Introduction:
“Every yes means at least one no.” For most of us, regardless of our confessions, we say yes to cool. But what exactly are we saying ‘no’ to? Unlike our default preferences, such sacrifices aren’t as obvious, or visual. Although not observable through the eye, there is a price for this lottery ticket with cool being the jackpot. Not all of us can win, but all of us pay that price. Our attempts at being cool comes is at the expense of our connections with the world around us. More specifically, coolness alienates: our bodies from our minds & our minds from our bodies, us from our loose grip on life, and us from our chances of even acknowledging the possibility of a life beyond the roles.
Background Info:
“Whichever way you spell it, it’s as well to remember the word cool is not merely another way of saying ‘good.’ It comes with baggage- an alternative set of values which are often profoundly in conflict with official valaues” (Pountain and Robins)
There are different paths towards coolness. Within every different culture, there are different perceptions of cool. Cool isn’t about being popular, nor is it about having mainstream values or your pants on the ground. It’s about the role we play that will most likely give us status and a label within our sub-worlds. Whatever that role is, it derives from both nature and nurture- both our biological structures and our environments. We define “success” based on the stories that we hear and/or witness. However, there are also the innate factors that push us, those who are given the options, towards certain paths, simply because of the convenience (e.g. tall person and playing basketball). Having this coalesce that forms our ideas of “cool,” we project this idea through our identities. And thus our interpretations of cool become interpretation of how we should live our lives.
Argument #1: Separation of Body and Identity
In our attempts at being cool, we alienate our bodies from our identities- mind from body, and body from mind. It is as though, the mind and the body are two separate entities. And when we think of ourselves, we identify that as our minds- the one that dominates the body. The coolness that we perceive is based on what we think. The body is merely an accessory- a template which we adorn to reflect our perceptions of cool. Rather than being who we are, our bodies are a projection of who we are, which apparently is our minds.
If our minds are our identities, the essence of our being, then our bodies would be the canvas on which we paint on. Our bodies are seen as representatives of our beings, rather than our beings. We specifically alter our bodies so that it can reflect our interest in whatever culture or fashion. We cover ourselves with different ornaments to match our sense of coolness, and how it’s usually represented by outside sources. As many of us have noticed, there has been a recent hype on clothing that accentuates the exact shape of your legs, and glasses that mystify your eyes and eyebrows. Blame is not necessary, but it does appear that such fashion originated from hip-hop artists, specifically Kanye West. The fashion that the mind interprets becomes the form of the body. Although both the mind and the body changes according to our interpretations, the two are separate. The adjustments that the mind makes are seen as who we are, or simply how we think, whereas the body is just our way of telling everyone else who we are.
Show, don't tell"- this is what we've been taught; this is what we do. Throughout our lives, we project various aspects of our identity to the world. Tattoos are just one of those methods of projection. Rather than going around saying, "I think _____ is cool! I think _____ is cool!..." (which would seem desperate, and therefore uncool), people get tattoos to portray that. Tattoos signify to other people- give hints about what the hosts' preferences are, without telling the whole story. Tattoos make out bodies more convenient of selling ourselves out. With a tattoo(s), we are able to constantly project our identities in one of the most obvious ways. Tattoos show what we think is cool, but more importantly they show what's in our packages. It sends out signals about the culture- the "tribe" that he or she is a part of. As John Fanning said, people (at least, he) get tattoos to "be in that world", whatever that world is. The tattoos are not only a signifier of what world you're in, but, in some cases, your ticket into that world as well. Just as farmers give brandings to their cows to mark their ownerships, certain cultures do the same with people using tattoos. Rather than saying "I am into this kind of stuff," it's more like the tattoos are saying, "Property of this kind of stuff." In attempt to be cool, and show that we are cool, we alienate our bodies from ourselves, in that it is merely an accessory to us- something that we decorate on to send out the best signal.
Aside from playing dress up with our bodies, and getting inked, we also alter our hair. In order to play our roles, mostly gender roles, we change our hair accordingly. And once again, this part of our bodies becomes just a signifier for who we are. “Hair is hair is hair? Not exactly. It is also a powerful symbol of self” (Synott, 122). For most of us, our bodies do not define who we are. Instead, who we are, which is often perceived as the mind/brain, defines our bodies. We would not look at someone and think, “Person with long hair,” we think “girl,” and the long hair would just be supporting evidence that she is, in fact a girl. “Opposite ideologies have opposite hair. Hair is not only a sex symbol, it is also an ideological symbol. Opposition to conventional sex roles, to conventional definitions of femininity and to the conventional norms for a women and men is therefore often expressed in opposition to conventional hair norms” (Synott, 115). Hair, like other parts of our bodies, adjusts according to our identities, and our ideas of appropriate roles and coolness. The two do no coincide, instead they body follows the mind. It would appear that the body is dominated by the mind, even though it takes both to define our identities. However, since we are human, intelligent beings that rose above the animal level, we classify ourselves by our advantage- our brains. Therefore, if we were to identify ourselves based on our bodies, (aside from seeming superficial) it would be like we are “degrading” ourselves back to that level. And so, our minds become our identities, that dominate our bodies- our connection with the other animals.
Argument #2: Grasp on Life
Trying to be cool and reenact the previous success stories that we’ve interpreted, we follow these maps throughout our lives. For all of us, if not most of us, we were told that wealth and intelligence are the ultimate goals in life. Therefore, all of us go to school and try to do well, so that maybe one day, we’ll obtain both trophies. Whatever our ideas of cool are, we try to achieve that in order to create importance for ourselves. Trying to gain this status, we follow a strict path that leads to the desired results.
“Teens are like Africa” (Merchants of Cool). Our lives have become another colony for the coolness to take control of. We can all say that we are our own person, and that our lives are in our own hands. However, our desire for cool and status forfeits that control. We process whatever is given to us in our surroundings, mostly the media. Although it may be impossible, we never try to achieve originality. Our only goal is to fool ourselves enough to appear original amongst the people around us, while imitating an experience. Through this imitation, we are alienated from our control on life, because we are living by a map that has been roughly set out for us.
“Life is like a game of cards. The hand that is dealt you represents determinism; the way you play it is free will” (Jawaharlal Nehru). Even with our free will, there are is a limited amount of combination that we can play the cards by. And there would be, of course, an inclination towards one specific combination for every person. That inclination is a result of both the person’s nature and nurture. However, once the person is on one path, we are to follow that road. We do not create their own roads, we only follow the ones that have already been laid out. As it has been said in class, many of us want to create our own stories- stories that are not only significant, but allow us to be the heroes. But the fact is that we aren’t creating our own stories, we’re only reenacting stories that have already been told. By being admitted to the cool game, which we are before we’re even born, we are to live a certain life- a life that best corresponds with the environment you are in, and the life that will most likely give you recognition. Regardless of what that life specifically is, it is and never was our choice. We let the idea of cool dictate the way we live.
Coolness not only controls our overall goal in life, but it also influences every action that we take. As part of the roles, it is expected that the characters perform a certain way. In order to make it believable that our roles and identities are truly one in the same, we act and do things that the role would do. “We shall not concern ourselves too deeply with this question here, leaving that pleasure for others. Rather we intend to take on unfashionably naïve approach by simply accepted. Cool as a phenomenon that we can recognize when we see it from its effects in human behavior and cultural artifacts- in speech and dance, films and television shows, books and magazines, music, clothes, paintings, cars, computers or motorcycles (Cool Rules: Anatomy of an Attitude). Our identities are portrayed through our actions; or rather our actions are dictated by the roles that we take on.
Argument #3: Escaping the Boxes
It is without a doubt that we play roles- roles that we consider significant or cool. And of course, playing those roles is a part of who we are; we can define ourselves based on the roles we play. However, by embracing these roles, and letting it completely consume our entire identities alienates us from looking past the roles, and seeing who we are at the core, without all the cool layerings. Although, it is highly improbable that our “cores” are any different from our layers, and that the roles we play are the cores of our cores, we are forfeiting consideration for any alternative. By acting cool, we are trapped in this cycle of constantly hopping from one role to another, never acknowledging if there’s even anything past the perimeter.
According to Buddhism, our lives are like cups. If it is not filled with a solid or a liquid- something visible, we believe that it is empty. But in fact, the cup is never empty. There are still particles that hold a place in the cup, regardless of how apparent that is. However, living in a predominantly superficial world, where merit only exists when it can be instantly perceived, we need some sort of signifier to believe that our cups are full. "The cup exists, but like everything in this world, its existence depends on other phenomena." We only (think we) know what we perceive. Viktor Frankl's metaphor of the existential vacuum says that: "If meaning is what we desire, then meaninglessness is a hole, an emptiness, in our lives. Whenever you have a vacuum, of course, things rush in to fill it." I agree, in that there is some sort of socket in our lives that needs to be filled. However, we do not live our lives as a vacuum, collecting dirt to fulfill that need. Going back to Buddhism, the nothingness does not even exist. We do not need nor do we fill our lives, because it's already filled. We're just not acknowledging or appreciating the moments, because we're so caught up in making them special, or valuable. We coat the moments that we already have in our lives by being cool. When you're cool, and you do cool things, your life becomes note-worthy. By winning over other people's approval, you can see how valuable your life is. It's not that we're gaining meaningful experiences, but it's that we're reconstructing those experiences in our lives so that they're observable. This need to be significant, and thus cool, draws us away from having an alternative life. All of us go through life, trying to appear significant, but we’re not actually gaining any significance.
Not being able to look beyond the roles, if there is anything beyond the roles, we continue living our cool lives. Rather than being concerned about evaluating the roles that we play, most of us are just concerned about the next step to take towards coolness, and any new roles that we would be interested in taking on. We continue to delude ourselves in these characters that we perform. By playing this cool game, we lose sight of the possibility that there might be something more. And although, there might not be, we’re still taking away any consideration of that chance.
Connection:
Kazuo Ishiguro portrays our obsession of cool in Never Let Me Go. The donors in this book are encouraged to create works of art, ones that are worthy to go in the gallery. Being that their (as well as ours) fate is to die, they want to have these art pieces as proofs of their existence. In a similar manner, we want to have these "immortality projects" to prove that we matter. And trying to act cool, and drawing attention from others is one of our methods. But just as the characters are passively living their lives by trying to act cool, so are we. For the most part, both the characters in Never Let Me Go and the people in our society, we are caught up in making our significance apparent through acting cool, we fail to see the bigger picture. For them, it's pretending to be important to a certain teacher by having a fake pencil case gift, and neglecting that the purpose of their existence. For us, it's receiving ignorant comments while acting ignorant, and losing sight of our situation (this applies to Never Let Me Go as well). Both the characters in Never Let Me Go, and our world blindly live their lives. And although, there is a great deal of despair lying ahead, we choose to neglect that. Instead, we continue on, living disconnected with all these aspects of life.
Alternative POV:
We aren't alienated, in the sense that we are now more aware of our identities. We are constantly shaping it- molding it so it becomes more appealing. For instance, we keep ourselves in shape, adorn ourselves so that it matches our perception of cool. Our desire to be cool provides us with the desire to maintain ourselves, mentally and physically. Although, our bodies are perceived as less significant, in terms of our identities when placed side-by-side with our minds, we still give it attention. Coolness has brought us closer to our bodies, in the sense that we are constantly refining it for the sake of status.
Although the road we follow has been set out for us, we can still, however, make turns and follow different roads throughout our lives. We still have the ability to choose the character we want to play (with the guidance of your environment). But we are not all set to one role and one role only. We can change courses throughout our lives.
Contrary to my argument #3, we may not really be alienated from our chances of escaping our roles. That is because the chances might not even exist. As Carrie said in her comment for my rough draft: “Isn't the attempt to not play a role a role in itself? Even trying not to be cool has its own label. Is it possible to not strive to not strive for a role… and to be completely oblivious of your own role and place in society?” Regardless of what we do, we are playing a role. Nearly everything throughout the entire spectrum constitutes as a role that is played. Playing roles is inevitable, and inescapable. We can say and hope that we have a true self, but chances are, we’re pretty much there.
Significance/Conclusion:
By being aware that being cool comes at a cost, we might start reconsidering our lifestyles. And although we may or may not be able to escape these roles that we play, we can still question the importance of these roles. If we see that it breaks our connections with our bodies, our hold on life and the scope at which we look at life. Acknowledging these alienation does not necessarily mean that we have to change anything (because, there’s probably nothing we can change). It rids us from our delusions. We can now live our lives, knowing what we do, aware of the sacrifices that we’re making as less ignorant actors.
Works Cited:
- Boeree , George. "Viktor Frankl." WebSpace < http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/frankl.html >
- Ishiguro, Kazuo. Never Let Me Go. NY, NY: Vintage International, 2005. 288. Print.
- Pountain, Dick and Robins, David. Cool Rules: Anatomy of an Attitude. FOCI. 2000.
- Synott, Anthony. The Body Social Symbolism, Self and Society. Routeledge. NYC. 1993.
- Frontline: The Merchants of Cool. PBS Online, 2001. Web. 7 Feb. 2005
- "Emptiness is Form." Big View (2006): n. pag. Web. 25 Jan 2010.< http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/emptiness.html >
Monday, January 25, 2010
Friday, January 22, 2010
Triangle Partner Help [HW #36]
Comment for John's Blog
Here's something to cure the virus:
1. Rephrasing main idea (not sure if this is an improvement): Being cool is not being original or unique, it's having the appearance that you are original or unique amongst the other people in your group. The identities of the "cool" people derive from several common ideas. And the task of the "cool" person now is to put on a mask and that portray that idea.
2. Additional paragraph: In attempt to become a hero in our tribes, we engage in activities that will give us recognition. We follow these "immortality projects" that will give us the impression that we are significant, and will be remembered- that we will have a place in history. However, in reality, we aren't really cool at all (i.e. we are not original) nor are we heroes. We just choose to deceive the people around us, and especially ourselves into thinking that we all play the roles, rather than having the roles play us.
3. Other considerations:
- Bring in direct sources/quotes
- Create better transitions, so it seems like all of your paragraphs are linked together by one main idea
- And like Bao Lin said, personal connections
Comment for Gavin's Blog
Thesis: There is one dominant pattern in coolness, not just in the present, but also in the past. By examining that patter, we might be able to find where coolness originated, and where it will be headed.
Throughout history, people have maintained their strive for attention and status. Although the approach has certainly changed from feeding a tribe to dressing like Kanye West, the same underlying purpose is still there. We are still trying to be the hero of our own stories, and create meaning in our own lives. That desire, which we express through our cool actions, have remained the same.
- Create more tieback sentences that sew all these good points together
- Typo: "I would say that this is the first example of a mold that is half-complete; [they] weren't entirely..."
- Break up the 2nd argument into paragraphs
- You certainly have many connection and evidence, but may it'll help to include some quotes.
Here's something to cure the virus:
1. Rephrasing main idea (not sure if this is an improvement): Being cool is not being original or unique, it's having the appearance that you are original or unique amongst the other people in your group. The identities of the "cool" people derive from several common ideas. And the task of the "cool" person now is to put on a mask and that portray that idea.
2. Additional paragraph: In attempt to become a hero in our tribes, we engage in activities that will give us recognition. We follow these "immortality projects" that will give us the impression that we are significant, and will be remembered- that we will have a place in history. However, in reality, we aren't really cool at all (i.e. we are not original) nor are we heroes. We just choose to deceive the people around us, and especially ourselves into thinking that we all play the roles, rather than having the roles play us.
3. Other considerations:
- Bring in direct sources/quotes
- Create better transitions, so it seems like all of your paragraphs are linked together by one main idea
- And like Bao Lin said, personal connections
Comment for Gavin's Blog
Thesis: There is one dominant pattern in coolness, not just in the present, but also in the past. By examining that patter, we might be able to find where coolness originated, and where it will be headed.
Throughout history, people have maintained their strive for attention and status. Although the approach has certainly changed from feeding a tribe to dressing like Kanye West, the same underlying purpose is still there. We are still trying to be the hero of our own stories, and create meaning in our own lives. That desire, which we express through our cool actions, have remained the same.
- Create more tieback sentences that sew all these good points together
- Typo: "I would say that this is the first example of a mold that is half-complete; [they] weren't entirely..."
- Break up the 2nd argument into paragraphs
- You certainly have many connection and evidence, but may it'll help to include some quotes.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Cool Paper Rough Draft [HW #35]
Introduction:
“Every yes means at least one no.” For most of us, regardless of our confessions, we say yes to cool. But what exactly are we saying ‘no’ to? Unlike our default preferences, such sacrifices aren’t as obvious, or visual. Although not observable through the eye, there is a price for this lottery ticket with cool being the jackpot. Not all of us can win, but all of us pay that price. Our attempts at being cool comes is at the expense of our connections with the world around us. More specifically, coolness alienates: our bodies from our minds & our minds from our bodies, us from our loose grip on life, and us from our chances of even acknowledging the possibility of a life beyond the roles.
Background Info:
There are different paths towards coolness. Within every different culture, there are different perceptions of cool. Cool isn’t about being popular, nor is it about having mainstream values or your pants on the ground. It’s about the role we play that will most likely give us status and a label within our sub-worlds. Whatever that role is, it derives from both nature and nurture- both our biological structures and our environments. We define “success” based on the stories that we hear and/or witness. However, there are also the innate factors that push us, those who are given the options, towards certain paths, simply because of the convenience (e.g. tall person and playing basketball). Having this coalesce that forms our ideas of “cool,” we project this idea through our identities. And thus our interpretations of cool become interpretation of how we should live our lives.
Argument #1: Separation of Body and Identity
In our attempts at being cool, we alienate our bodies from our identities- mind from body, and body from mind. It is as though, the mind and the body are two separate entities. And when we think of ourselves, we identify that as our minds- the one that dominates the body. The coolness that we perceive is based on what we think. The body is merely an accessory- a template which we adorn to reflect our perceptions of cool. Rather than being who we are, our bodies are a projection of who we are, which apparently is our minds.
Argument #2: Grasp on Life
Trying to be cool and reenact the previous success stories that we’ve interpreted, we follow these maps throughout our lives. For all of us, if not most of us, we were told that wealth and intelligence are the ultimate goals in life. Therefore, all of us go to school and try to do well, so that maybe one day, we’ll obtain both trophies. Whatever our ideas of cool are, we try to achieve that in order to create importance for ourselves. Trying to gain this status, we follow a strict path that leads to the desired results.
Argument #3: Escaping the Boxes
It is without a doubt that we play roles- roles that we consider significant or cool. And of course, playing those roles is a part of who we are; we can define ourselves based on the roles we play. However, by embracing these roles, and letting it completely consume our entire identities alienates us from looking past the roles, and seeing who we are at the core, without all the cool layerings. Although, it is highly improbable that our “cores” are any different from our layers, and that the roles we play are the cores of our cores, we are forfeiting consideration for any alternative. By acting cool, we are trapped in this cycle of constantly hopping from one role to another, never acknowledging if there’s even anything past the perimeter.
“Every yes means at least one no.” For most of us, regardless of our confessions, we say yes to cool. But what exactly are we saying ‘no’ to? Unlike our default preferences, such sacrifices aren’t as obvious, or visual. Although not observable through the eye, there is a price for this lottery ticket with cool being the jackpot. Not all of us can win, but all of us pay that price. Our attempts at being cool comes is at the expense of our connections with the world around us. More specifically, coolness alienates: our bodies from our minds & our minds from our bodies, us from our loose grip on life, and us from our chances of even acknowledging the possibility of a life beyond the roles.
Background Info:
There are different paths towards coolness. Within every different culture, there are different perceptions of cool. Cool isn’t about being popular, nor is it about having mainstream values or your pants on the ground. It’s about the role we play that will most likely give us status and a label within our sub-worlds. Whatever that role is, it derives from both nature and nurture- both our biological structures and our environments. We define “success” based on the stories that we hear and/or witness. However, there are also the innate factors that push us, those who are given the options, towards certain paths, simply because of the convenience (e.g. tall person and playing basketball). Having this coalesce that forms our ideas of “cool,” we project this idea through our identities. And thus our interpretations of cool become interpretation of how we should live our lives.
Argument #1: Separation of Body and Identity
In our attempts at being cool, we alienate our bodies from our identities- mind from body, and body from mind. It is as though, the mind and the body are two separate entities. And when we think of ourselves, we identify that as our minds- the one that dominates the body. The coolness that we perceive is based on what we think. The body is merely an accessory- a template which we adorn to reflect our perceptions of cool. Rather than being who we are, our bodies are a projection of who we are, which apparently is our minds.
Argument #2: Grasp on Life
Trying to be cool and reenact the previous success stories that we’ve interpreted, we follow these maps throughout our lives. For all of us, if not most of us, we were told that wealth and intelligence are the ultimate goals in life. Therefore, all of us go to school and try to do well, so that maybe one day, we’ll obtain both trophies. Whatever our ideas of cool are, we try to achieve that in order to create importance for ourselves. Trying to gain this status, we follow a strict path that leads to the desired results.
Argument #3: Escaping the Boxes
It is without a doubt that we play roles- roles that we consider significant or cool. And of course, playing those roles is a part of who we are; we can define ourselves based on the roles we play. However, by embracing these roles, and letting it completely consume our entire identities alienates us from looking past the roles, and seeing who we are at the core, without all the cool layerings. Although, it is highly improbable that our “cores” are any different from our layers, and that the roles we play are the cores of our cores, we are forfeiting consideration for any alternative. By acting cool, we are trapped in this cycle of constantly hopping from one role to another, never acknowledging if there’s even anything past the perimeter.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
The Cool Pose and Various Approaches to Life Rooted in Class, Race, Gender, Age, etc. [HW #34]
Life is like a game of cards. The hand that is dealt you represents determinism; the way you play it is free will.
Even with our free will, there are a limited amount of combination that we can play the cards by. And there would be, of course, an inclination towards one specific combination for every person. The factors that determine the direction of the push is either innate or influenced, or both. I argue that it's both. And rather than being nature versus nurture, it's nature and nurture.
In class, we've been hearing a lot about how the environment we are in shapes our maps- how it always depends on the situations we're put into. This is undoubtedly true. We mentioned on several occasions that people with different ethnic background in different living conditions will have different maps, and different ideas for cool. One example, that Andy S. used over and over, would be the "black kid who lives in a housing project and buys Prada shoes rather than saving for college." This character values looking "fresh" or "dope" over success ("success" according to mainstream society). The scene in where this character placed in encourages him/her to act a certain way- interact with certain props. The stage, and the supporting cast play just as much of a role as the script.
— Jawaharlal Nehru
Even with our free will, there are a limited amount of combination that we can play the cards by. And there would be, of course, an inclination towards one specific combination for every person. The factors that determine the direction of the push is either innate or influenced, or both. I argue that it's both. And rather than being nature versus nurture, it's nature and nurture.
In class, we've been hearing a lot about how the environment we are in shapes our maps- how it always depends on the situations we're put into. This is undoubtedly true. We mentioned on several occasions that people with different ethnic background in different living conditions will have different maps, and different ideas for cool. One example, that Andy S. used over and over, would be the "black kid who lives in a housing project and buys Prada shoes rather than saving for college." This character values looking "fresh" or "dope" over success ("success" according to mainstream society). The scene in where this character placed in encourages him/her to act a certain way- interact with certain props. The stage, and the supporting cast play just as much of a role as the script.
Moving away from the dominant perspective of the class, I think that there are other factors- factors that are more innate. I'm not saying that our biological structure defines our personalities, but it does contribute.
In 1979, two men named Jim Springer and Jim Lewis were reunited after a separation of 39 years. They were twins, separated less than five weeks after birth, who were brought up by two different families about 50 miles from one another. When they were finally reunited, they found spectacular similarities between themselves; both were married twice, first to a woman named Linda, then divorced, and then remarried to another woman named Betty. They each had children, both including sons named James Allan. Both drank Miller Lite, drove Chevrolets, chain-smoked Salems, and hated baseball. Both had served as sheriff’s deputies in their Ohio counties. (Gardiner)
The way that we are constructed, whether as humans, animals, or as individuals, influences the way that we act. Although, it may not be as great of an influence as our surroundings. There are things that we are more inclined to doing because of the conveniences based on our biological structure. Some people have body types that are more capable for certain activities. Therefore, the person will have more of an urge to pursue that activity (e.g. tall people and basketball, trees and providing oxygen, etc.). Even though people are brought up in different environments, there are inborn factors that push you towards certain perceptions of cool and paths (...although, in the example above, those two people might've had similar living conditions even if they were 50 miles apart). Everything is cool to at least one person. To whom specifically varies depends on both the person's nature and nurture.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Cool Paper Outline [HW #33]
Focus: Alienating effects of our pursuits towards coolness.
Background Info: What is the definition of "cool"? What are the aspects of cool?- Playing the roles that would most likely give us status and a label- Being put under certain circumstances that shape our perception of "cool"
(Sources: Merchants of Cool, Interviews, More Interviews, Cool Rules: Anatomy of an Attitude)
Argument #1: Alienates our bodies from our identities- Separates bodies from our minds, and minds from our bodies- Bodies become accessories, tools- Bodies: a way that other people identify coolness- Rather than being who we are, our bodies are a projection of who we are
(Sources: Tattoos/John Fanning, The Body Social Symbolism)
Argument #2: We lose control of how we experience life- Go through our lives, fulfilling roles, playing our little game, creating a false sense of self-importance to the world
(Sources: Merchants of Cool [?], Viktor Frankl, Buddhism, Previous Blog)
Argument #3: Our chances from escaping our boxes, the roles that we play- Seeing past the roles- Finding out who we are at the core, without all the cool layerings, if possible- End the cycle of jumping from box to box
(Sources: Closed Captioned, Lectures, Cool Rules: Anatomy of an Attitude)
Connection: Never Let Me Go or Youth in Revolt
Alternative POV: We aren't alienated, in the sense that we are now more aware of our identities. We are constantly shaping it- molding it so it becomes more appealing. For instance, we keep ourselves in shape, adorn ourselves so that it matches our perception of cool. Our desire to be cool provides us with the desire to maintain ourselves, mentally and physically.
Significance/Conclusion: Be aware that being cool comes at a cost. We might be gaining momentary approval, but we lose our connections with...{Sum Up}
Background Info: What is the definition of "cool"? What are the aspects of cool?- Playing the roles that would most likely give us status and a label- Being put under certain circumstances that shape our perception of "cool"
(Sources: Merchants of Cool, Interviews, More Interviews, Cool Rules: Anatomy of an Attitude)
Argument #1: Alienates our bodies from our identities- Separates bodies from our minds, and minds from our bodies- Bodies become accessories, tools- Bodies: a way that other people identify coolness- Rather than being who we are, our bodies are a projection of who we are
(Sources: Tattoos/John Fanning, The Body Social Symbolism)
Argument #2: We lose control of how we experience life- Go through our lives, fulfilling roles, playing our little game, creating a false sense of self-importance to the world
(Sources: Merchants of Cool [?], Viktor Frankl, Buddhism, Previous Blog)
Argument #3: Our chances from escaping our boxes, the roles that we play- Seeing past the roles- Finding out who we are at the core, without all the cool layerings, if possible- End the cycle of jumping from box to box
(Sources: Closed Captioned, Lectures, Cool Rules: Anatomy of an Attitude)
Connection: Never Let Me Go or Youth in Revolt
Alternative POV: We aren't alienated, in the sense that we are now more aware of our identities. We are constantly shaping it- molding it so it becomes more appealing. For instance, we keep ourselves in shape, adorn ourselves so that it matches our perception of cool. Our desire to be cool provides us with the desire to maintain ourselves, mentally and physically.
Significance/Conclusion: Be aware that being cool comes at a cost. We might be gaining momentary approval, but we lose our connections with...{Sum Up}
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Tattoos & The Presentation of the Self [HW #32]
"Show, don't tell"- this is what we've been taught; this is what we do. Throughout our lives, we project various aspects of our identity to the world. Tattoos is just one of those methods of projection. Rather than going around saying, "I think _____ is cool! I think _____ is cool!..." (which would seem desperate, and therefore uncool), people get tattoos to portray that. Tattoos signify to other people- give hints about what the hosts' preferences are, without telling the whole story. But the best part about having a tattoo isn't that it projects our identities. The best part is that it constantly projects our identities in one of the clearest ways. The tattoos are always active, without any additional efforts required.
Tattoos show what the person thinks is cool, but more importantly they show what's the person's package. It sends out signals about the culture- the "tribe" that he or she is a part of. As John Fanning said, people (at least, he) get tattoos to "be in that world", whatever that world is. The tattoos are not only a signifier of what world you're in, but, in some cases, your ticket into that world as well.
Just as farmers give brandings to their cows to mark their ownships, certain cultures do the same with people using tattoos. Rather than saying "I am into this kind of stuff," it's more like the tattoos are saying, "Property of this kind of stuff." So perhaps, tattoos aren’t our tickets into certain cultures, but it’s the culture’s ticket into our bubbles.
If there are people who have tattoos, there are also people who don’t. And the absence of tattoos says just as much about a person as the presence of a tattoo. Your clean, bare skin is still an emblem- one that represents you're part of the purists culture. Tattoos are a norm for different kinds of misfits, whereas the clear skin is the norm for the mainstream characters in our society. Although, the lack of tattoo doesn't automatically scream out, "I'm one of people who would rather not taint their bodies." but it does send vibe. With or without a tattoo, your body has become an accessory that projects your interest in whatever culture or fashion.
Tattoos show what the person thinks is cool, but more importantly they show what's the person's package. It sends out signals about the culture- the "tribe" that he or she is a part of. As John Fanning said, people (at least, he) get tattoos to "be in that world", whatever that world is. The tattoos are not only a signifier of what world you're in, but, in some cases, your ticket into that world as well.
Just as farmers give brandings to their cows to mark their ownships, certain cultures do the same with people using tattoos. Rather than saying "I am into this kind of stuff," it's more like the tattoos are saying, "Property of this kind of stuff." So perhaps, tattoos aren’t our tickets into certain cultures, but it’s the culture’s ticket into our bubbles.
If there are people who have tattoos, there are also people who don’t. And the absence of tattoos says just as much about a person as the presence of a tattoo. Your clean, bare skin is still an emblem- one that represents you're part of the purists culture. Tattoos are a norm for different kinds of misfits, whereas the clear skin is the norm for the mainstream characters in our society. Although, the lack of tattoo doesn't automatically scream out, "I'm one of people who would rather not taint their bodies." but it does send vibe. With or without a tattoo, your body has become an accessory that projects your interest in whatever culture or fashion.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Death of Ivan Illyich [Extra Credit 2]
Ivan, as almost all of us, bases his efforts in life on the map provided by his culture. The culture values "the easy, agreeable, gay and always decorous [ ...] life, approved of by society and regarded by himself as natural." What map has been provided by your family, subculture, culture? What are the main destinations and goals and plans in your life? What should the tone of your life be, according to the map you've been provided?
Family. Prosperity. Happiness. Those are the big three in Chinese culture, and probably most other cultures as well. These are the definitions of a good life, at least from what I heard. Although, it is best to obtain and maintain all three, people say that happiness and family are the most important. But of course in our society, if you're not even slightly prosperous you cannot have either one. Therefore living by ourselves, happily with our family is not a true option. We all have to make the requirements of our financial need, and thus have to this role mapped out for us to satisfy those needs.
It is expected that we all have some kind of success story. But before we even get to approach that, there are some preparations that need to be made that occupy at least the first 21 years of our lives: school. We are all already moving along the road that society has mapped out for us. Once we get past this stage of our lives, we move onto picking our occupation. For me personally, being that I am of the Chinese race, there are certain options that I am more inclined to (mostly because of the expectation of my family, which are very similar to the expectations of other Chinese family I have encountered). Some of my options are: doctor, accountant, and pharmacist. It doesn't really matter which road I choose to go on, as long as it brings me to having some sort of financial basis then it's good.
The tone of my life has been and probably will be very negative, yet somewhat positive. Knowing that your life is not completely within your control is not quite so pleasing. But it does not mean that this negativity will occupy my mind all the time, and drag me down. There is still hope that within this arbitrary lifestyle that it will lead me to happiness- that I still have control of certain aspects of my life. Although it is frustrating to accept something so inevitable, it is also important to distract ourselves with the positive aspects of life, so that we're not living in complete misery. It might be a bad thing that we don't have much of a choice in the bigger picture, but that does not necessarily mean that the life given to us is bad (not saying that it isn't).
Similar to Ivan Illyich, we're trying to have some kind of success story. For me, although I say that we don't absolutely need money, I'm still most likely going to end up following the mainstream lifestyle. Everything about happiness and living life or whatever, that's on the side of the mainstream. In this society, it would appear that we can't escape this map that has been set up for us: going to school, finding a job, raising a family, retiring, dying. A vast majority of the people in our society is going to follow this general path, regardless of their perspective on life. It does not mean
Family. Prosperity. Happiness. Those are the big three in Chinese culture, and probably most other cultures as well. These are the definitions of a good life, at least from what I heard. Although, it is best to obtain and maintain all three, people say that happiness and family are the most important. But of course in our society, if you're not even slightly prosperous you cannot have either one. Therefore living by ourselves, happily with our family is not a true option. We all have to make the requirements of our financial need, and thus have to this role mapped out for us to satisfy those needs.
It is expected that we all have some kind of success story. But before we even get to approach that, there are some preparations that need to be made that occupy at least the first 21 years of our lives: school. We are all already moving along the road that society has mapped out for us. Once we get past this stage of our lives, we move onto picking our occupation. For me personally, being that I am of the Chinese race, there are certain options that I am more inclined to (mostly because of the expectation of my family, which are very similar to the expectations of other Chinese family I have encountered). Some of my options are: doctor, accountant, and pharmacist. It doesn't really matter which road I choose to go on, as long as it brings me to having some sort of financial basis then it's good.
The tone of my life has been and probably will be very negative, yet somewhat positive. Knowing that your life is not completely within your control is not quite so pleasing. But it does not mean that this negativity will occupy my mind all the time, and drag me down. There is still hope that within this arbitrary lifestyle that it will lead me to happiness- that I still have control of certain aspects of my life. Although it is frustrating to accept something so inevitable, it is also important to distract ourselves with the positive aspects of life, so that we're not living in complete misery. It might be a bad thing that we don't have much of a choice in the bigger picture, but that does not necessarily mean that the life given to us is bad (not saying that it isn't).
Similar to Ivan Illyich, we're trying to have some kind of success story. For me, although I say that we don't absolutely need money, I'm still most likely going to end up following the mainstream lifestyle. Everything about happiness and living life or whatever, that's on the side of the mainstream. In this society, it would appear that we can't escape this map that has been set up for us: going to school, finding a job, raising a family, retiring, dying. A vast majority of the people in our society is going to follow this general path, regardless of their perspective on life. It does not mean
Death of Ivan Illyich [Extra Credit 1]
How does Ivan's quest for status, advancement, prestige, and generally the approval of others endanger his chance to live a more meaningful life?
Ivan Illyich, for the most part in his part, did not create meaning in his life. He was playing by the rules of societies, and rode along the expectations of others. His desire to become successful and live the life that was considered the standard. Every decision that he made was his attempt to satisfy his desires for happiness and success (in other words, success and success). And by following his lifestyle, he became a puppet of society, just moving as society tells him to, and never able to make his own path (well, making his own path that will lead him to the mainstream).
His marriage, to him, was a stepping stone towards his success story. "The marriage gave him personal satisfaction, and at the same time it was considered the right thing by the most highly placed of his associates." We always hear the cliche that marriage should occur when two people love each other. But in Ivan Illyich's case, it's when his "associates" love the situation. This aspect of life, that is often considered sacred, is just part of Ivan Illyich's approach towards the normal life- the life that would be considered as honorable by others.
Once his married life extended, he developed "the need of securing for himself an existence outside his family life became still more imperative." Once he accomplished his momentary goal, he did not take grasp of it. What he had was not enough for him, because it was never his true desire. Having something we don't really want and that's in our faces, we naturally avoid it. And that is what Ivan Illyich did with his wife. It was as though, the only purpose of his marriage was the status. Once the status was his, there was no reason to maintain a healthy relationship with his wife. His attempt to get status degraded his marriage, in that he saw marriage as just a piece of his success, rather than something that he values. For some people, marriage is their ultimate goal, and being successful is a way to support that marriage. But for Ivan Illyich, it's the opposite: he gets married as a way to support his success. Marriage may not necessarily be the most important thing, but his aspiration for success is alienating him from that experience.
In attempt to create a successful life, Ivan Illyich jumped from place to place, and thus created a meaningless life. In hopes to find a chance to improve his life, economically, Ivan Illyich was constantly moving in his life. Until he got his house, which was just a palate for him and his decorous needs, he went from one job to another, and one home to another. As a result he never got attached to anything, any place, or anyone. And when something attached to him (e.g. his wife and his family), he avoided it. There was nothing that held true value in his life, other than the ambition to create a success story. In a way, you can say that this ambition was so up in his face, that he could not see anything else. He constantly strive to win the approval of society, and therefore was blinded from what he actually had.
The life of Ivan Illyich was an arbitrary one. Rather than living his own life, he lived a life that was generic and mapped out by society. He was always trying to live up to standards that he could not meet. He was trying to live a life that would best fit the story of the hero. As a result, his life was meaningless. He was playing the role of the dog chasing the car. And by having his sights set on nothing but the car, he could not appreciate his own life, just constantly moving and chasing something that he will never obtain, and render as useless even if he had it.
Ivan Illyich, for the most part in his part, did not create meaning in his life. He was playing by the rules of societies, and rode along the expectations of others. His desire to become successful and live the life that was considered the standard. Every decision that he made was his attempt to satisfy his desires for happiness and success (in other words, success and success). And by following his lifestyle, he became a puppet of society, just moving as society tells him to, and never able to make his own path (well, making his own path that will lead him to the mainstream).
His marriage, to him, was a stepping stone towards his success story. "The marriage gave him personal satisfaction, and at the same time it was considered the right thing by the most highly placed of his associates." We always hear the cliche that marriage should occur when two people love each other. But in Ivan Illyich's case, it's when his "associates" love the situation. This aspect of life, that is often considered sacred, is just part of Ivan Illyich's approach towards the normal life- the life that would be considered as honorable by others.
Once his married life extended, he developed "the need of securing for himself an existence outside his family life became still more imperative." Once he accomplished his momentary goal, he did not take grasp of it. What he had was not enough for him, because it was never his true desire. Having something we don't really want and that's in our faces, we naturally avoid it. And that is what Ivan Illyich did with his wife. It was as though, the only purpose of his marriage was the status. Once the status was his, there was no reason to maintain a healthy relationship with his wife. His attempt to get status degraded his marriage, in that he saw marriage as just a piece of his success, rather than something that he values. For some people, marriage is their ultimate goal, and being successful is a way to support that marriage. But for Ivan Illyich, it's the opposite: he gets married as a way to support his success. Marriage may not necessarily be the most important thing, but his aspiration for success is alienating him from that experience.
In attempt to create a successful life, Ivan Illyich jumped from place to place, and thus created a meaningless life. In hopes to find a chance to improve his life, economically, Ivan Illyich was constantly moving in his life. Until he got his house, which was just a palate for him and his decorous needs, he went from one job to another, and one home to another. As a result he never got attached to anything, any place, or anyone. And when something attached to him (e.g. his wife and his family), he avoided it. There was nothing that held true value in his life, other than the ambition to create a success story. In a way, you can say that this ambition was so up in his face, that he could not see anything else. He constantly strive to win the approval of society, and therefore was blinded from what he actually had.
The life of Ivan Illyich was an arbitrary one. Rather than living his own life, he lived a life that was generic and mapped out by society. He was always trying to live up to standards that he could not meet. He was trying to live a life that would best fit the story of the hero. As a result, his life was meaningless. He was playing the role of the dog chasing the car. And by having his sights set on nothing but the car, he could not appreciate his own life, just constantly moving and chasing something that he will never obtain, and render as useless even if he had it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)