Wednesday, October 23, 2013

New and Wonderful Words

I absolutely love it when we come up with new words that work.  Granted there are some (twerk springs to mind) that I wish weren't things, but by and large, when we language using monkeys come up with a new word, it seems to me like a triumph of the human spirit.  So I celebrate today, the birth of "nontroversy."  Which I first encountered here.  I was vaguely aware of who Nigella Lawson was, and absolutely oblivious to the nontroversy that had surrounded her, but the article explains out who she is and what has befallen her in recent days (as well as several other obviously British cultural references), as well as explaining the phenomenon of a twitterstorm and doing a fairly good job of telling us why, in the name of all that is holy, it matters.
I think a good place to start is with the following excerpt, for those of you who didn't choose to read the whole thing:
One problem is that the media landscape is structurally hostile to nuance, whether it's the gladiatorial debate format favoured by the likes of the Today programme, the pressure to generate kneejerk opinions at short notice, or the sheer volume of websites recycling unsourced, out-of-context and even mistranslated quotes. Subtlety doesn't sell. But bad habits aren't imposed from the top down. Across blogs and social media you can see how the internet amplifies and facilitates the impulse to think the worst of people you have never met and to ignore any facts or context that might take the wind out of your indignation.
I spend more time than is probably good for me reading about politics and more time than is definitely good for me trying to keep up with pop culture.  I have noticed that structural hostility, not just to nuance but to logic and reason.  The point about it not being a top down decision is also insightful.  The reason why Fox News and Bill Maher are both popular is because they give certain segments of the population something they want to hear.  Fox News tells people of a conservative bent that the world is teetering on the brink of socialist, amoral, cultural collapse and that the likes of Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity are some of the last, desperate prophetic voices of truth, justice and the American way.  "Liberals" are the people who want to infringe on your rights and create a nanny state where individual freedom is sacrificed on the altar of "social justice."
Liberals have their propaganda too, and speak with decidedly uncharitable bile about the Tea Party and Ted Cruz.  They blame the Fox News contingent and "big business" for everything that's wrong with the world, and claim that if the darn conservatives would just get out of the way things would be all hearts and flowers
Being a moderate, I believe that the truth lies somewhere in the nuanced positions between the extremes.  I believe that someone does need to make sure that we don't give up our freedom for the sake of safety, but I also believe that we need to work a hell of a lot harder to create a just society where the deck isn't so stacked against the poor and disenfranchised.  I have almost entirely stopped paying attention to television news.  I thank the Lord for the interweb because it means that I can read and watch, research who is saying what and check the facts, and check the checking of the facts.  But sometimes I wonder if it's just too darn hard, then I remember that the truth is never easy, and if its "obvious" it stands a rather good chance of not being true.
I'm a skeptic by nature, and so this makes sense to me.  I have never trusted authority, and am generally suspicious of people who are too shiny (which includes most, if not all, TV news personalities). It seems to me that human community, real human community, sorry twitterverse, you don't really count, is necessary to combat the worst angels of our nature.  We must be exposed and learn to care about people who are different from us.
As I was driving into work this morning thinking about the nature of dialogue in our society I was struck by an abiding thankfulness for the diverse characters that God has put into my life, people I am related to, people I call friends, people I consider adversaries (I almost said enemies, but I think adversaries is a better description).
I have relatives who are:
White, black, bi-racial, conservatives, Tea Partiers, liberals, a heroin addict, alcoholics, people who believe that we're all going to be raptured into heaven any day now, creation scientists, mild racists, conspiracy theorists, welfare recipients, bourgeoisie, Protestant, Catholic, Atheist, profoundly agnostic, messianic Jews and some who are entirely non-religious.
I have friends and acquaintances who are:
Young and Old, Atheists, hipsters, anarchists, Universalists, survivalists, Zionists, observant Jews, secular Jews, Muslims, Arabs, Indians, Native Americans, Asians, Irish, British, Mexican, Episcopalians, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Russian, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Wesleyans, Mennonites, and Quakers, hermits, schizophrenics, bi-polar, Punks, head-bangers, Hippies, folksie people, dance club types, even people who listen to the worst music you can possibly find, mildly eccentric and profoundly dysfunctional, addicts (recovering and active), drug users and teetotalers.
And I won't even get into all the people I deal with at work.
The thing is, while this list may seem somewhat derogatory in some directions, I am profoundly thankful for all of them, because they teach me things.  When we talk, argue, or yell at each other, we are in community and in dialogue.  I have no desire to segregate my life into the ghetto of people who agree with me.  I have come to hate the term "like-minded" with a righteous hatred.  What could you possibly learn from someone who totally agrees with you?  Come to think of it, where would you find someone who totally agrees with you?
We need nuance, we need to learn to really see each other.  It's sometimes useful to classify people, I had a blast rifling off those lists I just made, but you need to know that each one of those categories has a name and a face, and I'm glad they are or have been a part of my life.
Controversy or nontroversy can be a great thing as long as we talk to each other, I mean really talk, and a world that is drained of all our differences and the variety that makes so all fired interesting, would really be hell indeed.

1 comment:

  1. and for more about how nuance (and often truth) gets wiped out:
    http://www.upworthy.com/ever-hear-about-the-lady-that-spilled-coffee-on-herself-at-mcdonalds-then-sued-for-millions?c=ufb1

    ReplyDelete

Please comment on what you read, but keep it clean and respectful, please.