So, a slice of life at the beginning of the third millenium after Christ: although the duration of our planet's years have been pinned down to the millisecond, we still use multiple systems to measure the passage of time. In some places we divide years into two slopes: those that came before the birth of a religious prophet, and those that came after. In other places eras succeed one another seemlessly, according to the length of time a symbolic government figure holds his position as symbolic government figure. In yet other places, even though people pin the beginning of an era at the same moment, their calendars diverge in the length and succession of their years, so that they've become out of phase with each other. And finally, there are those who don't count years, and thus don't know them.
We are equally disparate in our measurement of temperatures, distances and weights; hundreds of currencies coexist and each of them attempts to give value to the same thing. Those values are not only hard to translate from one currency to the next, but they are also different from place to place and from moment to moment. And there are places were currencies don't exist, and people barter, instead.
The most astounding thing about this confusion is that we propose thousands of theories about what is the right way for things to be or be measured, but most of us are simply utterly confused. The information is too much, and in such superabundance honest, informed decisions are hard to make. Much of this defending of one system over another is the result of either dishonesty or ignorance.
We have not enough control over our insecurities: greed is rampant, and so is the inability of identifying with others and their needs.
We have not enough computing capabilities, either.
Emotional education and more technology are the things we need.
Information technology does gather speed all the time, although since it is being developed by elites that use and issue it according to their own interests, its value can also be perceived as double edged, particularly because we still have very little control over our thougths and actions. In this respect, some steps have been taken in several fields and there are whole new disciplines, such as Conflict Transformation and Eco-economics, that are very promising indeed.
Nevertheless it would seem we are rather lopsided, and our immaturity can be seen in the way this lopsidedness is explained: you will hear some people saying that technology is proliferating unduly, and others will blame it on a stagnation of the Humanities. We still can't see that our problem is the whole, not the parts. Not that that would immediately help us; problems would still remain as big as they are, but a shift in attitude would help us tackle them better.
What is most frightening is that many of us foresee a time of great suffering coming. Millions are already dieing in the so-called Third World, because of unfulfilled basic needs; in the meantime the First World (there's no Second), hasn't realized that we all share the same planet. The brand of prosperity that is enjoyed here is entirely dependent on resources and people coming from that Third World. Even leaving aside the injustice of a system that prospered precisely because it took advantage of others' disadvantages and, directly or indirectly, ensured that these disadvantages continued to be there to be exploited, the situation is not tenable for much longer. Change is not a question of retribution, but of survival.
Yet we don't change things; we don't know if we can't, or if we aren't trying hard enough... Or if, indeed, we aren't trying hard enough, and we're just not admitting it to ourselves. Perhaps we need to become wiser, or be replaced by some others, wiser than we can be.
Friday, December 31, 2004
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
Ana's monologue
Yesterday night i watched Eliseo Subiela's Dark Side of the Heart. I hadn't seen that movie in years. Ana's monologue on the peer is, in my opinion, a particularly wonderful piece of writing, and Sandra Ballesteros delivers it masterfully: "Never look at a whore in daylight; it is like watching a movie with the lights on; like a cabaret at ten in the morning, with sun rays piercing the dust brought up by sweeping; like discovering that the poem that made you cry at night barely interests you the next day. It is like this fucking world would be if we had to accept things just as they are; like finding the actor you saw playing Hamlet on the soup kitchen line; like the emptiness when they pay you and you don't feel, even a bit; like the sadness when they pay you and you felt, at least a bit; like opening a drawer and discovering a picture of the whore when she was nine. Like letting you come with me, knowing that when the magic is over you will be with a woman like me in Montevideo."
Monday, December 27, 2004
Really, really, really slushy
When i went shopping this morning it was pissing outside, except at intervals, when the piss froze and it snowed down. The whether didn't seem to be able to make up its mind. After having lived in Norway for three and a half years you'd think i'd already have wisened up and adopted the waterproof clothing everybody wears here, but I make do with my regular sneakers, jeans, t-shirts and sweaters -- everything on top of nice, thick, woolen underwear and socks, of course, and accompanied by a handy leather jacket, scarf and cap. Yes, you do get wet, but the wool keeps you warm. Plus, you don't have to spend on freakishly expensive waterproof gear and look the same everywhere you go.
In any case, even though this time it meant plodding through slush and at times uncertainly sliding on the compacted snow on the road with wet and fogged up glasses, i love the walk to Vilkis. It's two kilometers of rolling hills, with glimpses of the fjord at times and always the mountains, in the distance. It gives me time to think.
Today i was wondering at how we human beings seem to have power to create our own reality, at least at times, as if we were able to affect the way the universe is with the force of our thoughts. We certainly are able to transform other people and other animals, at least. White slavers justified themselves by saying that blacks and indians were inferior human beings, or animals, or lacking certain sensibilities. They treated their slaves cruelly and, in doing them violence, many times it was violence that they reaped: in real life Segismundo does not forgive Basilio so easily. So even nowadays, the fruits of that violence still stop people from seeing each other as people. I suppose sensibilities were damaged on both sides, in the end.
What crossed my mind this morning, however, was the possibility that mind might affect reality, not only other people. What if simply by thinking we affect the way the universe is? What if we see stars and galaxies because mind makes them that way? We thinking entities, i mean, not only humans and other animals, but all those that may exist out there, in other planets and stars, or in this one, embedded in matter or vacuum or outside or across our little bubble of space and time. What if what we see is part of their making?
This thought implies that i do believe in a creative force in the universe, after all. A force with personality, of which I am a part. But this is all speculation, fancy and ripe with the appeal of endless beauty and possibilities, i think, and from such I may draw strength and energy, now and then, but to treat the whole idea like more than --again-- a possibility, would be crazy.
This is why i don't understand how a concept such a faith could have been born from other than the will to dominate or influence others. For a person to wish that something were true is one thing, but to convince oneself that it is so, or why such conviction should be necessary, I can't comprehend. No, faith was impossed by force (as History confirms), with threats and violence, and that is why the mechanics of religion can only work when introduced to young children, and then only if carefully nurtured and protected.
In any case, even though this time it meant plodding through slush and at times uncertainly sliding on the compacted snow on the road with wet and fogged up glasses, i love the walk to Vilkis. It's two kilometers of rolling hills, with glimpses of the fjord at times and always the mountains, in the distance. It gives me time to think.
Today i was wondering at how we human beings seem to have power to create our own reality, at least at times, as if we were able to affect the way the universe is with the force of our thoughts. We certainly are able to transform other people and other animals, at least. White slavers justified themselves by saying that blacks and indians were inferior human beings, or animals, or lacking certain sensibilities. They treated their slaves cruelly and, in doing them violence, many times it was violence that they reaped: in real life Segismundo does not forgive Basilio so easily. So even nowadays, the fruits of that violence still stop people from seeing each other as people. I suppose sensibilities were damaged on both sides, in the end.
What crossed my mind this morning, however, was the possibility that mind might affect reality, not only other people. What if simply by thinking we affect the way the universe is? What if we see stars and galaxies because mind makes them that way? We thinking entities, i mean, not only humans and other animals, but all those that may exist out there, in other planets and stars, or in this one, embedded in matter or vacuum or outside or across our little bubble of space and time. What if what we see is part of their making?
This thought implies that i do believe in a creative force in the universe, after all. A force with personality, of which I am a part. But this is all speculation, fancy and ripe with the appeal of endless beauty and possibilities, i think, and from such I may draw strength and energy, now and then, but to treat the whole idea like more than --again-- a possibility, would be crazy.
This is why i don't understand how a concept such a faith could have been born from other than the will to dominate or influence others. For a person to wish that something were true is one thing, but to convince oneself that it is so, or why such conviction should be necessary, I can't comprehend. No, faith was impossed by force (as History confirms), with threats and violence, and that is why the mechanics of religion can only work when introduced to young children, and then only if carefully nurtured and protected.
Intro
Yesterday night i fell asleep on the sofa watching Sound of Music; if it sounds suspicious for a 30 year old man to do so, it's because there's reason to suspect. I'm gay, and do match the stereotype as far as enjoying movies that straight men wouldn't touch with a two meter pole. There's more: i live alone with a cat that wakes me up every morning by bouncing onto my chest, whether i'm sleeping on the sofa, my bed or the floor (yeah, it happened once). My first impulse is to grab her by the tail and send her spinning to the other side of the room, but then my better self (always oversleeps a little, poor guy; i must tire him a lot) starts simply scratching her behind the ears, and she starts purring... Then i have to stop her from rubbing her ass against my face because, for some reason, as soon as i start petting her, she lifts her tail, crouches on her paws, and shoves her ass towards me... I'm flustered by this behavior, dr. Spock: What have i done wrong for the horny little bitch to have such wrong ideas about our relationship, i wonder?
Anyway, there are extenuating circumstances for my fitting of stereotypes... I live in an isolated little village on Vestlandet, and at the moment am practically snow-locked, hours away from the nearest city, and before choosing Sound of Music i'd already run through more than half of my movie collection on the previous days -- much of it gay-themed too, i admit, but not all of it. The other night i even watched MIB and no, it's not because i have a fetish, either! Just the occasional (frequent, my friends say) display of bad taste which, again, takes me away from stereotypes.
But why am i writing so much about the s word this morning? Contrarily to what this freudian slip would indicate, i tell myself i don't care one bit whether i fit into them or not. I've noticed that our social lives are defined by attempting to conform to (or get as far as possible away from) stereotypes. When you're a child, you have to be a "good boy", show that you are "well educated"... Then you're taught to grow close or away from some behaviors if you want to be a manly man (my Latin American upbringing showing its teeth again), and in order to be accepted by different social groups (family, school, the people you work with, etc.) you have to warp your personality in yet other ways. And if you realize how unfair and thwarting this all is and, like Joan Jett, you decide you don't give a damn 'bout your reputation, you become an outsider, and many of your needs as a social animal are not fulfilled, and you grow up deformed anyway.
So the trick lies in realizing that very few people are completely healthy in this world of ours. Everybody has their quirks and sensitive spots... If our emotional personæ were visible, I imagine they would have members that would match our physical ones more or less faithfully... but then they'd be made of all kind of incongruous materials: parts of us would be metallic or wooden carapaces that'd hide, alter or exaggerate certain features, while others would be made of putty or even vapour...
Of course, i know we're not like other animals because culture does play a very big role in our formation, but still, I'm sure there should be a balance between how culture shapes us and how much we get to develop our innate potential... No, it's more than that: nobody should ever have to be shunned by their differences. On the contrary, we should create a meta-culture that treasures differences, both in cultures and individuals. But our species had to learn to discern without guidance, and we're not done yet, obviously, so we got work to do. Social and cultural engineering are far away, yet.
Anyway, i got to go mail some letters.
Anyway, there are extenuating circumstances for my fitting of stereotypes... I live in an isolated little village on Vestlandet, and at the moment am practically snow-locked, hours away from the nearest city, and before choosing Sound of Music i'd already run through more than half of my movie collection on the previous days -- much of it gay-themed too, i admit, but not all of it. The other night i even watched MIB and no, it's not because i have a fetish, either! Just the occasional (frequent, my friends say) display of bad taste which, again, takes me away from stereotypes.
But why am i writing so much about the s word this morning? Contrarily to what this freudian slip would indicate, i tell myself i don't care one bit whether i fit into them or not. I've noticed that our social lives are defined by attempting to conform to (or get as far as possible away from) stereotypes. When you're a child, you have to be a "good boy", show that you are "well educated"... Then you're taught to grow close or away from some behaviors if you want to be a manly man (my Latin American upbringing showing its teeth again), and in order to be accepted by different social groups (family, school, the people you work with, etc.) you have to warp your personality in yet other ways. And if you realize how unfair and thwarting this all is and, like Joan Jett, you decide you don't give a damn 'bout your reputation, you become an outsider, and many of your needs as a social animal are not fulfilled, and you grow up deformed anyway.
So the trick lies in realizing that very few people are completely healthy in this world of ours. Everybody has their quirks and sensitive spots... If our emotional personæ were visible, I imagine they would have members that would match our physical ones more or less faithfully... but then they'd be made of all kind of incongruous materials: parts of us would be metallic or wooden carapaces that'd hide, alter or exaggerate certain features, while others would be made of putty or even vapour...
Of course, i know we're not like other animals because culture does play a very big role in our formation, but still, I'm sure there should be a balance between how culture shapes us and how much we get to develop our innate potential... No, it's more than that: nobody should ever have to be shunned by their differences. On the contrary, we should create a meta-culture that treasures differences, both in cultures and individuals. But our species had to learn to discern without guidance, and we're not done yet, obviously, so we got work to do. Social and cultural engineering are far away, yet.
Anyway, i got to go mail some letters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
