I have always loved writing and have always considered myself to be a writer. I can only attribute my love for writing to the appreciation I have for a damn good story. I longed to give people the same escape I had when I found myself spending hours on end with a book in my lap, lost in the pages and lyricism of language. I supposed I’m the kind of writer who writes to be read. I write to entertain; for the enjoyment of others and the enjoyment of myself.
I agree with Raymond Williams’ definition of community when he says it can be a “warmly persuasive word to describe an existing set of relationships” and I agree with Joseph Harris when he says the it can quickly become an “empty” and “sentimental” word. As I understand it, community seems to be a somewhat neutral term, it doesn’t have the personal touch of a family and doesn’t have the concrete connotation of nation. To be in a community it seems there needs to be an established mutual understanding of the state of the community and its members. There also seems to be an equality from all members of a community, where there is no one superior to another and no one with absolute control.
The communities in which I find myself a part of are my neighborhood (not a community I am part of by choice, mind you), the community of students here at UNL - including the communities within each of my classes - the community within Andrews Hall, and the community of laborers in my workplace. Thinking of these leads me to believe that communities have a certain secular quality about them that strongly excludes them from other communities - whether it be the walls of a building or a strict belief system or some other social barrier.
It’s not easy to completely understand the position Harris takes when it comes to language and writing in communities (at least it wasn’t for me). Harris seems to allude the aspects to the assimilation of ideas within the community: “crossing the border from one community of discourse to another” as he puts it. It would also seem that Harris attributes a flirtation with different viewpoints to be another way in which we establish communities and learn to function within them. And while we may do that with our communities, we may also do so with our writing.
Communities are not without conflict, and in fact it, it may be the conflicting theories and ideas of its members that makes a community such a common social force. There can be a certain comfort in discrepancy and individuality, and that may be why we are comfortable establishing community with one another, but keep it as such; only a community. As Harris puts it, community is both an “appealing and limiting concept.”
Carson,
ReplyDeleteI can already see your enjoyment in being read as a writer. You have a clear voice. I wonder how you see that connecting to all the reading you mentioned doing? Do you see yourself as part of a community of writers? ...or a community of readers, for that matter? Can you be a part of a community of people you've never met or who aren't even alive anymore or who were never alive (like authors or characters in a book)?
I would agree that community is very vague term. In fact, that's why we're having this conversation! I'm interested in the sort of spectrum you create between 'family' and 'nation' with community somewhere in between. When I think of it, I think I think of community as encompassing the other two, but I can also see your point. This could be an interesting thing to discuss in class--how might we visually represent the idea of community? Is it linear? Hierarchical? something else?
I agree that Harris ideas are complicated and a bit hard to follow. I think that's because of the exact point he makes (and you highlight)--community is a nebulous idea. I think you've hit the key ideas though: it involves boarder crossing and conflict in many ways. How have you seen these ideas plaid out in the communities you're a part of ?