When you really truly think about the "modern," "Westernized" world and all of its innovations and conveniences, it's difficult to comprehend. In fact, it's probably incomprehensible to most. As an example, our globalized socioeconomic system is so complex and convoluted that it's oftentimes cheaper to manufacture products overseas because resources and labor are so much cheaper (even heavier items that cost a lot to ship). And, as consumers in a post-industrial, hypercapitalistic world, inexpensive and abundant consumer items are what we have come to anticipate as the norm. As a person who has grown up in such a world, I find it a difficult habit to break out of, even knowing the consequences of buying, for example, shoes costing $14 - someone got paid very little to make them, said shoes will not last very long, their ultimate resting place in a landfill may leach chemicals into the soil, water, etc. And paying $125 for Nikes isn't much better, as most of the cost is actually going straight into the profit margin for the transnational corporate giant, not higher wages for the workers stitching those shoes together. "Fast fashion" is only one drop in the seemingly unending stream of convenient practices we engage in on a daily basis with little passing thought as to how our actions might be affecting the world at large.
Globalization is not a phenomenon new to the world for the 21st century. Humankind has been moving toward the degree of globalization we experience today since...always. As a species we move, adapt, interact, create and destroy, but never in a bubble. For instance, the endless obsession white nationalists have with Europe is predicated on a wholly bizarre, cherry-picked version of history. Sure, the Ancient Greeks and Romans had mighty civilizations...which were influenced by the Egyptians and Persians and other groups who coexisted or *gasp* even predated their advancements. The Renaissance, Scientific Revolution, Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution, et al, would not have been possible if Europeans were solely looking to themselves for inspiration. Their GLOBAL connections to great empires elsewhere, like the Middle East and China, helped rekindle learning and innovation on their continent. Of course, development is not something that happens worldwide in one fell swoop. Different areas may benefit initially, with others lagging behind. Sometimes, the places lacking development may actually be at the mercy of the more "advanced." The imperialization of land and labor occurs even today. It's what makes $14 shoes possible for us Target shoppers. And, as beneficiaries, we just accept it. Turn a blind eye to it? Well, more likely, what's out of sight is out of mind so we don't have to really confront the people (inclusive of children) employed for dollars a day to make our lives more comfortable and "rich" with goods.
My favorite novel (really a novella) of all time is Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad. I read it in high school, and despite all of its flaws and the critiques leveled at it, to me, it still holds up as one of the best descriptions of the psychological horrors of modern life. Instead of existential dread brimming over each page, as in Kafka's works, Conrad's depiction of a journey down the Congo River to retrieve a lost European, Mr. Kurtz, begins much more straightforwardly. Yet, as the narrator, Marlow, edges closer to and finally reaches his destination, his experiences in the Belgian colony has already begun to change his outlook on not only his mission, but on Europe's place in the world as well. The disturbing realization he comes to is this: what everyone back home in England referred to as the "heart of darkness" wasn't the supposed unknowable and wild truths of the African continent, but instead the unsettling ambiguity within all of us. The supposed "cannibals" he was to fear treated him respectfully. The "uncivilized" laborers were actually the ones subjected to cruel treatment by his fellow countrymen. When he finally finds Kurtz, he's living as a "savage" and yet can still carry on a conversation with Marlow regarding his outlook on life, what he's learned and why he cannot return to Europe. Marlow, clearly shaken by his time in the Congo, does not return to Europe wholly changed. He still lies to Kurtz's fiancee about the conditions under which he died. He upholds the lie of the modern world - that the "modern" and "civilized" are somewhat better than the rest.
Its no wonder a novel that highlights the ambiguous morality of power and progress became the underpinning of the movie "Apocalypse Now." It puts the American role in Vietnam into sharp question. Were we there to "do right" by these people? Or was the ultimate geopolitical goal of the presidents and military top brass who presided over it at odds from what was drilled into the heads of soldiers and the American people? The Vietnam War era on the homefront was the end to American innocence in many ways; it exposed that the American establishment followed the same patterns of thought as so many other imperialist nations had previously, belying our own foundational ideology. It also seeded a deep mistrust of the government on the part of many Americans which has blossomed into the anti/alterna-fact orgy we are dealing with today.
Ultimately, to bring it full circle, the message of this story, written over 100 years ago, still rings true today. The modern world, with all of its development and progression comes at a price. As consumers living in the "first world" we are often not aware of the horrors that occur elsewhere in the name of providing the luxuries and comforts we take for granted. In an ever-globalized, highly connected world, the communication of such horrors as child labor, wage slavery and deplorable living conditions (among others) becomes more and more difficult to ignore. And yet, we feel powerless to effect real change. So I'm often left grieving for the way things are with a real sense of powerlessness about how to go about making them different. I often dream about running away to some mountaintop and washing my hands of all of it, but in the end, the same practices will go on whether or not I drop out. So it's vital to stay and think of ways in which to ameliorate the current system, if it's not possible to tear it down quite yet. The biggest threat to even those basic steps being taken is apathy. It's an everyday struggle to stay inspired and vigilant, but without even the attempt, all we have in the end are a bunch of hollow lies.
“Even extreme grief may ultimately vent itself in violence--but more generally takes the form of apathy” - Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness
22 April 2017
Appreciating the In-between moments
Admittedly, I am obsessed with transience. It winds itself through most of my posts as the common theme - from the discussion of Japanese aesthetics to criticism of the transhumanist movement, the fleetingness of life fascinates me to no end. I have 8 tattoos currently and most of them relate to transience in some way. Funny, since permanent marks on my body represent the impermanence of all things. People often point this out to me, but I guess they forget I'm not too permanent myself.
A few years ago, I took a small class of students to experience a Japanese tea ceremony. We traveled to a rural area of western NJ to a large, old farmhouse. The ceremony's master led us to a small tea house in the backyard, nestled in a quaint Japanese-style garden. The tea house was seemingly no larger than a shed, but we were able to fit 8 people comfortably (?) inside, seated on the floor. Two attendants appeared from behind a paper screen to begin the ceremonial boiling of the water and steeping of matcha tea. The tea master began by making a cup of tea, drinking it and then passed the empty cup to the next patron, so they could inspect his cup for its beauty and imperfections. They received a separate cup to drink from, which they subsequently passed, empty, to their neighbor. The flower display on the mantle was a small raku vase with a sprig of cherry blossom. The tea master also noted to the children that they should take in this sight, as if they came back tomorrow, that flower arrangement would be different and would represent a wholly new scene.
The students sat rapt in attention, their quiet filling the small space. As the ceremony continued, they began to politely discuss the taste of the tea and the sweets offered to them. Going last in the procession, I noticed how the students' behaviors adapted to the new, unusual situation. Unlike most every American experience, the ceremony's rituals were understated. With no cell phones in hand and having no literal space to escape to, the students had to confront each other (and themselves) in that small tea shack. Either we made polite conversation or we didn't. And either way, it was OK.
In the aftermath of the experience, the students wandered lazily around the Japanese garden, lounged around a small reflecting pool with koi, sticking their hands into the water to try and pet the fish. The tea master and his partner laughingly encouraged their attempts. As we spent a good portion of our day at the estate, I came to appreciate the break from the schedule of our regular day, and, from their relaxed behavior, I could tell the students did as well. Even the short break from their phones while we were in the tea ceremony seemed to help them focus more. Those in-between moments, the ones we usually fill with silently staring at our own personal devices were now brought back to the forefront through this trip. These students will likely not change their patterns of behavior in any real way due to this experience, yet I do hope that it had as much of an impact on them as it did me.
As a person who grew up without a computer until late high school and without a smart phone until a year ago, I am still not ready to give into the temptation of constantly being able to be connected. Perhaps it is due to my introvert nature, but constant contact feels like an obligation I don't want to fulfill and see little positives in. Most of my students tend to be on an extreme end of this spectrum - constantly in contact with everyone and anyone through social media apps and texting. They will often claim that this is unhealthy as they scroll through endless posts, compelled to see more. What are they missing by looking down into their screens all of the time? Well, they end up missing some of those more unusual moments in life. Again, as an introvert, I have a habit of people-watching and appreciate what I see ("people are strange, when you're a stranger...). Are these moments life-changing? Most definitely not. But they do remind you, more than anything, that we are fallible creatures that are somehow both amazingly similar to each other and utterly unique at the same time. As we become more accustomed to seeing the same type of edited posts and pictures that people share about themselves online, it can be jarring to realize that no one is that put together in real life.
This week, a friend recommended an album to me, which, in one of those weird moments of aesthetic attraction, has become an immediate obsession (very occasionally, I will buy an entire album on a gut feeling after hearing one track. This was such an album and I haven't regretted that decision). The lyrics to this song, "Southern Gothic" relate to this feeling I often have - that I am speaking of things no one cares about anymore - but here's the real rub - I think they really do care about them, but have been conditioned not to. About a month ago, the NYT magazine ran an article about a website where people write in with descriptions of books they read and cannot recall the author or title (oftentimes, children's books). Bizarrely, this dead-end for memories led to a poignant essay about the humanity encapsulated within all of us, "The posts on Stump the Bookseller are far more utilitarian than they are sentimental, but...[they] routinely bring tears to my eyes. Each one forces an overwhelming rediscovery of just how real other people are. a confrontation with the fact that everyone's mind is cluttered with images that are incidental, almost partly lost, affecting in ways that are subtle, unpredictable and impossible to explain." And, I think, when we let our guards down long enough to talk to each other, like really sit down and talk face to face, or engage in a shared experience, we'd actually feel better not only about ourselves but about the world in which we live.
A few years ago, I took a small class of students to experience a Japanese tea ceremony. We traveled to a rural area of western NJ to a large, old farmhouse. The ceremony's master led us to a small tea house in the backyard, nestled in a quaint Japanese-style garden. The tea house was seemingly no larger than a shed, but we were able to fit 8 people comfortably (?) inside, seated on the floor. Two attendants appeared from behind a paper screen to begin the ceremonial boiling of the water and steeping of matcha tea. The tea master began by making a cup of tea, drinking it and then passed the empty cup to the next patron, so they could inspect his cup for its beauty and imperfections. They received a separate cup to drink from, which they subsequently passed, empty, to their neighbor. The flower display on the mantle was a small raku vase with a sprig of cherry blossom. The tea master also noted to the children that they should take in this sight, as if they came back tomorrow, that flower arrangement would be different and would represent a wholly new scene.
The students sat rapt in attention, their quiet filling the small space. As the ceremony continued, they began to politely discuss the taste of the tea and the sweets offered to them. Going last in the procession, I noticed how the students' behaviors adapted to the new, unusual situation. Unlike most every American experience, the ceremony's rituals were understated. With no cell phones in hand and having no literal space to escape to, the students had to confront each other (and themselves) in that small tea shack. Either we made polite conversation or we didn't. And either way, it was OK.
In the aftermath of the experience, the students wandered lazily around the Japanese garden, lounged around a small reflecting pool with koi, sticking their hands into the water to try and pet the fish. The tea master and his partner laughingly encouraged their attempts. As we spent a good portion of our day at the estate, I came to appreciate the break from the schedule of our regular day, and, from their relaxed behavior, I could tell the students did as well. Even the short break from their phones while we were in the tea ceremony seemed to help them focus more. Those in-between moments, the ones we usually fill with silently staring at our own personal devices were now brought back to the forefront through this trip. These students will likely not change their patterns of behavior in any real way due to this experience, yet I do hope that it had as much of an impact on them as it did me.
As a person who grew up without a computer until late high school and without a smart phone until a year ago, I am still not ready to give into the temptation of constantly being able to be connected. Perhaps it is due to my introvert nature, but constant contact feels like an obligation I don't want to fulfill and see little positives in. Most of my students tend to be on an extreme end of this spectrum - constantly in contact with everyone and anyone through social media apps and texting. They will often claim that this is unhealthy as they scroll through endless posts, compelled to see more. What are they missing by looking down into their screens all of the time? Well, they end up missing some of those more unusual moments in life. Again, as an introvert, I have a habit of people-watching and appreciate what I see ("people are strange, when you're a stranger...). Are these moments life-changing? Most definitely not. But they do remind you, more than anything, that we are fallible creatures that are somehow both amazingly similar to each other and utterly unique at the same time. As we become more accustomed to seeing the same type of edited posts and pictures that people share about themselves online, it can be jarring to realize that no one is that put together in real life.
This week, a friend recommended an album to me, which, in one of those weird moments of aesthetic attraction, has become an immediate obsession (very occasionally, I will buy an entire album on a gut feeling after hearing one track. This was such an album and I haven't regretted that decision). The lyrics to this song, "Southern Gothic" relate to this feeling I often have - that I am speaking of things no one cares about anymore - but here's the real rub - I think they really do care about them, but have been conditioned not to. About a month ago, the NYT magazine ran an article about a website where people write in with descriptions of books they read and cannot recall the author or title (oftentimes, children's books). Bizarrely, this dead-end for memories led to a poignant essay about the humanity encapsulated within all of us, "The posts on Stump the Bookseller are far more utilitarian than they are sentimental, but...[they] routinely bring tears to my eyes. Each one forces an overwhelming rediscovery of just how real other people are. a confrontation with the fact that everyone's mind is cluttered with images that are incidental, almost partly lost, affecting in ways that are subtle, unpredictable and impossible to explain." And, I think, when we let our guards down long enough to talk to each other, like really sit down and talk face to face, or engage in a shared experience, we'd actually feel better not only about ourselves but about the world in which we live.
01 March 2017
On Love in Many Forms
After reading this piece from the "Modern Love" column in the NYT - Romance as friendship - I decided I should try to write my own explanation of how I love. This has been kicking around in my head for a while, but it has taken some effort to articulate my thoughts and feelings on the matter. Saying "I love you" is no light task. If I've said it to you, I've meant it in a profound way and it's not something most people in my life will ever hear. In my first romantic relationship, my boyfriend said those words after a month of dating. Although I'm sure it came off in a bitchy way, I laughed in disbelief and said I couldn't return the sentiment...yet. It took me over a year to do so. Nearly half a lifetime later, I know that my way of loving (and expressing said love) is different from most. Of course today there's a label for every kind of love expression. If we want to get specific, I fall into the category of "demisexual" which seems to cover anything from nearly asexual to stereotypical sexual expression. Generally speaking, demisexual expression of romantic feelings is a slow burn - there's no "love at first sight" or immediate chemistry. The relationship progresses over time and usually meanders through a long friendship before the demisexual can ever truly feel romantic feelings for the object of their interest (I'd say desire, but that seems to not be the case).
Like the author in the article, those who are the closest to me friendship-wise, probably have, at one time or another, been an object of desire to me. Further reading on the "demisexual" way of love brings up the idea that such people are often "confused" about whether someone is a friend or a romantic interest. Well, yes, I guess that might be the case, but this explanation also tries to fit an unconventional way of approaching love into the more conventional box. Such a dismissal of love as confusion also elevates monogamy above other forms of expression - how can you hold romantic love for a friend and a designated erotic partner? Monogamy is the norm due to socialization - there are obviously many benefits to monogamous relationships, and although I am in one, I do not necessarily think they are by any means the natural expression of human desire (nor do I think having multiple partners necessarily is either). The expressions of human sexual desire and love are kaleidoscopic - multi-layered; a complex mix of elements we can never fully tease out to reflect a cut-and-dry explanation. Some expressions are obviously more preferable to others, especially for the stability of society and safety of its members. Although we has made great strides to be more inclusive, there is still room to grow. And I'm sure most people don't think they're wrong regarding their opinion, but I cannot see how, logically, there would be only one form of sexual expression. Naturally (and thus, evolutionarily), adaptation would lead to a spectrum of presentations of sexuality, just as it has led to variations in height, weight, eye, hair and skin color, etc.
Like the author in the article, those who are the closest to me friendship-wise, probably have, at one time or another, been an object of desire to me. Further reading on the "demisexual" way of love brings up the idea that such people are often "confused" about whether someone is a friend or a romantic interest. Well, yes, I guess that might be the case, but this explanation also tries to fit an unconventional way of approaching love into the more conventional box. Such a dismissal of love as confusion also elevates monogamy above other forms of expression - how can you hold romantic love for a friend and a designated erotic partner? Monogamy is the norm due to socialization - there are obviously many benefits to monogamous relationships, and although I am in one, I do not necessarily think they are by any means the natural expression of human desire (nor do I think having multiple partners necessarily is either). The expressions of human sexual desire and love are kaleidoscopic - multi-layered; a complex mix of elements we can never fully tease out to reflect a cut-and-dry explanation. Some expressions are obviously more preferable to others, especially for the stability of society and safety of its members. Although we has made great strides to be more inclusive, there is still room to grow. And I'm sure most people don't think they're wrong regarding their opinion, but I cannot see how, logically, there would be only one form of sexual expression. Naturally (and thus, evolutionarily), adaptation would lead to a spectrum of presentations of sexuality, just as it has led to variations in height, weight, eye, hair and skin color, etc.
22 February 2017
Death is OK, really.
Recently, two articles in the New York Times stood out to me - both relating ot the topic of death. The first appeared in the Sunday magazine - an article about a "transhuman" presidential candidate, Zoltan Istvan, whose major impetus (as there was no chance he'd be elected) was to raise awareness of his personal strides toward ending death. This piece was one in a line of many I have read recently in various publications regarding increasing human longevity beyond anything ever previously believed to be possible. As medical science and technology progress, doctors have been able to elongate their patients' lives by years, if not decades. Yet, despite these gains, the candidate and his followers believe strongly that death has become an inevitability only because we've been taught it's the endpoint, not that it actually is. As a transhumanist, Istvan is interested in wedding human longevity with technology. The author, who traveled with the candidate, seemed skeptical of the overall messaging, though intrigued by which camp - the people who accept death, or those who don't - as the ones who are really the ones deluding themselves.
One of Istvan's followers referred to those who accept death as the finality as "deathists" who have the view that death isn't so bad or is "natural" because they're trying to convince themselves to accept death, when, in fact, they should be breaking free to realize their full potentials as ever-living beings. This wouldn't be my description of my thoughts regarding the matter. Not that I want to die right now, but over the years I have cultivated an acceptance of the realities of a mortal body. There's nothing in observable nature that would make me think there IS another option besides death. I don't believe in god(s) or any sort of higher, supernatural power. What we cannot explain boils down to what we either cannot - or choose not - to understand.
The idea of living forever cheapens the experience. If you only get one go around, you have to be more careful. You have to pay attention to the details. Living in the now is essential. Yet, this doesn't jive well with modern life, where everything is rapidly changing and we're always looking for the next best thing. So why are we obsessed and further falling into this mode of being? A lack of knowledge about death as a part of life. Strangely, it took getting and being pregnant for me to fully understand how little practical information about my own body was passed on to me through general education. In fact, I spent the first half of my pregnancy in a state of shock because everything I thought I knew was only partly correct. Instead of continuing to be surprised or enraged, I began reading as much as I could on the process from the points of view of doctors, doulas, midwives and other moms. This empowered me to be able to go about the rest of the pregnancy with less anxiety.
The second article focused on just that - the importance of teaching students about death from a clinical (and practical) standpoint. What is your body experiencing in this stage? The author, a doctor who specializes in both critical and palliative care, focuses on not only empowering her students through knowledge of the process of dying, but also in how to reach out to those in their lives who might be suffering. Much like sex education, which she also teaches, death education has become, for her, an essential plank in the k-12 education platform. And yet, unfortunately, also like sex ed, it has become relegated to something that many Americans think should either be taught by a child's parents or spiritual leaders. The end result is we have a lot of people walking around with no clue of what their body is capable of. As a history teacher, I've had students interrupt my class with questions like, "what IS a placenta?" because they left health or biology with insufficient answers. How they decided these questions were OK for history class is beyond me, but it probably has something to do with the fact that I will answer most of their questions.
To put it simply, the body, your body, is the only one you will have in this life. And as we spend upwards of 10 hours a day on "screen time" the idea that your body is limited seems, well, antiquated. The reality is that our analog brains (and fragile egos) cannot comprehend that our digital profiles are only avatars in a illusory world. Human consciousness and "flesh-embodiment" isn't privileged, it isn't prestigious, it's simply a function of the biological world in which we all exist. And to the question of whether we should then strive to completely transcend this biology through science does not sway me to resoundingly say, "Yes, let's!" because it puts too much faith in the nebulous concepts of "science" and "technology" for me. As an atheist religiously, I find that this lack of belief I have in gods also inevitably transfers to all things that require a hard-line faith. So, I return to the observable. the cycles of life I see around me in nature and say, "death is OK, really."
One of Istvan's followers referred to those who accept death as the finality as "deathists" who have the view that death isn't so bad or is "natural" because they're trying to convince themselves to accept death, when, in fact, they should be breaking free to realize their full potentials as ever-living beings. This wouldn't be my description of my thoughts regarding the matter. Not that I want to die right now, but over the years I have cultivated an acceptance of the realities of a mortal body. There's nothing in observable nature that would make me think there IS another option besides death. I don't believe in god(s) or any sort of higher, supernatural power. What we cannot explain boils down to what we either cannot - or choose not - to understand.
The idea of living forever cheapens the experience. If you only get one go around, you have to be more careful. You have to pay attention to the details. Living in the now is essential. Yet, this doesn't jive well with modern life, where everything is rapidly changing and we're always looking for the next best thing. So why are we obsessed and further falling into this mode of being? A lack of knowledge about death as a part of life. Strangely, it took getting and being pregnant for me to fully understand how little practical information about my own body was passed on to me through general education. In fact, I spent the first half of my pregnancy in a state of shock because everything I thought I knew was only partly correct. Instead of continuing to be surprised or enraged, I began reading as much as I could on the process from the points of view of doctors, doulas, midwives and other moms. This empowered me to be able to go about the rest of the pregnancy with less anxiety.
The second article focused on just that - the importance of teaching students about death from a clinical (and practical) standpoint. What is your body experiencing in this stage? The author, a doctor who specializes in both critical and palliative care, focuses on not only empowering her students through knowledge of the process of dying, but also in how to reach out to those in their lives who might be suffering. Much like sex education, which she also teaches, death education has become, for her, an essential plank in the k-12 education platform. And yet, unfortunately, also like sex ed, it has become relegated to something that many Americans think should either be taught by a child's parents or spiritual leaders. The end result is we have a lot of people walking around with no clue of what their body is capable of. As a history teacher, I've had students interrupt my class with questions like, "what IS a placenta?" because they left health or biology with insufficient answers. How they decided these questions were OK for history class is beyond me, but it probably has something to do with the fact that I will answer most of their questions.
To put it simply, the body, your body, is the only one you will have in this life. And as we spend upwards of 10 hours a day on "screen time" the idea that your body is limited seems, well, antiquated. The reality is that our analog brains (and fragile egos) cannot comprehend that our digital profiles are only avatars in a illusory world. Human consciousness and "flesh-embodiment" isn't privileged, it isn't prestigious, it's simply a function of the biological world in which we all exist. And to the question of whether we should then strive to completely transcend this biology through science does not sway me to resoundingly say, "Yes, let's!" because it puts too much faith in the nebulous concepts of "science" and "technology" for me. As an atheist religiously, I find that this lack of belief I have in gods also inevitably transfers to all things that require a hard-line faith. So, I return to the observable. the cycles of life I see around me in nature and say, "death is OK, really."
17 January 2017
Melancholia and the Inauguration Sadness
I was hesitant to watch the film, "Melancholia" because the only other film I'd seen by the director, Lars von Trier, "Dancer in the Dark," was so profoundly sad, I can't even think about it in more than a fleeting way. This movie is also dark, although more ironic in tone. The main character, played by Kirsten Dunst, royally fucks up her wonderful and expensive wedding day by being a sad sack that cannot get beyond her own depression to appreciate the love others have for her. In the aftermath of her bad behavior, her mood is lifted only after the realization that a wandering planet is on a collision course with Earth. Suddenly, and strangely, her inability to see a silver lining in most events allows her to see one here - the prospect of having a planetary-level moment of universal indifference to the whims and desires of mankind coincides with her personal feelings on relationships and her own existence. Her approach to the end of the world is not only tender but encapsulates the fleetingness of all of our inevitable mortal realities.
After watching, I realized that I dislike the idea that someone is "suffering" from depression. Surely, there is suffering in a depressed state. However, like any human experience, there can be an opportunity for growth during a trying time. As an American and a teacher, I too often see a desire for only the good, the pleasurable, the positive. While I'd obviously prefer elation to depression, being consistently happy is an unattainable state. How would happiness or contentedness even be measured if not against a more negative experience? In the past, I've written about the softening of younger generations in particular, although I think most adults I encounter are as lost in a fantasy as their younger counterparts. Constant distraction through social media and entertainment (which includes info-tainment [ memes, celeb news] and edu-tainment [trying to make every classroom activity as "fun" as possible, to an absurd extent]) has permeated all parts of American society, to the point that if real events do not coincide with a predicted trajectory, there is a complete breakdown by the perceiver (hence, the feelings on Nov 9 for many liberals and progressives, as well as the continued disavowal of literally everything based in reality for Trump himself).
In the case of the current political milieu, the next four years will be living in the aftermath of a similarly massive explosion. The choice lies with those who see it as terrible to stand up and change how they not only react to such events, but also how they act in the first place. I've been labeled a "luddite" for not embracing online activism, but I've yet to see anyone in a Western-style democracy effect real change as a result of using platforms like Twitter or Facebook as their main tools. Sure, Trump uses Twitter, but to say tweeting won him the election is a dangerous downplaying of his intense ground game throughout the campaign. He stumped across the country, drawing large crowds, including demographics that do not use Twitter and the like. While these technologies are not going away, their effectiveness, especially with drawing in others who many not be of a like mind, is small. My proposal is a return to the salon, especially for the progressive left. At least two years of a Republican-controlled Congress captained by a Republican president should be a time of introspection and reflection. Read, think, write, meet and discuss. Retweeting or sharing memes, while satisfying in the immediate, adds to the cacophony of an increasingly partisan echo chamber, a trend that will not win over any hearts or minds, and may even serve to create factions within opposing forces (already I see the left balkanizing....and that's just reading over Facebook comments).
Thus, in response to this disconnect that many feel as we inch toward Jan 20, 2017, I am calling on everyone to let that awful planet hit us - hard. Sure, it won't be pleasant, but it will likely be jarring enough to ripple change through one's being. Maybe the end result will only be a slight adjustment in perception, or maybe a larger awakening will occur. Much like Dunst's character, those with nothing to lose may have an insight into how to make the best of a bad situation.
After watching, I realized that I dislike the idea that someone is "suffering" from depression. Surely, there is suffering in a depressed state. However, like any human experience, there can be an opportunity for growth during a trying time. As an American and a teacher, I too often see a desire for only the good, the pleasurable, the positive. While I'd obviously prefer elation to depression, being consistently happy is an unattainable state. How would happiness or contentedness even be measured if not against a more negative experience? In the past, I've written about the softening of younger generations in particular, although I think most adults I encounter are as lost in a fantasy as their younger counterparts. Constant distraction through social media and entertainment (which includes info-tainment [ memes, celeb news] and edu-tainment [trying to make every classroom activity as "fun" as possible, to an absurd extent]) has permeated all parts of American society, to the point that if real events do not coincide with a predicted trajectory, there is a complete breakdown by the perceiver (hence, the feelings on Nov 9 for many liberals and progressives, as well as the continued disavowal of literally everything based in reality for Trump himself).
In the case of the current political milieu, the next four years will be living in the aftermath of a similarly massive explosion. The choice lies with those who see it as terrible to stand up and change how they not only react to such events, but also how they act in the first place. I've been labeled a "luddite" for not embracing online activism, but I've yet to see anyone in a Western-style democracy effect real change as a result of using platforms like Twitter or Facebook as their main tools. Sure, Trump uses Twitter, but to say tweeting won him the election is a dangerous downplaying of his intense ground game throughout the campaign. He stumped across the country, drawing large crowds, including demographics that do not use Twitter and the like. While these technologies are not going away, their effectiveness, especially with drawing in others who many not be of a like mind, is small. My proposal is a return to the salon, especially for the progressive left. At least two years of a Republican-controlled Congress captained by a Republican president should be a time of introspection and reflection. Read, think, write, meet and discuss. Retweeting or sharing memes, while satisfying in the immediate, adds to the cacophony of an increasingly partisan echo chamber, a trend that will not win over any hearts or minds, and may even serve to create factions within opposing forces (already I see the left balkanizing....and that's just reading over Facebook comments).
Thus, in response to this disconnect that many feel as we inch toward Jan 20, 2017, I am calling on everyone to let that awful planet hit us - hard. Sure, it won't be pleasant, but it will likely be jarring enough to ripple change through one's being. Maybe the end result will only be a slight adjustment in perception, or maybe a larger awakening will occur. Much like Dunst's character, those with nothing to lose may have an insight into how to make the best of a bad situation.
27 November 2016
In Fiction We Cannot Hide Ourselves
At some point in the recent past, people stopped reading long form texts. It's been a challenge to teach in these times when "the few and far between" have the capacity to grasp the importance of reading to the formulation of thought. Sure, we read all day long - text messages, tweets, statuses, ads, article headlines, and so on- yet, when you think about how often, you, the reader here, truly reads in any real sense of the word, you realize how often the act is pushed to the wayside. More important and pressing matters or through a sense of inertia or outright laziness, reading is replaced by scrolling through a social media feed for another ten minutes before bed. I get the urge to give in to this, I really do, but I also make time to read because I find it to be a valuable source of information in the case of non-fiction (and not in the form of facts simply filling up an empty vessel, but more like fodder for the intellect). As a student of history, one reads not only to understand the past, but to project into the future. A gestalt reading of historical texts considers events in the context of human development, not just as a list of dates, events and people for memorization.
And fiction? Well, fiction helps us to enter the mind of someone beyond ourselves. This glimpse into the workings of the thought processes of those outside of our own minds can not only provide us with the space to reflect on our own, but can prepare us for future encounters with different people and situations. The simple act of reading has been proven to bolster feelings of empathy for others, even those outside of our own immediate identity groups. Fiction, in particular, has this effect. Unsurprisingly, the more you understand how others approach situations and internally mediate their experiences makes you less likely to judge those around you. Wow - who would have guessed?
Yet, beyond reading, most activities people engage in do the exact opposite and instead foster a sense of narcissism.We cultivate an online persona for others to ingest; posting pictures or stories that portray only particular aspects of ourselves. Added onto such personal practices, the marketing ploy of micro-targeting (we see advertisements and news stories that further validate any confirmation biases we may have about the world around us AND the types of people in it) and you have a recipe for a very tight bubble beginning to form around each person.
And fiction? Well, fiction helps us to enter the mind of someone beyond ourselves. This glimpse into the workings of the thought processes of those outside of our own minds can not only provide us with the space to reflect on our own, but can prepare us for future encounters with different people and situations. The simple act of reading has been proven to bolster feelings of empathy for others, even those outside of our own immediate identity groups. Fiction, in particular, has this effect. Unsurprisingly, the more you understand how others approach situations and internally mediate their experiences makes you less likely to judge those around you. Wow - who would have guessed?
Yet, beyond reading, most activities people engage in do the exact opposite and instead foster a sense of narcissism.We cultivate an online persona for others to ingest; posting pictures or stories that portray only particular aspects of ourselves. Added onto such personal practices, the marketing ploy of micro-targeting (we see advertisements and news stories that further validate any confirmation biases we may have about the world around us AND the types of people in it) and you have a recipe for a very tight bubble beginning to form around each person.
So what are the effects of these inward-looking trends? They tend to feed a fear of an "other." Of course, the sense of the "other" is nothing new. But in an era of globalization, why is there not a dampening of such fears? In light of the most recent American presidential election, it is evident that there are serious issues plaguing this nation both politically and socially. We could write off any focus on the individual and identity-based politics as the common reaction to a wide-scale movement like globalization (eg: localization movements). Yet, I would contend this balkanization represents a different phenomenon altogether and is directly tied into the narcissistic behaviors encouraged by social media and consumer capitalism. It's amazing that now we can make ourselves unique and different for only three easy installments of $29.95! And though I kid, this sort of focus on consumerism has sounded a death knell for true democratic involvement. Consumer choice has become a stand-in for political freedoms. People engage by buying a shirt emblazoned with a logo of Standing Rock (as worn by a famous person they love!) rather than engaging in a more meaningful, and lasting, form of engagement. This, along with using personal online spaces to like, share and post information important to causes one cares about, has allowed people to feel as though their voices are being heard and that they are using their time to "do" something. It is no wonder so many Americans feel as though to country is on the wrong path - for try as they might, there do not seem to be any improvements underway. This must be a baffling paradox- the more "engaged" people feel they have become through their tiny virtual soapboxes, the more their voices get lost in the echo chamber.
Alongside the evolution of hashtag activism, very slowly, perhaps, those who don't share our statuses or articles or who aren't using the proper nomenclature become members of an out-group that we don't want to associate with. The "othering" of our neighbors, family members and political rivals has ended up quite literally making people feel like there was nothing left to live for on Nov 9, 2016. This feeling was wholly unprecedented - sure, people were upset after Obama won in 2008 or after Gore lost, but the massive bubbles of biased perception created by social media usage and endless cable media coverage truly made these most recent results unique in their reception.
So what do we do? How can we move beyond identity politics or is there a way to embrace the focus on individual groups and their struggles as well as coalesce into a larger identity when necessary? I have read many articles both about why identity politics need to end and about what will be lost of there are more coalitions and less factions.Will civil rights be thrown to the back burner for groups who feel underrepresented? Will there be less of a chance for egalitarianism? Yet, if each identity group is to continue fighting for equal footing, only those with the sheer numbers will win out (as the ascendancy of Trump in 2016 under a banner of white identity politics proved, to the shock of all). This will continue to happen unless political messaging undergoes a radical change.
A plausible answer is to embrace the subjectivity of both the human experience and of values as well. No one set of American values can be correct, for even within a particular identity group, there can and will be diversity. Returning to an old stand-by topic for me - control - we see that each group within the identity politics game seeks to control the current discourse. This control is, as all, suppositious. Only with an embrace of nihilistic existentialism will a society be able to move past desires to categorize, control or even destroy differences. The realization that everything and everyone is difference in itself, and thus, the same can only be achieved through the dissolution of labels. Through such an awakening, the only answer could be to embrace the absurdity of life before moving forward, only now with a profoundly different view of all of those around us. To return to the beginning comments on fiction's importance in our lives, the continued practice of reading would provide us with the ability to discern what is fiction and what is not. Our personal narratives, however true they may be, when distilled through the filter of social media or even language, become fictionalized to an extent. The recognition of this subjectivity would break down barriers between us all because there would be realization that others' experiences are as valid as your own.
So I leave you with a song, because, like reading, good music can also sow the seeds of empathy. It is through the reading of fiction (and I would contend, reading in general), that we can challenge our minds to grow more open:
Through fiction we saw the birth
Of futures yet to come
Yet in fiction lay the bones
Ugly in their nakedness
Yet under this mortal sun
We cannot hide ourselves
Through fiction we saw the birth
Of futures yet to come
Yet in fiction lay the bones
Ugly in their nakedness
Yet under this mortal sun
We cannot hide ourselves
05 August 2016
The Beauty of "Being" Human
This week I saw "Captain Fantastic" in the theater. The movie's plot revolves around the Cash family's (6 children ranging in age from (approx) 6 to 18 and their father) journey from their home in the forests of the Pacific Northwest to New Mexico for their mother's funeral. The mother committed suicide after years of living with severe bipolar disorder initiated by by postpartum depression. The children have been raised by the parents "off the grid" - living off the land and being home-schooled through books and intellectual discussion. Their adventures outside of their homestead range from comical to heartbreaking, with the children (and father) encountering few who truly understand their way of life. Although it seems as though the entry into the "real world" will ultimately tear the family apart, in the end, they adjust enough to gain legitimacy in this world while still retaining their core values.
Now, there's a lot more detail I won't go into as not to :"ruin" the entire movie- and can you believe, I had the audacity to not write SPOILERS on the top of this post? Wow. Shameful- but I left the theater with tears in my eyes because it was just so damn beautiful in the end. Truth be told, I have written about running away from civilization a bunch of times in the past and have a propensity to romanticize this scenario of running wild, so this is most definitely NOT objective. However, the possibility of an alternative lifestyle/point of view in these "modern" times was refreshing, even if only fictional. To watch Dad Cash challenge his children physically, mentally and emotionally, in a loving and open environment, brought forth a desire to teach my own in such a way. Their household was much more democratically run (and any sort of authoritarian decrees he made received push back from the children) than most American children experience. Such an environment allows for children's voices to be heard. The most crucial aspect of the relationship between father and children was this way in which he spoke with them - he never talked at them, nor insulted their intelligence by talking DOWN to them either. Even the youngest child's opinions were validated - this was not in a 'great job, Johnny!' way either. For example, he asked his father about sex and was provided an answer that 1. he would understand based on his age and experience, 2. was not a lie or half-truth that you often hear adults relay to children to avoid talking about serious topics. How can children learn about the world if those that they look toward and trust in lie to them? Bodily functions and the cycle of life (so yes, questions about the human body, sex and death) are all important topics that should always be answered truthfully but also in a way that relates to the child's development. When children are sufficiently responded to, they tend to be content enough to move on from the subject. What adults tend to forget is that most children have the capacity to detect when people are being fake. I see this with high schoolers all of the time - their emotions are more like those of children than adults and they are very in tune to the "vibes" the adults in their lives are giving off. This is not actually a negative. In fact, I think being more in touch with one's emotions -having raw, real experiences - can be much more helpful in learning about yourself and your place in the world than the walled off sort of emotions most adults have cultivated through years of suppression.
As a mother now, I worry about my child growing up with the practice of constantly documenting one's life online.What sort of effect will being a "digital native" have on her emotional development? Her psyche? Will she be just as disengaged as the Cash family's cousins are in the movie - totally engrossed in their phones and video games? Is it cruel to deny her access to cell phones, television and the internet, especially if those items are in the house and used by adults? I would hate even more to be a hypocrite and tell her she could not use certain devices if I had them myself. So it makes me wonder whether it's too late for most of us, who have acclimated to this world to raise children who can transcend the "veil of maya" that is the digital world and use it to their advantage or to realize its limitations better than we can now. I cannot answer any of these questions yet, and it disturbs me to a large degree. The movie imparted in me a desire to break free of the, "well, this is how it is now so if I can't beat 'em, I better join 'em," sort of mentality with which many seem to approach negative trends in society. Hell, if I was going to think that way, I'd have a Trump sign on my lawn! I would rather experiment and stumble a bit at first than box myself (and my child) into a life of meh. To me, the entire message of the movie was just that - to be human, you have to try things out. Otherwise people get hurt both emotionally and physically. The "being" part of human being requires us to DO, not just "to be." (yes, I'm taking some liberties with parts of speech, chillax)
Now, there's a lot more detail I won't go into as not to :"ruin" the entire movie- and can you believe, I had the audacity to not write SPOILERS on the top of this post? Wow. Shameful- but I left the theater with tears in my eyes because it was just so damn beautiful in the end. Truth be told, I have written about running away from civilization a bunch of times in the past and have a propensity to romanticize this scenario of running wild, so this is most definitely NOT objective. However, the possibility of an alternative lifestyle/point of view in these "modern" times was refreshing, even if only fictional. To watch Dad Cash challenge his children physically, mentally and emotionally, in a loving and open environment, brought forth a desire to teach my own in such a way. Their household was much more democratically run (and any sort of authoritarian decrees he made received push back from the children) than most American children experience. Such an environment allows for children's voices to be heard. The most crucial aspect of the relationship between father and children was this way in which he spoke with them - he never talked at them, nor insulted their intelligence by talking DOWN to them either. Even the youngest child's opinions were validated - this was not in a 'great job, Johnny!' way either. For example, he asked his father about sex and was provided an answer that 1. he would understand based on his age and experience, 2. was not a lie or half-truth that you often hear adults relay to children to avoid talking about serious topics. How can children learn about the world if those that they look toward and trust in lie to them? Bodily functions and the cycle of life (so yes, questions about the human body, sex and death) are all important topics that should always be answered truthfully but also in a way that relates to the child's development. When children are sufficiently responded to, they tend to be content enough to move on from the subject. What adults tend to forget is that most children have the capacity to detect when people are being fake. I see this with high schoolers all of the time - their emotions are more like those of children than adults and they are very in tune to the "vibes" the adults in their lives are giving off. This is not actually a negative. In fact, I think being more in touch with one's emotions -having raw, real experiences - can be much more helpful in learning about yourself and your place in the world than the walled off sort of emotions most adults have cultivated through years of suppression.
As a mother now, I worry about my child growing up with the practice of constantly documenting one's life online.What sort of effect will being a "digital native" have on her emotional development? Her psyche? Will she be just as disengaged as the Cash family's cousins are in the movie - totally engrossed in their phones and video games? Is it cruel to deny her access to cell phones, television and the internet, especially if those items are in the house and used by adults? I would hate even more to be a hypocrite and tell her she could not use certain devices if I had them myself. So it makes me wonder whether it's too late for most of us, who have acclimated to this world to raise children who can transcend the "veil of maya" that is the digital world and use it to their advantage or to realize its limitations better than we can now. I cannot answer any of these questions yet, and it disturbs me to a large degree. The movie imparted in me a desire to break free of the, "well, this is how it is now so if I can't beat 'em, I better join 'em," sort of mentality with which many seem to approach negative trends in society. Hell, if I was going to think that way, I'd have a Trump sign on my lawn! I would rather experiment and stumble a bit at first than box myself (and my child) into a life of meh. To me, the entire message of the movie was just that - to be human, you have to try things out. Otherwise people get hurt both emotionally and physically. The "being" part of human being requires us to DO, not just "to be." (yes, I'm taking some liberties with parts of speech, chillax)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)