Hello all! I am a rising soph. at one of the most prestigious high schools in the country, and it is (sadly?) math and science based. Because of this, I had the idea of creating a club for the demographic of dissatisfied humanities students for discussion of all the disciplines that fall under the aegis of the humanities: literature, politics, history, rhetoric and philosophy (though philosophy is broader in scope than the others).
More to the point, in designing the structure of meetings, I am being careful not to assume that everyone (or, more to the point, anyone) is a true intellectual; while most may have heard of Immanuel Kant or James Joyce by their Junior year, it would laughable to think that more than one or two prospective members are familiar with A Critique of Pure Reason or Ulysses. Therefore, I want to show the fundamental principles through popular culture and pure teaching. Perhaps this is the Romantic in me, but I have come to see pop culture as deeper than most intellectuals realize, and reflective of the values that our society organizes itself around. For example, while I believe I would make little progress if I tried to explain literary existentialism in Crime and Punishment, showing how Bruce Wayne goes through an existential crisis in the Dark Knight Rises might be productive. So basically, I'm looking for ideas about recurring motifs, styles, techniques and archetypes to discuss, preferably with examples in pop literature and cinema.
On cultural relativity and/or cultural equality:
There is a common debate to be made regarding stories like Avatar, The Help, and, going back a bit, Dances with Wolves. These films each depict a figure from one culture learning from and ultimately saving the peoples of a different, "less sophisticated" culture. This is an age-old mythological archetype but it becomes problematic in today's world where we value diversity and promote the idea of global cultural equality.
The "hero from without" narrative paradigm presents a set of phisophical-political problems which storytellers of old would not have had to face.
We might refer to this narrative paradigm as the Christopher Columbus narrative archetype. Some of the questions that arise here relate to:
- ...whether or not the "native" culture is actually less sophisticated than the dominant/hero culture...
- ...whether or not the dominant culture can be seen merely to provide a figure that saves the "natives" from harm inflicted by that dominant culture and so actually indicts itself and the salvationary figure as participating in "evil" (narratively speaking)...
- ...how stories which implicitly claim to support cultural equality none-the-less present a set of assumptions which undermine that claim...
(As a side note, it is interesting to me to think about how Mel Gibson, a man berated very publicly for a bigoted attitude, has made two films which serve as a great counter-point to the philosophical-political problems of the Christopher Columbus myth. His films Braveheart and Apocalypto each present stories featuring a "hero from within" mythical archetype, fully avoiding issues of implied cultural bias, judgement, etc.)
Are we defined by our technological advances and prowess? Has the advent of higher, more complex forms of technology really changed our lives for the better or are we creating a society that no one really understands anymore?