Every individual is just that: an individual. Our thoughts are unique, our consciences differed, and our decisions idiosyncratic. However, as humans began interacting, they realized certain situations only had so many varying approaches. Humans find comfort in commonality and companionship. When such was found, factions began to form, systems evolved to suit these general desires, and civilization was defined. Society is the result of the human desire and need for commonality.
Societies themselves resemble individuals. An American society is much different than an Oceanic society. This is most visibly understood through the art produced, clothing worn, government systems abided by, and family values upheld. Individuals in these regions adapted their lifestyles to the climates and locations of their homelands, and their societies developed according to the common beliefs these locations spawned. We should define a society, then, as what the majority of its inhabitants declare as right and beneficial in their opinions. We then must ask why, in many societies, the poor are the majority and do not reap the benefits the society offers. This question exemplifies why we are beholden to society. Society is the constant hope of the majority for improvement and satisfaction. The poor’s sole hope lies in society, for society itself is the only thing that has the possibility of uplifting their suffering. The middle class, if it exists, is beholden to society because, many times, those in the middle class exemplify society’s ability to uplift the suffering of the poor. Many middle class individuals are the product of the opportunities society holds for the poor coming to life and working in their favor. The upper class is beholden to society because it has the direct ability to define society’s values. Money does, in many societies, make the world go around.
A society is like a painting; few artists have the ability to project their exact thoughts onto a surface. An ideal society is the closest portrayal of human thought, using many different paints and surfaces to produce the most aesthetically pleasing overall effect. Each human in a society has the ability to add his or her shade of color to the mix. Yet, it has been proven time and time again that while one color may take over the picture, it eventually chips away to reveal the underlying shades. In our obligation to contribute our paint to the canvas, the canvas holds the obligation of a pleasing effect to the viewer. We paint with the hope that our individual brushstrokes cross paths with others to create a stronger effect in our favor than a sole line of color could ever produce. In our contributions to society, society must, ideally, come through for us at some point. The cycle of what is beholden to whom is in the efforts we put into society and the effects it produces for us. Thus, the painting is never finished; where pieces chip off, we repaint them with new brushstrokes in the hope of either blending into the background or beginning a new color scheme.
Yet, there are always those who realize the poor’s faith in society to bring them up is not enough to truly complete the desired action. There are circumstances when human idiosyncrasies individualize them from society’s general beliefs and right within a system seems synonymous to wrong. I bring up Susan B. Anthony and the women’s suffrage movement. We must not consider the poor only those who lack money, but those who are downtrodden and seen as weak in society. Those with power deemed women unable to vote and inferior to men. Society was based on male dominance in most aspects of life. So, Susan objected. She protested against the documented laws of United States and the unwritten laws of American society. She waited in poll lines to cast her ballot because her ideas of what was “right” and “beneficial” contrasted with those of society. The Civil Rights movement followed the same pattern. Blacks had no rights even though they lived in the same locations and were just as human as whites. Society did not allow for their freedom let alone opportunity for freedom. So, like Anthony, they protested. They made different colored brush strokes on a canvas whose color scheme did not match the new designs.
Ironically, these movements rose through the same mechanisms their society had risen with. They were individuals who had, what they thought, unique dreams and hopes. They found others who thought their hopes unique as well. Eventually, a faction formed and ideas for a new type of society flourished, slowly at first, but then like wildfire. Like the creation of oil paint, once one individual realized the colors could be brighter and paint could stay wet longer, he attempted to sell it to others. The new method of painting seemed logical to him. Few would try the new paint because humans fear change. However, once word of the new paint spread, many would begin using it and oil paint would become the new norm of society. It would soon be replaced by photography, film, and interactive art forms. Nobody knows what art will come next. Society gives us all the ability to answer that question.
No comments:
Post a Comment