by Dominic Echiverri
Panliligaw translates to courting. But if we break the word down, the root word is "ligaw".
Ligaw = to court, to woo; likewise, ligaw = to confuse, to mislead.
Levinas discusses love and and filiation, and on the matter of identifying with and being for the Other, the general misconception or fault of love is that it seems to be a matter of convenience. "I like this person because she has the features that I want to see, she's the person I want to complement my personality, she has those which keep ME interested". Love, and courting, are misidentified as means of finding someone who reflects the I. "The rule of the I" of Western Philosophy where the central figure is oneself.
And this seems to be the dis-inter-esse, or the disinterest, which in breaking down, shows this movement towards the radically other, the Other who is radically different a selfsame.
Basically, it seems Levinas wants us to stop the panliligaw.
If your panliligaw holds true to the original Filipino breakdown of the verb, you mislead the person to thinking you like her because you find qualities that she uniquely exhibits or presents as her own. You confuse the person by identifying and highlighting notable traits about her as if they were genuinely and uniquely hers, when in fact, these traits are mainly what satisfy or interest YOU and it doesn't really matter how it contributes or exudes HER, the radically other.
Examples:
Crush kita kasi ang ganda ng mata mo (kasi may thing ka para sa mga mata)
Crush kita kasi ang ganda ng boses mo (kasi may thing ka sa mga tila pangmalandi ang boses)
Crush kita kasi ang cute mo tumawa (kasi may thing ka sa mga tumatawa na parang si Joker)
But as you can see, it isn't because it makes her, her. Cut the crap: you like those traits because they satisfy or they interest YOU. And in the process of panliligaw, you make her believe those are her strongest or most completing assets.
This confusion, however, actually also works against oneself. It makes one believe that he is in love with that person, when in fact, he is in love with someone who reflects what HE wants to see. The Her is lost because the I dictated or constituted what makes her "otherness".
The Other is reduced to an extension of the Self.
Examples:
She's beautiful (interpretation: pangtrophy wife ang dating, matching my confidence)
He's soooooo hawt (interpretation: pag eto nakuha ko, ultimate revenge sa chismosa kong blockmate)
She got that smart thang going on (interpretation: convenient reviewmate bago mag-Finals. G)
Levinas' assertion is this dis-inter-esse, which for me is the radical movement of going out (dis) and be in full contact (inter) with the other (esse), which definitely constitutes separating oneself from, or suspending, one's own biases.
Instead of dressing up the Other in a cloud of I's, why not allow the Other to exude that Other-ness to the I? After all (and to quote something cliche): it's not always about you.
Friday, January 24, 2014
Breaking the Law
by Patrick Cruz
Rethinking that time when I had made the choice of joining the relief efforts for the areas struck by Typhoon Yolanda, I question myself: is it really for them, or just for me?
In many cases, not just in that particular situation, that I constantly raise that question to myself. More often, I end up still remaining clueless because the issue at hand seems to be putting me in a circular track. But as Dr. Garcia discussed Levinas’ Law of the I and Law of the Other, certain things got clarified. Before going to this, the laws, Law of the I and Law of the Other, must first be understood carefully. Law of the I basically defines one who has already gone out for the other, but still chooses to return to himself purposively. All the things that this person does is always in reference to himself, where he is the center of the universe and he has already become the law. He sees things merely interconnected for his own benefit and his personal growth. He never creates ultimately meaningful relationships as he is afraid to fully set off from himself and risk for the people around him. For example, when this person lends a hand to his friend, he already thinks that his friend would start to have utang na loob to him. This person knows that someday, he should also ask a favor to him. The same case can be said when a person simply gives a help he’s most comfortable with. Every interaction with other is always seen as an opportunity for nourishment of one’s self alone, without having any concern on the other.
Totally opposite to this idea is the Law of the Other. This law defines a person who has gone out for the other and remains journeying through the mystery of the other. Here, Levinas speaks about dis-inter-ested-ness, how a person removes himself as the center of his own universe and includes other people to share his own. The person remains in the loving struggle of seeking the otherness of the other in building more meaningful relationships.
As I said earlier, certain things became clear as these ideas occupied my mind. One is that certainly, a person does things not only for himself. I might have felt the joy after I have helped, but that only comes after the choice that I made, where the affected people are much included. Another is that a person cannot fully relate with the other people by simply sharing tangential worlds with them. He must fully open himself in order to construct a bigger universe where more and more people can come in, even if he does not realize yet his growth along the way. There, I have sought for them, and not to find a place for myself. Truly, though I have not known yet to whom the efforts I exerted went to, I will always seek them and they will always remain to me.
Rethinking that time when I had made the choice of joining the relief efforts for the areas struck by Typhoon Yolanda, I question myself: is it really for them, or just for me?
In many cases, not just in that particular situation, that I constantly raise that question to myself. More often, I end up still remaining clueless because the issue at hand seems to be putting me in a circular track. But as Dr. Garcia discussed Levinas’ Law of the I and Law of the Other, certain things got clarified. Before going to this, the laws, Law of the I and Law of the Other, must first be understood carefully. Law of the I basically defines one who has already gone out for the other, but still chooses to return to himself purposively. All the things that this person does is always in reference to himself, where he is the center of the universe and he has already become the law. He sees things merely interconnected for his own benefit and his personal growth. He never creates ultimately meaningful relationships as he is afraid to fully set off from himself and risk for the people around him. For example, when this person lends a hand to his friend, he already thinks that his friend would start to have utang na loob to him. This person knows that someday, he should also ask a favor to him. The same case can be said when a person simply gives a help he’s most comfortable with. Every interaction with other is always seen as an opportunity for nourishment of one’s self alone, without having any concern on the other.
Totally opposite to this idea is the Law of the Other. This law defines a person who has gone out for the other and remains journeying through the mystery of the other. Here, Levinas speaks about dis-inter-ested-ness, how a person removes himself as the center of his own universe and includes other people to share his own. The person remains in the loving struggle of seeking the otherness of the other in building more meaningful relationships.
As I said earlier, certain things became clear as these ideas occupied my mind. One is that certainly, a person does things not only for himself. I might have felt the joy after I have helped, but that only comes after the choice that I made, where the affected people are much included. Another is that a person cannot fully relate with the other people by simply sharing tangential worlds with them. He must fully open himself in order to construct a bigger universe where more and more people can come in, even if he does not realize yet his growth along the way. There, I have sought for them, and not to find a place for myself. Truly, though I have not known yet to whom the efforts I exerted went to, I will always seek them and they will always remain to me.
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
On Choosing and Making Friends
by Christian Gallardo
Emmanuel Levinas made the distinction between the “Law of the I” and the “Law of the Other”. He stated that the pattern of the Western thought, which follows the “Law of the I”, is that the I goes to the Other but only to go back to one’s self. On the contrary, the pattern of the “Law of the Other” is that the I goes to Other and remains there. From this we can imply that the “Law of the I” goes to the Other with the intention of a gain for one’s self. It reduces the “alterity” of the Other in a way that the Other is reduced to what the functionality is for the I. Hence, its relationship is more egoistic. On the other hand, the relationship of the “Law of the Other” is altruistic and selfless, meaning, it is not based on any gain or benefits, rather, it is based on caring or being responsible for the Other which respects its uniqueness.
Upon hearing, I could not help but relate it with the aspect of choosing or making friends. When I entered High School, I was frequently advised by my parents to choose decent friends which would be a good influence to me throughout my life. I was reminded often, especially during my first year in high school, to stay away from drug addicts, cigarette smokers, students who cut classes just to hang around somewhere and the like. This reminder somehow instilled in me a thought that friends should be chosen, not made.
Furthermore, it turns out that when I entered High School, “cliques” are very common. Cliques refer to a group of people having a common interest or other features and they do not readily allow other people without such same interest or feature to join them. Hence, I encountered various “cliques”, from group of preppies, to nerds, to rock stars, to athletes and so on and forth. Furthermore, I also encountered some people who hang out with “friends” to make them stand out. And this proved to me that friends are really chosen, not made.
Although these are the type of relationships that Levinas is opposing to. One must not go out to the Other because of one’s selfish interest. One must not reduce the Other to what one wants it to be. We should not choose our friends. Instead, we should make friends. One must respect the Alterity of the Other- its uniqueness and mystery that makes life more exciting. True and good friends must respect the Alterity of each other anyway so friends must not force each other to conform and to be uniform. Rather, friends must allow each other to grow and develop “to be”.
Emmanuel Levinas made the distinction between the “Law of the I” and the “Law of the Other”. He stated that the pattern of the Western thought, which follows the “Law of the I”, is that the I goes to the Other but only to go back to one’s self. On the contrary, the pattern of the “Law of the Other” is that the I goes to Other and remains there. From this we can imply that the “Law of the I” goes to the Other with the intention of a gain for one’s self. It reduces the “alterity” of the Other in a way that the Other is reduced to what the functionality is for the I. Hence, its relationship is more egoistic. On the other hand, the relationship of the “Law of the Other” is altruistic and selfless, meaning, it is not based on any gain or benefits, rather, it is based on caring or being responsible for the Other which respects its uniqueness.
Upon hearing, I could not help but relate it with the aspect of choosing or making friends. When I entered High School, I was frequently advised by my parents to choose decent friends which would be a good influence to me throughout my life. I was reminded often, especially during my first year in high school, to stay away from drug addicts, cigarette smokers, students who cut classes just to hang around somewhere and the like. This reminder somehow instilled in me a thought that friends should be chosen, not made.
Furthermore, it turns out that when I entered High School, “cliques” are very common. Cliques refer to a group of people having a common interest or other features and they do not readily allow other people without such same interest or feature to join them. Hence, I encountered various “cliques”, from group of preppies, to nerds, to rock stars, to athletes and so on and forth. Furthermore, I also encountered some people who hang out with “friends” to make them stand out. And this proved to me that friends are really chosen, not made.
Although these are the type of relationships that Levinas is opposing to. One must not go out to the Other because of one’s selfish interest. One must not reduce the Other to what one wants it to be. We should not choose our friends. Instead, we should make friends. One must respect the Alterity of the Other- its uniqueness and mystery that makes life more exciting. True and good friends must respect the Alterity of each other anyway so friends must not force each other to conform and to be uniform. Rather, friends must allow each other to grow and develop “to be”.
Thursday, January 16, 2014
In Life's U-Turn
by Eve Avila
NOTE: This is an article published over Rappler.
A handsome old man (the proprietor of the 3-star hotel where I stayed recently in Jodhpur, India) noticed that we were born in the same year (he saw it in the registry book) but asked how come I did not look my age. Then he was fast to say that it’s perhaps because my hair does not show as I wear a turban and I don’t have an elp. And what is that? He proceeded to demonstrate that it’s the flabby skin under the chin most commonly found among elderly women. I will be untruthful if I say I did not enjoy it when he pecked me on the cheek.
A few years before reaching the compulsory retirement age, I left my full-time job to volunteer overseas. After two years in Africa, I am back home and experiencing an identity crisis similar to a child who is in transition to becoming a teenager.
Should I be deliberate about trying not to look elderly and utter a white lie when casually asked in what year I was born? What for? Unless I make it a past-time to engage in a guessing game. In this modern world of inclusivity and equal opportunity, it has become acceptable to come-as-you are.
Feeling good
Regardless of my age, I still want to look good because it makes me feel good. When I feel good, I can make people around me feel good, too.
With age, my eyebrows are now disappearing with a speck of white hairs left. No problem. I have the time to pluck the white hairs and meticulously arch my brows. I even apply mascara now when before I thought it was a time-waster.
As I still do not have sagging upper arms (no elp), I am more emboldened to wear haltered or sleeveless tops especially during the summer months. I don’t worry about the underarm hairs because they are now maintenance-free, if not invisible, being sparse and white.
I wear a turban or a hat to protect my hair coloring which easily fades with the sun. But frankly, I think I look younger with those colorful head gears.
Carded
Accepting the truths associated with my age has indeed set me free. The first step to gaining that liberation was to apply for a senior citizens card.
A senior citizens card is far more superior than those issued by banks for their high net worth clients or international airline carriers for their frequent flyers or business and first class travelers. One is issued a senior citizens card not on the basis of how much money you have shelled-out to gain the special treatment. By simply letting nature take its course, one becomes privileged. So why not enjoy the ride?
As a senior citizen, I can jump queues almost everywhere, except when lining up for Holy Communion. I get special seats even in the cashier’s queue of a supermarket, discounts on purchases including movie house seats, restaurants, transport systems (except jeepneys, tricycles and taxis). But since my physique does not easily reveal my age, I have to brandish my senior citizens card lest I get heckled or maliciously stared at. It is wonderful to have a senior citizens card!
Annoyed
Embracing my new identify is however, not easy. I get annoyed when someone who looks older to me calls me 'ate', 'auntie', 'nanay' or 'lola'. The gall!
My tone changes to irritation when I talk to people who are wont to using “in” phrases such as “ask ko lang”, “wait lang”, “let me double-check” (even if it is the first time to check), “’Te/Kuya” (when it used to be Miss or Mister). I want to use ear plugs when I hear the word “pasensiya” profusely used in the context of "please tolerate my stupidity”.
I also have to get adjusted to the declining quality of service that I get from salespersons and call center agents.
These days, call center agents have become mere telephone operators. A far cry from the caliber of the agents some 4 to 5 years ago. Other than the deteriorating command of the English language with a universal accent, they seldom resolve phoned-in problems now. The recent trend is for them to say that they will forward your complaint to the department concerned. Are the call center agents burned-out or getting substandard training or turning out fast? Or has the business model of call centers been changed that the core service being offered (aided by the script) is just for someone to be on the line to receive calls and not solve complaints or problems?
Likewise, those behind the counters (even of reputable department stores) do not seem very knowledgeable about the products they are selling. Ask them about product features and they give you mediocre answers just to make a sale. Is this because of the trend of hiring casual or contractual salespersons who are replaced by a new batch before the end of the 6th month on the job? Do customers need to always remember “caveat emptor”? Being a senior citizen, I can only remember the times past when shopping was like an educational tour.
Beating the inevitable
If I have an issue about aging, it is the faculty of remembering. In my younger days, I often ascribed forgetfulness to being distracted, having too much on my plate or blaming my secretary. I simply have to devise ways now to combat this inevitability.
I don’t use a handbag because I am afraid to forget it. I have changed my wardrobe from office attire to T-shirts and pants with pockets. No need for a handbag when all I need to carry are my not-so-smart cell phone, a lipstick, and wallet with my senior citizens card, of course.
I don’t relish driving a car around the city anymore but I still enjoy long drives. With my 26-year old Jeep with a manual transmission, I sometimes forget what gear I am running on. At my age, my hearing is probably getting impaired that I do not hear my engine whining. But again, no problem. I have devised a method that if I am not on a top gear, I place my hand on the stick shift to remind me to watch out. It works, most of the time.
Nothing can spoil my fun though because I am now in possession of a great wealth – my own time.
I still wake up at 5:00 in the morning because by habit, I do not want to snub the beautiful sunshine by tarrying in bed. Nights and days were created for specific purposes and I look forward to what I can do best especially with my MacBook Pro.
With time in my hands, I am beginning to acquire the virtue of patience – something that I did not have in my younger days of rat race and ever-present sense of urgency. In a queue, I can wait for my turn even if it takes hours. No problem. I can easily start a small talk about trivial things. Unlike before when I need to fill the time by bringing something to read or tinkering with my Blackberry.
I have shelved my management and finance books; they belonged to my past life. Instead, I find constant guidance from Koheleth’s Ecclesiastes, Victor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning, Louis Fisher’s Gandhi, and John Ruskin’s Unto the Last.
According to Ruskin, “there is no wealth but Life, including its powers of love, of joy and of admiration. The man is richest who, having perfected the functions of his own life to the utmost, has also the widest helpful influence, both personal, and by means of his possessions, over the lives of others.”
And when all is said and done, I hope that my children might have learned early enough from my experience.
NOTE: This is an article published over Rappler.
A handsome old man (the proprietor of the 3-star hotel where I stayed recently in Jodhpur, India) noticed that we were born in the same year (he saw it in the registry book) but asked how come I did not look my age. Then he was fast to say that it’s perhaps because my hair does not show as I wear a turban and I don’t have an elp. And what is that? He proceeded to demonstrate that it’s the flabby skin under the chin most commonly found among elderly women. I will be untruthful if I say I did not enjoy it when he pecked me on the cheek.
A few years before reaching the compulsory retirement age, I left my full-time job to volunteer overseas. After two years in Africa, I am back home and experiencing an identity crisis similar to a child who is in transition to becoming a teenager.
Should I be deliberate about trying not to look elderly and utter a white lie when casually asked in what year I was born? What for? Unless I make it a past-time to engage in a guessing game. In this modern world of inclusivity and equal opportunity, it has become acceptable to come-as-you are.
Feeling good
Regardless of my age, I still want to look good because it makes me feel good. When I feel good, I can make people around me feel good, too.
With age, my eyebrows are now disappearing with a speck of white hairs left. No problem. I have the time to pluck the white hairs and meticulously arch my brows. I even apply mascara now when before I thought it was a time-waster.
As I still do not have sagging upper arms (no elp), I am more emboldened to wear haltered or sleeveless tops especially during the summer months. I don’t worry about the underarm hairs because they are now maintenance-free, if not invisible, being sparse and white.
I wear a turban or a hat to protect my hair coloring which easily fades with the sun. But frankly, I think I look younger with those colorful head gears.
Carded
Accepting the truths associated with my age has indeed set me free. The first step to gaining that liberation was to apply for a senior citizens card.
A senior citizens card is far more superior than those issued by banks for their high net worth clients or international airline carriers for their frequent flyers or business and first class travelers. One is issued a senior citizens card not on the basis of how much money you have shelled-out to gain the special treatment. By simply letting nature take its course, one becomes privileged. So why not enjoy the ride?
As a senior citizen, I can jump queues almost everywhere, except when lining up for Holy Communion. I get special seats even in the cashier’s queue of a supermarket, discounts on purchases including movie house seats, restaurants, transport systems (except jeepneys, tricycles and taxis). But since my physique does not easily reveal my age, I have to brandish my senior citizens card lest I get heckled or maliciously stared at. It is wonderful to have a senior citizens card!
Annoyed
Embracing my new identify is however, not easy. I get annoyed when someone who looks older to me calls me 'ate', 'auntie', 'nanay' or 'lola'. The gall!
My tone changes to irritation when I talk to people who are wont to using “in” phrases such as “ask ko lang”, “wait lang”, “let me double-check” (even if it is the first time to check), “’Te/Kuya” (when it used to be Miss or Mister). I want to use ear plugs when I hear the word “pasensiya” profusely used in the context of "please tolerate my stupidity”.
I also have to get adjusted to the declining quality of service that I get from salespersons and call center agents.
These days, call center agents have become mere telephone operators. A far cry from the caliber of the agents some 4 to 5 years ago. Other than the deteriorating command of the English language with a universal accent, they seldom resolve phoned-in problems now. The recent trend is for them to say that they will forward your complaint to the department concerned. Are the call center agents burned-out or getting substandard training or turning out fast? Or has the business model of call centers been changed that the core service being offered (aided by the script) is just for someone to be on the line to receive calls and not solve complaints or problems?
Likewise, those behind the counters (even of reputable department stores) do not seem very knowledgeable about the products they are selling. Ask them about product features and they give you mediocre answers just to make a sale. Is this because of the trend of hiring casual or contractual salespersons who are replaced by a new batch before the end of the 6th month on the job? Do customers need to always remember “caveat emptor”? Being a senior citizen, I can only remember the times past when shopping was like an educational tour.
Beating the inevitable
If I have an issue about aging, it is the faculty of remembering. In my younger days, I often ascribed forgetfulness to being distracted, having too much on my plate or blaming my secretary. I simply have to devise ways now to combat this inevitability.
I don’t use a handbag because I am afraid to forget it. I have changed my wardrobe from office attire to T-shirts and pants with pockets. No need for a handbag when all I need to carry are my not-so-smart cell phone, a lipstick, and wallet with my senior citizens card, of course.
I don’t relish driving a car around the city anymore but I still enjoy long drives. With my 26-year old Jeep with a manual transmission, I sometimes forget what gear I am running on. At my age, my hearing is probably getting impaired that I do not hear my engine whining. But again, no problem. I have devised a method that if I am not on a top gear, I place my hand on the stick shift to remind me to watch out. It works, most of the time.
Nothing can spoil my fun though because I am now in possession of a great wealth – my own time.
I still wake up at 5:00 in the morning because by habit, I do not want to snub the beautiful sunshine by tarrying in bed. Nights and days were created for specific purposes and I look forward to what I can do best especially with my MacBook Pro.
With time in my hands, I am beginning to acquire the virtue of patience – something that I did not have in my younger days of rat race and ever-present sense of urgency. In a queue, I can wait for my turn even if it takes hours. No problem. I can easily start a small talk about trivial things. Unlike before when I need to fill the time by bringing something to read or tinkering with my Blackberry.
I have shelved my management and finance books; they belonged to my past life. Instead, I find constant guidance from Koheleth’s Ecclesiastes, Victor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning, Louis Fisher’s Gandhi, and John Ruskin’s Unto the Last.
According to Ruskin, “there is no wealth but Life, including its powers of love, of joy and of admiration. The man is richest who, having perfected the functions of his own life to the utmost, has also the widest helpful influence, both personal, and by means of his possessions, over the lives of others.”
And when all is said and done, I hope that my children might have learned early enough from my experience.
Thursday, January 9, 2014
The Precariousness of Presence
by Lyka Gonzalez
One could probably liken watching his or her favorite band or artist perform live to the spectacle of arriving in a city one has longed to explore. For one thing, the experience is magical. It’s magic: Intoxicating.
An instantaneous roar fills the arena upon the sound of the band’s opening song. The thundering energy of the crowd races your heart along with the tiny strands of hair in your body. Suddenly, you are in a moment of disbelief. The songs you used to continually listen to from your computer, radio, iPod or record player you are now hearing live. You are caught in this dreamlike state until a 9.5-inch tablet is raised before you virtually blocking your view.
Concert-goers often end up drowning in a sea of smartphones and tablets as other attendees exhaust their efforts in getting a recording of the event for themselves. What are their intentions behind this? Perhaps they intend to have a memento they can look back to from time to time. Perhaps they intend to post it on their Instagram and Facebook account afterwards. Would it not be more satisfying to look back on a lasting memory of the experience rather than trying to “relive” the performance on the screen? Is a digital recording really what you are paying for in that event? Whichever the reason, what is common between the two is how absent they makes us in the present.
Though aimed at improving the quality of life, technology makes its primary goal questionable today. In a society with growing number of social media platforms and constant advancement of technology, we unconsciously allow ourselves to be too forward-looking. We preoccupy ourselves with what we can look back to later on and what we will post afterwards that we fail to just be and experience the now. The digital age tries to connect us more with one another and perhaps with ourselves as well, but it has also enforced us to be overdependent on technology. The mindset we have grown to have and the dependency it has caused make us even more disconnected with each other and with the present. It puts genuine relationships and lasting experiences (pagsasamahan) into uncertainty. Instead of making us more in tune with ourselves and with each other, technology has distracted from lived experiences that make life more meaningful. As with all things, learning to live the experience begins in the littlest of changes. Often, it starts with a self-reminder. By calling your impulses to attention, you make yourself more mindful of your actions and opens your mind to other options. You become aware of yourself and your surroundings. Then, it continues in letting go. Being present and being in the present also start by simply putting that gadget down. Let go of your temporal inhibitions about what to save or “Share” afterwards. Shake those worries off. Listen to the music around you. Watch the lights dance before you. Immerse yourself in the vibrations of the crowd--of the moment.
Sing. Dance. Scream. Jump. Cry.
Just live it.
One could probably liken watching his or her favorite band or artist perform live to the spectacle of arriving in a city one has longed to explore. For one thing, the experience is magical. It’s magic: Intoxicating.
An instantaneous roar fills the arena upon the sound of the band’s opening song. The thundering energy of the crowd races your heart along with the tiny strands of hair in your body. Suddenly, you are in a moment of disbelief. The songs you used to continually listen to from your computer, radio, iPod or record player you are now hearing live. You are caught in this dreamlike state until a 9.5-inch tablet is raised before you virtually blocking your view.
Concert-goers often end up drowning in a sea of smartphones and tablets as other attendees exhaust their efforts in getting a recording of the event for themselves. What are their intentions behind this? Perhaps they intend to have a memento they can look back to from time to time. Perhaps they intend to post it on their Instagram and Facebook account afterwards. Would it not be more satisfying to look back on a lasting memory of the experience rather than trying to “relive” the performance on the screen? Is a digital recording really what you are paying for in that event? Whichever the reason, what is common between the two is how absent they makes us in the present.
Though aimed at improving the quality of life, technology makes its primary goal questionable today. In a society with growing number of social media platforms and constant advancement of technology, we unconsciously allow ourselves to be too forward-looking. We preoccupy ourselves with what we can look back to later on and what we will post afterwards that we fail to just be and experience the now. The digital age tries to connect us more with one another and perhaps with ourselves as well, but it has also enforced us to be overdependent on technology. The mindset we have grown to have and the dependency it has caused make us even more disconnected with each other and with the present. It puts genuine relationships and lasting experiences (pagsasamahan) into uncertainty. Instead of making us more in tune with ourselves and with each other, technology has distracted from lived experiences that make life more meaningful. As with all things, learning to live the experience begins in the littlest of changes. Often, it starts with a self-reminder. By calling your impulses to attention, you make yourself more mindful of your actions and opens your mind to other options. You become aware of yourself and your surroundings. Then, it continues in letting go. Being present and being in the present also start by simply putting that gadget down. Let go of your temporal inhibitions about what to save or “Share” afterwards. Shake those worries off. Listen to the music around you. Watch the lights dance before you. Immerse yourself in the vibrations of the crowd--of the moment.
Sing. Dance. Scream. Jump. Cry.
Just live it.
The Face Stamp: Self-Exploration or Narcissism? Self-Esteem or Cynical?
by Denise Tan
Selfies are the new medium of making the “self” accessibly known to the world. With the rise of technology, it’s no surprise how almost everyone are so into this bandwagon of “self-expression”.
But the question remains, is it something psychologically termed to be a form of self-exploration? Is it something of worth in terms of raising our self-esteem? Or is it deemed to be some horrifying cynical way of one’s narcissistic self-projection?
Psychologists say that the selfie movement elicits a feeling of independence from an individual. It makes us in control, as we are able to manipulate the image we are projecting to the world at large. It makes us be, in the long run, “better”. Added to this, some even say, that selfies can be used as a medium in addressing self-perceptions. It aids in a way of molding one’s sense of self to the world. It is a catalyzed form of constant connection and reconnection.
However, in a philosophical light, selfies can be discussed in these two views.
(1) Could selfies be just a medium for the “I” to project its dominance?
Backtracking to the wise philosophical teaching of Levinas, he talked about the domination of I, in the Law of the I. Sure, individuals who invest in selfies say it’s for self-projection. Some even say they are capturing moments of selfies to be able to concretize connection and fully share this to others, and to the world at large. This would then mean it’s something mutual, something beneficial. But are we really investing it only for connection and sharing purposes for others? In retrospect, selfiesrevolve around the idea of egonomy. We concretize the parts we feel uncertain in ourselves, and indirectly seek attention or affirmation from the people around us.
(2) Could selfies be a way of escape? Could it be ones way of instant gratification?
Levinas also talked about the sinking feeling of il y a—the feeling of uncertainty, fear, horror, disturbance, disaster. He talked about how one experiences a state of il y a before one emerges to Being (Heidegger). Hence, would it be possible that man has found a way to “skip” this state of ilya, and thrown oneself into living that sense of Being?
What if selfies is a medium to bypass this? But please, don’t get me wrong. I still think that selfiesare far from the real experienceof actually living the essence and realness of Be-ing itself. However, it makes me think on the lines of “what if”. What if people categorize the movement of selfies as them already reaching that state of “Being”? What if by getting that attention, by making the uncertainties of themselves become certain, they are able to project themselves to the world better? But that’s where the problem mainly lies. They are doing this for self-gratification. They are doing this to invest in the “instant”. They are doing this all for the immediate moment. They are escaping that state of progression into Being. They are running from their experience of il y a.
In terms of self-image, il y a could represent those moments where in we’re unsure of ourselves. We are unsure of our image. We are unsure if our worth’s enough. We are unsure of our look. We are unsure of our confidence. We are unsure of who we are mainly—our placement in the world, our standing. But that’s just the beauty of it—the uncertainty, the dark moments, the indeterminacies.We have get through them, because it is where we grow. We energize. We exude.
After all,it is only in darkness, that we discover our light.
Well, whatever opinion one has on selfies, to each his own. But just always know how to capitalize on it with the right intentions. Selfies has his own perks. It’s a given. But just don’t let it eat you up—whole.
_____________________________________________________________________
To cap off this blogpost, here’s a funny article on how far one can revolutionize the selfie life.
Snap away!(?)
Selfies are the new medium of making the “self” accessibly known to the world. With the rise of technology, it’s no surprise how almost everyone are so into this bandwagon of “self-expression”.
But the question remains, is it something psychologically termed to be a form of self-exploration? Is it something of worth in terms of raising our self-esteem? Or is it deemed to be some horrifying cynical way of one’s narcissistic self-projection?
Psychologists say that the selfie movement elicits a feeling of independence from an individual. It makes us in control, as we are able to manipulate the image we are projecting to the world at large. It makes us be, in the long run, “better”. Added to this, some even say, that selfies can be used as a medium in addressing self-perceptions. It aids in a way of molding one’s sense of self to the world. It is a catalyzed form of constant connection and reconnection.
However, in a philosophical light, selfies can be discussed in these two views.
(1) Could selfies be just a medium for the “I” to project its dominance?
Backtracking to the wise philosophical teaching of Levinas, he talked about the domination of I, in the Law of the I. Sure, individuals who invest in selfies say it’s for self-projection. Some even say they are capturing moments of selfies to be able to concretize connection and fully share this to others, and to the world at large. This would then mean it’s something mutual, something beneficial. But are we really investing it only for connection and sharing purposes for others? In retrospect, selfiesrevolve around the idea of egonomy. We concretize the parts we feel uncertain in ourselves, and indirectly seek attention or affirmation from the people around us.
(2) Could selfies be a way of escape? Could it be ones way of instant gratification?
Levinas also talked about the sinking feeling of il y a—the feeling of uncertainty, fear, horror, disturbance, disaster. He talked about how one experiences a state of il y a before one emerges to Being (Heidegger). Hence, would it be possible that man has found a way to “skip” this state of ilya, and thrown oneself into living that sense of Being?
What if selfies is a medium to bypass this? But please, don’t get me wrong. I still think that selfiesare far from the real experienceof actually living the essence and realness of Be-ing itself. However, it makes me think on the lines of “what if”. What if people categorize the movement of selfies as them already reaching that state of “Being”? What if by getting that attention, by making the uncertainties of themselves become certain, they are able to project themselves to the world better? But that’s where the problem mainly lies. They are doing this for self-gratification. They are doing this to invest in the “instant”. They are doing this all for the immediate moment. They are escaping that state of progression into Being. They are running from their experience of il y a.
In terms of self-image, il y a could represent those moments where in we’re unsure of ourselves. We are unsure of our image. We are unsure if our worth’s enough. We are unsure of our look. We are unsure of our confidence. We are unsure of who we are mainly—our placement in the world, our standing. But that’s just the beauty of it—the uncertainty, the dark moments, the indeterminacies.We have get through them, because it is where we grow. We energize. We exude.
After all,it is only in darkness, that we discover our light.
Well, whatever opinion one has on selfies, to each his own. But just always know how to capitalize on it with the right intentions. Selfies has his own perks. It’s a given. But just don’t let it eat you up—whole.
_____________________________________________________________________
To cap off this blogpost, here’s a funny article on how far one can revolutionize the selfie life.
Snap away!(?)
Projecting The Self
by Kat Altomonte
Although I didn’t have the chance to say this in class this morning, I really didn’t agree on selfies being a negative habit or a waste of time. When I take a selfie, it is my way of projecting and marketing my self to the world. Each selfie I take, whether it be with family, with friends, or my doggie, is my way of sharing a part of myself to you.
It makes sense to me why selfies get more likes on Facebook and Instagram than the picture of pretty sunset does. It makes sense to me why selfies became so popular and why it is such an important aspect of our online identities. People are attracted to images of who you are. They give you their attention and give you the recognition that you want. Being able to capture the attention of so many people means that it is what people are actually looking for.
Selfies have the power of showing what you are passionate about: travel, food, art, music, whatever! There is opportunity in being able to both capture and create moments in a creative manner. Indeed, selfies do come across as narcissistic but they do have a personal element to it. But in this technological age and in the kind of society that operates today, they can be a means to share a snapshot of who you truly are what you love. Selfies are more than an act of vanity, they are a projection of the self.
Although I didn’t have the chance to say this in class this morning, I really didn’t agree on selfies being a negative habit or a waste of time. When I take a selfie, it is my way of projecting and marketing my self to the world. Each selfie I take, whether it be with family, with friends, or my doggie, is my way of sharing a part of myself to you.
It makes sense to me why selfies get more likes on Facebook and Instagram than the picture of pretty sunset does. It makes sense to me why selfies became so popular and why it is such an important aspect of our online identities. People are attracted to images of who you are. They give you their attention and give you the recognition that you want. Being able to capture the attention of so many people means that it is what people are actually looking for.
Selfies have the power of showing what you are passionate about: travel, food, art, music, whatever! There is opportunity in being able to both capture and create moments in a creative manner. Indeed, selfies do come across as narcissistic but they do have a personal element to it. But in this technological age and in the kind of society that operates today, they can be a means to share a snapshot of who you truly are what you love. Selfies are more than an act of vanity, they are a projection of the self.
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
A Big Adventure with the Little Prince
by Char Syliangco
I first read The Little Prince when I was 12. It was the oddest story for me back then – from the mysterious boa constrictor drawing to the huge guys stepping on small planets. Nothing in the story made sense to me, and it made me wonder why my teacher kept talking about this book like it was holy. A few years later, I randomly found my copy and read it. And then a few years after that again. What’s interesting about it is everytime I get to read it, it’s like I am able to unlock a new message. The book is like a mystery, and the only way to solve it is through age and time.
This is why I have come to love The Little Prince. It is a book that takes us to other worlds. We learn so much from it without leaving our seats; it is the prince who travels for us. He brings us to so many different planets, introduces us to a versatile bunch of people (even animals), and more importantly, he teaches us how to love.
Just in case you haven’t read it: the prince falls in love with a rose. The rose is unique; it was the first of its kind to sprout on the prince’s planet. Realizing that it was not harmful, he chose to take care of it despite her obvious vanity. The rose demanded to be treated with care because she was one of a kind. He took time to water it, protect her from harm, and cover her with a glass globe. But when the prince found out that roses were common in another world, he got hurt and decided to flee. In his journey, he learned that the rose was still one of a kind because it is the only plant he took care of. Also, he found out that the rose will not live forever. He hurried home to his planet upon discovering this.
The problem with us people is that we get too caught up in other people’s flaws that we fail to remember their strengths. There are times that we realize a friend/loved one of ours may be too loud, too sensitive, too irritating, what-have-you. Or maybe this friend might have even hurt us in some way. It is so easy to just hate on them or even stray away from them. But if we truly love this person, we would always choose to see past it. Our job is to point out their mistakes and be patient while they grow to be better people. With this, John Green’s quote comes to mind: “I don’t know a perfect person. I only know flawed people who are still worth loving.” Flaws are only on the surface. Deep down, every person has a kind heart. And that is why we should look with our hearts too, and not with our eyes.
I thank The Little Prince for being my cheat sheet to life. It is true that we need to experience things to fully understand it, but I think the book is an experience in itself. The story, no matter how bizarre the setting is, is based on real-life experiences and insights. In it, I learned how to appreciate each other more. The key is to never give up easily because we might be throwing our happiness away. There is beauty in our own roses despite its thorns.
Egology According to Blaise Pascal
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) is a famous mathematician and philosopher. He is more known as the father of the Pascaline (one of the earliest arithmetic machines) and the Pascal's triangle (which we are all familiar with in high school math). However, one thing that only a handful of people know is that he is a philosopher who criticized the cogito of Descartes and metaphysical systems, saying that the only path for the human being to become happy is to open himself up to charity.
Here is one fragment from his famous Pensees about self-love (fr. 597/455)
The self is hateful ......In a word the self has two characteristics. It is unjust in itself for making itself center of everything: it is a nuisance to others in that it trues to subjugate them, for each self is the enemy of all the others and would like to tyrannize them. You take await the nuisance, but not the injustice.
In what way is the self hateful when it is ego-logic and ego-nomic?
Two (Quite) Contrasting Articles about the Selfie
Selfies
by Randy David
There was a time when, as a young man traveling to different countries for the first time, I took photos of every building, statue, or landscape that caught my eye, hoping to share these with family and friends when I got home. I realized many years later that this habit was keeping me from enjoying and remembering the places I visited.
The experience is akin to filing away memos in neat folders for later retrieval so your mind is freed for the next task. You end up unable to recall much of what you filed away unless you have the actual document at hand. Busying yourself with picture-taking while on a trip to a new place creates a gap between you and the moment. It can strip traveling of the quality that uniquely belongs to it as an experience—the slow immersion in something new, and the oscillation between awe and recognition it brings about.
I think it is even more so when one likes to take “selfies”—the new obsession that has accompanied the advent of camera-equipped mobile phones, and social networking portals like Facebook and Instagram. Declaring it as the new word of the year, the venerable Oxford English Dictionary defines it thus: “Selfie: noun, informal. A photograph that one has taken of oneself, typically one taken with a smartphone or web cam and uploaded to a social media website. Also: selfy. Plural: selfies.”
To me, selfies are not the same as looking at oneself in the mirror, and the silent self-contemplation this connotes. On the contrary, they seem to epitomize the vast distance that separates narcissism from self-knowledge.
While almost every painter of worth in every era has done a self-portrait, taking a selfie for sharing and liking cannot possibly compare with the experience of an artist pondering the moods, desires, and emotions evoked by the lines and contours of his own face. The selfie is pure self-absorption where the self-portrait could be self-analysis. What distinguishes one from the other is the superficiality to which much digital communication technology has lent itself.
The writer Rebecca Solnit captures this difference eloquently in a recent London Review of Books essay titled “In the Day of the Postman.” She writes: “I think of that lost world, the way we lived before these new networking technologies, as having two poles: solitude and communion. The new chatter puts us somewhere in between, assuaging fears of being alone without risking real connection. It is a shallow between two deep zones, a safe spot between the dangers of contact with ourselves, with others.”
We are not just talking here of the occasional photos we take of ourselves, usually against the background of a place we are visiting, when there’s no one around to do it for us. Rather, we are talking of the almost compulsive manner in which many of today’s young people try to capture what they look like at any moment of the day. By taking countless pictures of themselves in different poses, and posting these in social networking websites for others to like (or deride, as the case may be), they presume that the world is interested in them—a way, as Solnit puts it, of “assuaging fears of being alone.” At the same time, their obsession with the number of likes and comments they get on these poses could be a way of evading the real challenge of deeply knowing and connecting with their own selves.
The sociologist Niklas Luhmann once defined maturity as a system’s capacity to observe itself. The term he uses for self-observation is reflexivity, the defining quality of the modern person. But, for all the cutting-edge modernity of the technology that serves as its platform, the selfie seems to me to be a throwback to the premodern era when men and women relied primarily on others to define who they were.
Rather than being a prelude to changing one’s life, the selfie has become no more than a cheap vehicle for instant self-affirmation. Like the ubiquitous mobile phone with which almost all of them are taken, doing selfies has taken the place reserved for reflection. We can no longer be alone with ourselves without yielding to the temptation of documenting the moment for social media. Solnit observes: “The fine art of doing nothing in particular, also known as thinking, or musing, or introspection, or simply moments of being, was part of what happened when you walked from here to there alone, or stared out the train window, or contemplated the road, but the new technologies have flooded those open spaces. Space for free thought is routinely regarded as a void, and filled up with sounds and distraction.” And selfies.
Perhaps, it’s a generation thing, which is why I’m conscious that I should not impose my idea of well-spent solitude on others. I like bird-watching, reading, taking solitary walks, and barreling down on an empty expressway, alone, on a motorcycle. Some will likely say these are precisely the pursuits of loners.
But, even in the company of others, I hardly take pictures, and I don’t have a Facebook or Instagram account. On a trip to Japan a few months ago, however, I decided to get myself a Nikon Coolpix P-520 with a built-in 42x optical zoom, thinking it might enhance and prolong my enjoyment of birds. I was wrong. I spent more time looking for birds through the viewfinder and focusing the lens to get a clear shot, than if I had been content to watch these winged creatures through binoculars.
I am convinced that many great moments of pleasure and happiness are not meant to be preserved, but merely lived. It was to this end that Nietzsche once said that we need “human beings who know how to be silent, lonely, resolute, and content and constant in invisible activities…”
Happy New Year!
* * *
----------------------------------------
The Meanings of the Selfie
by James Franco
Selfies are something new to me, but as I have become increasingly addicted to Instagram, I have been accused of posting too many of them. I was called out on the “Today” show, and have even been called the selfie king.
Maybe this is so, but only because I’ve learned that the selfie is one of the most popular ways to post — and garner the most likes from followers. The likes spin out of control for selfies of me and my two handsome brothers, especially Dave, the other actor, whose image pulls in its own legion of teenage fans.
I can see which posts don’t get attention or make me lose followers: those with photos of art projects; videos telling the haters to go away (in not so many words); and photos with poems. (Warning: Post your own, and you’ll see how fast people become poetry specialists and offer critiques like “I hate you, you should die.”)
But a well-stocked collection of selfies seems to get attention. And attention seems to be the name of the game when it comes to social networking. In this age of too much information at a click of a button, the power to attract viewers amid the sea of things to read and watch is power indeed. It’s what the movie studios want for their products, it’s what professional writers want for their work, it’s what newspapers want — hell, it’s what everyone wants: attention. Attention is power. And if you are someone people are interested in, then the selfie provides something very powerful, from the most privileged perspective possible.
We speak of the celebrity selfie, which is its own special thing. It has value regardless of the photo’s quality, because it is ostensibly an intimate shot of someone whom the public is curious about. It is the prize shot that the paparazzi would kill for, because they would make good money; it is the shot that the magazines and blogs want, because it will get the readers close to the subject.
And the celebrity selfie is not only a private portrait of a star, but one also usually composed and taken by said star — a double whammy. Look at Justin Bieber’s Instagram account (the reigning king of Instagram?), and you will find mostly selfies. Look at other accounts with millions of followers — like that of Taylor Swift or Ashley Benson (of the TV show “Pretty Little Liars”) — and you’ll find backstage selfies, selfies with friends, selfies with pets.
These stars know the power of their image, and how it is enhanced when garnished with privileged material — anything that says, “Here is a bit of my private life.”
I’ve found that Instagram works much like the movie business: You’re safe if you trade “one for them” with “one for yourself,” meaning for every photo of a book, painting or poem, I try to post a selfie with a puppy, a topless selfie or a selfie with Seth Rogen, because these are all things that are generally liked.
Now, while the celebrity selfie is most powerful as a pseudo-personal moment, the noncelebrity selfie is a chance for subjects to glam it up, to show off a special side of themselves — dressing up for a special occasion, or not dressing, which is a kind of preening that says, “There is something important about me that clothes hide, and I don’t want to hide.”
Of course, the self-portrait is an easy target for charges of self-involvement, but, in a visual culture, the selfie quickly and easily shows, not tells, how you’re feeling, where you are, what you’re doing.
And, as our social lives become more electronic, we become more adept at interpreting social media. A texting conversation might fall short of communicating how you are feeling, but a selfie might make everything clear in an instant. Selfies are tools of communication more than marks of vanity (but yes, they can be a little vain).
We all have different reasons for posting them, but, in the end, selfies are avatars: Mini-Me’s that we send out to give others a sense of who we are.
I am actually turned off when I look at an account and don’t see any selfies, because I want to know whom I’m dealing with. In our age of social networking, the selfie is the new way to look someone right in the eye and say, “Hello, this is me.”
What do you think?
by Randy David
There was a time when, as a young man traveling to different countries for the first time, I took photos of every building, statue, or landscape that caught my eye, hoping to share these with family and friends when I got home. I realized many years later that this habit was keeping me from enjoying and remembering the places I visited.
The experience is akin to filing away memos in neat folders for later retrieval so your mind is freed for the next task. You end up unable to recall much of what you filed away unless you have the actual document at hand. Busying yourself with picture-taking while on a trip to a new place creates a gap between you and the moment. It can strip traveling of the quality that uniquely belongs to it as an experience—the slow immersion in something new, and the oscillation between awe and recognition it brings about.
I think it is even more so when one likes to take “selfies”—the new obsession that has accompanied the advent of camera-equipped mobile phones, and social networking portals like Facebook and Instagram. Declaring it as the new word of the year, the venerable Oxford English Dictionary defines it thus: “Selfie: noun, informal. A photograph that one has taken of oneself, typically one taken with a smartphone or web cam and uploaded to a social media website. Also: selfy. Plural: selfies.”
To me, selfies are not the same as looking at oneself in the mirror, and the silent self-contemplation this connotes. On the contrary, they seem to epitomize the vast distance that separates narcissism from self-knowledge.
While almost every painter of worth in every era has done a self-portrait, taking a selfie for sharing and liking cannot possibly compare with the experience of an artist pondering the moods, desires, and emotions evoked by the lines and contours of his own face. The selfie is pure self-absorption where the self-portrait could be self-analysis. What distinguishes one from the other is the superficiality to which much digital communication technology has lent itself.
The writer Rebecca Solnit captures this difference eloquently in a recent London Review of Books essay titled “In the Day of the Postman.” She writes: “I think of that lost world, the way we lived before these new networking technologies, as having two poles: solitude and communion. The new chatter puts us somewhere in between, assuaging fears of being alone without risking real connection. It is a shallow between two deep zones, a safe spot between the dangers of contact with ourselves, with others.”
We are not just talking here of the occasional photos we take of ourselves, usually against the background of a place we are visiting, when there’s no one around to do it for us. Rather, we are talking of the almost compulsive manner in which many of today’s young people try to capture what they look like at any moment of the day. By taking countless pictures of themselves in different poses, and posting these in social networking websites for others to like (or deride, as the case may be), they presume that the world is interested in them—a way, as Solnit puts it, of “assuaging fears of being alone.” At the same time, their obsession with the number of likes and comments they get on these poses could be a way of evading the real challenge of deeply knowing and connecting with their own selves.
The sociologist Niklas Luhmann once defined maturity as a system’s capacity to observe itself. The term he uses for self-observation is reflexivity, the defining quality of the modern person. But, for all the cutting-edge modernity of the technology that serves as its platform, the selfie seems to me to be a throwback to the premodern era when men and women relied primarily on others to define who they were.
Rather than being a prelude to changing one’s life, the selfie has become no more than a cheap vehicle for instant self-affirmation. Like the ubiquitous mobile phone with which almost all of them are taken, doing selfies has taken the place reserved for reflection. We can no longer be alone with ourselves without yielding to the temptation of documenting the moment for social media. Solnit observes: “The fine art of doing nothing in particular, also known as thinking, or musing, or introspection, or simply moments of being, was part of what happened when you walked from here to there alone, or stared out the train window, or contemplated the road, but the new technologies have flooded those open spaces. Space for free thought is routinely regarded as a void, and filled up with sounds and distraction.” And selfies.
Perhaps, it’s a generation thing, which is why I’m conscious that I should not impose my idea of well-spent solitude on others. I like bird-watching, reading, taking solitary walks, and barreling down on an empty expressway, alone, on a motorcycle. Some will likely say these are precisely the pursuits of loners.
But, even in the company of others, I hardly take pictures, and I don’t have a Facebook or Instagram account. On a trip to Japan a few months ago, however, I decided to get myself a Nikon Coolpix P-520 with a built-in 42x optical zoom, thinking it might enhance and prolong my enjoyment of birds. I was wrong. I spent more time looking for birds through the viewfinder and focusing the lens to get a clear shot, than if I had been content to watch these winged creatures through binoculars.
I am convinced that many great moments of pleasure and happiness are not meant to be preserved, but merely lived. It was to this end that Nietzsche once said that we need “human beings who know how to be silent, lonely, resolute, and content and constant in invisible activities…”
Happy New Year!
* * *
----------------------------------------
The Meanings of the Selfie
by James Franco
Selfies are something new to me, but as I have become increasingly addicted to Instagram, I have been accused of posting too many of them. I was called out on the “Today” show, and have even been called the selfie king.
Maybe this is so, but only because I’ve learned that the selfie is one of the most popular ways to post — and garner the most likes from followers. The likes spin out of control for selfies of me and my two handsome brothers, especially Dave, the other actor, whose image pulls in its own legion of teenage fans.
I can see which posts don’t get attention or make me lose followers: those with photos of art projects; videos telling the haters to go away (in not so many words); and photos with poems. (Warning: Post your own, and you’ll see how fast people become poetry specialists and offer critiques like “I hate you, you should die.”)
But a well-stocked collection of selfies seems to get attention. And attention seems to be the name of the game when it comes to social networking. In this age of too much information at a click of a button, the power to attract viewers amid the sea of things to read and watch is power indeed. It’s what the movie studios want for their products, it’s what professional writers want for their work, it’s what newspapers want — hell, it’s what everyone wants: attention. Attention is power. And if you are someone people are interested in, then the selfie provides something very powerful, from the most privileged perspective possible.
We speak of the celebrity selfie, which is its own special thing. It has value regardless of the photo’s quality, because it is ostensibly an intimate shot of someone whom the public is curious about. It is the prize shot that the paparazzi would kill for, because they would make good money; it is the shot that the magazines and blogs want, because it will get the readers close to the subject.
And the celebrity selfie is not only a private portrait of a star, but one also usually composed and taken by said star — a double whammy. Look at Justin Bieber’s Instagram account (the reigning king of Instagram?), and you will find mostly selfies. Look at other accounts with millions of followers — like that of Taylor Swift or Ashley Benson (of the TV show “Pretty Little Liars”) — and you’ll find backstage selfies, selfies with friends, selfies with pets.
These stars know the power of their image, and how it is enhanced when garnished with privileged material — anything that says, “Here is a bit of my private life.”
I’ve found that Instagram works much like the movie business: You’re safe if you trade “one for them” with “one for yourself,” meaning for every photo of a book, painting or poem, I try to post a selfie with a puppy, a topless selfie or a selfie with Seth Rogen, because these are all things that are generally liked.
Now, while the celebrity selfie is most powerful as a pseudo-personal moment, the noncelebrity selfie is a chance for subjects to glam it up, to show off a special side of themselves — dressing up for a special occasion, or not dressing, which is a kind of preening that says, “There is something important about me that clothes hide, and I don’t want to hide.”
Of course, the self-portrait is an easy target for charges of self-involvement, but, in a visual culture, the selfie quickly and easily shows, not tells, how you’re feeling, where you are, what you’re doing.
And, as our social lives become more electronic, we become more adept at interpreting social media. A texting conversation might fall short of communicating how you are feeling, but a selfie might make everything clear in an instant. Selfies are tools of communication more than marks of vanity (but yes, they can be a little vain).
We all have different reasons for posting them, but, in the end, selfies are avatars: Mini-Me’s that we send out to give others a sense of who we are.
I am actually turned off when I look at an account and don’t see any selfies, because I want to know whom I’m dealing with. In our age of social networking, the selfie is the new way to look someone right in the eye and say, “Hello, this is me.”
What do you think?
Saturday, January 4, 2014
The Spirit of Drinking
by Andrew Gallardo
It’s the time of the year again! A season where gatherings fill the schedule and the celebration seems to never end. And since we are talking about celebration, it would, for most people, be not complete without alcoholic drinks.
Alcoholic drinks have a long history. Although it served various purposes such as for religious rites, medicinal care, business discussion and commemoration of events, one of its main functions is, undoubtedly, an aid to make socialization easier.
The ancient Greeks used alcoholic drinks to intoxicate themselves on their symposiums. Well, think of it as a party exclusive for Greek dudes, with all those women dancers as entertainers, those pots and sculptures for artistic appreciation, those garlands for aromatic fragrance and those couches for comfort. Only that they are having serious conversations about life and the world, thus entering into philosophical dialogues.
Until recently, it has been used as a social lubricant. Although there are various social etiquettes and manners of drinking in different countries, its common theme is that it is used to ease socialization. One popular casual drinking event is social drinking where people drink without the intention of getting drunk. Hence, it is more of acquiring a little alcohol spirit so that the conversation will run smoother.
There are a lot of social gestures and etiquettes too governing drinking. One common gesture is buying someone a drink as a sign of good will. It may also be a sign of gratitude or forgiveness. An English journalist known as William Graves also developed rules that should be followed in drinking in pubs. This is commonly known as the “Greaves Rules”. The one that should be noted is the rule number 1 which states that the first open that enter through the door must be the “benefactor” who should buy for the drinks for his companions, known as the “first round”. There is an unspoken understanding though that when the drink is nearly consumed, one of his companions will reciprocate. Rule number 5 states that any new entrants are not expected to buy drinks for one’s self, rather, he is expected to join any table which invites him. If instead he is in a rush, he must say the words “Thanks, but I’m only popping for one”. Another etiquette is if the party has a BYOB (Bring Your Own Beer) rule, it is proper for the person to leave any unconsumed drinks that he brought as a gesture of appreciation to the host and it also shows responsibility on the guest’s part.
So why am I stating all of these? What I’m just pointing out is that drinking is a social event. Like eating, we must not forget the Others in front of us. We should not be too individualistic and drink only for the pleasure of ourselves. Rather, we should enjoy the smooth flow of conversation while enjoying the drinks. At the same time, we must not be too personalistic too and talk and drink with close friends and relatives only. Maybe try talking to a distant relative or friend then while drinking next time? Well, maybe it sounds too shallow to connect to philosophy, but I’m just emphasizing the social aspect of drinking. So yeah, cheers and have a happy holidays!
Reference: Greave’s Rules http://www.oxfordpubguide.co.uk/rules.html
It’s the time of the year again! A season where gatherings fill the schedule and the celebration seems to never end. And since we are talking about celebration, it would, for most people, be not complete without alcoholic drinks.
Alcoholic drinks have a long history. Although it served various purposes such as for religious rites, medicinal care, business discussion and commemoration of events, one of its main functions is, undoubtedly, an aid to make socialization easier.
The ancient Greeks used alcoholic drinks to intoxicate themselves on their symposiums. Well, think of it as a party exclusive for Greek dudes, with all those women dancers as entertainers, those pots and sculptures for artistic appreciation, those garlands for aromatic fragrance and those couches for comfort. Only that they are having serious conversations about life and the world, thus entering into philosophical dialogues.
Until recently, it has been used as a social lubricant. Although there are various social etiquettes and manners of drinking in different countries, its common theme is that it is used to ease socialization. One popular casual drinking event is social drinking where people drink without the intention of getting drunk. Hence, it is more of acquiring a little alcohol spirit so that the conversation will run smoother.
There are a lot of social gestures and etiquettes too governing drinking. One common gesture is buying someone a drink as a sign of good will. It may also be a sign of gratitude or forgiveness. An English journalist known as William Graves also developed rules that should be followed in drinking in pubs. This is commonly known as the “Greaves Rules”. The one that should be noted is the rule number 1 which states that the first open that enter through the door must be the “benefactor” who should buy for the drinks for his companions, known as the “first round”. There is an unspoken understanding though that when the drink is nearly consumed, one of his companions will reciprocate. Rule number 5 states that any new entrants are not expected to buy drinks for one’s self, rather, he is expected to join any table which invites him. If instead he is in a rush, he must say the words “Thanks, but I’m only popping for one”. Another etiquette is if the party has a BYOB (Bring Your Own Beer) rule, it is proper for the person to leave any unconsumed drinks that he brought as a gesture of appreciation to the host and it also shows responsibility on the guest’s part.
So why am I stating all of these? What I’m just pointing out is that drinking is a social event. Like eating, we must not forget the Others in front of us. We should not be too individualistic and drink only for the pleasure of ourselves. Rather, we should enjoy the smooth flow of conversation while enjoying the drinks. At the same time, we must not be too personalistic too and talk and drink with close friends and relatives only. Maybe try talking to a distant relative or friend then while drinking next time? Well, maybe it sounds too shallow to connect to philosophy, but I’m just emphasizing the social aspect of drinking. So yeah, cheers and have a happy holidays!
Reference: Greave’s Rules http://www.oxfordpubguide.co.uk/rules.html
The il y a and the Labyrinth
by Kathleen Sun
I wonder how many hours we spend imagining the great things that we will do, the places we will go, and people we will meet someday. But unfortunately for many of us, we never actually get to do any of these things and they will forever remain only in our imagination. We find ourselves stuck in the “labyrinth”, caught up in the repetitive and technical cycle of today’s world. We are afraid to go out and to be ourselves because of the feeling of security and familiarity in just doing what everyone else is doing. We know that there is something more we want to do, and something greater that we can offer to the world, but instead, we settle on the routines and patterns that we are used to.
Why is this so? I think this is what Levinas refers to as the “Il y a”. It is the refusal to be separated and different from everyone else. It is an inner struggle that hinders us from being unique because perhaps we fear judgment and criticism. We become willing to set ourselves aside because we do not take charge of the situation, and thus we miss out on what it truly means to be an embodied subject. Because of this, we cannot become what we really want to be. This also means that we can never find fulfillment in just living the “custom made life” laid out before us.
As humans, we have the capacity to use what we are given to the best of our abilities. And this means that we also have the capacity to escape from Il y a, and escape the labyrinth. One of the first steps in doing so is the experience of jouissance or the “innocent enjoyment”. It is through finding joy and gladness in the simple things that we slowly come to a better understanding of who we are and who we want to become. We must begin to ask ourselves why we are doing what we do so that hopefully, we can break free from the “broken world” that we find today.
Furthermore, it is also important to remember that the search for who we are is not a solitary journey. As beings in the world, we are also defined by the relationships we form and our connections with those around us. This is why Levinas insists that moving away from Il y a is only the first step. The next is the realization that we must “de-position” ourselves and to realize our responsibility for the Other. Therefore, in order to gain the ultimate fulfillment, we must find ourselves through our relationships with those around us. We find meaning not only in realizing what we need to do for ourselves, but also in knowing what we must do for others. We need people around us to teach us, guide us, and to help us grow because it is our interactions with others that truly defines our existence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)