We are all afraid of not being accepted because of something we’ve said, or thought, or done. This basic human fear, which explains the aggrieved response of many who have physical and verbal disabilities to Lizzo’s use of the word ‘spaz’ in her latest song GRRLS, is also, paradoxically, the fear that drives some to question that kind of a response in the first place.
Thanks for this. I was having a difficult day, but this elevated me. It gave me hope. Common sense and caring are rare AND welcome (by me, at least). And I learned from you as well. Thank you.
"Without context, there can be no poetry, no hip hop, no double entendres and no comedy."
I don't want to end up sounding like a conspiracy theorist, but sometimes I think this is the point.
When all of those things are gone, we will have plenty of mainstream pop music that's over-compressed and quantized and autotuned. We will have plenty cookie-cutter Marvel movies with a lot of camera movement and cool, CGI-assisted shots to create the feeling that something interesting is happening on screen. And we'll even have comedy. It will just be the sensible, politically conscious kind that elicits the right kind of clapter. Because uncontrollable belly laughter is a little bit threatening.
What we'll have is plenty of content that's just edgy enough to approximate danger but that doesn't meaningfully threaten anyone important.
I love this, Chloe! Context is such an intriguing way to consider this issue. It also gets me thinking about the context in which something is received - the inner context of experience and belief that affects our perception and can limit what we’re able to see. The play and multiplicity of language (like the self) may go unrecognized or be distrusted.
Perhaps the question becomes, how do we take a wider view to consider and accept contexts outside of ourselves? What conditions (good will, trust, imagination…) would help with this endeavour?
I often think of Antonio Porchia’s aphorism, “I know what I have given you. I do not know what you have received.”
That bit about Protestantism and the death of context really made me think. I used to be a Protestant Christian myself and I think the worldview definitely encouraged my literalist, rigid streak. (You can see a pretty straight line between Biblical fundamentalism and its secular cousin, constitutional originalism.) Thankfully I also have a deeper metaphorical/fluid/easygoing streak and the past couple of years have been about bringing my beliefs (or lack of beliefs) into harmony with that. Focusing on unlearning rather than learning is a scary but ultimately relaxing process.
Thanks for this. I was having a difficult day, but this elevated me. It gave me hope. Common sense and caring are rare AND welcome (by me, at least). And I learned from you as well. Thank you.
Excellent and beautiful.
This is great. Really appreciated the empathetic counter to valuing impact over intent. You always have such a human-focused way of looking at things.
"Without context, there can be no poetry, no hip hop, no double entendres and no comedy."
I don't want to end up sounding like a conspiracy theorist, but sometimes I think this is the point.
When all of those things are gone, we will have plenty of mainstream pop music that's over-compressed and quantized and autotuned. We will have plenty cookie-cutter Marvel movies with a lot of camera movement and cool, CGI-assisted shots to create the feeling that something interesting is happening on screen. And we'll even have comedy. It will just be the sensible, politically conscious kind that elicits the right kind of clapter. Because uncontrollable belly laughter is a little bit threatening.
What we'll have is plenty of content that's just edgy enough to approximate danger but that doesn't meaningfully threaten anyone important.
I dig this so much.
I love this, Chloe! Context is such an intriguing way to consider this issue. It also gets me thinking about the context in which something is received - the inner context of experience and belief that affects our perception and can limit what we’re able to see. The play and multiplicity of language (like the self) may go unrecognized or be distrusted.
Perhaps the question becomes, how do we take a wider view to consider and accept contexts outside of ourselves? What conditions (good will, trust, imagination…) would help with this endeavour?
I often think of Antonio Porchia’s aphorism, “I know what I have given you. I do not know what you have received.”
Thanks so much for your ongoing beautiful work!
You continue to be the voice of reason in the storm.
That bit about Protestantism and the death of context really made me think. I used to be a Protestant Christian myself and I think the worldview definitely encouraged my literalist, rigid streak. (You can see a pretty straight line between Biblical fundamentalism and its secular cousin, constitutional originalism.) Thankfully I also have a deeper metaphorical/fluid/easygoing streak and the past couple of years have been about bringing my beliefs (or lack of beliefs) into harmony with that. Focusing on unlearning rather than learning is a scary but ultimately relaxing process.
Word.
Thanks for the boost of sanity, as always.