Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Response after reading "Shame and Forgetting in the Information Age"

In the reading material “ Shame and Forgetting in the Information Age”, the author attempts to show a different attitude towards current information narration system and also pronounces a skeptical voice towards many ubiquitous phenomenon by using evidence the he recapitulated from history and logic deduction. The term strategic amnesia and narrative dysfunction are the two point he mainly focuses on. He believes quite of a lot of people, including a great bunch of elicits who have lost their ability to be a competent storyteller for the reason of the data cramming. It’s a tragic to see the most direct and sensitive way of expression has been replaced by very accurate data that blocks the experience’s formation. Besides, the author also condemned some writers who he thinks have ignored the principle that he claims in writhing memoirs.

Undoubtedly, the author has used all kinds of methods rendering this piece of work more convincible. At least for me, the title is quite perplexing with a very offensive epigraph underneath, tightly clenches reader’s interest of a deeper glancing. However, instead of making a quick penetration, the author intends to play as a storyteller himself in the first section while exemplifies a very specific specimen whom marshals all the features that he supposes to analyse hereinafter. The brother Tom, surely, is a tragedy, someone who was always striving but nothing achieved until a bleak end of life. The dump brother, certainly in most people’s view has a ability that is thought to be unique and a pile of strange characteristics that,we, the normal people can’t understand. That’s a usual way usher the reader opening a door of theatrical demonstration.

In fact, I think it’s quite oblivious to see the author’s stance only if you have read the epigraph. It is impossible to make a opponent declaration after merely a single sentence without any cited context. The body of the analyze is separated into four sections, a pretty prevail form of progressive digestion. The first section, of course, has to vent out the fundamental concepts of the key words along with some interesting changes in academic background. These changes, can not only explain the birth of new time, but also assist to make comparison of time and world, indicate to echo with the content in section 2, the core of the essay.
In section 2, the author has explained the notion of data and experience and proposed the opinion against the conventional understanding of remember and forget.He is very conversant in using all kinds of subject to prove his point. From the familiar everyday life to the politicians like Regan and Clinton. You can always find a instance channel you into his perspective, otherwise there is an apparent conclusion as the final, for example, the detriment of info- glut.
What’s more, in section 3 and 4, the author intercepts Walter Benjamin’s doctrine on information and memory, an old prophesy which could work as a cushion to reduce the brusque concept plantation. And as usual, he uses very specific examples and models to make the interpretation. Meanwhile, in these two sections, the author finally reveals the primary topic he is trying to point at, the literature issues,particular in the “father distortion phenomenon”, and ultimately spread until the last section talking about the forgetfulness.
So as far as I’m concerned, the watershed could be settled between Section 3 and 4 and steer into an entire different direction but not how to write a memoir, say, how to be qualified parents or doing more effective education. The reason for multiple choices is the following contents are not necessarily connect to the title mentioned on the first page.

1 comment:

  1. Hi Ziwei,

    I think that's interesting that you say that the epigraph is "offensive". That's a bit harsh, haha. I think I understand what point you were trying to get across though.