I woke up this morning thinking about today—not the today in the sense of this day, this morning, but in the relational sense of time. A close friend of mine and I were discussing the day’s news events last Thursday. I asked her the same question I always ask her when we catch up: “Did you hear what’s going on?” Normally this implies a sensational gossip tale. Not with us. Our relationship consists of discussions about the world, politics, and how we relate the two. In a lot of ways, we have similar views, usually keeping our conversations light and agreeable, which can be nice.

We have one significant difference between us: levels of awareness.

Whereas I immerse myself in current events, she likes to filter her attention on a more limited basis. We talked about our participation with social media—her on Facebook, me on Twitter. Our grasping of social and political issues usually stemming from each, respectively. Her stance is that she can limit how much she knows through only attending to specific groups on her medium, letting them provide her with what she calls “a heavily liberal slant.” She likes their views, and predominately agrees with their posts. I, on the other hand, take my news more global.

Specific reasons entice me to look at how people in other places are faring, what their social conditions are like. I subscribe to various international education pamphlets and newsletters. A favorite of mine is Greg Mortenson’s Central Asia Institute’s newsletter (check it out here: ). I find that connecting to people in other countries raises my awareness of what is at stake globally. It is hard to take my rights into consideration when I have no context or purpose in which to think about them. What’s more: my own socio-economic oppression usually means little comparatively; for this, I am grateful.

You may be asking, “What is she trying to say here?” And you would right to do so. I have a point somewhere; let me find it…

My intention is not to set up a dichotomy between me and my friend, quite the opposite. She truly feels more safe and in control of her life if she only attends to a specific level of involvement. Incidentally, I feel more comfortable in the chaos. What is beneficial to our friendship is the mediation between our levels of awareness. I constantly “harass” and inform her of specific news stories (especially those on Occupy Wall Street, more to come on that soon!) whether she likes it or not. Her sigh of resignation to yet another hour-long rant of why such and such is not cool or too cool permits my elocution. After such a discourse, she applies her logical, sound voice of reason to the story, and sees through its various systemic values. This calms me.

My dear friend and I have employed a community of practice: we both get our news from different places, and put them into conversation together. Our mutually exclusive discourses meet, connecting various ways of seeing to mediate our grasping of the larger social and political discourse. We report to each other. And this seemingly banal interaction was what I began thinking about this morning.

Every single day we participate in knowledge acquisition with those close to us. We engage in conversations about things that are meaningful in our lives to help us better understand them. All of us do this in some way.

This leaves me with a question for you all: who do you share the news with? How do the perspectives of the people in your lives inform you? If I am correct in my observations, discussing how we come to know our world through our participation in it only furthers our attachment to the issues at hand. I’m under the belief that it takes a community to change things. My curiosity in how we can increase our consciousness of interaction with each other starts here–within the context of talking with you.


One thought on “Perspective

  1. I have just discovered this blog, by looking for something about Derrida. I immediately felt comfortable reading these pages, and flipping further, curiously, as if through an exciting book. I am not half way through, and given my busy life, it’ll take a while for that, but I had to laugh when I came to the bottom of this post, which speaks about interaction and communication, because when I scrolled down, no comment was left! Only “2 bloggers like this.”. That’s what interaction often means in online communication. Not an argument, not even a claim, but a universalized stance of “liking”. Why did they like it? Is it just a mere:
    “I’ve seen you posted something, I don’t have time to think about it (nor maybe to even read it?), but I’ll show my appreciation by “liking it” “?
    And how can that bring this topic any further? That’s why I find the platform of blogging so problematic. It is beautiful as a start, but it is just too less. There is no space to elaborate, to question, to discuss!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s