THE
PHENOMENOLOGY OF FACEBOOK
by
Zachary Horvitz
~
Facebook
is a sophisticated attempt to objectify subjective experience. The original
objectifier is language itself. The origin of language is the image: the ideogram
or pictogram.
In
primitive times the distinctions between language, poetry, and art did not
exist. All symbol-making (objectification) was a form of communication.
(Non-symbolic communication exists, but it does not objectify.) There was no
dichotomy between pragmatic and aesthetic communication: the gap between form
and function was not so apparent, if not altogether nonexistent. The conclusion
I draw from this is that all good art should move us in ways that are both
aesthetic and pragmatic: the effect of the most purely aesthetic poem should
have pragmatic consequences, and vice versa. By "pragmatic consequences"
I do not simply mean "utilitarian applications" or "moral
lessons" but consequences in our emotional, psychological, political, or
spiritual life that extend from, and ultimately extend beyond, the moment of
aesthetic contemplation. Most art that is exclusively formal (a mere display of
technique) is likely unpalatable, as in the music of Joe Stump.[1]
On the other side of the spectrum, art that is exclusively functional is also
unpalatable, as in the propagandist painting of Stalinism. Art's highest aim is
the unity of function and form.
Two
understatements: I consider the music of Joe Stump exhibitionistic, and
Stalinist painting dogmatic. Facebook tends to produce overt exhibitionism as
well as propagate covert dogma. A great deal of Facebook photos are like Joe
Stump arpeggios: undeniably novel, but often vapid. Furthermore, a great deal
of Facebook photos are also like Stalinist paintings: the dogma they disperse is
sometimes unapparent if left critically unexamined. The most persistent dogma
that many Facebook photos are culpable of propagating is explained by the hip
catch-phrase: "Pics or It Didn't Happen," which implies: if it does
not exist objectively, it has no reality. I do not think we have fully grasped
that uncanny implication of this watchword, which is often used pseudo-ironically to mask our belief in it.
Facebook is the most advanced form of objectification the world has ever known, and by consequence it is the most advanced means by which the value of subjective experience is being undermined. Please note: I am not against objectification. I am a logophiliac. There is no way back to the Eden of prelinguistic society. Art and poetry (like many aspects of religion) is the attempt to use symbols to represent that which transcends symbolic communication and linguistic society itself. I claim that even something as commonplace as a Facebook photo or status update can have this kind of transcendental power, if the Facebook user wields her medium like a gifted artist. (This does not mean that every Facebook photo should be artsy or every status update poetic. I am not championing so-called high culture at the expense of so-called low culture. A post that endorses the latest Lady Gaga music video can open hearts and minds just as well as any post about Lord Byron, if done in the spirit of beneficence and not solely to showcase personal cultural consciousness. Everyone knows that the latter approach devolves into games of one-upmanship. I know because I too am guilty.) A maxim for all gifted Facebook artists might be the following: "a good picture can be worth a thousand words, and a single sentence can be worth a thousand bad pictures."
Facebook is the most advanced form of objectification the world has ever known, and by consequence it is the most advanced means by which the value of subjective experience is being undermined. Please note: I am not against objectification. I am a logophiliac. There is no way back to the Eden of prelinguistic society. Art and poetry (like many aspects of religion) is the attempt to use symbols to represent that which transcends symbolic communication and linguistic society itself. I claim that even something as commonplace as a Facebook photo or status update can have this kind of transcendental power, if the Facebook user wields her medium like a gifted artist. (This does not mean that every Facebook photo should be artsy or every status update poetic. I am not championing so-called high culture at the expense of so-called low culture. A post that endorses the latest Lady Gaga music video can open hearts and minds just as well as any post about Lord Byron, if done in the spirit of beneficence and not solely to showcase personal cultural consciousness. Everyone knows that the latter approach devolves into games of one-upmanship. I know because I too am guilty.) A maxim for all gifted Facebook artists might be the following: "a good picture can be worth a thousand words, and a single sentence can be worth a thousand bad pictures."
The medium is not the problem. The problem is: how are we using it? I
have no prescriptions where the "how" is concerned. I make status
updates about anything from Ellie Goulding to Arthur Schopenhauer. I don't
think it really matters, but I do think one thing does matter: intention. What
do we intend to do when we are posting a photo or a thought? Is it mere
exhibitionism or do we care about how what we share will affect others? Even
quotidian humor affects others in positive ways; there is no formula, only the
possibility of a greater awareness of intention.
I
believe in what the German poet Hölderlin once said: "Where the danger is,
there the healing power also grows." Let's keep moving forward with technological
and 21st Century objectification, but with real care and critical concern.
Nonetheless, let us remember that even the advent and exponential proliferation
of objectification itself has only ever happened within the vast fields of
subjectivity we call persons.
[1] Joe Stump is
a contemporary neoclassical metal guitarist. His music is characterized by
ostentatious "shredding," a style of soloing that indulges in
warp-speed, sweep-picked arpeggios.
