Nothing is older than yesterday’s newspapers
It sounds a bit like an empty statement: I like concert halls as much as plenary parliamentary meeting halls, lecture theatres and rooms for seminars and intensive debates.
It fills with so much substance by the sentence Alvin Ailey contended:
I want that everybody understands that dance is not about wind-up-dolls. I am interested in ensemble-dance and human personality – that is the most important. Whet makes it really interesting is when a dancer can reveal something of him- or herself by the dance.
You can turn it as you like, never loosing, though always specifically gaining meaning:
Life is a dance – dance is living – political and learning stages are dance floors – all those theories and political strategies and studies make only sense if they reflect such dialectic that makes the apparent main actors to mere servants, keys opening gates to spaces, more than unlocking doors to corridors – allowing inner beauty to unfold … –
– … so strange, remembering dancing with the European Commissioner and heads of the “DG V”, many years back?
– … so strange remembering dancing with the young cygan woman, many years back? What went wrong that we dance less and less instead of more, and instead of all of us dancing together?
– … so strange, remembering the para from the German Ideology,, that is dealing with [overcoming] the division of labour?
A meeting the other day – in connection with exams I dared to raise a point that should be considered. Indeed my muttering, expressing some demur was not ignored but answered:
We are not talking about fairness, we are looking for a solution.
Sometimes I cannot stop myself thinking that days are increasingly speechless since we life in the communication society. Time is absorbed by searching for information on the web; waiting for the sites to open: increasingly data-complex with the many integrated links ad fancy features, and in inverted proportion decreasingly info-deep; safe files that we download and don’t read; search on the own computer where we saved them …
… not much left to be said …, and what we say is too often adopted and adapted, reduced on the exchange of information … – equally then up to be forgotten before it is expressed … – if going beyond 42, ending in the best case up by reaching at 84.
It remains remarkable: This way it is possible to impress, maintaining life, living on a stage without recognising the iron curtain.
an idea at last to dialectically overcome the minima moralia – didn’t critical theory claim that it needs to be critical against itself, thus suggesting that it has to oppose itself ?
Anyway, there is one of such moral hazards that comes to my mind, and it is about a blank that Niklas Luhmann did not just leave as unfilled space, but that he actually ‘created’ when he talked about the different subsystems and their reflexivity, in need of finding solutions to their own limitations: problems of the legal system can only be solved by legal provisions, problems of the monetary systems can only be sorted out by monetary mechanisms, not to say by money, problems of love can only be addressed by love, problems of science and the academia require solutions dealing with truth …
But where does this leave us in a world that is full of lies?
I once asked students, for the exams, to write a brief essay on the following:
Why are we frequently impressed by looking at the poor and this lives: at least seemingly simple and content with what they have?
I recently looked at Davis’ Book on The Planet of Slums, reading there:
Urban inequality in the Third World is visible even from space: satellite reconnaissance of Nairobi reveals that more than half of the population lives on just 18 percent of the city area.This implies, of course, colossal contrasts in population density. “The gulf between rich and poor in Nairobi, one of the world’s most unequal cities,” writes journalist Jeevan Vasagar in the Guardian, “is starkly illustrated by its neighborhoods. In the leafy suburb of Karen there are fewer than 360 inhabitants per square kilometer, according to the 1999 census; parts of Kibera have more than 80,000 people in the same sized area.” But Nairobi is scarcely unique in forcing the poor to live in slums of anthill-like density while the wealthy enjoy their gardens and open spaces. In Dhaka 70 percent of the population is estimated to be concentrated into only 20 percent of the surface area.4 Likewise in Santo Domingo, two thirds of the population, living in tenements and squatter settlements, uses only one fifth of urban space, with the poorest eighth in the central city slum crowded into 1.6 percent of the city’s area.s Bombay, according to some urban geographers, may be the extreme: “While the rich have 90 percent of the land and live in comfort with many open areas, the poor live crushed together on 10 percent of the land.”
I recently said, travelling through a city that is a well-known tourist spot, that I would not really like it …- this being answered by something like
But didn’t you find all the narrow narrow side streets, so nice for a stroll?
I dared outing myself, replying
Yes, that is exactly what I found? And I longed for space, for the opportunity to escape, like air, being compressed, looking for gaps to escape or waiting for the point where the pressure is getting so high that it opens to one way to escape, one way, with two faces: implosion or explosion.