4 ms·
As I've said elsewhere in this thread, it's that you consider culture in general to be "collective," and that's a dangerous idea. I'm pretty okay with the idea
by FroshKiller 9y ago
As I've said elsewhere in this thread, it's that you consider culture in general to be "collective," and that's a dangerous idea. I'm pretty okay with the idea of sharing my culture with you, but unless you're one of my people, you certainly don't have any claim on it.
- lucozade 9y agoWhat a scary notion. I'm Egyptian Christian descent (genuinely, my father was from Alexandria). Do I get a golden ticket? If I want to set fire to the library are we good with this as its "my people"? What about if I asked an external power in to preserve it? But wait, I'm not Coptic. Are they not my people now? Am I a colonialist for wanting to preserve the library because of the church my old man attended? What could possibly go wrong with cultural ghettoisation?
- keyboardtyper 9y ago> "...but unless you're one of my people..." This is complicated. Are we to assume that we aren't in a culture group unless we are born from a group's member or born in a specific location. If a culture resonates with an individual that doesn't fit into the "culture group" definition, can they never see the culture as their own? It definitely seems to bring into question what the definition of culture is and when is a culture added to the collective. Isn't that what sharing does? Aren't there arguments about writers writing books and readers interpreting the story in their own way? The story is now everybody's, right? I do feel the danger in the idea, but it also feels sort of correct.