My friend Patrick posed the question to me, if we were to live our lives not knowing anything about the world beyond what is directly visible to us, or its history, would we live it any diffrently?
(We usually chat about less heavy things, like fun cities, or how his mum's name is BJ, but I thought this topic was very relevant to our readings.)
History, or the signification of it, is a way for people to connect with each other. Reading a novel is the same as reading a history book: it creates a common knowledge base so that we can better understand ourselves in relation to other members of teh speies, within the context of our material surroundings. So, does it matter that history doesn't exist if all it is for is to provide purely subjective definition and context to us? It does when hegemonic interpellation can create false problems of value that are n contradiction to our own interests. The divide between high and low culture is what prevents an honest (and more interesting) connection/context. It's rather scary to think of being completely ignorant to everything tha's not immediately effecting our lives. But then again, if history doesn't exist, then that's exactly our condition. I'm stuck in this cyclical thinking and can't quite break it.
Does anyone have some wisdom they'd wish to spread here?
4 comments:
On days like today when the world an go fuck itself (I had a bad day) and my ability to think critically, without undue emotional influence and impartiality, is completely lacking, it seems like history doesn’t matter all that much and instead the hear and now holds greatest value. With the advent of technology and the “disappearance” of cultural products and belief systems into “perfection” many people, including myself, place historical relevance by the wayside (Baudrillard, 5). In the need to consider our lives “perfect” and original we forget that many have come before us, have paved the way for our educations, political and social freedoms and thus disregard the flawed, yet relevant, wisdom of yesterday. If understanding and direction could be found in the lives and events of our predecessors the “immense indifference and silent potency” that permeates mass culture today could possibly be averted and maybe, just maybe I’d be a bit more optimistic in what the future holds and not so fricken bittern today (Baudrillard, 3).
Kelly Mac.
What caught me with your post was "It's rather scary to think of being completely irgnorant to everything that's not immediately effecting our lives". It is scary for post-secondary students, an odd elite, to think of that. We're a group of people in specific academic disciplines who have never had to deal intensely with failure and thus separate distinct high (A+) and low (F). However the thing is, we are VERY ignorant (in other disciplines), and I think this ignorance (please forgive the cliche) can be blissful relating to Baudrillard's disappearing history. I think we live in bliss because everything is hitting us so fast that we don't have time to be seriously SHOCKED with significance, because we don't give it time. The constant stimulation helps us wash clean our memories of previous 'atrocities' (ie) hilarious things Ralph Klein has done with Alberta politics. HOWEVER we don't remember it each time election rolls around.
I have to admit, I don't give a shit right now about anything going on in the world except getting my paper proposal done for class tomorrow. I just meant that it's scary to think of people to be so ignorant about everything- as in not reading, not experiencing art made by others, etc- like if we had the memories of goldfish. If we just sailed through life not taking in ANYTHING at all.
I think we are like goldfish though, until we are required by act of getting graded and paying lots of money to read & experience art by others very seriously and critically. (ie) I don't think many of us would have looked Althusser up to read in our free time???
But I do agree with the scary - kind of makes the world depressing yet happy at the same time.
Post a Comment