|
|
problematics behind starting
a dialogue. by Eduardo Navas
| |
I was very curious to
see what kind of postings would develop from this net-forum as it is
a bit odd to ask participants who are judging to also write
criticism/comments about the work on which they are expected to pass
judgment, as this activity may also affect the actual voting on
their personal project.
Interesting it is. This situation
reminds me of the traditional classroom setting -- at least in the
U.S., where only a few egotistical self-righteous students are eager
to always state what they think, while others are quitely waiting
for the bell to ring and turn in their classwork.
I would
not be surprised if most participants who have stayed quite up to
this point simply send their votes in, so that they are not
disqualified from the exhibition. This would be equivalent to
turning in homework on time.
However, if this is true, it is
also disappointing as it would then prove that complacency is the
status quo in diverse cultures based on self-centered pluralism,
instead of active change for a more productive and progressive
global community.
After stating the above, I would like to
ask those who are interested in developing a more constructive
dialogue around 9/11 to consider posting the reasons behind
developing the projects. If anything, this will give others a better
idea behind your process and reasoning. I have read the profiles on
all the participants, and hardly any of them actually explain the
motivations behind the projects development, expect for a few, and
even these seem a little general.
So let us take this
opportunity to open our motives for discussion. If anything it will
be interesting to read them on the forum one after another.
I will be posting my own contextualization as well, but I
would rather wait for others to start the activity. This message is
already long enough. Obsessively discussing opinions is the only way
to actual change.
Eduardo Navas
|
| Friday, October 11st,
2002 at 04:35 |
|
|