Posted on 04/04/2003 9:45:45 AM PST by bourbon
Column: Greying the Societal Zebra Everyday life losing clear distinctions, constantly gaining contradictions
Published on Thursday, April 3, 2003
Illustration by Adam Hayes/Collegian
Zach Hauser
Kansas State Collegian
If you commit a crime, there is a set punishment. When you read a book in English, you read from left to right. It is as straightforward and as black and white as the pages and ink with which it is printed. But that is where the buck stops, consistency vanishes and common sense becomes quite uncommon.
In a society where our foundation is built on black and white, where according to Sir Isaac Newton, "every action has an equal and opposite reaction," it sometimes seems hypocritical to dabble into the exception.
It's beyond me how a "fat chance" and a "slim chance" are the same thing, but a "wise man" and "wise guy" are considered opposites. Walking fast isn't considered jogging slowly, and it's perfectly normal to drive down a parkway and park on a driveway.
We long to bask in the exception but live in a world dominated by black and white distinction. To preserve our sanity, we thus prescribe to a doctrine of "close enough" to justify our exceptions not as exceptions, but as just a shade off the rule, effectively graying the black and white zebra that we call society to the point where eventually there will be no zebras, simply brown horses.
But that's what we want, even though we love to contradict what we do and say. People need structure and consistency in their lives and those that don't have any are a mess. While those who revel in formulation and organization long for something more, something sporadic and spontaneous.
Always wanting what we have but needing what we don't have. This is the price of being human. Living in the contradiction and living for reliability is what we define as a life with exhilaration and excitement. But even what we define as desirable changes with the tides and wind and ultimately comes full circle back to where we each began.
What we define as opposites becomes more and more alike each day. Republicans now are "compassionate conservatives," which means they now only want to hold onto most of their money, so a little can be shared. And with pushes like "faith-based initiatives" and other sweeping legislation, one can only wonder which party is acting more conservative. Or moreover, which party is which anymore. Should we condense both parties and call them the Republi-crats or the Dem-icans?
We live in a world where new trends are simply old trends revived, where the buzzword "diversity" is just another way for everyone to be more like everyone else. Our advancement as a society is based wholly on how fast and small we can get our computers. People find it odd if your name doesn't conform to the societal norms of Adam, Mike or John. The homogenization of society is in full swing.
America supported Iraq with weapons in the 1980s in an eight-year war against Iran. America trained many of the so-called terrorists we are fighting against today. And everyone agrees that the "four out of five dentists think that this toothpaste rocks" ad is a little shady.
But that's the problem -- that everyone agrees. You can even agree to disagree.
Words cannot express the exercise in futility portrayed by this irrelevant circumlocution.
--erik
Hell, I would have run one of the kids' drawings off Mom's refrigerator door instead of this babble.
With trite old saws like these, one thing is certain; A writer he ain't.
I sincerely hope not.
(^B[>
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.