09.19.05
Posted in culture, life at 8:14 pm by
In a series of posts in the past few weeks, Zalm from From the Salmon, and Kristen from McCarty Musings, have both made keen insights into the way dialogue happens in society. Kristen made a comment (either at her place, Zalm’s, or over here–I don’t remember) that emotion was a key part of why exactly people are moved by stories.
I think her point is a good one. Indeed, folks are often swayed and moved by the stories we share as a community. My point here is not to disagree with Kristen. Quite the contrary, I think her point is valid. Yet, I think there’s always the possibility of going too far in telling our stories.
While sharing emotion is the key to deepening our understanding of eachother’s experiences, too much emotion (nod to Shakespeare’s, Romeo and Juliet) can get us into trouble. Now, I don’t suppose that many of us are going to be taking our own lives because of an emotionally charged story of another, yet emotion has it’s pitfalls, too.
Emotion has a unique use in dialogue. Sometimes we can use it honestly. We can use it to share, to reveal, to deepen our commitments to others. Interestingly, though, emotion can be easily perverted. Emotion, commonly as it is used in the dialectic, is a tool of coercion. So, while Kristen’s absolutely right, emotion has the power to change people…there’re two sides to that coin.
In one sense, emotion absolutely needs to be aroused in the stories we share with one another. In another very real sense, emotion needs to find its place along side of reason and temperance in the wholeness of the beings we are.
At the end of this short thought, I’ll leave you with the thoughts of one who said this much better than I could ever hope:
The two worst sins of bad taste in fiction are pornography and sentimentality. One is too much sex and the other too much sentiment. You have to have enough of either to prove your point but no more. . . .
–Flannery O’Connor
She’d have passed the Bad Christian test, I think.
Permalink
Trackback URL »
http://www.badchristian.com/2005/09/19/walking_that_emotional_line/trackback/
Posted in culture, life at 8:14 pm by
In a series of posts in the past few weeks, Zalm from From the Salmon, and Kristen from McCarty Musings, have both made keen insights into the way dialogue happens in society. Kristen made a comment (either at her place, Zalm’s, or over here–I don’t remember) that emotion was a key part of why exactly people are moved by stories.
I think her point is a good one. Indeed, folks are often swayed and moved by the stories we share as a community. My point here is not to disagree with Kristen. Quite the contrary, I think her point is valid. Yet, I think there’s always the possibility of going too far in telling our stories.
While sharing emotion is the key to deepening our understanding of eachother’s experiences, too much emotion (nod to Shakespeare’s, Romeo and Juliet) can get us into trouble. Now, I don’t suppose that many of us are going to be taking our own lives because of an emotionally charged story of another, yet emotion has it’s pitfalls, too.
Emotion has a unique use in dialogue. Sometimes we can use it honestly. We can use it to share, to reveal, to deepen our commitments to others. Interestingly, though, emotion can be easily perverted. Emotion, commonly as it is used in the dialectic, is a tool of coercion. So, while Kristen’s absolutely right, emotion has the power to change people…there’re two sides to that coin.
In one sense, emotion absolutely needs to be aroused in the stories we share with one another. In another very real sense, emotion needs to find its place along side of reason and temperance in the wholeness of the beings we are.
At the end of this short thought, I’ll leave you with the thoughts of one who said this much better than I could ever hope:
The two worst sins of bad taste in fiction are pornography and sentimentality. One is too much sex and the other too much sentiment. You have to have enough of either to prove your point but no more. . . .
–Flannery O’Connor
She’d have passed the Bad Christian test, I think.
Permalink
Trackback URL »
http://www.badchristian.com/2005/09/19/walking_that_emotional_line/trackback/
bananie said,
September 19, 2005 at 9:18 pm
you know, because of you (you bad christian, you), i am now addicted to slices of laodicea.
ingrid never posts my comments (which i deem thoughtful and lacking in flippancy), but i keep going back, hoping. for what? who knows.
we’ve officially been uninvited, however. and now i’m just spitting mad.
sorry, you wrote the word “dialogue”, and i found my tangent.
apparently ms ingrid confuses “dialogue” with “diatribe.”
oops. anyone’s mistake i guess.
Brandon said,
September 19, 2005 at 9:25 pm
I think you’re right, bananie.
I also think that in an odd way Slice of Laodicea epitomizes both porn (because, oddly, it both arouses and tittilates me) and sentimentality (the playing on the emotions of the fearful.)
I’ve no doubt what Flannery’d say.
Though, I doubt that Ingrid’s SOL (love the acronym) is in any way interested in dialogue. That’d be frighteningly like what Jesus did.
Audrey said,
September 20, 2005 at 12:07 pm
I have three words for you, but they happen to be greek:
Pathos, ethos, logos.
Gotta have them all and in the right proportions to communicate effectively.
Audrey