Coincidentally, I viewed the same George Carlin video around the same week that classes started this semester. He is one of my favorite comedians, along with others like Bill Hicks. This clip and “All of My Life for Sale” are some good ways to think about how material objects affect our identity, and prepare for the first paper.
My favorite section in Freyer’s story is the recollection of him selling his toaster, and discovering that parting from this item would change him subtlety—he would stop eating toast. It is funny and insignificant, but creates the argument that ‘stuff’ permits us to do things we otherwise couldn’t. The notion that it changes who we are is still debatable.
Thinking about the toaster, I remembered a video I recently watched that I feel ties into these ideas well. The video describes a man’s attempt to build a toaster from scratch, and concludes that without the help of the rest of society, creating a toaster is nearly impossible. So if creating the things in our worlds requires a civilization, and the things in the world actually define who we are, then social forces do have a direct effect on our identity . . . that is, if the first two arguments are irrefutable.
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ODzO7Lz_pw
I found myself at a disagreement to the context of the “Shitty First Drafts” article. As I’ve said in an earlier post, I often find there is little I want to edit in my writing, or that I don’t know how to go back through and make it better. So at the end of the article when it asks, “From what Lamott has to say, is writing a first draft more about the product or the process?” for me, it is the product. If I did go about and write papers more carefree, I would not be sure if I could go back and make it suffice. I see a work of writing as a more holistic effort, rather than a form that is built piece by piece.
Lamott does create a bit of a false dichotomy between product and process. Obviously, writing is, as you astutely point out, a "holistic" effort. HOW we do it matters, but so does what we end up with. She tries to push us beyond our own self-imposed constraints - but it doesn't sound as if you have many of those : )
ReplyDeleteGreat video (fun) - really supports the notion that social and material forces shape us and what we do.
Carlin was indeed a fantastic comedian. Hicks was great, too - though his misanthropic rants are almost hard to listen to at times.
You said, "The notion that [stuff] changes who we are is still debatable."
ReplyDeleteI agree completely.
If the guy really liked toast and saw it as an essential part of who he is, then he wouldn't have sold his toaster. Granted, he won't be able to make toast again unless he buys another one, but not eating toast doesn't change the kind of person he is.