Advocating Myth (Hari Ini Atau Tidak Sama Sekali Part 2)

leave a comment »

This is the follow up though on the Situationist blabbering that I have written here.

More voices in my head. As I have written on how the spectacle, what we see around us has been a concoction of half truths anyway, I am here to advocate for myth. Myth here is what understood as the statements/stories that are ‘fake’. fabricated, with half- or the absence of any elements of truth.  Truth itself is debatable in many many ways.

Following the Gramsci thesis of hegemony, and how institutions such as the media, schools, universities and other tools of information dissemination of those with power, authority has been feeding the masses with their version of truth.  History books for example, has been understood generally as being always biased to the writer’s point of view.  Who is the freedom fighter or the terrorists according to these books depends on the intention and the means that the one’s who’s writing.

And it has always been the stories, tales and narratives of the masses, the small powerless group that has always been labelled as myths.  What I am saying here is, why only the grassroots tales that are subjected to such label?  Of always being labelled as ‘desas-desus’, ‘ura-ura’, ‘words from the grapevines’ that always seems to have some negative notion?  That the narratives lack certain kind of ‘authority’?

If the effort of seeking the real truth, if there is such thing, is a fallacy, then may I suggest that we embrace all myths.  Since we have been received ‘facts’ that have been doctor-ed in one way or another anyway, why don’t we embrace it all?  To believe our allegedly senile senior friends?  To put all the things that we heard, without the discrimination of the speaker?  One is no less human than the other anyway.

Blogs have to a certain extent, realising this suggestion of mine anyway.  The democratic power of the Internet has to a certain extent put all that is written and said on par of the other- it’s all there, all represented by a single URL- on the same imagined par of being heard and listened.  Why don’t we apply the same logic to those who expressed their tales in spoken words.  (Derrida’s discussion on Writing vs Speaking applies here, look for it)

And only then, we decide for ourselves, what to believe and what to not to be believed.

(I like to thank you Kalinda Vyasa on the conversation that we had a few years back on this idea of embracing Myth.  It was your idea bro)


Written by yuenkokleong

April 1, 2009 at 11:48 am

Posted in Days at Sarawak

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: