Well this week's post is going to be a short one again because I have a lot of work to do, but after this week I should be free to make long, thought provoking posts, or so I hope.
I was having a conversation with someone this week and they were commenting on "how funny it is that whichever microcosm you live in shapes your viewpoint on life." Upon further reflection, this statement really doesn't make much sense. Microcosm, defined by google, is a community, place, or situation regarded as encapsulating in
miniature the characteristic qualities or features of something much
larger. In the statement above, using microcosm leaves much to be interpreted, and taken out of context it makes the speaker's point unclear. I guess a simpler, more clear way to phrase it would be to just say environment; the environment one lives in shapes their viewpoints, something many people would agree with.
The choice of the word microcosm stuck out to me though, and so I've reflected on why it was used in the context of our conversation. I've spoken with this person before and we have often appropriately used the word microcosm to describe situations in our life. Maybe using the word often in each others company spurred a simple misuse of the word and nothing should be taken note of. Or perhaps there is something else there. Perhaps what we attribute our specific situation to is actually what we believe this larger entity is. How we believe people interact on a more general level might not be what others see as predictable behavior.
Let's look at an example. It's a Friday night and I'm planning on going out to dinner. I want to drop by the bank to get some cash because no one wants to be that one person with card. I walk up to the ATM and discover there is $200 sitting there, unclaimed. Do you take the money for yourself or walk into the bank and give it to one of the tellers? One might parallel this scenario to a forked road, choosing between two difficult choices. Others might, without a second thought, look at this as good fortune and claim the money for their own. Is any choice inherently wrong?
Depending on how you grew up and what you were taught as a little kid you could have completely different responses. Is it fair then to say someone has wronged when, from their perspective, they have acted on what they see as the only course of action. Sometimes I would say yes, sometimes no. In conclusion, what I've reflected on by over-analyzing this simple verbal misstep is how great of an impact one's environment can have on shaping their identity.
This brings up another thought. What thoughts of ours are completely independent of environmental influence? Are any thoughts outside of this sphere of influence? I could see arguments for both sides. Definitely something I have to further reflect on.
Well that's all the time I got this week. I'll see you next week with something hopefully a bit longer.
- Jason
P.S. I just read through my post and at points (read: everywhere) it is very unclear what I am trying to explain. I don't want to write a new post though so I'm going to leave this one and let you struggle through it. Again, next week will be better! Hopefully.
I like your title reference. God, could this blog have more Rothfussian elements?
ReplyDeleteI get the idea and as (nearly) always, have my opinions. I am who I am because of my environment, and I am who I am despite my environment. I imagine everyone is that way. You absorb what you like and reject what you don't, and I would argue that we'd all be different people if we had different parents/friends/high schools/nationalities/economic situations. It comes back to the nature vs. nuture argument.
If I found $200 at the ATM down the street from me, I would keep it, because the machine stole 150 euros from me last week, which is $206. I'd let them keep the differential.
Hope things are good.
I generally don't like Rothfussian elements appearing on our blog because it just makes us sound like fan boys and girls but this one I thought was too good. Not too good because I agree with it, but too good because I think it is so applicable and so not applicable at the same time.
ReplyDeleteBut, to quote you, "how great of an impact one's environment can have on shaping their identity"-- Rothfuss is part of that environment, and his stories have become part of our shared identity. I enjoy reflecting in that shared identity. My favorite books shape my consciousness.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, a cornerstone of my life philosophy comes from a single situation in John Green novel with the conclusion that when something trivial goes wrong in your life, “you gotta see the humor in it, baby.” So when the water in my shower blasted me with freezing water this morning, I laughed. There are a hundred tiny moments where that we can choose to be frustrated over or choose to laugh at. I laugh at as many of them as I can. Now (going back to your post's question), did the novel CHANGE me, or did I really identify with it because I already agreed with the sentiment? That's the part that's up for debate.
Loving Rothfuss isn't being "just" a fan boy or girl, in my opinion. We found someone who speaks to us, for whatever reason, and his world overlaps with our in the same way that Kvothe's overlaps with the Fae. Or at least, it did for me that day in Vilafranca with the incredible festival I saw that was straight out of NoTW.
Now I just really want to re-read "Name of the Wind"...
ReplyDelete