The Harpers Letter

[LDAHL]

So I read that letter being published in Harper’s Magazine signed by the 150 or so literary types decrying the stifling effect of “cancel culture” (after the ritual condemnation of Trump & Co., of course). It seemed pretty innocuous to me, so I was surprised at all the attacks quickly springing up.

Some insisted there is no such thing as cancel culture, and anyone who claims otherwise deserves to lose their job. Others went with the “OK Boomer” approach, or advised the signers to check their privilege. Still others went with the guilt by association attack, questioning why anyone would appear on a list that included this or that offender. Some felt an appeal for freedom of speech somehow ignores the struggles of various groups in various ways.

I guess it was a little disheartening to me that so many people have such a problem with the free flow of ideas that they want to punish anyone who doesn’t think like they do.

[catherine]

I just spent 10 minutes reading the letter, and then reading the article about it in the NYT and also reading the comments in the NYT, and I agree with you, LDAHL. The letter has been signed by people whom I greatly respect. I think the thesis of the letter is valid.

I, too, am dismayed at the pushback. The comments in the NYT were disheartening. In general, I blame a culture shift towards thought based on Facebook memes as opposed to critical thinking, a reactionary culture as opposed to a culture responsive to dialogue, and an increased tribal mentality as opposed to a mentality based on an expectation that others may experience life differently and have different opinions, but are still worthy of respect.

When I read about stuff like this, I have a craving for Neil Postman, because I think cancel culture represents the dark side of a world in which human relations and communications are driven by technology and the media.

[Tybee]

When I read about stuff like this, I have a craving for Neil Postman, because I think cancel culture represents the dark side of a world in which human relations and communications are driven by technology and the media.

I agree, Catherine, a great time for everyone to read Amusing Ourselves to Death, which has proven so prescient.

[catherine]

I agree, Catherine, a great time for everyone to read Amusing Ourselves to Death, which has proven so prescient.

Yes, Tybee--also Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology

[rosarugosa]

I like JP Sears and I thought you guys might like this one:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7A-MLVEeMA

[Simplemind]

I had never heard of JP Sears but dang..... he's pretty funny.

[catherine]

I had never heard of JP Sears but dang..... he's pretty funny.

I agree--he was pretty spot on!

[ApatheticNoMore]

the thing about the letter is noone knows what it is about. I was like: oh for heaven sakes, say something concrete, what is it you are even referring to, abstract if you must, but tie it to the real world so we even know what you are on about.

It's like I wrote a letter that said nothing but how wonderful democracy was and went on and on but it was really about how I disliked Trump and thought the electoral college that elected him should be abolished, but it was so obscure noone could actually tell. Lay it on the line.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Of course that's assuming the letter was every meant to be of concern for most people. Which I don't think it was. Some kind of inter-elite battle. If you have to ask what it's about, it's not meant for you. If you have to ask the price, you can't afford it.

[LDAHL]

It seemed straightforward enough to me. And to the legions of exception-takers. I certainly hope our culture hasn’t been dumbed down to the point where attempting to intimidate people from expressing ideas is just an “inter-elite battle”.