"...as the English like to say, "if a man’s not a Marxist at 20, there’s something wrong with his heart. But if he is still a Marxist at 30, there’s something wrong with his head."
I love Grant McCraken's above nod to the critical role adaptability plays in our lives.
It reminds me of the concept of holding ideas lightly, described by Emily Levine's interpretation of Lewis Hyde's "Trickster Makes The World." Video below, link here
"The trickster has the ability to hold his ideas lightly so that he can let room in for new ideas or to see the contradictions or the hidden problems with his ideas."
Nutrition experts have analyzed the food depicted in some of
the best-known paintings of the biblical Last Supper and found that the portion
and plate sizes depicted in them increased substantially from older paintings
to those painted more recently.
John Horgan, author of Rational Mysticism and The End of Science has been asking people for the better part of a decade: "do you think humans will ever stop fighting wars?"
The answers are varied of course, and the question is deeply intriguing. Suffice to say that those of both camps could make valid arguments and find evidence that supports their reasoning.
I've been wanting to identify a question of my own of similar complexity, and I think I may have found it.
She makes a lot of very well thought and well supported points about people whose lives are directly and deeply impacted by privacy concerns. Her thoughts in this case, as in most cases of hers, are directed within the context that she enjoys a relatively privileged life and it is an unfortunate reality that many others do not. In all her thinking, she makes it clear that at her core what she is most passionate about is sharing that privilege with others, particularly by doing all that she can to counteract the injustices faced by marginalized groups.
Those who know me know that I believe that the history of humanity has moved in only one direction, which is to deliver more rights to more people. I look at marginalized groups today and think about how ridiculous it will seem in the future that we ever even tried to argue against rights for homosexual couples.
Still I can't help but wonder: do you think humans will ever strike sociocultural equality?
And I can't help but feel like that world with equal rights and advantages for all is that same conflict-less world with no wars.
(quick edit: I should note that while I don't believe the above scenarios are ultimately possible, there's certainly a part of me that believes there's value in the work that goes into trying.)
If you look at all the interesting concepts for how the iPad will fundamentally shift how we think about content, each one is the result of clever writers integrating creative narration into their work. Artists change the world, not technology.
Addendum: The above was inspired by the comment conversation on the PSFK post linked above:
Michael Kowalski: Hm, so the iPad could be a good platform for multimedia, games and augmented reality. Not much of a surprise there. I expect the textbook industry in particular will be utterly transformed in short order. But what about, you know, *real* books? I would have liked to have seen how, say, the next Martin Amis will be “enhanced” on the iPad.
Kyle Studstill:@Michael I tend to think of this about a variety of media/story content in general as well. Movies, for example. Everything about a movie, promotion and all, is about getting you into the theater, and once you’ve seen the film you’re done. I’d be fascinated to see a movie written such that the experience of “watching the movie” continued in some way outside of the theatre. Perhaps something is written into the script such that some common event occurs that everyone can be a part of (and anticipate) months after people have seen the film opening week. I don’t know. But I do think that the kind of “enhanced” you’re talking about comes from within the work itself, not necessarily the iPad that holds it. I think you’re right if you’re saying the iPad gives storytellers a fantastic opportunity to create something with the ability to be “enhanced,” and I hope they do.
To which I was referencing a thought that occurred to me once upon a time:
It occurs to me that every movie-based campaign focuses entirely on getting consumers into the theatre to watch the film. There have been more and more interesting ways of doing this, through events leading up to launch day, but everything culminates in seeing the film in theatre and then the experience is over.
Seeing this today got me thinking: 'what if the Batman: Dark Knight experience were still something ongoing?' Something we were still excited about today. What if inherent in the plot and script of a movie there was something that made the story much more than a 2-hour experience? Something in the script that took the movie into real life, an event that could be held months after opening day, once everyone has had a chance to see it and understand how the event is an extension of the plot.
"As a public experiment, artist Julia Burns (alias: 'rose_burns') decided to blog on twitter in full view of the lunchtime crowd in Martin Place, Sydney, for one hour.
She sat on her living room couch, wearing ugg boots and a comfy sweater, next to her heater, favourite cup, and a box of chocolate mints as she posted tweets about her life in front of the Channel 7 building.
Burns is interested in the concepts of public access to the private sphere and the changing nature of privacy.
Do 'followers' read with the same zest in the real world as they do in cyberspace?
What is it like to follow a stranger's blog entries, while standing in front of them?
Why do individuals increasingly publicize their private lives?
Recognising the immense complexity and power of social networking and blogging sites, Burns does not wish to condemn these tools. Rather she wants to provoke, especially for the younger generation, debate on the integrity of some of their uses.
She is concerned by the increasing need for public acceptance and validation in the social networking scene."
I didn’t actually “like” the fact that five people had died in a terrible accident. Technically, I didn’t even “like” the story...
I called up an expert on language for some insight into this issue: Jesse Sheidlower, lexicographer and editor at large of the Oxford English Dictionary. Mr. Sheidlower said the evolution of meaning and interpretation is natural for language. He considers it entirely possible that a younger generation growing up online might understand “like” to mean something different than older folks do. “People are posting very heartfelt feelings on these social sites, and the option is to either like it or comment,” he said. “I don’t think it changes the meaning of the word, but there is a disjunct that is happening here, and it forces you to think of the word that is pointing to a story and not necessarily the content within it.”
“Like” clearly isn’t the only word that is seeing a change to its context or understanding. We are starting to perceive the word “friend” differently, too, thanks to social networking services. “There’s a point when these friends are really just people I have in common with others, or people I’ve only met once, but ‘friend’ is the only word available to say you know this person, even though they are simply connections,” Mr. Sheidlower said.
