After reconsidering the strongest overarching theme that connects A.O. Scott’s Better Living Through Criticism to Stephen Greenblatt’s Renaissance Self-Fashioning, I have come to the conclusion that it is self-betterment. Through aesthetic experiences and the knowledge that autonomous agency is out of our reach, we have the ability to change our lives. This understanding presents us with “an ineradicable principle of hope,” and directs us towards a more fulfilling existence.
The very title Better Living Through Criticism suggests that through the process of criticism, one can improve or change one’s life. The process of criticism involves something that was produced as a result of a certain experience or epiphany in its creator’s life and someone who views this creation. The viewer brings with them all of their life experiences, thus causing them to look at the creation through a lense of their own biases. It is through this practice of criticism that we learn more about ourselves and our predilections, better observe our surroundings, and ask more meaningful questions. Similarly, Greenblatt contests that “one man’s alien is another man’s authority,” meaning that due to the difference in our experience, what may be foreign and distorted to one could be familiar and comforting to another. By questioning why we see certain things as aliens, we can dig deeper into our biases and better understand why they exist, allowing for self discovery and a more inquisitive outlook. Scott’s concept of the aesthetic experience, which occurs when one has an experience with art that evokes an emotional response, is an important and vital part of the self betterment process. By analyzing and using Rilke’s “Archaic Torso of Apollo” as an example, Scott is able to explain the inner-workings of an aesthetic experience. He walks us through an imaginary experience of visiting the Torso of Apollo, and shows us that reading Rilke’s sonnet or viewing the work of art that it is focused on can make one feel seen, exposed, vulnerable, and, at the same time, powerful. This occurs, not because we are feeling validated by another person’s creation, but because we are able to look at this creation and see ourselves and our own experiences. In this moment of vulnerability that comes with viewing art and subsequently feeling something, one’s existence is more intensified, purposeful, and mindful than it is daily, or, perhaps, ever. Additionally, having the awareness that there is a greater power at play, that we will never be able to exercise complete autonomy over our own fates, makes life less of a tug of war. Greenblatt even includes his own personal experiences of grappling with the reality that “the dream of autonomous agency, though intensely experienced and tenaciously embraced, is only a dream” both in the preface, where he acknowledges that his “voice could not float free of a powerful set of institutional, intellectual, and historical forces,” and in the epilogue, where he finds himself on a plane wishing that he had the ability to be autonomous, but remembering that, alas, he did not. Because of this realization, Greenblatt was able to shift his focus from wanting and trying to achieve autonomy onto pondering “how we have become the way we are.” Releasing the idea of autonomous control allowed him to be elevated to a higher level of consciousness. This is a prime example of Greenblatt’s brilliant concept of “the force of submission.” However, this force of submission is not connotated by the defeat or passivity that one may assume, but rather by the empowerment and peace that comes with knowing that there will be no more struggle to gain control that will never be had. The growth that occurs due to self-reflection prompted by critical engagement with external things is undeniable. This is the central theme that is present in both Scott and Greenblatt’s work, and it is what ultimately leads to the long and winding but rewarding road to self betterment. While reading excerpts from Better Living Through Criticism by A.O. Scott, A More Beautiful Question by Warren Berger, and Renaissance Self-Fashioning by Stephen Greenblatt, I identified one overarching theme that each author yielded examples of in their writing: the impact of society and societal norms on perspective and opinion. The four examples of societal norms that appeared were criticism, stereotypes, the pressure of our culture to follow a certain life timeline, and the manner in which we find our identities.
In his text, Scott discussed how our opinions are largely influenced by those around us, and specifically, our decisions are largely influenced by the criticism we receive. Criticism is most closely defined as “the act of expressing disapproval and of noting the problems or faults of a person or thing.” In our society and in our culture, we are invited to give what we like to call “constructive criticism” to our counterparts. Many people consider themselves music critics, movie critics, or art critics. It is normal today for us to receive judgements on our work, our opinions, our perspectives, or our beliefs, however, these judgements will often alter our organic thinking process so we subconsciously cater to what the mass public considers to be beautiful. Scott adds that we often make the mistake of thinking that what is popular and well-liked is something of great quality. The illusion that popularity equals quality is perpetuated by the impact that others have on our opinions and our choices in life. In his text, Berger brings up stereotypes, another societal norm. In our history, generalizations made about one group of people are often regarded as truth by the greater population. Not only are these generalizations mostly untrue, but they also tend to objectify this one group of people, which can be offensive and cruel. Our culture, which is complex and sometimes corrupt, was built on the stereotyping of different groups of people, which has led to over-generalizations being accepted in society today. Additionally, Berger examines the pressure our society places on us to follow a certain life timeline. We are encouraged to establish careers, accomplish our goals, and live at a very fast pace, which does not allow time for us to slow down and question our intentions or why we are doing what we do. Less questioning and thinking only leads to more submission to societal norms. In his text, Greenblatt considers the process in which we find our identities today. It is widely believed that in our society, we have autonomy over our likes, dislikes, and life choices. However, if we actually pause to question why we like what we do, the answer is often because it is popular, because it meets society’s superficial standard of beauty, or because we think others will look down upon us if we state that we don’t like it. This is not always true, but it is often true, as the impact of criticism, stereotypes, the pressure of our culture to follow a certain life timeline, and the manner in which we find our identities regularly inform our perspectives and opinions. Throughout the process of reading Scott, Berger, and Greenblatt, I had many different ideas of what I would connect their writings back to. My initial thought was that each one of their excerpts kept coming back to how society ultimately influences our taste, opinions, perspectives, beliefs, and sense of self. I had this concept in my mind for a good amount of time before the other ideas came flooding in. I was re-reading A More Beautiful Question, and all of the sudden, something must have clicked, because my mind began rapid firing many other ideas that these three excerpts could connect to. At this point, it felt like I was solving a puzzle, only instead of having one correct way of everything fitting together, I had found multiple. Originally, this frustrated me, as my preference is to come up with one idea that, to me, is far superior than any other thought I could have dreamed up. However, I found that I would be equally happy walking any of the paths I had carved out. This led me to focus on which of my ideas were most original. I decided to go with my gut and remain true to my first idea. I combed back through all three texts and used the notes I had taken in my commonplace book to weave together my concept map. It was interesting to see not only how all three excerpts connected to and gave examples of the influence of societal norms, but also how they all also fit together and overlapped. This showed me that I chose the right idea for me, the one that was the most original, the most authentic to back with evidence, and felt most compelling. This process re-enforces something that I’ve been thinking about a lot lately: not everything is black and white. All or nothing thinking provides me no flexibility to explore, to be creative, and to actually immerse myself in curiosity and learn, which is always my goal in the first place. Because I was able to see that each idea I had could have worked equally as well, I could lean into the fact that I was truly choosing to dive deeper into a concept that felt the most enjoyable. Despite that initial discomfort, I was able to make my own choices, invent my own ideas, and create something that I am proud of.
After reading the sections we were given of Ovid, Lucretius, Genesis, the Dryden translation of Metamorphoses, and the books of Paradise Lost, I can highlight specific thematic patterns I noticed. First of all, each text is about creation, and each mentions chaos. All spend a significant amount of time detailing the creation of man. This could include how God took a rib out of Adam and used it to create Eve (I thought that was fascinating, as it was something I never knew and then the words man and woMAN were explained, which truly made me stop and think), how Jove destroyed the first human race and recreated a second one (this baffled me – why?), or how, in Genesis, the seven days of creation are explained. However, despite their similarities, each text differed from the next. Lucretius stood out to me, as it seems to me to be the most on par with what we think scientifically about the way the world came to be. It discusses molecules, atoms, and particles, and the creation of the earth, which seems more advanced and less outdated than some of the ideas presented in the other texts like the story of Deucalion and Pyrrha in Ovid.
Do not get me wrong, I thought it was lovely that people grew out of stones once they were thrown into the earth by either Deucalion or Pyrrha and I found it comforting that the Earth was the womb and incubator for the first humans. I simply think this idea sounds, at its root, more mythological than the concepts of Lucretius. Additionally, God was mentioned in Genesis, Dryden, and Paradise Lost, but not in Ovid or Lucretius at all, similarly to how Satan was mentioned in the former but not in the latter. I know there is likely a reason or a purpose for this, and it would be interesting to examine the roles that God and Satan play in each text to determine why some of them function well without God and Satan and some do not. I thought it was interesting that each text also referred to characters such as Sin, Chaos, Death, and others. This intrigued me because, for example, in order to personify Sin, Milton had to think to himself about what embodies sinning and wrongdoing and package that all into a person. In this way, Sin is a reflection of what Milton thought were the worst, most evil actions, allowing us to learn more about our author through his writing. This thought reminded me of Greenblatt and self-fashioning. Not only do Sin, Chaos, Death, Satan, etc. remind me somewhat of the Alien, Authority, and the Self, but they are the product of some self-fashioning done by Milton and cultural forces around him. I speculate that we will take a step back and zoom out in this season of class. With these texts, the topic is the original creation of the universe, which includes the initial creation of the self, but does not necessarily include finding ourselves as we do through self-fashioning. I predict we will be learning and talking more about the different theories of creation, dissecting them, and comprehending the uniqueness of each message. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
April 2020
Categories |