Frank Kogan

OK, Dave's posted his round one recap, and he kindly links us.

(1) "Are there any concepts to add to Sabina's 'I want that,' 'I am that,' 'I want to be that'?"

Scores of concepts, I'd think. E.g., "I like how it sounds," "It tells an interesting story," "WTF?" "It's witty," "I've never seen that before," "I wonder what the world is like that created this song," "this would sound good on my next Eardrums mixtape," "She's got a good beat and I can dance to it," "It will have a calming effect in the background as I work on this math problem," "the crowd will go crazy when I flash her picture on the screen," etc. etc.

As much as I identify with the lyrics to Boney M's "Calendar Song," I've never thought, "I want that," "I want to be that," or "I am that" when listening to Boney M (who may well be in my top twenty groups ever).



(2) "I, for instance, can probably objectify women, quite literally, just by absorbing lots of objectified imagery, whether I consciously identify with it, think critically about it, etc.

I have little idea what Dave means by "objectify" here, and I don't think he does either. Is a buzzword, and I'd can it. It's not pulling its weight, and if you don't believe in Descartes' mind-body split (and you shouldn't), you should steer clear of terms like "subject,"* "object," "subjectify," "objectify," "subjective," "objective," etc. You can look at something with lesser or greater understanding, and with a narrower or broader interest.** Period. Socially, there are relative differences in power hence relative differences in how much one gets to act and how often one has to respond (but everyone acts and responds). The words "subject" and "object," being either/or, just confuse those issues, add nothing useful. (The trouble with the mind-matter dichotomy is that it leaves everything out. Well, leaves out everything that isn't a mind with an observing eye, on the one hand, and things being observed, on the other. Which means it leaves out all action and all interaction and all use, which for practical purposes is everything, even if you're just gazing at the stars.)

*Unless you're talking about parts of a sentence.

**"A narrower or broader interest." E.g., a bank teller can undertake a transaction with a customer without thinking of him as anything but a customer, without caring what brought him here or what's going on in his life. Or she can notice that he's really sexy, and still not care what brought him here or what's going on in his life. So what? Or maybe she wonders where he buys his clothes. Has he suddenly transformed from an object to a subject when she wonders this? Suppose, to make small talk as they're waiting for the electronic approval to go through, and to be friendly and therefore bring him back as a customer, she asks him where he shops. Again, so what? I feel that the term "objectify" hand-waves at a theory when actually there is none.