Why Talk Culture?
Why talk culture? Or more specifically, why care enough to talk about culture? Is there really a point to doing so, besides making conversation? Is there anything to get out of it? Cultural discourse seems to be in that realm of topics that is nice to talk about until it’s time to get serious about things, at which point you apparently put on your serious hat and leave any contemplation at the door. But if that’s the case, is there any point to having a blog on it besides making conversation? Should I have any goals outside of the occasional deep thought? A couple years ago, I tried to give a defense of the humanities in general (including cultural discourse along with literature, philosophy, and so on) in my other blog. At some point I will likely revise that defense. What I want to do here is more limited. Instead of humanities education in general, I am defending cultural discussion; and, while there are a variety of grounds on which I might defend these topics, I will be using one specific one here.
The idea of cultural discourse seems related to the general ‘humanities’ subjects, such as history and philosophy, in that it considers broad questions about the nature of things rather than thinking about how to solve exact problems. With all of these topics there is always, implicitly or explicitly, a question of whether they have any concrete value, or if instead they are amusements at best or distractions (perhaps even some sort of high-minded corruption) at worst. If you want to be well-rounded and think broadly, so the general conception goes, you go with a humanities education; if you want to focus on success, look for something more specific, like med school or occupational training. The thought that always follows behind this is the idea that, while it would be nice to be well-rounded, really we should focus on being successful first; the time for becoming cultivated, if it is even necessary, comes later. In short, culture can wait.
My contention is that no, it cannot. The reason is that culture is not something we can stand apart from while we focus on our own lives and then return back to when we’re financially secure and comfortable. Consideration of cultural developments is not something that should be avoided, because culture itself cannot be avoided, nor can its effects on us. Previously I defined culture as “the set of factors, including institutions, traditions, history, values, and symbols, that has developed into the defining background for a group’s identity, into the means through which the members of the group make sense of their situation and make decisions about how to live.” Assuming this to be true, the influence of culture on our lives begins even before we can speak. Culture helps to decide what preferences we have; it pushes us towards certain associations and causes us to shun others. But it is not limited to these, which are rather obvious; culture’s influence extends beyond the types of choices we prefer to affect the very choices we think we have. That is, not only preferences but possibilities themselves, including what we think makes an ‘acceptable’ career and life path, and what sorts of factors make up a livelihood and ‘security’ are influenced heavily by the background in which we grow up, the values which are transmitted into us from day one; what is important to us and what constitutes a good life are not simply free-floating choices made on our whim, but ranges of possibility determined by what we have accepted as good and bad, worthy and unworthy, and this is done through that broad range of social affects which I have called culture.
This means that there are external factors pushing on us at all times and in all situations, to such a degree that they have the power to define possibility. And those forces are always at work. Ironically enough, one way in which we can see these forces explicitly try to influences us is through the “culture wars” as defined by conservatives. It is said that our culture is under attack, and that we have values that need defending. But rather than being a matter of preservation, diversity, cultural contribution, or some other such justification, it is accepted as given that the culture under attack is the only acceptable culture for America. Apparently, it is a given that there is a certain universally binding set of values that needs defense from all opposing factions no matter what. These values themselves are not interrogated, nor even politely questioned as to their own justification. Not that they are evil values; that’s not the issue. What is the issue is that what they represent is never considered, nor are their sources (in a genuine, historically verifiable sense) or relations to other cultures and elements of daily existence, such as the natural world. What is good and right is already decided, without debate, and people are willing to pay a great price to defend it; this is not a case of culture acting like a casual outside influences suggesting one possibility over the other, for the culture warriors and for those they are trying to “save,” us, the people in the middle.
Culture war isn’t the only way in which control is exercised in this realm, of course; all of the component pieces of culture are engaged in the struggle for influence. Our upbringing conflicts with the things we learn from schoolyard friends, which is different from the expanded world that post-secondary education offers, which is again different from the world of work. We listen to family members and internet friends and 24 hour news channel talking heads, and they all present a view. Left alone, all of this can confuse us, leaving us desperate for an anchor in the shifting seas and willing to grasp onto any strong authority (one of the motivations of “culture warriors”). It can make us lose faith in any chance of carving out a sensible existence in the chaos. Or it can lead to apathy.
But this is not a foregone conclusion. We still have a way to pull apart and coherently reconstruct the mess of vectors that pull on us, and that comes first of all through awareness. I said before that cultural discourse, as a humanistic study, is something to help you “be well-rounded and think broadly;” what I didn’t say is that this is in itself a powerful and necessary tool for taming the influences in one’s life. The reason that this sort of investigation doesn’t appear to offer an immediate value is because its influence has to do with the whole of life rather than one specific possibility of one specific component of it; its effects are lived through us in the way we handle social pressures and psychological urges, how we consider our options and weigh the validity of evidence, rather than in accomplishing a set task. In this sense, cultural discourse acts as a tool of knowledge, and knowledge is power. But while that’s a truism, it’s never explained why knowledge is power: it’s because it takes knowledge to see the field for what it is, and it takes insight to turn so bind so many moving pieces into an order that makes victory possible where sheer force falters. Here, it means that cultural discourse is what makes you aware of what culture is and does. You become aware of what influences your choices, so that you can decide what influences are to be trusted as benevolent; you become aware of the alternatives, so that the total set of options, rather than a set of possibilities pre-determined by others, is opened to you; you also learn to see the strange and mysterious other for what it is, another human being under the same influences in a different situation, so that you can begin to understand how to communicate and how to separate the beneficial from the harmful in the lives of others (something the culture warriors do not spend much time considering). In other words, you were blind and now see; and when it comes to navigating a maze that shifts constantly, that doesn’t hurt.
So anyone who tells you that there are more important things to think about is not only not an intellectual; that person doesn’t understand his or your own best interests. That person either isn’t aware of or isn’t interested in understanding the real factors that go into making the human amongst humanity, which includes himself; he thus is unable to pursue the real sources of his discomfort, his indignation, or his anomie when he feels them. He will mistake the lack of clarity with which life greets him for simplicity, and he will make enemies where he could have valuable friends. True, he could live happily; but his happiness is subject to the whims of his captors, nature and nurture; he does not consider that the former can be directed, and the latter overcome, if the need arises, and so you should wish him luck that he not have to face such a time. In short, with talk of culture comes understanding of culture; and with understanding of culture comes understanding of yourself; and with understanding of yourself, comes control of yourself; and the person who possess herself is a person with genuine power.
The idea of cultural discourse seems related to the general ‘humanities’ subjects, such as history and philosophy, in that it considers broad questions about the nature of things rather than thinking about how to solve exact problems. With all of these topics there is always, implicitly or explicitly, a question of whether they have any concrete value, or if instead they are amusements at best or distractions (perhaps even some sort of high-minded corruption) at worst. If you want to be well-rounded and think broadly, so the general conception goes, you go with a humanities education; if you want to focus on success, look for something more specific, like med school or occupational training. The thought that always follows behind this is the idea that, while it would be nice to be well-rounded, really we should focus on being successful first; the time for becoming cultivated, if it is even necessary, comes later. In short, culture can wait.
My contention is that no, it cannot. The reason is that culture is not something we can stand apart from while we focus on our own lives and then return back to when we’re financially secure and comfortable. Consideration of cultural developments is not something that should be avoided, because culture itself cannot be avoided, nor can its effects on us. Previously I defined culture as “the set of factors, including institutions, traditions, history, values, and symbols, that has developed into the defining background for a group’s identity, into the means through which the members of the group make sense of their situation and make decisions about how to live.” Assuming this to be true, the influence of culture on our lives begins even before we can speak. Culture helps to decide what preferences we have; it pushes us towards certain associations and causes us to shun others. But it is not limited to these, which are rather obvious; culture’s influence extends beyond the types of choices we prefer to affect the very choices we think we have. That is, not only preferences but possibilities themselves, including what we think makes an ‘acceptable’ career and life path, and what sorts of factors make up a livelihood and ‘security’ are influenced heavily by the background in which we grow up, the values which are transmitted into us from day one; what is important to us and what constitutes a good life are not simply free-floating choices made on our whim, but ranges of possibility determined by what we have accepted as good and bad, worthy and unworthy, and this is done through that broad range of social affects which I have called culture.
This means that there are external factors pushing on us at all times and in all situations, to such a degree that they have the power to define possibility. And those forces are always at work. Ironically enough, one way in which we can see these forces explicitly try to influences us is through the “culture wars” as defined by conservatives. It is said that our culture is under attack, and that we have values that need defending. But rather than being a matter of preservation, diversity, cultural contribution, or some other such justification, it is accepted as given that the culture under attack is the only acceptable culture for America. Apparently, it is a given that there is a certain universally binding set of values that needs defense from all opposing factions no matter what. These values themselves are not interrogated, nor even politely questioned as to their own justification. Not that they are evil values; that’s not the issue. What is the issue is that what they represent is never considered, nor are their sources (in a genuine, historically verifiable sense) or relations to other cultures and elements of daily existence, such as the natural world. What is good and right is already decided, without debate, and people are willing to pay a great price to defend it; this is not a case of culture acting like a casual outside influences suggesting one possibility over the other, for the culture warriors and for those they are trying to “save,” us, the people in the middle.
Culture war isn’t the only way in which control is exercised in this realm, of course; all of the component pieces of culture are engaged in the struggle for influence. Our upbringing conflicts with the things we learn from schoolyard friends, which is different from the expanded world that post-secondary education offers, which is again different from the world of work. We listen to family members and internet friends and 24 hour news channel talking heads, and they all present a view. Left alone, all of this can confuse us, leaving us desperate for an anchor in the shifting seas and willing to grasp onto any strong authority (one of the motivations of “culture warriors”). It can make us lose faith in any chance of carving out a sensible existence in the chaos. Or it can lead to apathy.
But this is not a foregone conclusion. We still have a way to pull apart and coherently reconstruct the mess of vectors that pull on us, and that comes first of all through awareness. I said before that cultural discourse, as a humanistic study, is something to help you “be well-rounded and think broadly;” what I didn’t say is that this is in itself a powerful and necessary tool for taming the influences in one’s life. The reason that this sort of investigation doesn’t appear to offer an immediate value is because its influence has to do with the whole of life rather than one specific possibility of one specific component of it; its effects are lived through us in the way we handle social pressures and psychological urges, how we consider our options and weigh the validity of evidence, rather than in accomplishing a set task. In this sense, cultural discourse acts as a tool of knowledge, and knowledge is power. But while that’s a truism, it’s never explained why knowledge is power: it’s because it takes knowledge to see the field for what it is, and it takes insight to turn so bind so many moving pieces into an order that makes victory possible where sheer force falters. Here, it means that cultural discourse is what makes you aware of what culture is and does. You become aware of what influences your choices, so that you can decide what influences are to be trusted as benevolent; you become aware of the alternatives, so that the total set of options, rather than a set of possibilities pre-determined by others, is opened to you; you also learn to see the strange and mysterious other for what it is, another human being under the same influences in a different situation, so that you can begin to understand how to communicate and how to separate the beneficial from the harmful in the lives of others (something the culture warriors do not spend much time considering). In other words, you were blind and now see; and when it comes to navigating a maze that shifts constantly, that doesn’t hurt.
So anyone who tells you that there are more important things to think about is not only not an intellectual; that person doesn’t understand his or your own best interests. That person either isn’t aware of or isn’t interested in understanding the real factors that go into making the human amongst humanity, which includes himself; he thus is unable to pursue the real sources of his discomfort, his indignation, or his anomie when he feels them. He will mistake the lack of clarity with which life greets him for simplicity, and he will make enemies where he could have valuable friends. True, he could live happily; but his happiness is subject to the whims of his captors, nature and nurture; he does not consider that the former can be directed, and the latter overcome, if the need arises, and so you should wish him luck that he not have to face such a time. In short, with talk of culture comes understanding of culture; and with understanding of culture comes understanding of yourself; and with understanding of yourself, comes control of yourself; and the person who possess herself is a person with genuine power.
posted by Derek at 11:40 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home