has would not change the fact that she often is worse off on account of being bitter.

Needless to say, it has to be possible that one is rightly angry with what has happened without it being true that one is in the least bit bitter.  This might be rare, but surely it has to be the case that it happens from time to time.

Al Gore, in fact, might be a perfect illustration of this.  Let us suppose, as many think, that he unfairly lost the election in 2000 to President George Bush.  What is surely impressive about Gore is that he seems to have gotten on very well with his life doing other very, very interesting things.  Now, if in a conversation Gore expressed some hurt over what had happened to him, this would certainly be natural.  What is more, it would be silly to saddle him with the charge of bitterness merely because he expressed some hurt over what happened.  Why?  Because there is no evidence whatsoever that he is running around with a particularly negative outlook with regard to the election loss, given that a much more positive interpretation is plausible. 

Whether one agrees with the idea of global warming or not, it is ludicrous to maintain that Gore raised the issue only because of his bitterness over having lost the presidential election in 2000.  That would be preposterous.  From what I can see, Gore does not spend his life focusing on that loss.  Yet, this is perfectly compatible with his feeling a twinge of deep pain if someone raises the issue.  His feeling a twinge of pain would be perfectly normal and understandable.  All the same, it would not constitute bitterness on his part.

In a recent blog entry, I explained why I am a black conservative among white liberals.  And a former student remarked that he sensed some bitterness on my part.  Indeed, it seems to be that whenever I talk about anything that has happened to me involving the matter of race, someone will remark that perhaps I am bitter.

Now, I think that nothing of the sort is true.  What is more, I think I can prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt.

I think that if I were indeed bitter over whatever misfortunes that I have expressed as a professor over matters of race, that bitterness would time and time again play itself out in some way in my interactions with my students, the overwhelming majority of whom are white.  Perhaps I would be particularly critical of the work of white students.  Or, where a criticism was in fact justified, I would be, as they say, over the top in my criticism of white students.  Or, in lecturing to my classes, I would never miss an opportunity to talk about some experience of racism that I have had.  Or, I would always find an opportunity to remind whites of the persistence of racism.  Or, I would see the relevance of race in just about every instance of human behavior, from going to the bathroom to brushing one’s teeth.  And so on.  Unless, I am absolutely and extraordinarily out of touch with reality, it is a brute fact that my behavior towards my students cannot possibly be characterized in this way. 

For all the rumors about me among students at Syracuse University, no one seems to whisper "He has a chip on his shoulders towards whites". 

The former student who raised the issue is comparatively well-off; and over the years (since his graduation), we have talked about one thing and then.  In fact, I gave the student a call from Paris just the other day.  It has never even crossed my mind to suggest to him that his life must be riddled with residual racism owing to his privileged background.  Absolutely not.  Quite simply, that strikes me as a ridiculous and immature line of thought.  The student is also Jewish; and I don't for a moment think that he supposes that any Jew who lived through the Holocaust and talks about it ever so poignantly from time to time is bitter.

To be bitter is not to express pain about a wrong that one has experienced.  That, rather, is to be human.  To be bitter, rather, is for that pain to have a saliency that allows it spill over in areas of life that do not at all pertain to that pain. 

Now, at the risk of stereotyping, white liberals intrigue me here: On the one hand, they go on and on about the persistence of racism in today’s society; on the other, if a black talks about racism with any poignancy, then they insist that the black is bitter.  Notice that I said “with poignancy”.  I did not say “with venom”.  The distinction is real and of fundamental importance, even if the first sentiment can shade into the second one. 

That is, it is certainly true that we cannot always determine whether a person is speaking with poignancy or venom.  Indeed, it often takes knowing a person’s character in order to be quite certain that what one is hearing is poignancy without bitterness.  

Now, from a moral point of view, the distinction is of considerable significance.  Other things being equal, here is why the difference is so important.  If a person is guided by bitterness, then it is easy to dismiss the individual as being too pained even to have the psychological and emotional wherewithal to take the right perspective on things.  By contrast, if a person is being poignant without being bitter, then the individual’s words must be accorded considerable weight. 

As I have just said, it often takes knowing a person’s character in order to be quite certain about that what one is hearing is poignancy without bitterness.  

Imagine that four black men had robbed and beaten up my student.  I would expect him to recount that story with poignancy without bitterness.  I know that he would never become bitter towards blacks.  I know his character very well.   All that I ask of him is that he should return the compliment. 

In the essay that prompted my former student to contact me, I maintained quite simply that just as a woman’s role in life should not be to help make me feel good about not being sexist (insofar as I am not), my role as a black among whites is not to make them feel good about not being racist.  I stand by that very simple claim.   

A final comment.  If anyone has listened to me, I have said over and over again that I believe myself to be one of the most fortunate people on the face of the earth.  Of course, there are others better off than I am.  But my life is surely rich on so very many fronts.  I have never ever come even close to suggesting that anything has detracted from the richness of my life.  I most certainly have never accorded the racism that I have experienced in my life that weigtht. 

Here is a one sentence-characterization of my; and to know me is to know that I embrace that charactization with all my heart:

I am blessed.