Everyone whose last name is in A-M to comment on posts by Thursday @8am.
Out of consideration for the commenters, please try to be as prompt as possible so that commenters have time to read your posts.
Also, on Thursday, we will be discussing the Beltran article and the hannaharendtcenter.org blog.
We will also discuss your perspectives on "the art of politics" p. 206. (The "art of politics" could also be the subject of blog postings...)
Thanks!
Some additional thoughts for the next set of postings...
--Is there a value in spontaneity and the unexpected? Should politics have this quality?
--Is Arendt's focus on speech and action warranted? I was wondering whether art (film, music, tv, books, graphic novels) can be as--or even more--political than speech and action.
--What is the "agonal spirit" for Arendt?
--Is a life lived without action and speech really a "dead" life? Is it so horrible to live life only in the "consumer society"?
--Why doesn't Arendt focus on more conventional forms of politics (elections, voting, legislation, rights, constitutions)? Is this a problem for her account of politics?
Examples of action? Maybe? Feel free to debate, agree, challenge, or offer your own example...
- http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/magazine/camila-vallejo-the-worlds-most-glamorous-revolutionary.html
- http://www.salon.com/2012/04/05/abortion_war_hits_britain/
- http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/kony-2012-releases-new-video--your-voice-changes-everything/2012/04/05/gIQAigkQxS_blog.html?wprss=rss_world
- http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/04/george_zimmerman_killing_trayvon_martin_has_sanford_s_black_community_angry_.html
Given that the Human Condition was written in 1958, times have greatly changed and I disagree with Hannah Arendt’s focus on speech and action. In the modern world we live in today, our society is very much focused on the visual. Therefore, much political argument is shown through visual practices, such as, political cartoons, documentaries, street art, protests, film, and so much more. I think these mediums are so prevalent in today’s society because they are so easily accessible to the general public, but are still able to get a political message across. It is much easier for someone to watch a documentary that investigates corporations rather than go to a speech or a discussion panel concerning the same issue. However, according to Arendt, the simple act of someone watching a political documentary would not suffice to their active engagement in political discourse, or in her words, action. Moreover, must a person actively engage in public discourse to be political, as Arendt would argue, or is it possible for a person to be political without engaging in public discourse?
ReplyDelete