Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 04-12-2007, 12:56 PM

i think then that we just agree to disagree on this.
from what i put up above, it's probably obvious that i do not see any way that you can make such a separation between yourself and the collective history that shapes you. i should say on the way out that it does not follow from this that we are simple repetitions of that history--we have agency--but that agency itself leans on the past. another way: a society is not an accumulation of objects that only happens to cohere because these objects exist simultaneously. to my mind, claiming to be a spectator with reference to history requires that you also understand society as a collection of objects..and that who you are and what you are are functions of your experience, which you can think about as separate from social determinations. i mean, you can, i guess: you can, but to my mind, you'd be wrong.

but we could go round and round about this: i am not sure that i am communicating terribly well what i am trying to say here. i find that i am shifting in and out of work-mode as i write this, using alot of compressed arguments that make sense because of what i do with them for a living, but which i suspect are not being translated well as i write this.

2. the victimization trope seems silly to me. i dont know what you mean by it, what it refers to--if i understand your position correctly, it seems to me that you arent really in a position to reject the idea that victimization has some descriptive power because much of what you have put up in this thread turns on a version of it.

we dont agree on this one.

shakran: i suspect that had this same conversation unfolded in 3-d over a beer or 6 there'd be no misunderstanding of your position.
like i said above, it seems that such differends as exist here are mostly functions of reading what you wrote with a particular tone in mind.
i misread them a bit first time through.
the arguments about the relation of the history of racism in the states to the present still stand, to my mind, but i guess i was talking more directly to ng than to you, though i initially took myself to be talking to both because your positions seemed initially quite close to each other. they arent, not really.

04-12-2007, 12:56 PM	#116 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i think then that we just agree to disagree on this. from what i put up above, it's probably obvious that i do not see any way that you can make such a separation between yourself and the collective history that shapes you. i should say on the way out that it does not follow from this that we are simple repetitions of that history--we have agency--but that agency itself leans on the past. another way: a society is not an accumulation of objects that only happens to cohere because these objects exist simultaneously. to my mind, claiming to be a spectator with reference to history requires that you also understand society as a collection of objects..and that who you are and what you are are functions of your experience, which you can think about as separate from social determinations. i mean, you can, i guess: you can, but to my mind, you'd be wrong. but we could go round and round about this: i am not sure that i am communicating terribly well what i am trying to say here. i find that i am shifting in and out of work-mode as i write this, using alot of compressed arguments that make sense because of what i do with them for a living, but which i suspect are not being translated well as i write this. 2. the victimization trope seems silly to me. i dont know what you mean by it, what it refers to--if i understand your position correctly, it seems to me that you arent really in a position to reject the idea that victimization has some descriptive power because much of what you have put up in this thread turns on a version of it. we dont agree on this one. shakran: i suspect that had this same conversation unfolded in 3-d over a beer or 6 there'd be no misunderstanding of your position. like i said above, it seems that such differends as exist here are mostly functions of reading what you wrote with a particular tone in mind. i misread them a bit first time through. the arguments about the relation of the history of racism in the states to the present still stand, to my mind, but i guess i was talking more directly to ng than to you, though i initially took myself to be talking to both because your positions seemed initially quite close to each other. they arent, not really. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 04-12-2007 at 01:00 PM..