data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c3d5c/c3d5c5f64295d3a4c67dbbb701a6e2b9634e49de" alt=""
Most of the time, when something sounds very complex in the words of a theorist, it is very simple in its application. This simplicity is beauty itself, and it is beauty, that most valuable of human knowledge, that institutions work to both propogate and conceal. When it is in danger of being concealed, you will know it by the convoluted, specialized language that presents it. What is important to remember here is that, sometimes, the beauty is the complexity itself.
So what we are doing when we translate and interpret messages of knowledge is categorizing it: is the message addressing aesthetics, or something that is applicable to the concrete? If, for example, someone tells you something like, "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about (Oscar Wilde)," it is your job to sift through and either accept or reject the statement. If the statement is referring to a novel, and it serves no workability within your experience of that novel, you may be best off to acknowledge, but reject such a statement. If, however, the statement refers to an economic principle that may either build up or tear down your very lifestyle, it may be more in your interest to spend the time and energy to decode the abstraction.
When it comes to the creation of written work, the first example hits closer to this project: write what you know, understand what you write, and disregard what you do not understand, until it is understood.
No comments:
Post a Comment