3 ms·
I don't think it mocks the notion that something has been lost along the way. Instead, it seems to say that there are many ideas of what the "one true essence"
by lawpoop 10y ago
I don't think it mocks the notion that something has been lost along the way.
Instead, it seems to say that there are many ideas of what the "one true essence" of Burning Man is, and each of those "essences" have been lost, often times more than once in a single event.
So if one points to a single event that "ruined" burning man, you're picking out one thing that was its True Essence, inadvertently putting yourself at odds with all the other people who thought that something else was the True Essence of Burning Man.
All in all, perhaps the essence of Burning Man is more resilient than we think.
- philh 10y agoI agree with wpietri's interpretation more than yours. ("Mock" might be a bit strong, but I don't think it's totally unfair.) The article talks about people integrating into BM's unique culture, and defending that culture. It talks about how things that once "ruined" BM are now accultured into it. It doesn't seem to ever indicate that the culture changed along the way. I think a similar article could have been written with the thesis that you indicate; but I don't think it was this article.