Re:

["T W" <WaverijnConcerts@hetnet.nl>]

If we all could place a small picture of ourselves and a short text of who
we are and what we do in "normal life" in the footer of our email, it would
make the communication on the list less impersonal (or better: more
personal), on the other hand it would slow down the down- and uploading
time.
Perhaps we could build a database on the web with short information of all
the people on the list, or make a fill up questionnaire for newcomers!

Well, got to go now, it's getting late...

Kind regards,

Teun (if can't pronounce it, just call me "Tone", it comes pretty close)

Ps. Somebody talked about "Gödel, Escher, Bach", I happen to have bought
this book a couple of months ago!

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Paul <pauljohnson@mountsett.freeserve.co.uk>
Aan: f minor <f_minor@email.rutgers.edu>
Datum: dinsdag 20 juli 1999 22:54


    hello all,

    joseph's pensive email has made me think a lot about this forum... i am
a sociologist so you'd presume i would have thought about the implications
of this type of communication before, but i haven't. the internet is a big
sociological current at the moment and attracts much attention in the
discipline. i hadn't really engaged with it before but i think i may start
to now.

    it strikes me that we f_minors constitute a striking and coherent
example of what it means to live in late-modernity. if modernity is
characterized by the dissipation of social ties and relationships (all that
is solid melts into air, writes marx) and a new type of individuality, then
perhaps this is it. modernity is both freeing, in the sense that an identity
can be constructed from dissperate elements (the technology of creating our
"selves"), and constraining, because modern individuality is isolating and
lonely. max weber once said that modernity was the greatest step in human
existance, but also our downfall because it was a spiritless age, and age
without heart.

    does our list exemplify weber's thesis? do we use this communication in
this way? we can link up, using technology, and exchange ideas across time
and space, allowing ourselves the freedom of discussion. this is a freedom
never known before. yet we will never meet, will we? we are all alone, at
our computers, looking into the screen of our pcs or macs, and we don't know
who we are conversing with. there is no concrete relationship - it is the
exact opposite of a pre-modern form of human exchange.

    there is a certain melancholy in this. we become isolated by the very
tools which allow us the freedom to explore and exchange ideas. is this the
ambiguity of modernity? the way in which we are at once both constrained and
free? i am interested in this question because i enjoy participating in this
list a lot - or at least reading it - yet i think that it is one of the most
impersonal forms of communication there is.

    what struck me about joseph's email was that it posed the question "why
am i writing to you when i don't know who you are"? he answered it and
justified himself - and i agree with him - but the question still remains.
forget the subject matter for a moment - as important as gould is - and
think about the way we construct identities and selves. an identity is by
definition created through an identification with something. we all identify
with one thing on this list. but it is an abstract identification, far
removed from a traditional based identity. now i identify with people who
live in places i cannot pronounce - instead of the boys from my local
village. the class boundaries are broken slightly (not completely as forms
of cultural capital are still required to engage with the music that is
discussed [and economic capital if you look at the price of cds in the uk!])
and other boundaries such as those which we cannot experience in this format
(sexuality for example) are dispelled.

    it is a strange thing, so it is...and i could go one writing...but
you're probably bored by now (whoever you are!).

    paul.