Showing posts with label Humanities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Humanities. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

In the Name of Humanities

paris3-edited


Time for a little meditation on the encroaching habits of the Technological Age. I came across this article in New Republic (read it if you know what's good for you!) and suddenly, my right-brained soul didn't feel quite as subordinated. It's a speech by Leon Wieseltier at the commencement of Brandeis University. For all those college-bound teens, we're all getting swept up in the STEM trend. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Medicine, the core four building blocks of the successful and wealthy of today and tomorrow. It's the only way to go if you want to make it in life these days. But in the words of Wieseltier:
Has there ever been a moment in American life when the humanities were cherished less, and has there ever been a moment in American life when the humanities were needed more?

There are still those of us who cherish the works of human creativity, who reject, as Wieseltier describes, the "cult of data, in which no human activity and no human expression is immune to quantification, in which happiness is a fit subject for economists, [and] in which the ordeals of the human heart are inappropriately translated into mathematical expressions." Yet of course, no one in this modern age can ever reject science. Where would I be without ibuprofen? How else could I live life Claritin clear? However, Wieseltier distinguishes science with scientism:
Scientism is not the same thing as science. Science is a blessing, but scientism is a curse. Science, I mean what practicing scientists actually do, is acutely and admirably aware of its limits, and humbly admits to the provisional character of its conclusions; but scientism is dogmatic, and peddles  certainties.

Alas, as scientism takes ahold of society with a firm grip, this "defense of the humanities" is sorely needed. I have now heard two fully credible voices proclaim the death of knowledge and the birth of information. The first was Sugata Mitra, who solemnly pondered that, perhaps, "knowing is obsolete." And now, Wieseltier says:
In the digital universe, knowledge is reduced to the status of information...A great Jewish thinker of the early Middle Ages wondered why God, if He wanted us to know the truth about everything, did not simply tell us the truth about everything. His wise answer was that if we were merely told what we need to know, we would not, strictly speaking, know it.

It's an interesting thing to think about, and one can't help but wonder how all this will pan out in the long run. Will the humanities eventually cease to exist? Will culture and art and literature perish at the hands of society's natural selection? Logically, science and math are the fittest in this new, tech-driven environment, and science itself has theorized that it's all about survival of the fittest. But I am a lover of the humanities, and if you are human, then you should be, too. And now, we are under attack by robots. It's actually happening. More or less at least.. More specifically, our human individuality is under attack. Wieseltier urges:
So there is no task more urgent in American intellectual life at this hour than to offer some resistance to the twin imperialisms of science and technology, and to recover the old distinction — once bitterly contested, then generally accepted, now almost completely forgotten – between the study of nature and the study of man.

This is a weird, tricky situation, because we all love our little robots. I'm ironically using one right now to spread this message. I love my phone, my laptop, my Direct TV, my Tumblr..I'm pretty much Albert Einstein's greatest fear:
I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots.

In restaurants, my family and I have to set time limits on cell phone use. We have it bad. But anyway, I'm getting distracted. The point is, society as a whole these days does not prize culture and the humanities as much as it did in, say, Venus de Milo's time. Instead, Wiesltier says,
Perhaps culture is now the counterculture.

I'll never leave science or my robot friends now, but like all magic, all this technology must be used for good. And by good I mean the preservation of human, not mechanic, activity.

Visit me on Bloglovin, Instagram, Tumblr and Twitter! Hooray for social media.

Friday, June 14, 2013

Non, Rien de Rien

 Some humble (probably cheesy) philosophies and thoughts of mine about a movie that really got the pathos going.

la_vie_en_rose_1


I watched La Vie en Rose last night. The movie about Édith Piaf starring Marion Cotillard as the famed French singer. What a life Édith lived. What a crazy, devastating, glorious, and epic life. I was expecting a nice, subtle period movie about the upper crust French culture, about fame, and, of course, about the life of Édith Piaf. Something to prepare me before I go to France this weekend. About 75% of my expectations were disproven. This movie was not particularly subtle in plot line. In acting, yes. Marion Cotillard's performance was outstanding. A guttural, authentic portrayal filled with raw passion. The movie trailer shows a quote from Stephen Holding, from the New York Times: "the most astonishing immersion of another performer into the body and soul of another I've ever encountered in a film."

vie_en_rose_movie_poster-e1285098038376


But the story of Édith's life is anything but a subtle, upper crust life. The tile is quite misleading. Call me ignorant, I was, but I had no idea of the troubles and trauma she had gone through. And watching that movie, I don't think I've ever more genuinely, albeit vicariously, experienced how hard the adversities of life can be. However, despite everything, the countless maladies and hospitals, the devastating losses, the vulgar poverty, the cruel separation from those she loved most dearly, I believe that Édith still remained innocent. Or rather, she yearned for an innocence denied to her. Her experiences of course made her wise, aged her with unnecessary burdens. But yet she clung on for her life onto that pure idea of love, and she lived her life, however impossible, with unwavering, unpolished, and candid love. If anything, this is what "La Vie en Rose" refers to. This steadfast and undiluted approach to life.

I think my favorite scene might be the one where she goes to the beach in South France. She's older, more withered, hunched over, with an orange puff of hair on her head and some yarn and needles in her hand. After waving to the lifeguard she sits on the sand knitting, watching the waves roll in the sea. And then a young woman, a journalist, comes to interview her,  the questions seeming so naive: What is your favorite color? What is your favorite dish? Blue, pot roast.  Édith answers them all with a little smile on her face, short and simple, in a tone that somehow blends the heart of a child with that of and old soul. A young heart and a wise mind. Finally, the interviewer asks: What's the most important thing for an adult to know? For a woman? A child? A baby? Édith answers them all the same: To love.

A diamond in the rough, but an uncut one at that, Édith Piaf blazed through the dark universe of the world, a shooting star born from dirt and dust. She never compromised herself, stubbornly resisting the influences of others. She never let the beatings and abuses of life keep her down. In short, elle ne regrette rien.




Visit me on Bloglovin, Instagram, Tumblr and Twitter! Hooray for social media.

Saturday, December 29, 2012

Les Miserables

This post will be slightly longer than usual, so if you’re not in the mood to read my humble, PMS-infused reflections on the epic, the tragic, the one-and-only Les Miserables, feel free to skim. But I'll have you know, this movie has been on my mind constantly for the past three days…

 So I recently saw Les Mis on opening day, on Christmas, and without a doubt it was the most profound and moving experience I’ve ever had with a movie. In fact, I don’t even think it’s right to classify something like this as a movie. As expected, I was reduced to tears several times during the movie. And not sloppy, mushy, typical tears, but very special tears, or at least I like to think so.

            It wasn’t only sadness I felt, however. Les Mis brought up so many raw emotions: Love. Redemption. Camaraderie. Revolutionary spirit. A real emotional roller coaster, but not at all in a bad way, in a way that you love for the thrill. I felt like I was living life to the fullest while I watched this movie, albeit vicariously through various actors and actresses that pranced around on the screen of my local Regal theater. It's okay though, because the acting was superb all around, so believable, authentic, and unvarnished. For a production of such magnitude, these actors and actresses managed to whittle it down to its most simple and important elements but in a most subtle and complex way. 

 In a nutshell, this tragic tale of inherently good people placed in the worst of situations will inspire, astound, and break your heart. Note: watch with your fellow girlfriends, preferably those who appreciate a good, dramatic musical. This movie will also, unfailingly, bestow you with a newfound obsession over Eddie Redmayne. Whatta guy. 

Have you seen Les Mis yet? Thoughts, comments, criticisms?


image source





Visit me on Bloglovin, Instagram, Tumblr and Twitter! Hooray for social media.