(no subject)
Its exam week, and I get distracted by the collection of books in the library every single time. Finished this last night, and her major theme and framework of linking the notion of "shame" to vulnerability and nakedness to the process of "coming out" is rather interesting. Nakedness suggests feelings of vulnerability, of being physically as well as emotionally exposed, and of being shamed. Shame, in turn, leads us to hid the vulnerable parts of who we are and reveal to others only those aspects of ourselves that make us seem powerful and in control. She mentions how homosexuals hide their identity as the society perceives this as "shameful" and destroys the moral fabric of society. One chapter mentions how the nuclear family is the model that "works", though Stein argues that with the divorce rates in America rising, most men today do not have a father figure while growing up, thereby discarding the notion that the typical family setting is the right path in raising kids.
Some parts of the book fell flat, especially when she mentions The Who and The Clash. I love the marriage of music in books, but this book pushes it to an autobiographical setting, especially when she mentions the part of her crashing in The Who concert, makes it hard for readers to take her ideas seriously. A commendable effort was put in when she mentions the emergence of Black women music artists, who faced a double minority problem in 1960s America.
"Human beings are deeply troubled about being human--about being highly intelligent and resourceful, on the one hand, but weak and vulnerable, helpless against death, on the other. This suggest that human fragility is what is really at the root of shame. The sense of frailty is exacerbated in periods of rapid social change, Today we live in a world in which global, faceless corporations have more and more power to make decisions about what we will eat, how we will work, and where we will live. Many of us feel that we have little control over the course of our lives. Some try to compensate for their won sense of weakness by weakening others,or keeping them in a weak state, How much better off we would all be, though, if we acknowledged our common frailty. Addressing our differences and our vulnerabilities should be, in the end, what morality is about. "
An excerpt from her concluding remarks, and I question her definition of 'morality'- especially since she addresses a book on homosexuality in society. Furthermore, I do not agree with the term "faceless corporations". On the surface, it may seem as though these corporations have no boundaries, but this term she puts forth is a difficult concept to grapple with as corporations do take notice of the geographical settings and customs of a country, abiding by tax and government regulations. Again, I dismiss this as a general sweeping statement the author made, probably in a haste to conclude her book. In all, it was a good read and it did put me to bed.
x ciao