Home from work today with a Martian Death Cold or something. If my head clears up enough to think for a while, plan to finally review a book or two – Forbidden Thoughts, maybe Souldancer (although I should really reread that last one). Also got the rest of the Moth & Cobweb series out so far, as well as the Rachel Griffin books. Need to find that sweet spot between too sick to go to work (man, we modern sissies!) yet clear-headed enough to write reviews. And let’s not talk about the education history stuff, OK?
Speaking of education history, never finished Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed because AAAGH! MY EYES! I mean, because it follows a traditional Marxist analysis while at the same time remaining abstract to the point of meaninglessness – but I repeat myself – and my stomach for such nonsense is not as sturdy as it might be. Am trying to plow through now.
It takes a lot of brains, sometimes, to be this stupid. Not that Freire is all that sharp – he’s learned to apply the Marxist/Hegelian template, which, if I am not mistaken, studies have shown lungfish can be trained to do.
The key is to stay way up in the clouds. Don’t drag the real world (except under the guise of ‘concrete reality’, whatever that might mean) into it until you’ve
softened up the target established the intellectual underpinnings, as it were.
Here’s a more-or-less random chunk, for your edification and amusement:
While the problem of humanization has always, from an axiological point of view, been humankind’s central problem, it now takes on the character of an inescapable concern. Concern for humanization leads at once to the recognition of dehumanization, not only as an ontological possibility but as an historical reality And as an individual perceives the extent of dehumanization, he or she may ask if humanization is a viable possibility. Within history in concrete, objective contexts, both humanization and dehumanization are possibilities for a person as an uncompleted being conscious of their incompletion.
It’s not so much that it is incoherent per se (by Marxist standards it’s practically Hemingway), it’s just that in education departments all over America this book is assigned to teenagers and twenty-somethings who, it can be safely assumed, have no philosophical or historical background, no practice deciphering jargon-laden pseudo-philosophy – and no instruction or background in clearing Marxist weeds so that the thoughts – when you get down to it, childish revenge fantasies packaged for people with daddy issues – can be seen for what they are. In fact, they are encouraged to see this as the height of trenchant analysis and compassion. You know, the kind of compassion that gets 100 million defenseless people murdered.
And that, sadly, is the trick: whereas a liberal education, traditionally, was intended to provide the student with the intellectual, philosophical, logical and aesthetic background needed to do battle with these dragons of incoherence and despair, modern training (not education in any meaningful sense!) lines the kids up and marches them into the gaping maw.
They never know what hit them, and go on through life never laughing at Marx, which, in the abstract, is the correct response.
- Story: have a major client in Nashville, and so have taken people out to dinner quite often there in nicer restaurants. Thus, I once ate dinner inside of 10′ from Dolly Parton. Nobody bugged her – I certainly didn’t. That’s the whole thing about country: the stars remain accessible – and the fans give them a little space. Very cool.