Categories
Opinions

The three arrows Cupid forgot

Single or smitten, there’s a lot of love to go around

Valentine’s Day has come and gone, along with the usual suspects: bitter haters and self-obsessed lovers. What are you supposed to do if you don’t fall into either category? You could buy up boxes of discounted chocolate hearts and gorge yourself, but that’s what’s known as a bad decision. I’ve been there myself (don’t do it, even though it sounds like a great night).

I’ve got a better idea on what to do, and it starts with shifting our perspective on love. You’ve heard the calls for boycotting Valentine’s Day but I’m thinking bigger. Let’s burst the bounds of one day and spread all that love around, because there’s more of it than you may think.

Graphic by Jenny Kwan

When most people think of love they think of romance; the sexy, passionate love of HBO. Kisses, coitus, and cuddles (if you’re lucky) are what dominate the field of love today and that’s not bad in itself. What’s bad though, is the inordinate focus on one type of love: “Eros”.

In order to explore this weighty topic we’ll defer to the founders of Western Civilization, those ineffable ancient Greeks. To begin, we’ll start with the hungry ache of Eros because it’s what we know best (and think we want most).

According to A Greek-English Lexicon, Eros is the erotic love of romance, with all its smoulder and breathless sighs—the love that is most often envied. Eros is the drug that Valentine’s Day is pushing and buyers line up for their chance at a hit. But I’m not here to tear down romantic love, just to tell you that it has been cheapened and to warn you not to waste your time on the knockoff. Eros is all about enjoying a person, but far too often we simply want to enjoy ourselves, and our lover becomes the means to an end.

Next up is “Storge” and, yes, it sounds funny (like a stork in storage) but it’s also the reason you didn’t get hit by a bus when you were two years-old. Storge is the affectionate love of parents and children, brothers, and sisters. Storge possesses a durability that isn’t always present in Eros because we don’t choose our family. Ours being a time when choice is supreme, this familial love is often ignored because it is unavoidable; an obligation.

“Philia” is the love that grows out of proximity and circumstance; this is the love of study dates, man-hugs, and long talks—love, between friends. Philia begins with a common element like a prison cell, or stuffy lecture hall, and grows into friendships built around shared interests, cares, and concerns. Friendship is a wonderful thing, but what’s most interesting about Philia is its comparative uselessness.

Eros makes babies, Storge keeps them alive, but the Philia of a Starbucks heart-to-heart isn’t biologically essential. C. S. Lewis, the British writer and philosopher said: “Friendship is unnecessary, like philosophy, like art. It has no survival value; rather it is one of those things which give value to survival.” I’m inclined to agree.

The last of these Greek loves is “Agape”. This is love that expects nothing in return. Eros, Storge, and Philia can all reasonably expect a payoff, whether that be sex, gratitude, or simple companionship. Agape however, having never taken ECON 200, gives love away for free like a fool, with no conditions, priming itself for exploitation. Agape, with very good reason to not show love, does it anyway.

This isn’t the love of a loonie in a crumpled coffee cup, it’s the love that takes the homeless man out for coffee, listens, and still gives him a few bucks. Agape is a love that hasn’t heard of selfies.

Ok, that was a nice little word study but maybe you’re wondering what this has to do with Valentine’s Day. Well, first of all I wanted to prove a point: there’s more to love than a dozen red roses.

Also, I wanted to remind you that love is essential to humanity. We need a quiver full of heart-tipped arrows to make life happen, and to make it happen beautifully. This life demands a full-featured love.

Perhaps the oddest thing about Storge, Philia, and Agape are that they’re often unremarkable. No branding, no ensemble-cast movies, and no billion dollar industry to strip them of all decency. Eros has sold out, but we can buy it back and set it straight if we’re willing to take a risk on the real thing.

Lewis again gives eloquent guidance: “To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything and your heart will be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact you must give it to no one, not even an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements. Lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket, safe, dark, motionless, airless, it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable. To love is to be vulnerable.”

Love makes us vulnerable because of the price we must expect to pay; not in dollar bills or shots, but in sacrifice. Love is never only for you, it’s for another person or else it’s not love.

Valentine’s Day is a great excuse to spread love of all varieties, because Eros doesn’t have a monopoly on love.

So here’s a challenge for you: buy those chocolate hearts, but give them to someone you don’t expect to put out. Don’t want to be commercial? No worries, it’s my understanding that moms still love cardboard hearts.

Now that Valentine’s Day has come and gone, remember that love is more than bodies. There is a love that protects, a love that shares, and a love that gives too much.

That—no, those—are love.

 

Categories
Opinions

Ways to overcome reverse culture shock

Post-exchange depression shouldn’t keep you grounded

Studying abroad or taking a gap-year to travel is an invaluable experience. One that’s sure to transform the returning student in one of two ways: it will make you better, or it will make you bitter.

Two weeks ago, the Life section ran an article entitled “They say you can’t come home again”. The writer suggested that the common reaction students have to ‘re-entry’ into normal life after traveling abroad is largely negative, what she refers to as post-Erasmus depression. The Erasmus Student Network (ESM) facilitates university exchanges and internships for students wishing to study in Europe, and one can assume that the condition is common to all foreign travel. In any case, that is where the name comes from.

I don’t contradict the fact that returning home from an extended time abroad is difficult—this is very true. I do, however, contradict the implied solution to post-Erasmus depression. Having traveled extensively in Europe and North Africa over a gap-year, I can sympathize, but I cannot agree that the only solution to the back-home-blahs is to book another flight. That’s the reaction of the bitter, and I think we can do better.

Post-Erasmus depression is just a fancy way to talk about reverse culture shock. Actually, reverse culture shock could use some explaining too. Culture shock is a process people experience when they enter a culture very different from their own. Being a Montrealer, I would not experience any shock in Moncton—but in Marseilles I might be bothered, and even more so in Marrakech.

“But new cultures are fun,” you might say, and I’d respond “indeed!” But for how long, and to what extent?

The official Canadian government travel website lists three distinct stages of this process: The “Honeymoon,” “Culture Shock,” and “Adjustment” phases. I experienced all three of the stages abroad and when I returned home, so I hope to provide some insight for those who are struggling with coming home and those who might travel soon.

The “Honeymoon” phase is glorious. In this stage, “everything you see and do in the country you are visiting is exciting and positive” says the government travel webpage. Baguettes? Delicious. Donkeys? Cool. A distinctly non-Western approach to punctuality? Well, that’s endearing, of course. If the things you experience in this phase are not amazing in and of themselves, they are, at the very least, oddities which interest and intrigue you.

It should be noted that sometimes you don’t come out of the “Honeymoon” phase. Maybe because the trip is too short, or the culture is not radically different (a trip to Vermont or Maine, perhaps). Maybe you live in the “Honeymoon” phase because you’re the Greek god of travel! If you’re not though, and you spend enough time in a different culture, you will experience the shock of culture shock.

So if we accept that culture shock is a real process, then we must acknowledge that the reverse can, and does, happen. The government website describes this second stage as: “a sense of dislocation and general unease” and lists several symptoms. I should mention that my main point of contention with the original article was that post-Erasmus depression was presented as an almost unavoidable phenomena, when it can be rightly understood as reverse culture shock. So in the interest of bouncing back from those back-at-home blahs, let’s explore reverse culture shock.

When you return from spending six to 12 months overseas you’re certain to experience a gamut of emotions. Regret, some relief, and perhaps nostalgia in both directions. When I returned from a year abroad the first Tim Hortons I saw was to me as the Statue of Liberty might’ve been to a returning American. To me Tim’s represented so many comforting values and experiences, and it tugged at my heart in spite of the quality of their coffee. The trick is to not fall into one of two traps: idealizing home or demonizing home. The latter happens when we idealize wherever we’ve been abroad.

Unqualified as I am, it was apparent to me while reading the original article that the experiences and stories of those interviewed showed strong signs of being the reactions of those idealizing “abroad.” I am deeply nostalgic for many aspects of my time abroad, but I remember also being homesick while I was away. Not the whole time, mind you, and there were times when I said “I’m never going back!”

But I did come back, and so will you if you study abroad.

So, what can you do when you find yourself hating everything about home? You can get right back on that plane and go back, but that’s probably not an option, and even if it were, it’s not helpful. All the excitement and novelty of the “new place” will wear off eventually and you’ll find yourself in the same spot—restless and lusty for wandering.

I propose a far more pragmatic solution: have another adventure.

If an adventure is made from equal parts “old familiar self” and “exciting new place” why isn’t the reverse true? Mix up a little “new exciting self” with the “old familiar place” and get to it. Sure, it’ll be just as much work to adjust the new you to your old “culture”, but you had experience doing that when you went abroad, only now it’s in reverse.

I’ve reversed and revised the recommendations of the Canadian government for your convenience:

  • Admit, frankly, that these impacts exist. Reverse culture shock is real but it’s not the end of the world, you just need to readjust.

  • (Re)learn the rules of living in your country. Local behaviour and customs, although they may be different from your own, are neither better nor worse than what you are used to.

  • Take care of yourself. Eat well, exercise and take the time to sleep. Limit your alcohol consumption to moderate amounts.

  • Travel. Take the time to be a tourist and explore your country’s sights as if you were a visitor.

  • Make (new) friends and develop relationships. Getting to know local people will help you (re)adjust to cultural differences.

  • Maintain contact with friends abroad. It is also a good idea to keep a journal of your feelings and thoughts.

  • Do something that reminds you of life abroad. Maintaining some of the habits you made overseas can be helpful re: independence, etc.

  • Avoid idealizing life abroad. You were in another country that had its own set of problems. Also, you can find people everywhere, and people can be terrible.

 

Go on, travel and study abroad if you can. One semester is good but a whole year is even better. If you have the chance, explore a country whose culture is vastly different from your own, maybe the Middle East or East Asia. Do it, have the invaluable experience—but don’t let it make you bitter about coming back. Live it, love it, and let it soak into you. Then come back a fuller, more insightful you and have the adventure all over again as you rediscover a familiar place through new eyes.
Welcome home, world traveler.

Categories
Opinions

Society’s love affair with the Academy Awards

The Oscars aren’t just glitz and glam: they’re validating

Awards season is upon us, and you know what that means: we will mercilessly judge well-dressed strangers while sitting in our pajamas with a bag of chips.

Celebrities make it easy to be cynical. They’re practically living advertisements for the clothes and jewelry designers loan them for the night, and many of us are aware of this. Why then, do we love to watch the Oscars? Is it the glamour of fame and fortune, or a critical interest in filmmaking? Perhaps for some, but I think most of us are watching for a reason that goes a bit deeper: validation.

Did your favourite movie even get nominated? Is The Lego Movie being snubbed for casting too many yellow plastic people? Will Benedict Cumberbatch become too mainstream if he wins? I too am wrestling with these questions, and we won’t have a solid answer until the Academy hands out its awards.

But wait—aren’t all value judgments subjective? Sure, that’s what your professors may have told you, but when I observe people around me I see very few shrugging their shoulders in apathy. I see people making arguments to support their positions.

I see people craving authoritative objectivity: external validation.

It’s not enough to like a movie and enjoy it, we want to know that we enjoyed it because it was good. I’ll admit that the human desire for objectivity is a big topic to unpack, but all I want to do is provide a springboard for reflection. Why do you watch the Oscars? Before you proudly declare that you don’t watch the Oscars because they’re commercialized bilge let me tell you that you’re doing the same thing when you read IndieWire, or when talking Sundance over beers with your film friends. We all do it, no shame here.

Despite our time’s love affair with ‘the self’, individualism has its limits: I cannot congratulate or love myself. Of course I could, but if given the choice I’d choose external validation every time. Why? Because it’s objective to me. Being congratulated means I’ve accomplished something, being loved means I’m lovely, and when a film is nominated for Best Picture I can safely assume that it is very good.

I don’t expect everyone to agree with me—in fact, I can poke holes in my own argument. Take my favourite movie of the year as an example: Calvary, an Irish movie directed by John Michael McDonagh and starring Brendan Gleeson. It’s not even nominated—for anything! Does that mean it’s not good? I’d be the first to say “I don’t think so!” but I’m still indignant about the lack of Oscar recognition for this great film.

Therein lies my conclusion.

If objectivity is a fiction I certainly don’t live like it doesn’t exist, and chances are neither do you. While it’s obvious not everyone agrees with my pick for Best Picture, I believe it deserves more than a pile of zero recognition. I want the validation that The Oscars gives, not only for myself, but also for you. Why? Because we’re all attracted to the best and greatest.

That’s why we love watching The Oscars.

Categories
Opinions

Will cat GIFs fuel the future of journalism?

You won’t believe the answer!

Let’s be honest, BuzzFeed probably isn’t the future of journalism. They are, however, all over the web and they’re doing something interesting. They’re adapting to the publishing realities of the internet age by using the internet’s most valuable currency: cats.

Here’s how they’re doing it.

BuzzFeed gets people in the door. They do this with cats, mostly, but also serve up a potent cocktail of sharable lists and frivolous quizzes. It turns out that they’re also hoping you’ll stay for the journalism. It’s true: there’s journalism on BuzzFeed, but don’t worry if you missed it. It’s easy for a climate change headline to look like a joke when you’re scrolling through 37 unbelievable cat-fails.

This new side of BuzzFeed isn’t so new, having begun in 2012, but it still surprises many people. I first noticed serious headlines on BuzzFeed last year but, like many, assumed they weren’t worth my time. Besides, I had photobombing cats to look at. My perspective changed when I heard an interview with Anne Helen Petersen, a Ph.D. who left academia for a writing career and ended up at BuzzFeed. Unbelieveable. There is at least one Ph.D. at BuzzFeed and she does thoughtful, long-form pieces on celebrity culture. Petersen cites the huge online audience for BuzzFeed as one reason for making the move, and that makes a lot of sense.

I don’t always know that I want to read a feature-length story before I see it, and I never know that I need to read it before I actually do. For instance: I once clicked a silly BuzzFeed headline while goofing off in the library; moments later I was enthralled. I was reading the harrowing first-person account of how American journalist Gregory D. Johnsen (he’s working on his Ph.D.) escaped a kidnapping attempt in Yemen, a country he had lived in and loved for years—on BuzzFeed! The clickbait headline got me in the door but I stayed for the insightful narrative journalism. Does it matter that I was carried in on the backs 37 cats?

I don’t have a degree from JMSB but this makes sense both from a business perspective and might (maybe) be good for journalism, an industry that’s still finding its place in the age of Facebook and Twitter. All those clicks and views of silly cats pay the bills for cultural critics like Petersen and perspectives from experienced correspondents like Johnsen. I like cats and I like insight, and I bet I’m not the only one. Go find their features online; you won’t believe you’re reading BuzzFeed.

I’m intrigued by the concept, but I’m not sold on it yet. BuzzFeed can be a useless time sink, but I believe it’s trying to be more than that. Their approach is novel, but it remains to be seen if this marriage of clickbait and serious reportage will last.

No one likes to see the weak exploited, so a serious question remains: how do all those cats stand to benefit from BuzzFeed’s growth? There’s a feature story here somewhere, and I hope BuzzFeed tackles it.

Exit mobile version