Posts
(Cont'd from Part 2/3 http://lotusandcedar.blogspot.com/2010/07/exchanges-between-bloggers-part-23.html)
Part 3: Not Every Exchange/Blogger is "Intellectual"
Some of us are fortunate enough to have an education, a job, and ways to self-improve. However, I am highly aware of ppl in other sectors of our society or in other countries where resources and opportunities are hard to come by (jargon: social-economic stratifications) and where richness, wisdom and happiness are defined quite differently. Therefore, I would caution against falling into the trap of calling ourselves "intellectuals", riding the intellectual hobbyhorse and expecting everyone to be on the same merry-go-around.
Come to think of it, I leant a lot of my life's lessons while working on the railroad track as a labourer and let me assure you that the steel gang's language of engagement (such as: f this and f that; you c, go f yourself) and way of thinking (e.g. "Chinese are like socks, they stink - but oh, you are ok!!") are less than "intellectual". Nonetheless, I learnt a lot from these non-intellectual exchanges.
So, that's my two bits worth of opinions, or to use your term, my "ranting" from this side of the pond.
Cheers
ps: As to the many other issues you have raised in your 13-page article, they are equally important, but I just don't have time to address them all. Sorry !!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
"I would caution against falling into the trap of calling ourselves "intellectuals", riding the intellectual hobbyhorse and expecting everyone to be on the same merry-go-around."
Now, this is the bit where I do think that, unfortunately, you've gravely misread me, as I subscribe to a democratised view of intellectuals. I don't think the term "intellectuals" only apply to lofty individuals with qualifications, in fact, it is precisely because I DISAGREE with this biased view of intellectuals and intellectual exchange that I rant about the haungthiness of certain academics.
My point is that, academics and intellectuals are NOT one and the same. There could well be, and there indeed are, many intellectuals among the peasants. Just as not every academic you would come across could be called an intellectual.
It's the reason why I cited under "further reading" the quotes about how a Chinese farmer should well be allowed to share the same podium as the renowned philosopher Habermas; and why it's a great thing when students challenge their teachers; and indeed, why I wrote that I prefer the kind of exchange between apparent working-class rough guys like 三個表面是裁縫佬、苦力、拿棍搵食的武林中人 in the《功夫》電影. In fact, I described myself as 生來就是老粗!
And indeed, if you have a chance to read about my other blogposts as well, you would see that this is not the first time I've ranted against intellectual snobbishness (see the links at the end of this comment).
Oh, talking about foul language, it's another topic close to my heart. I always maintain, pace Savage Chickens, that there is a place for profanity in language as much as formal language. Indeed, one of the very first poems I posted online is entitled, "Fuck'em".
So, I don't think we should restrict the "intellectual" label only to those who are formally educated. There have been plenty of instances when poorly educated and those whose primary occupations farmers in the West became renowned poets and novellists (to give you some Irish examples, see Thomas Kinsella and John McGahern). In fact, it's this rather Chinese hierarchical way of categorising intellectuals as only belonging to those who are formally educated that I railed against in my blogpost.
But thanks for the opportunity to re-state my case against here and indeed for your kind patience in indulging in this debate at all. I really appreciate it.
(have to post the links in another message as I too exceeded my character limit!)
Links:
http://crispapples.blogspot.com/2010/06/on-poets-poetry-and-philistines.html
"Once upon a time I thought Wong was somewhat genuine -- not "genuine" as in whether she is a "she" or a group of bloggers or what have you, I really couldn't care less -- but in the sense that she could appreciate how intellectuals could easily be found amongst the so-called grassroot classes (even though she blogged about it as if she's just discovered a whole new continent)"
http://crispapples.blogspot.com/2010/01/orchids.html
"but the people with such a mentality also rather self-servingly forget that poets (as well as poet-wannabes, comme moi) and other intellectuals have never professed themselves to be above the average person.
Intellectuals, whether in the East or the West, including those who are greatly acclaimed, are human beings at the end of the day, the size of their intellects granting them no more immunization against human foibles than others who are less cerebrally-inclined, and they hate and they despair and they get jealous and they get angry and they get bored and they get lonely and they get frightened and they get frustrated just like any other ordinary joe out there who wields not a pen but a shovel or a spanner or a spatula. They never profess to be saints, just humble scholars, and often times not even that. It wouldn't have been possible for poets to produce any work of value, work that has resonance and meanings for others, if their own emotions are on an even keel all the time and if they don't feel the things that mere mortals like you and I feel, warts and all."
http://crispapples.blogspot.com/2006/04/john-mcgahern-on-writing.html
"Being a farmer suited him however, not only in terms of allowing him headspace to write, but it also suited his laid-back personality, and he admitted that he sometimes enjoyed the tasks of farming much more than writing. But he said, "Writing is what I do." John very clearly identified himself as a writer first and foremost; the rest - farming and teaching - are coincidentals of what he also did in life."
http://crispapples.blogspot.com/2006/03/fuckem.html
(My poem full of foul language - justified in my not-so-humble opinion)
Oh, just a final comment as well regarding your PS. No worries at all! Don't be silly, I never expected anyone to respond in full my long rambling post :P As I said I'm very grateful already that you took the time to read my long-winded mad ramblings. And apologies also for my long-winded comments on your blogposts :) But thanks for the chance to engage in such an unapologetically intellectual conversation :)
Hi Snowdrops:
As someone with a science and technology background, I knew the discussion on "intellectual" would be way over my head. So, here I go again: Open mouth only to change foot !!!
For me, "intellectual exchange" is different from "intellectual" per se. However, due to my own biased definition of the latter, I automatically equate "intellectual" with "academic intellectual", which you've rightly pointed out are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, Wikipedia (the most reliable source of information under the sun if not thru-out the known universe *_^) has suggested that there are more definitions and interpretations of "intellectual" than you can shake a stick at. Just to make sure Wikipedia is not a left-wing conspiracy, I went into Conservapedia (the most rightist source of information right of the sun, if not right of the whole universe ^_*) and learnt the new term "liberal intellectualism" as well as why it should be wiped out, exterminated, kaputt (preferably by patched NRA members). After reading both "pedia" articles with their gazillion references, I am afraid to report with glassy eyes that my intellect has maxed out !!!
Definition of "intellectual" aside, I am pleased to learn that we actually share the same sentiment against intellectual snobbishness !!! More importantly, I appreciate the opportunity to have this exchange with you, be it of an intellectual, academic, intelligent, a public, private, liberal, neo-con (or whatever) nature.
ps: Before I go get some shut-eye, I just want to say I am actually more on the chicken-sh*t, timid side when it comes to profanity and the likes. We have something called the "Global and Mail" test here in the capital: Don't say or write anything that you don't want to be quoted next day on the front-page of the media.
Haricot signing off
References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual
http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Liberal_Intellectualism
http://lotusandcedar.blogspot.com/2009/01/fuddle-duddle.html
"As someone with a science and technology background, I knew the discussion on "intellectual" would be way over my head."
Erm, why? I don't think I've given an impression that only artists and social scientists could be called "intellectuals"?? Why can't scientists and engineers be called intellectuals?
So you're grand, no "foot-in-mouth" incident has actually occurred, we're just exchanging views :)
"For me, "intellectual exchange" is different from "intellectual" per se."
Er, yes, one is an adjective and the other is a noun?? I'm not sure I understand what you mean? Any exchanges in which the participants probe deeper into their conceptions about the world is an intellectual exchange, it doesn't matter if these people are publicly deemed as intellectuals themselves.
As for Wikipedia (or the conservative equivalent) definitions, they are just people's views of the matter. You don't have to subscribe to, or even agree with, all of them. But the key point I was making is that "academics" and "intellectuals" should not be automatically equated without further thought.
"Definition of "intellectual" aside, I am pleased to learn that we actually share the same sentiment against intellectual snobbishness !!!"
Yup, same here :)
"I just want to say I am actually more on the chicken-sh*t, timid side when it comes to profanity and the likes. We have something called the "Global and Mail" test here in the capital: Don't say or write anything that you don't want to be quoted next day on the front-page of the media."
I would be very happy if my humble poem could one day make it to the front-page of the Globe and Mail XDDDDDDDD!!!
Anyway, all joking aside, as with anything else, there is a time and a place for profanity. But you may find that the Irish, from all classes and backgrounds and intellectual pursuits, are a lot more tolerant towards the F-word than perhaps other cultures. I'd highly recommend Roddy Doyle's books if you want to see how profanity is best used in Irish literature :D
Snowdrops:
Thank you for your reply. You've raised more points than I can handle at this time of the day. So, I will respond the key ones, as shown below:
>> ... Why can't scientists and engineers be called intellectuals?
Sure, I don't have any hang-up with definitions, as long as we have an understanding of their similarities or differences.
>> ... "academics" and "intellectuals" should not be automatically equated without further thought...
Your point (re academics are not necessarily intellectuals and/or vice versa) is well taken.
>> ... I would be very happy if my humble poem could one day make it to the front-page of the Globe and Mail ...
You never know, eh?
Post a Comment