July 16, Morning (5)
I have a question: does bad poetry make a bad poet, or does a bad poet make bad poetry?
It is the age-old question of cause and effect, at first glance. What causes one thing and what affects it? At the same time, it is a question of labels. What gives a thing whatever title it acquires?
The discussion came about because I was asked to mentally ponder the greater causalities of labels, or some such. The first label to require attention was the label of "immature". The discussion came up as the result of a flare of the temper, which I decided to - instead of alleviating it upon some poor fool - use the fire to discuss an interesting, and rather fresh topic.
Now, I realize you are probably sitting in your gray armchair right this moment, reclining and thinking to yourself: dear skyscrapers! This is a fresh topic?!
However, perhaps you left off the "skyscrapers" bit - as it is really only a harkening to how much I miss the city. Right, but back to the topic - "immaturity".
Labels are an interesting thing, really. At first sight, they are quite useful: I read his poem, it was badly written; I talked to her, she used bad grammar; I visited them, they were noisy. You may not consider the above labels, persay, but bear with me. They are what I would call "nonchalaunt labels": things we say everyday to describe people or actions in a certain way. And the above can be fine descriptions. The problem comes in when when the simple description takes on new form: he's a bad poet, this book must be full of bad poetry; she uses bad grammar, I cannot communicate with her; they are noisy, I don't want them at my house. And suddenly, the description we imposed as a reaction to an event becomes the label by which we judge.
The same goes for immaturity. "You did (blank), which was immature" becomes "You are immature, so your actions are a symptom of that". And any laugh, any untimely joke, any minor frustration that is expressed becomes a sign of how immature the individual actually is. There is no room for error because the judgement has already been passed and all other actions will now be filtered through the lens of that label. The problem is that, in reality, immaturity is not a set of behaviors - contrary to popular belief. Immaturity is the inability to recognize what is appropriate and inappropriate and behave accordingly. Fun is not immature. It is about a balance of appropriateness at any given time - not whether you wear the right clothes and use the right vocabulary and don't laugh too much or speak too vibrantly.
The same is true of gender. For so long, we have been told endlessly to believe that a male is one way and a female the other. For century upon century each new generation is conditioned to see, encourage, and perpetuate the same gender roles that our parents and grandparents did. We are told that male equals single-mindedness, playfulness, sexuality. We are told that female equals multi-mindedness, propriety, emotionalness. And so, in our children we recognize the patterns and encourage them. We subvert and punish those that don't apply, that we haven't been told to establish. And as our children are fed their gender roles from gender-typed parents, the cycle loops over itself and continues, doubly strong. For now, a new generation in a new time exhibits the same behaviors - and we are proud of our correct labels and our finite judgements.
There is a back-lash against this idea, however. I see in many of my own generation and the generation after us, a tendency to question the labels we have been given. Perhaps it is because we see many who we cannot label within the old limits. The danger, however, is new labels emerging for the "weird ones who won't fit in". And so we hear the emergence of "metrosexual" and the over-tendency to label "gay" or "homosexual". And we see a redoubling of the "tomboy" - labels to label the ones who don't go along with the labels their parents sold them.
But, I have been called a tomboy and un-lady-like for too long. My husband been referred to as "effeminite" and "girlish" too many times. We will, instead, stand strong in our opposition to the labels we have been told to live. And we will stand firm in our belief that the roles humanity establishes are not black and white, are not clean-cut, are not neccessarily true at all.
For our God is neither black nor white, neither young nor old, neither male nor female.
It is the age-old question of cause and effect, at first glance. What causes one thing and what affects it? At the same time, it is a question of labels. What gives a thing whatever title it acquires?
The discussion came about because I was asked to mentally ponder the greater causalities of labels, or some such. The first label to require attention was the label of "immature". The discussion came up as the result of a flare of the temper, which I decided to - instead of alleviating it upon some poor fool - use the fire to discuss an interesting, and rather fresh topic.
Now, I realize you are probably sitting in your gray armchair right this moment, reclining and thinking to yourself: dear skyscrapers! This is a fresh topic?!
However, perhaps you left off the "skyscrapers" bit - as it is really only a harkening to how much I miss the city. Right, but back to the topic - "immaturity".
Labels are an interesting thing, really. At first sight, they are quite useful: I read his poem, it was badly written; I talked to her, she used bad grammar; I visited them, they were noisy. You may not consider the above labels, persay, but bear with me. They are what I would call "nonchalaunt labels": things we say everyday to describe people or actions in a certain way. And the above can be fine descriptions. The problem comes in when when the simple description takes on new form: he's a bad poet, this book must be full of bad poetry; she uses bad grammar, I cannot communicate with her; they are noisy, I don't want them at my house. And suddenly, the description we imposed as a reaction to an event becomes the label by which we judge.
The same goes for immaturity. "You did (blank), which was immature" becomes "You are immature, so your actions are a symptom of that". And any laugh, any untimely joke, any minor frustration that is expressed becomes a sign of how immature the individual actually is. There is no room for error because the judgement has already been passed and all other actions will now be filtered through the lens of that label. The problem is that, in reality, immaturity is not a set of behaviors - contrary to popular belief. Immaturity is the inability to recognize what is appropriate and inappropriate and behave accordingly. Fun is not immature. It is about a balance of appropriateness at any given time - not whether you wear the right clothes and use the right vocabulary and don't laugh too much or speak too vibrantly.
The same is true of gender. For so long, we have been told endlessly to believe that a male is one way and a female the other. For century upon century each new generation is conditioned to see, encourage, and perpetuate the same gender roles that our parents and grandparents did. We are told that male equals single-mindedness, playfulness, sexuality. We are told that female equals multi-mindedness, propriety, emotionalness. And so, in our children we recognize the patterns and encourage them. We subvert and punish those that don't apply, that we haven't been told to establish. And as our children are fed their gender roles from gender-typed parents, the cycle loops over itself and continues, doubly strong. For now, a new generation in a new time exhibits the same behaviors - and we are proud of our correct labels and our finite judgements.
There is a back-lash against this idea, however. I see in many of my own generation and the generation after us, a tendency to question the labels we have been given. Perhaps it is because we see many who we cannot label within the old limits. The danger, however, is new labels emerging for the "weird ones who won't fit in". And so we hear the emergence of "metrosexual" and the over-tendency to label "gay" or "homosexual". And we see a redoubling of the "tomboy" - labels to label the ones who don't go along with the labels their parents sold them.
But, I have been called a tomboy and un-lady-like for too long. My husband been referred to as "effeminite" and "girlish" too many times. We will, instead, stand strong in our opposition to the labels we have been told to live. And we will stand firm in our belief that the roles humanity establishes are not black and white, are not clean-cut, are not neccessarily true at all.
For our God is neither black nor white, neither young nor old, neither male nor female.
0 Thought(s):
Post a Comment
<< Home