To the horizon
There is a film I watched once – quite accidentally as I flicked onto it whilst channel surfing (back in the days when I had a TV) – called 1900. In brief it stars Tim Roth as the titular character, 1900, an abandoned baby discovered on a luxury cruiser by an African American labourer on the very first day of this “our new century, 1900”; hence the appellation bestowed upon the child. Anyway to cut a long story short 1900 grows into adulthood purely within the confines of the cruiser, cared for by the ship’s labourers. Towards the end of the film 1900 befriends a passenger on the cruiser, a passenger adamant that 1900 set foot on shore and discover the world that he is missing out on. Towards the climax of the film the friend visits the cruiser which is in port (New York, I believe) and about to be decommisioned. The friend is amazed to find 1900 still on board the ship and enquires into the time in between the last time that they had meet, the friend is sure 1900 must have made residence somewhere on solid ground by now. In a very poignant flashback 1900 narrates how, a number of years prior to the current meeting, he was indeed about to disembark, touch skin with the sun, at the very gangplank, ready to descend. On recalling seeing the sprawling metropolis in front of him he turns to the friend and says “there was no horizon, I could not see any horizon, only endless buildings”. At sea, for 1900, there was always a horizon, stars to look upon, a place for the mind to dream.
Sometimes I feel the same as 1900 did when he gazed out onto that endless metropolis, instead for me it is an endless network of webpages. In getting everything we seem to gain nothing. The most beautiful note registers no sound. I know the potential of the web, but give me my horizon, my blank space to dream. Let me look on the wonders of the city, marvel at ingenuity and beauty; but let me do it in quantities and at a pace befitting such activity. Let me always have my horizon.
I highly recommend watching the film. The story is powerful, Tim Roth’s acting superb;it abstracts enough from reality to give it that mythic quality and the ending is particularly touching.
missing title
As the course comes to a close I have to admit to feelings of sadness and frustration related to my experiences of it. However, it is hard to locate a primary source for this feelings. Unlike many, in fact most, undertaking the course I am not here for reasons of my own. I am here rather due to a quirk of the system, my program based on an older and now outdated structure where this course was a requisite of the MCM program.
As usual I am of two minds in relation to the assement part of the course. Today in class Jenni attempted to to give a clearer picture of what might constitute specific grades – factors to take in to consideration – when carrying out the self- assesment task. Chief amongst these factors was that of learning. Exactly just how much did we learn – or at least attempt to – learn from active participation in the course? Of course this question can only be approached when we consider what exactly we wished to gain from the course. One might posit, rather prosaically, the primary reason for enrolling in the course as wishing to gain elementary web-design skills; another, more abstractly, might posit the reason as being to become a better communicator.
Once these objectives are fully understood and articulated it is then possible to mark oneself against how successfully one succeded in achieving these objectives; gaining elementary web-creation skills, becoming a more adept communicator etc. But how does one mark oneself if the primary reason for being in a course is not due to clearly defined learning objectives but because one ‘has’ to do the course, because it is compulsory; a requisite.
When you get lemons make lemonade, as the eternally optimistic say. But that is the slogan for the ever accomadating.
So what, I hear you ask, marks did I give myself in the self assesment? (Okay, so I didn’t hear you ask as there is no-one to do the asking; one hand, a forest and all that). HD’s across the board as I achieved exactly what I set out to achieve, nothing.
This is no reflection on the subject or Jenni’s teaching methods, or on anyone else involved in the coure for that matter. The course is interesting, the knowledge it imparts valuable, for those undertaking the course of their own free-will (pardon the hyperbole, again).
At the level of study I am currently undertaking (Masters), all must add to the forward momentum of one clear, defined objective. of course I realise the university recognises this fact at it has made the course an elective. As stated at the beginning I am a carry-over; my placement in the course is an anomaly.
So here’s where the frustration and sadness come in. I strive to do my best in everything I set out to do (hence I hardly set out). Regardless of the course I find myself in my first inclination is to do the best, academically, that I possible can. I see all learning serving a higher purpose; being able to be applied to clearly thought out and articulated objectives. Of course, this is where the paradox comes into play. If forced to learn something I can’t readily apply there is bound to be a short in the circuit somewhere; I want to do well as it something I must do yet I have no reason for doing it. I feel sad for not doing as well as I could have done yet frustrated that I never even wanted to do anything (not even taken into consideration qualitative factors) in that area in the first place.
Despite all that I want to express a big thankyou to those that have perused this blog. I can’t be bothered to solicit responses as seems to be the order of the day (pheona) and I think concentrating on the arbitrary requirements of the course defeats the whole purpose of learning (it should be a joy, boys and girls, a joy). Having said that be prepared for the obligatory fifth blog.
Thankyou Camilla (I would have commented more but, as you see, I simply don’t know where to stop). Thankyou Simon’s friend, Anita. Thankyou Nimh and thankyou Jenni. Thankyou all for the wonderful and thought provoking comments. And to each and everyone a Merry Christmas.
Title Missing
Privacy. Philosophical fundamental or outdated irrelevance? Tonight, on 59:59 minutes.
With every flashbang, wysiwyg, user friendly piece of technology that emerges – and don’t they emerge at a pace of knots now? – a greater solidifying and expansion of information gathering resources/techniques seems to come with it. What does this mean to the individual? At polar opposite sides of the camp we have large corporations and Government institutions who reply in the affirmative for such a trend; transparency allows for greater efficiency, effectiveness – allowing a quantitative boost in data analysis (not neccesarily qualitative) – in meeting the ‘needs’ of the community.
Idealogically opposed to this we have the libertarian who staunchly believes in an individual’s right to conduct his business with as little intrusion as possbile. To this individual the trend is negative; it ’erodes’ and ’invades’, empowering and improving the methods and techniques of not only the altruistic but also the nefarious (pardon the hyperbole).
How does one approach such a topic? Jenni’s observation in class the other day - that futurizers (those who like to hypothesize on the future landscape) present either overly utopian or dystopian visions with little ground in between - is particularly relevant here.
As always I am torn between the warring ideologies. Emotionally I feel that privacy is an inherent right of the individual; there is a definite reason for the seperation of the ’public’ and ‘private’; there is information about one’s self that is ‘sensitive’ and, as such, should only be divulged in the strictest of confidence amongst those we ‘trust’.
However, this may be only a gut level reaction to the issue at hand. I was particulary struck by a comment made by a fellow student last year. The student was commenting on the relation between the individual and government noting that the status quo is that of a populace ‘in fear of the government’, whereas as this student, quite the radical, borrowed a quote from V for Vendetta (the Michael Moorcock graphic novel) stating that is the government who should ‘fear the people’.
Correct me if I am wrong but, in the classic understanding of the concept, government is not meant to ‘fear the people’ nor are people meant to fear it but government is meant to be the people (at least in a model based on democratic principals). Rule by the people for the people.
The only true revolution comes from a revolution in concept; a revolution of the mind. While I am not so naive as to be not aware of the injustices perpetrated throughout the world by big business and government I am also equally aware of the limitations of militant thought.
As always it is indefatigable history that is having the final say; dictating the course of action. Phenomenons such as the proliferation of My Space sites and success of reality TV shows (such as Big Brother) seem to indicate that the evolving human is finding less and less pertinent the question of privacy. We are faced by a generation that seems to be quite willing to let all their volumes be perused.
This is central to the development of the ‘hive mind’. It is the barriers that we build in our own minds, barriers quite often erroneoulsy constructed to ‘protect’, that stymies the flow of information and leads to the root cause of most of the human inflicted evils of the world: misunderstanding.
I look forward to the surrender of my individualism to the greater good; my full immersion and intergration into the matrix. Hope to see you there.
Postnote: Privacy. Interesting site about media manipulation found whilst scouring the internet for information about the ‘hive mind’: hives.
Now is the winter,
The recent stabbing incident at La Trobe University is interesting on a number of levels, in particular when contrasted against the the tragic mass shooting that occured at Virginia Tech in the States. Both incidents share similar features, both attacks occuring at an institute of higher learning and both perpetrators being attendee students at those institutes. The main deviance between the attacks – the degree of damage inflicted by the perpetrators – brings in to question once again gun control laws in the states.
I would have to concur with the now old NRA shibboleth “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people”, as being a self evident truth but, of course, as so many slogans have a tendency to do, it does not take in the totality of the situation and the clause should be added that although guns don’t kill people they sure as hell make it a heck of a lot easier to do so. If a person wants to carry out heinous acts and perpetrate damage on a community they will certainly find a way of doing so regardless of the circumstances, but it must be said that some societal conditions make those acts a lot more devasting than they need to be.
The stabbing at La Trobe hit particularly close to home for me as that is the institute where I undertook my undergrad studies. I know the area where the stabbing occured quite well and I feel for the people affected by it. However, I thank my lucky stars I live in a country that exhibits a a responsible and progressive attitude towards weapon control. Knowing that area I know the sort of damage that could have been inflicted if the student who undertook the stabbing had of had access to semi-automatic weapons.
It only took one incident, the massacre at Port Arthur, for the Australian government to realise the untold damage that could be leashed on the community via unregulated gun laws. Although I am not a fan of the current entrenched liberals at least they acted rapidly and appropriately in that situation (oh, if only they would do so in so many others). I do not wish to preach or proselytize but as long as tragedies, such as the one at Virgina tech, continue to occur in the States than the issue must surely continue to remain on the table. I genuinely feel for all those affected by such tragedies and do hope that this one in particular may spur the American Government to take a closer look at gun reform. For a more thorough account of the La Trobe incident I suggest people go here the age.
So much for the editoral, on a lighter and shameless self promoting note check out flint for some atmospheric ditties. ‘Tis a group of friends I am currently creating music with.
Still Looking
Hi y’all. I don’t know if such a salutation is appropriate given the overwhelmng lack of ‘y’all’ there is currently accessing the blog. I am thankful to the comment Jenny posted regarding my previous entry on community. Perhaps my equating of community to culture was generalized and overly reductionist. Of course this is a tendency of a great deal of hypothesizing; seeking to explain the whole via the part.
Jenny put forward the contention that exclusion and superiority – and uniformity in evaluation – are not a neccesarily inherent aspect of community. Indeed the inverse could be argued; it is the difference between individuals in a community that makes community strong and valid; individuals who are strongly in agreement with one another on diverse topics perhaps have less to communicate than those who are at odds. Without the contributions of foreign influences communities may risk stagnation.
I think somewhere between these two extreme views (cohesion through difference/cohesion through similarity) lies commnunity.
At the risk of reverting back to a reductionist inquiry on the nature and functioning of community Jenny’s comments also throw into question the role hierachy plays in community. Jenny contests that, along my line of thought, being a part of the RMIT community implies feeling in competition/superior to other learning instituitions such as La Trobe or Monash, which, hueristically, for Jenny is untrue.
One might argue that it is to the community of academics and scholars that Jenny feels a greater sense of belonging to and places a slightly higher value on than the institution that is RMIT. In this light of course Jenny doesn’t feel superior to members of other learning institutions as these institutions, in totem, form a great part of the wordwide collective (community) of academics and scholars. In this way it can be seen that one can, and no doubt being a member of the multifarious contemporary, will be a member of a diverse number of communities; communities which may be hierachized in importance to the individual. Merely a thought.
Wherefore art thou, Community?
Tossing and turning this evening. Check the time; it’s nearly six thirty in the morning and I haven’t got a wink of sleep. Sorry if this entry seems a little hazy; disjointed, but it’s coming to you from the edge of infinity. A million thoughts are flowing through my mind; a million synapses firing. The story kernel for the film that I am supposed to be writing as the final and most important component of my Master’s degree has decided this evening to start it’s evolution into a tree ( don’t talk to me about the mixed naturalistic metaphors… let this man speak so he can get some rest!!).The paradox being that for every moment that passes – the project seems to become more tangible – conversely I am assured of less and less sleep as I become over excited. Truly the muse is a fickle, mercurial mistress in the dispensations of her affections.
Too, D-day awaits me tomorrow as I have to submit for your, and cetain other person’s approval, this, my first true blog – the other’s being merely exercises in folly. I still am at somewhat of a lost as to what constitues ‘blogging’ content as I am fairly new to whole blogging phenomenen.
Aggh, how the freedom overwhelms me. Give me a clear cut topic, structure, limitations. Limitations…. The heaven’s pour forth!!! Community is the central concept explored in the university course that requires me to keep the blog you are currently reading. Community limits. Community limits both positively and negatively. Community can help limit the overwhelming flow of information, and stem the torrent of stimulus, that has become such a hallmark of the postmodern age by focusing individuals around key ideologies, practices and beliefs to the exclusion of other ideologies, practices and beliefs. Perhaps the famed French socio-anthropologist Claude Levi Strauss expressed it best:
‘What threatens us right now is what probably we might call over-communication – that is, the tendency to know exactly in what part of the world what is going on all parts of the world. In order for a culture to be truly itself and to produce something the culture and its members must be convinced of their originality and… to some extent… their superiority over others; it is only under conditions of under-communication that is can produce anything (Myth and Meaning, pg.20). (I equate culture and community to be one and the same thing, only truly differing in scale.)
In order to form identity this exclusion is neccesary and warranted. Limitation is central to identity formation; without limits of any kind an individual is susceptible to fragmentation of the self. Community is another form of identity formation, taking place at a group rather an individual level. It is the limiting and defining function of community that fascinates me the most: member cohesiveness enforced through uniform qualitative judgements made about certain social features and artifacts. My fascination may arise from the fact that I find myself a victim of the post-modern era, enthralled to the concept of relativism, kneeling supplicant to the ‘tyranny of communication’; unable to make qualitative judgments of any kind without the greatest of difficulty. Is this what a blog is? I do not know, I do not know. I just write.
a bug on the screen » 2007 infinite narrative, episode 1
a bug on the screen » 2007 infinite narrative, episode 1 She felt something stir deep inside her… or was that just the curried egg she had for lunch?
jenny weight, RMIT » 2007 infinite narrative, episode 1
jenny weight, RMIT » 2007 infinite narrative, episode 1 As he stood up she could see he was considerbly shorter than his reclining posture indicated.
ChocolateCulture « awesomestuffs
Hmm, Mr. Brenner seems to be quite popular.ChocolateCulture « awesomestuffs
