Thursday, November 14, 2013

More things that don't make sense.

As this is our last class session and our last blog entry, I naturally still had no idea what I was going to talk about. What has interested me most this semester is story. The story of religion, the stories we play out online, the stories we play out in video games, and why humans like stories. I like stories--I have always loved to read and have learned a ton through stories, and also like to tell stories (sometimes.) But WHY do humans have this need to create a narrative that has a beginning, middle and end? Why does everything need to be neat, no loose ends, why does everything have to be part of something larger that we are working toward? Why do need to have somewhere we came from and somewhere we're going? Sometimes things just suck. Sometimes things just happen and they just....happen. Sometimes we work a crappy job to keep a crappy apartment in a crappy city and we're not really doing anything but turning our wheels and we're not living a "story" at all, but we still TELL ourselves stories. ""Well, when I get my next paycheck..." "Well, I came from a hard place..." "Well, this is temporary..." "Well, at least I'm better than before..." These are all forms of stories that make our lives seem bigger, seem better, seem larger. They give meaning to our lives in ways that nothing else can. I believe that religion and story are VERY similar....I would even argue that religion wouldn't exist without story. I mean, how do we learn about religion? Through parables, stories, sermons, ect. I feel like Christians have this notion (although probably not all, I'm speaking to some stereotype in my head here) have this idea of "this is where I came from, this is where I'm going, this is how I get there, these are some obstacles that are my plot line, and then there will be this glorious hero-esque ending." And as humans we don't want to die but we are going to die so we might as well construct some sort of meaning around that and gosh darn it stories give us that meaning, thus, religion. (I hope this doesn't sound offensive in its simpleness, because I truly don't mean it that way, but it's also not a secret that I am not religious and either don't know what I believe or don't believe in anything and I'm still working out the difference between the two.)

But here's the problem for me: I also believe that life is just messy. People die. People use you. Friends leave and come and go and bad things happen. But good things also happen--you meet people, you make some friends, you put your feet into the ocean for the first time. Blah blah blah everything in between. But what if these are just events that happen instead of stories? What if there IS NO MEANING?! What if as humans we lost this idea that we are bigger than just the cells we live between and we actually are just cells and synapses and the information that fires between them? 

Even typing this I get stressed out because I love stories, people. I love them. I can think of many stories that have changed my beliefs about life and about myself. But I also believe we can deceive ourselves with them and other people can deceive us with them. And I hate to think of myself as 1) able to be deceived or 2) capable of deceiving others. But I fear that these might be the only two roles of stories. Because if everything IS just random and life is just some sort of frenzied card dealing, we ARE deceiving ourselves through the stories we tell and form, especially large systematic stories like religion. We are assigning significance to things that don't have significance and this has the potential to be damaging.

People spend so much time in story. It's no surprise to me that things like video games and religion get compared because to me those are both just stories and we're drawn to them because humans are drawn to all stories. We watch movies, we gossip, we read books, we learn history, we play video games, we listen to other people. There is almost nothing in our culture I can think of that does not contain some sort of story. Even as consumers we are drawn to stories--TOMS shoes, for example. If you read the company's book (I've read a lot of random stuff) the founder talks a lot about the story he created around the company because people buy into stories. And people like to be part of stories. Because when they are a part of a story they matter. And people like to matter because mattering means that when we die we will still be here and none of us want to be gone. Stories also help us learn, help us grow, help us not do what that guy over there did, help us think we can get to the top too if we work hard enough. But here is where the lines blur for me: What is the value in the story of a violent video game? Is it usually set up so the person who is playing is the "hero?" This is a true question I hope someone can answer because I don't play video games, and I'm curious. Because if the story is just straight up killing and shooting, that is the kind of story that would confuse me greatly. Are they usually you vs. the "bad" guys? And if the narrative is bad, like in the Columbine game in our reading from last week, what does that mean? Is that game then "bad?" Why do bad stories have no value? Can't bad stories still teach us things?

What if this is all just pretend? What if stories are just socially constructed because our brains simply evolved too far and we can't stand our existential problems? That, friends, kind of scares the pants off of me. I know I'm not the first ones to think these thoughts and I'm going to be far from the last one to think these thoughts but I really struggle with this idea that life might not be a narrative and if it's not, what is the harm in pretending that it is? And, getting into  a new problem with technology: our lives now CAN be fully 'just a story' we tell. What does it look like when our lives DO become a narrative--through blogs, facebook, avatars....can we create a life for ourselves that is ONLY a linear narrative and does that have value? I think for sure it can have a therapeutic value, but can that caricature then stand on its own? And is it you or a different being entirely? And what aspects of your story do you add and remove and WHY and who influences that choice?

...Sometimes thinking about stories keeps me up at night. Also, here is my TED talk for the week:



(Also, just so everyone knows, when he says no one describes their life as reality show, I always do and always have. I'm happy to bask in that uniqueness for a bit.)

(Also, if anyone has found my textbook for class and can return it me, I'd be grateful. Cough cough.)

9 comments:

  1. I really enjoyed reading this post. There is something about being able to relate all of what Rachel Wagner is saying to our own lives and to practical things that make her worth the read. Now about your post...I agree with the idea that story is one of the reasons why we are so attracted to video games, movies and even religion. you posed the question of why humans think that in order to have a story they need a beginning, middle and end. This is what most religion is isn't it? a pursuit for the beginning and end, and also don't forget that religion also tells us how to live our middle. The idea of having a story be larger than us is definitely an attractive one. I wouldn't like to find out someday that its all a lie, that there is nothing larger than life and there is no story I am a part of...that we just eventually disappear ...not only are our bodies gone at one point but our souls and memories are gone too. I think that one of the things about story that we all like so much or feel attracted to is the comfort of story. We have a beginning a middle and end and that's it, everyone has that timeline. But we have grown too comfortable with this, we have grown so comfortable with the idea of our own stories that we have to design everything else with story in mind. I guess what I'm really saying is that story is "aight", it is a structure that we are all used to and are comfortable with. A question I would like to be answered someday somehow is : Are we part of a larger than us story? or do we live our own narrative and just as easy as there is a beginning there is an end. This being a final end of course.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A lot of profound questions here. I'll respond to a few (ones I feel like I have a decent response to) but in the end I kinda just want to give you a hug and tell you it'll all be ok, because it will. Also I don't have your book. sorry bro.

    Christianity and the hero-esque ending: I don't think that your storyline is very far off from how many Christians (Evangelical and Dispensational especially) interpret their lives. I also don't know that they are entirely to blame - doesn't every human hope for and desire the same thing? Every major religion calms the fear of death in some way, provides a lens through which to see suffering, and gives a meaning-framework through story. Even atheists and peple who 'just dont care' about religion at all, after a loved one has passed, say things like 'they're in a better place' or 'she's in heaven now' or 'we will all meet again someday' and I think that even if they don't 100% believe that, they really WANT to believe that. So what is really happening there?

    CS Lewis (there he is) uses two analogies that I think are relevant: a piano and a fish in a fishbowl. Our human instincts and desires, he says, are like keys on a piano. There is a right and wrong time to play certain ones as determined by the sheet music in front of you (religion, morals, social rules, etc etc). Motherhood and its related desires are appropriate at many times, but there exists places where it can be too strong or too overpowering or too overplayed, like if someone just rammed on the G# key for an entire song. Sex he says has many times when it doesn't fit in wth the 'music', but it exists as a key on this keyboard and therefore has a place somewhere, however common or rare. I think that our instinct/desire for story, as you have so amazingly observed it, is a key on this keyboard. I think that there is a role for it. Whoever is the One listening to this piece of music, adjudicating if you will our effort to master the song, I think knows every key one the piano and knows that they are all there for some purpose. To motivate, to placate, to give courage, to give solitude, to give hope, to give discernment, all those things.
    This leads into the fosh in the fishbowl. I little tiny goldfish doesn't know that it is wet as it swims and lives in water (yeah yeah scientifically this is obvious because of their brainpan but pleeeaase don't miss the point here lol). To the fish, there doesn't even exist a distinction between 'in' and 'out' of the water because water is all that it was made for, all that it was intended to know. If, say, the fish did have an idea of dryness, or of being outside of his fishbowl, though having never experienced or seen anyone experience either, could we not infer or entertain a notion that perhaps the fish was made to someday be out of the water? Absurdly, to sprout legs or wings and exist outside of the water? Maybe. Lewis explores that this feeling of 'beyond', of some kind of bigger, more real 'life' after this one, a life that we experience infinitesimal glimpses and senses of, exists. It exists exactly because it must, because it is evidenced by this overwhelming, cross-cultural, pan-historical, singularly human conviction and need.
    It is so much more compelling to read this idea in its context from the source. He explains it way better.

    ReplyDelete
  3. *on, *fish, *a, 'need *for this story, this beginning, end, and after'.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ....So can't the stories we act out/live in/believe in keep us like a fish in water? Like our natural state is a certain way because of these things we believe and we get "trapped" in this narrative we become blind to other ways of life? Like, I get the fish story...the problem is is that I don't want to be that fish. I would HATE to be that fish. If I believe this one 'story' about who I am and where I'm going and where I way came from and I think my little tank I swim in is it...I am naive. And I to me being naive is one of the characteristics I do not, under any circumstances, want to have. And I'm not talking about religion specifically here, just about stories people tell themselves at large. It could be religion but not exclusively. I think everyone does this. We are trapped in this one story we're in and it makes them unaware that some people aren't living in the same water they are. My parents did this, so thus I am this. I work in this job, so therefore I am this type of person. Blah blah blah.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ...Also I never ever log into my trinity account so forgive that all my comments are always from my private one.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It was less of an idea of 'trapped-ness' than an idea of if we have a desire for something, the thing that the desire was made for exists. There is hunger, and food exists. In the world of the fish, dryness isn't a desire so dryness doesn't exist (he is imagining such a world, not talking about actual fish). There is thirst, and water exists. There is loneliness, and love exists. There is another/a bigger reality, and so story exists.

    ReplyDelete
  7. ....So if there wasn't a bigger reality, we just instinctively wouldn't have this need to have stories? Our need represents something real? But does this only work if you have belief in some sort of designer who instilled these things in us? Or if you believe in some benevolent universe? What if you DONT believe that? The fact we get hungry and thirsty could just be a mistake that we just learned to cope with. And we are on earth and so the earth things that are the easiest to consume became our food. And this is all a story we've created around the flaws in our operating systems.

    The trouble is you can't explain the need or reasoning for story without a story and it's a song that never ends, ya know? The only choice we have is to live in this narrative because we are wired for it, and we can never get around this wiring. We will never know what it means to exist outside of story. I know there are philosophers who have dealt with this and perhaps I need to be smart and read some.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mallinson had this illustration of a garden sitting in the middle of a forest that two guys Sven and Ivan found. One argued for a gardener and had all kinds of irrefutable evidence, the other argued for no gardener and had all kinds of irrefutable evidence. I could tell you sometime, it's a good one. So really, no matter what allegories or theories there are, your lens determines whether it rings true to you or not. I think it easier to talk over this in person (thank you, virtual reality). Also, yes I recommend you read the chapter of Lewis' lol. It's a hell of a lot better explained. I just sound like an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 1. I love that you remember the names of the characters from Mallinson's story.

    2. Interesting. Let's talk about something other than cheeseballs soon.

    ReplyDelete