Currently: finishing a website for someone, working on a new layout/content for myself, listening to some Stephanie Mills, and drinking cranberry juice
I wrote this down awhile ago in one of my classes. Wilst my teacher scolded us for not knowing some material. Material she has yet to deliver without the constant aid of her dusty notes. Though she’s been teaching the same humdrum eurocentric crap for the past 30 years. Anyway, history.
It’s grossly generalized and often one-sided. The Romans were this. The Neoclassicists were this. The 70s were this. Surely, every Roman didn’t place the family over the individual. Surely, every Neoclassicist didn’t have confidence in man’s ability to know all. But, that is what is remembered. That is the infomation given validity and value.
I cringe at the thought of what people in the Information Age will be remembered as. Self-deluded? Shallow? Greedy? Sleezy? And who future historians will crown pillars of our time. Paris Hilton? Oprah? George W. Bush? Flavor Flav?
Although, the specifics don’t lend a much nicer view than the generalizations. How we gave a $2 million to fight AIDS and paid an actor $10 million to entertain. Paid a doctor $250,000 and a model $5 million. Pampered animals, while children starved.
Even as I attempt to walk this narrow line reaching beyond our box. I make my square habitat obvious, with the subconcious distinguishing of value in terms of money, lol.
What have you to say on the subject? How do you think future textbooks will compress our times?
