I have never read the book, but recently watched the series created from it. They could have done more with the series.
This whole situation has being a catalyst to accelerate the erosion between these social groups and created a segmented society.
It is also based on identity, which is in constant flux and can be infinitely divided into new lines of contention. The problem is now that no matter what group you are in, people in that group are also simultaneously in conflicting groups with other identity points. Everyone is an enemy on some front.
Also, contrary to what you say here, I can't identify myself in terms of my relationships to other people. I believe this is a kind of social dysfunction. I was raised to do things by my own.
As was I and I tend not to rely on anyone, but I also recognize my part in the network and that although I might not need, it doesn't mean everyone is like me - so I am still connected, still relative.
Not saying that I'm not a social person, but I tend to isolate myself when I get fed up with people.
Have you ever considered that this is part of yourself reflected in other people - where you acknowledge a part of yourself and isolate in order to either recover or, not inflict unnecessary pain on others.
Of course, this decision has always ended relationships with people that can't bear to have this kind of distant friend that can be addressed from time to time, but won't be showing up frequently.
But, it has also potentially allowed you to connect with people who do accept this part of you and value it still.
As an artist I wonder what you think - Would there be art if there was no social connection - would the proverbial raised on a deserted island with no formative culture of society person - still create art in the caves? Isn't art inherently about sharing stories?
That's a tough question. Most of the things we consider art have been created with the idea of being shown in society because they are a reflection of it. In one way or the other, this necessity of social connection is entwined in the meaning of art.
I think that literal art in caves was made with the idea or history and identity preservation. Also, a person in isolation might as well produce it as a form of expression whether this person knows it is art or not. But I guess the social factor is always implicit. There's the need for other people to be touched by this work in order to be considered art. It is similar to this question of the tree falling down in the forest with no one to hear it fall.
Society is a lot of building blocks we tend to rearrange every once in a while hoping someday we could make something that suits everyone; but inevitably, we know that we will be changing something for eternity.
Maybe, but if alone, what is the point of keeping history or an identity of self for one self? If it is for memory purposes only, is it art?
Nothing stands still, which is why life and art tend to be a feedback loop that directs our change.
Thanks for adding your thoughts!
Maybe not only memory, but keeping sanity. Maybe if an archaeologist finds this thing, it may get classified as art. But who knows?
Yes, I have a phrase for that: "Rome has fallen countless times"
It is always a pleasure to bump into a post like this and share some ideas. Thanks for posting!