Some ponderings on freedom
This week I noticed a continuous theme throughout our readings: all of the pieces we read largely referenced freedom and the author's perspective on the concept, and all of those authors were Americans.
Wallace defined freedom as something more internal. Something I thought was interesting was how he made freedom out to be something to be achieved rather than something that's given to you by birthright. In this aspect, you have to work for freedom, and once you finally achieve it then you are free. I like this one the most because it encourages the growth of self and open-mindedness!
Despite this, the writings of Douglass, Vowell, and Wallace all defined freedom in a different way..
Douglass' definition was physical freedom. The ability to be your own person, not the property of another person. At first glance, I thought that this concept was irrelevant to the modern American, because we're all here and free anyway, right? Then I thought deeper about the undocumented immigrants in overcrowded "accommodations", and the people who have to suffer through the deeply flawed U.S. prison system. You can probably think of even more examples of this here in our country.
Vowell defined freedom as the ability to have an expression of self and opinion. As long as you're not doing anything illegal or inherently wrong/harmful-- yolo, right? Well, that's what it's supposed to mean. That one isn't exactly enforced.. (hence: alt-right groups radicalizing children). But in a lighter aspect, that one is relatively true. Look at goth people. It's 2019 and these folks are out here repping their huge and deeply complex subculture with some very interesting hair, clothing, and identity expression. And who are we to stop them?
 |
| ok this is such a look tho |
So with this I leave you my question: how do you define freedom, and is there an extent to which it should be limited?
I definitely think that there has to be limits to freedom. Like you said, you can't be allowed to do something illegal or harmful. Essentially, your freedom, can't hurt or take away someone else's. It's like we all have the right to the pursuit of happiness. Someone's happiness might be hurting other people, so there has to be boundaries. That's why we have laws in place so that no one's freedom or happiness can hurt or take away someone else's. In this country, and just as humans in general, I think we have the most trouble with giving people the freedom to express themselves. Your goth example is what made me realize this. We see people on the streets every single day, and if they look drastically different from us we judge them. We look at them, and not usually with the sincerest intentions or thoughts running through our heads. We don't look at them because we love their outfit, but to question why they would ever wear such a thing. If you want to go out with a nose ring and a crop top or black lipstick then you don't want someone judging you. So I think this is what society needs to work on most. We have to stop being so judgmental and give people the freedom to express themselves they deserve.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed and found it interesting how you explained how all three authors described freedom. When you connected current events/issues to each version of freedom, I was able to understand the authors definition. As I didn't fully comprehend them when I read the pieces the first time.
ReplyDeleteI love all the examples you provided for each type of freedom. I'm very glad you brought up the horrible stuff illegal immigrants have to go through (don't even get me started) and yes, the goth picture is a look. On a more serious note, I personally define freedom as the ability to be your own self with no hindrances. This is more in line with Wallace and Vowell's definition of freedom - of challenging societal standards and overcoming sometimes, even yourself. However, something I do see as interesting is how privilege influences each person's idea of privilege. In my case, I'm privileged enough to be able to aspire for a higher freedom besides basic legal rights. I guess each person's idea of freedom plays into Maslov's hierarchy of needs in a way.
ReplyDelete