Read this ( long but worth it) and then think about what she said:
There are a lot of take aways in this essay, some of it we have discussed here from time to time, including in the last day or so.
One issue is the concept of inherited traditions and wisdom @goat and I touched on. Does that perpetuate white European privilege? That’s the argument why the study of Western Civilization has been cast aside or substantially changed. What about reshaping history to comport with current narratives? How important is the fact that Jefferson slept with a slave to the study of his impact?
Another take away is why are younger educated individuals not reading classics with their moral complexities and social dilemmas? For me, reading complex things is like strength training for your mind. People now are missing out.
Anyway, deep thought provoking issues don’t get much activity here, but maybe at least this essay will give people something to think about whether or not they post.
@co-hoosier Have not read your link and you’re looking for elevated discussion and I’ll immediately bring it down with one word:
Phones.
I do not believe tech in the last ten years has improved our quality of life
Kids dont want to read on their own. They want to doom scroll
@co-hoosier I think you might have me mixed up with @arthur-dent on this one?
Anyway, as to your essay, I agree with the author in bemoaning the collapse of the canon, as she would describe it. Students - and society - are worse off for the sidelining of the classic Western literary tradition. However, I do think she - to a lesser extent - and you - to a greater extent - misunderstand the issue with postcolonial thought.
The problem with the postcolonialists isn't the idea that we should care that Jefferson owned and fucked slaves. That's a valuable and important context. The problem is that they may take it to the extreme that it's the only context that matters. But it's really, intellectually, no different from the problem of the traditionalists like yourself, who would claim that it's a meaningless context that should be ignored.
Both extremes are wrong. By framing the issue as the destruction of the Western Canon, you and yours allow yourselves to only attack the other side. But their sins are your sins. If the destruction of the canon is wrong, so was its traditional, historical limitation. In other words, yes, let's teach the great Jefferson did, but also let's teach that he fucked his slaves. Let's not ignore one in favor of the other, but let us neither make one so important we forget the other.
I don't usually believe in the both sides fallacy, because I think both sides are usually wrong in very different ways, but in this case, I think it fits. I think the postcolonialists - in their extreme incarnation - commit the same sin as the traditionalists - in their reactionary incarnation - and in the same way.
So you want a serious discussion, but YOU bring up Epstein, MAGA, Minneapolis, and Hemmings.
I have no problem teaching philosophy. I don't know it has to be all Western, Art of War had a huge boom with even RMK touting it. I am not sure reading Confucius is bad, make your case why it should be excluded.
But reading all these things requires knowing the context. In the Declaration it says, "All men are created equal... ." What did that mean in 1776? It certainly in no possible way meant "all men" as we think of that phrase. So we need to put all that into context. We build Athens up as some model, yet Socrates was forced to drink hemlock. Was Athens really that enlightened by today's standards.
But it's really, intellectually, no different from the problem of the traditionalists like yourself, who would claim that it's a meaningless context that should be ignored.
I stand by my extreme traditionalism. The evolution of politics and culture of the United States is one direction, that is toward more tolerance, more recognition of rights, more suffrage, and more prosperity. This is indisputable. We did this by standing on the shoulders of people like Jefferson and many others for the good that they recognized and advocated. Jefferson’s sleeping with a slave is irrelevant to this history.
Jefferson’s warts, as all the warts in history, are highly relevant to those who find political traction in their constant derision of the U.S. and where we have come. As an example, I heard one black lady who was recently arrested in Minneapolis claiming that arrest was a continuation the slavery experience of “her people”. That attitude will never allow us to be free from the sins of the past.
Getting back to the point of the essay, this organized belittling of the foundations of western civilization is taking its toll on reading and understanding history and literature. It wasn’t that long ago since reading lists for university students were forced fed literature from POC’s and women because dead white guys advanced only racism and patriarchy.
@arthur-dent Intellectual enlightenment not human rights type. Their intellectual breakthroughs and ideas were during a time they kept slaves and all kinds of shit. Tho they did like the gays
@arthur-dent Intellectual enlightenment not human rights type. Their intellectual breakthroughs and ideas were during a time they kept slaves and all kinds of shit. Tho they did like the gays
However, some aspects of how antiquity approached human rights we should have preserved.
I thought about this when I saw clips of all the musicians speaking their mind at the Grammys. Actors and musicians throughout antiquity had the social status of prostitutes. Not fit for polite company and didn’t retain all the rights of normal free men.
How do we get back to that dynamic?
@arthur-dent Intellectual enlightenment not human rights type. Their intellectual breakthroughs and ideas were during a time they kept slaves and all kinds of shit. Tho they did like the gays
However, some aspects of how antiquity approached human rights we should have preserved.
I thought about this when I saw clips of all the musicians speaking their mind at the Grammys. Actors and musicians throughout antiquity had the social status of prostitutes. Not fit for polite company and didn’t retain all the rights of normal free men.
How do we get back to that dynamic?
You're referring to a social dynamic that was idiosyncratic to late Republican and early imperial Rome, not shared throughout antiquity.
But it's really, intellectually, no different from the problem of the traditionalists like yourself, who would claim that it's a meaningless context that should be ignored.
I stand by my extreme traditionalism. The evolution of politics and culture of the United States is one direction, that is toward more tolerance, more recognition of rights, more suffrage, and more prosperity. This is indisputable. We did this by standing on the shoulders of people like Jefferson and many others for the good that they recognized and advocated. Jefferson’s sleeping with a slave is irrelevant to this history.
Jefferson’s warts, as all the warts in history, are highly relevant to those who find political traction in their constant derision of the U.S. and where we have come. As an example, I heard one black lady who was recently arrested in Minneapolis claiming that arrest was a continuation the slavery experience of “her people”. That attitude will never allow us to be free from the sins of the past.
Getting back to the point of the essay, this organized belittling of the foundations of western civilization is taking its toll on reading and understanding history and literature. It wasn’t that long ago since reading lists for university students were forced fed literature from POC’s and women because dead white guys advanced only racism and patriarchy.
Yes, you've made your position quite clear. And in repeating it again here, you are again displaying the same fault that you would find in the woke postcolonialists, namely that the study of history should only be done through the frame of a single, preferred narrative.
Yes, you've made your position quite clear. And in repeating it again here, you are again displaying the same fault that you would find in the woke postcolonialists, namely that the study of history should only be done through the frame of a single, preferred narrative.
Most history is studied in discrete parts. I won’t deny many historians impose their narrative on their studies of those parts. Jefferson drafted a Declaration of Independence to be considered and then unanimously ratified by the Second Continental Congress. I don’t think his relations with a slave (more than 10 years later) has anything to do with the study and views of the declaration. Many disagree with me. I think those who disagree are the ones advancing a narrative.
So, history, to you, is a study of dates, facts, maps, and quotes without context to be memorized?Yes, you've made your position quite clear. And in repeating it again here, you are again displaying the same fault that you would find in the woke postcolonialists, namely that the study of history should only be done through the frame of a single, preferred narrative.
Most history is studied in discrete parts. I won’t deny many historians impose their narrative on their studies of those parts. Jefferson drafted a Declaration of Independence to be considered and then unanimously ratified by the Second Continental Congress. I don’t think his relations with a slave (more than 10 years later) has anything to do with the study and views of the declaration. Many disagree with me. I think those who disagree are the ones advancing a narrative.
.
Latest Post: 2027 HS Recruiting News Our newest member: Redd Collects Recent Posts Unread Posts
