as fashion statement no doubt can be understood as proof of the country's immense wealth and as a tribute to the success of its experiments with virtual reality, but it fosters a habit of mind unable to imagine a future that doesn't resemble a Hollywood remake or a Broadway revival. The circumstance explains the political ignorance of the New York literary salons. The subjects under discussion require too detailed a knowledge of history, law, finance, or nuclear physics, which in turn bear witness to the world's rigor and complexity - distasteful and faintly vulgar. Far better to strike moral or aesthetic poses and so concentrate on the recognition (or, more often, nonrecognition) of mutual states of refined feeling. Why make trouble? Why argue with the system that provides one with a microphone, a syndication deal, and a hairstylist? Learn to confine the expression of dissent to the wearing of an angry nose ring, and look for a better world in the lands of fantasy and irony.-Lapham, Lewis. Gag Rule: On the Suppression of Dissent and the Stifling of Democracy
. Penguin Books. 2004. 125.This guy is on point and witty mA!
No comments:
Post a Comment