Monday 19 November 2012
Reply to : stories.connections.moments.
I have been following my colleague Pamela Snell's blog Collectively Creating for Change for the past few months. Recently, she wrote
We use stories to decode the world around us, making understanding through moments of connection with others. We share stories with our friends, family and environment; building community, and provoking emotion. We each have our own interpretation and retelling of the same stories, this helps shape our sense of self and belonging. But in a world inundated with stories of little substance, we lack the ability to reflect upon and understand each other. . . .
This relates to another thoughtful post of hers: The power of media or the poser of globalization? Here she describes the sudden appearance of laptops in an Ethiopian village as part of a MIT project: One Laptop Per Child (OLPC). The concept is that without instruction, children can learn by themselves. I say: what's the fun in that? Where is the opportunity for the stories and moments of connection that Pamela observes are of value? It seems to me that these connections are missing.
I am not surprised by the curiosity shown by these children, nor by their ingenuity in figuring out how to use these electronic tools. However, they are not monkeys. And as Pamela points out - why English as it's not their mother tongue? It seems to me almost inhumane to walk away from the one opportunity the researchers had to engage with the children, thereby losing the chance to participate in a process and witness the shared delights of discovery. To me, that would be the story that would be most interesting as it would encourage the interaction and engagement of researchers/scientists/technophiles to move away from their electronic world where there is no physical interaction. By being there with the children each could learn from the other.
Pamela goes on to alert us to the hazards of this reality:
We are left in a desolate environment, sifting through each others tweets in a desperate attempt to form a moment of connection.
And I would add, when we are offered opportunities to connect, we miss them as we look into our boxes of technologies. Are we fearful of curiosity and explorations?
I agree with Pamela as I too applaud the organization's aim to provide educational opportunities for children in rural developing countries. But I myself, far prefer the stories and connections that emerge through sharing discovery and learning from one another.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I know you were hoping to get to Ursula Franklin’s lecture last night, Sarah, and you would have found much in it that resonated with the ideas expressed in this blog. In talking about the connections and similarities between peace and public health, Ursula expressed that we simply cannot have peace or be healthy without each other. Our very idea of well-being is interconnected. Of course, this ties to the concept of ubuntu, often described as African humanism, in which our humanity cannot be realised except in connection with each other.
ReplyDeleteThe lecture Ursula gave was in commemoration of Zofia Pakula, a holocaust survivor who became a doctor and humanitarian. In discussing that generation and their struggles to create a better world, Ursula feels that we have now lost not our sense of humanity, but our sense of collectivity. Echoing some of the thoughts in this blog, she also decried the dangers of what she calls “techno-fascism".
The remedy—as both you and the initial post from Pamela Snell indicate—is connection. And indeed, it is connection and meaning, both key elements of storytelling, that makes us human. In this regard, I recommend a reading to add to your list. It’s a chapter called “Symptoms of Cultural Pathologies” by biologist, Mary Clark. It’s in a book called “Conflict Resolution Theory and Practice”, edited by Dennis Sandole and Hugo van der Merve, Manchester University Press, 1993. The chapter asks the fundamental question: what are the elements of a healthy vs. a pathological society? The author believes the elements are social bonding and sacred meaning, both of which can only be fulfilled in a social context. I’ll be interested in your response (and Pamela's too, if she reads this).