On innocence, rhetoric, responsibility and unintentionally supporting hatred
I caught up with a lot of online chat over the weekend. I painfully noticed the number of people who thought they were the only one who had read a book (and that we had to join them) or that they were the only one thinking something about a popular subject (and that we should share this sentiment). When I pointed out to one person on Twitter that I had read the book he was talking about he was surprised and said that none of his friends had, which is why he framed his, "Read this!" in the way he had. The "You need to do this clever thing, because you can't possibly know about it except through me" was entirely innocent. Like copying one of those Facebook memes. "Paste this and you'll show that you, too, think beautifully on all subjects that need beautiful thoughts." The pasting isn't the problem. Nor is recommending a good book. The wording is the problem. It excludes, by claiming "I know more" and commanding us to think that way.
I can't help thinking that this verbal play ("Pay attention to my opinion on this subject, for you will hear something new") is familiar. I've seen it in any number of medieval tales. Jongleurs adored it. Obviously we do, too.
My problem with translating something from a formal retelling of stories into a personal experience ("This is me and my life and my views are special and my experience is different.") is that other people are demoted. Worse, they can demote themselves, for if they see enough "I am special, and you aren't" when they read recommendations for views or for thoughts on the popular news, then their life experiences will appear less important. Not pasting that Facebook meme into your timeline doesn't mean you're a bad, bad person. It just means you didn't paste that meme. The meme's wording may suggest, that you're a bad, bad person. When we see it often enough, we take on that meaning, whether we want to or not (ask me where Jewish guilt comes from, sometime).
The special status that we claim when we say "You can't have read this book - do it!" "You can't have had this thought - think it!" assumes all kinds of things about the lives of others. It's not the reading of the book or the thinking of the thought that's the issue. I would have followed the book recommendations without it, and admired the wit or the political insight in other comments: it's the assumption that the rest of us are somehow less capable. It's a rhetorical flourish that shouldn't be used terribly often at all, and right now it's littering my online landscape.
In medieval literature, it was used mostly to assert the taleteller's right to tell their tale and to ensure the specialness of that particular version. This is a good use. It's a writer saying, "I need income - and this is a reason to give it to me. Also, sit down and shut up, because this story is worth listening to."* It only applies to that story, and the story is the thing, so the attitude that drew us in is not part of it and we (mostly) leave the attitude behind and worry more about whether our hero will get through the next set of trials. In other words, the privileged view of the raconteur is a device to make us start to play the role of audience, but it's not what convinces us to stay for the whole story.
When the device is used in social media, it's half the story, especially on Twitter (where tales are short). It reminds me, unfortunately, of those "You wouldn't know because you're lacking my special privilege" comments that one receives so often when one is perceived as belonging to a minority. It is, in fact, another manifestation of the wave of misogyny, racial intolerance, antisemitism and other nasties that we're currently experiencing. Except it's not coming from the misogynist, racist or otherwise emotionally disadvantaged. It's a small manifestation of how those attitudes push other people into new ways of thought that (quite unintentionally) reinforce the negatives by asserting personal superiority.
This doesn't mean we can't assert superiority. I, in fact, am a highly superior person. I'm especially good at whingeing, for instance, and have a rare talent for accumulating paper.
What it means is that we need to be careful not to demean others in our assertions, even over minor things like "Taste this chocolate cake." Especially over minor things like "Taste this chocolate cake." My superiority in recommending this particular chocolate cake** should come from its historical origins and my research or my cooking skills or my sourcing of good ingredients or its amazing recipe: it should never come from assuming that my friends can't work out what good chocolate cake is for themselves. My chocolate cake is awesome - and so is the one I had for morning tea last Monday. It's a big world and there is much space for chocolate cake.
The chocolate cake example was brought to you by my need for lunch. Everything else was brought to you by my far greater need for us to take ownership of our privilege and learn how we assert it and realise that small things can reinforce big nasties. I could take this idea and show you (using real life examples of things that happened to me, very recently) that this kind of asserting of privilege can lead to someone saying "You're not qualified to say this" to someone who, in fact, has those qualifications, or can lead to someone being put down because of their gender or their religion.
The point, however, is not to focus on my personal needs in this (and I have them) or to get people arguing over whether something did or said something (which would be derailing in this instance). The point is that many of us are using this kind of language casually.
This language is only a rhetorical device. In and of itself, it's nothing but a series of flourishes that add interest to what we say. Used often and by many people, however, these flourishes add to the burdens of those who either lack privilege or are seen to be lacking privilege. It exacerbates perceived difference.
I've been looking elsewhere for my rhetorical devices ever since I realised this. I only wished that three different people whose posts on Facebook and Twitter I read this morning, would do the same. I'd rather have wit and feeling from a friend than the sense that there are lesser human beings and that I or other friends may be among them.
I'm very grateful for every single friend who doesn't fall into this trap. They make all our lives less uncomfortable.
*In one tale, the teller stops part way and says "I'm not finishing until you give me money" - I toast him mentally every time I read a three volume modern work.
**I have a couple of chocolate cakes I can recommend right now. Rather than just tell you about them, I am willing to make one of them for afternoon tea for anyone who wants and can get here. I back my claims.
I can't help thinking that this verbal play ("Pay attention to my opinion on this subject, for you will hear something new") is familiar. I've seen it in any number of medieval tales. Jongleurs adored it. Obviously we do, too.
My problem with translating something from a formal retelling of stories into a personal experience ("This is me and my life and my views are special and my experience is different.") is that other people are demoted. Worse, they can demote themselves, for if they see enough "I am special, and you aren't" when they read recommendations for views or for thoughts on the popular news, then their life experiences will appear less important. Not pasting that Facebook meme into your timeline doesn't mean you're a bad, bad person. It just means you didn't paste that meme. The meme's wording may suggest, that you're a bad, bad person. When we see it often enough, we take on that meaning, whether we want to or not (ask me where Jewish guilt comes from, sometime).
The special status that we claim when we say "You can't have read this book - do it!" "You can't have had this thought - think it!" assumes all kinds of things about the lives of others. It's not the reading of the book or the thinking of the thought that's the issue. I would have followed the book recommendations without it, and admired the wit or the political insight in other comments: it's the assumption that the rest of us are somehow less capable. It's a rhetorical flourish that shouldn't be used terribly often at all, and right now it's littering my online landscape.
In medieval literature, it was used mostly to assert the taleteller's right to tell their tale and to ensure the specialness of that particular version. This is a good use. It's a writer saying, "I need income - and this is a reason to give it to me. Also, sit down and shut up, because this story is worth listening to."* It only applies to that story, and the story is the thing, so the attitude that drew us in is not part of it and we (mostly) leave the attitude behind and worry more about whether our hero will get through the next set of trials. In other words, the privileged view of the raconteur is a device to make us start to play the role of audience, but it's not what convinces us to stay for the whole story.
When the device is used in social media, it's half the story, especially on Twitter (where tales are short). It reminds me, unfortunately, of those "You wouldn't know because you're lacking my special privilege" comments that one receives so often when one is perceived as belonging to a minority. It is, in fact, another manifestation of the wave of misogyny, racial intolerance, antisemitism and other nasties that we're currently experiencing. Except it's not coming from the misogynist, racist or otherwise emotionally disadvantaged. It's a small manifestation of how those attitudes push other people into new ways of thought that (quite unintentionally) reinforce the negatives by asserting personal superiority.
This doesn't mean we can't assert superiority. I, in fact, am a highly superior person. I'm especially good at whingeing, for instance, and have a rare talent for accumulating paper.
What it means is that we need to be careful not to demean others in our assertions, even over minor things like "Taste this chocolate cake." Especially over minor things like "Taste this chocolate cake." My superiority in recommending this particular chocolate cake** should come from its historical origins and my research or my cooking skills or my sourcing of good ingredients or its amazing recipe: it should never come from assuming that my friends can't work out what good chocolate cake is for themselves. My chocolate cake is awesome - and so is the one I had for morning tea last Monday. It's a big world and there is much space for chocolate cake.
The chocolate cake example was brought to you by my need for lunch. Everything else was brought to you by my far greater need for us to take ownership of our privilege and learn how we assert it and realise that small things can reinforce big nasties. I could take this idea and show you (using real life examples of things that happened to me, very recently) that this kind of asserting of privilege can lead to someone saying "You're not qualified to say this" to someone who, in fact, has those qualifications, or can lead to someone being put down because of their gender or their religion.
The point, however, is not to focus on my personal needs in this (and I have them) or to get people arguing over whether something did or said something (which would be derailing in this instance). The point is that many of us are using this kind of language casually.
This language is only a rhetorical device. In and of itself, it's nothing but a series of flourishes that add interest to what we say. Used often and by many people, however, these flourishes add to the burdens of those who either lack privilege or are seen to be lacking privilege. It exacerbates perceived difference.
I've been looking elsewhere for my rhetorical devices ever since I realised this. I only wished that three different people whose posts on Facebook and Twitter I read this morning, would do the same. I'd rather have wit and feeling from a friend than the sense that there are lesser human beings and that I or other friends may be among them.
I'm very grateful for every single friend who doesn't fall into this trap. They make all our lives less uncomfortable.
*In one tale, the teller stops part way and says "I'm not finishing until you give me money" - I toast him mentally every time I read a three volume modern work.
**I have a couple of chocolate cakes I can recommend right now. Rather than just tell you about them, I am willing to make one of them for afternoon tea for anyone who wants and can get here. I back my claims.
No comments have been added yet.
