Pico Iyer on the importance of seeing the world
“I think the most dangerous thing in a world that is ever more connected is to close your eyes and to draw the curtains. In any neighborhood the person who doesn’t even try to look at the neighbors is the one who is endangering himself and the others. And I think the other danger is, you can get in a vicious cycle, scared on seeing the world, and before you know it, you’re a sort of cultural agoraphobe.
“I traveled a lot in the week of September 11th and shortly thereafter, and during the bombing of Iraq I deliberately went to Dharamsala, to hear about peace, not war. I think it’s presumption on our part to assume we know what’s dangerous and what isn’t, and my life has shown me that danger comes when I least expect it. And safety, too.”
–Pico Iyer, in Michael Shapiro’s A Sense of Place (2004)
January 10th, 2005 at 1:12 pm
Quote: “I think it’s presumption on our part to assume we know what’s dangerous and what isn’t…”
Nonsense. Is a plane flying into a building dangerous? Is a ticking nuclear device dangerous? Nice, easy line for someone who isn’t charged with others’ safety, and we can all understand the philosophy behind it, but a litte pie in the sky for those in the real world who are responsible for the lives of others.
January 18th, 2005 at 5:26 am
You totally missed the point of the post.
January 18th, 2005 at 1:34 pm
Justin- Then explain how I missed the point- explain what the point is– explain why my partial rebuttal regarding those that live in the real world of safety and danger is wrong.
January 26th, 2005 at 6:57 am
First things first: My question to you – What is your profession?
January 26th, 2005 at 1:02 pm
Justin- You’re answering my question with a question, but fine — I’m a lawyer living and practicing in the West Pacific– which is irrelevant to the post and any critique of it.
And just to skip ahead a few steps, if I may, I get the “importance of seeing the world” part, that events like 9-11 shouldn’t cause us to draw the curtains and stay home, that we can’t really understand all the dangers out there, etc..
My post was, of course, responding to a sub-point of the writer, an implied point regarding “the bombing” of Iraq and presumtpion about danger. You know, good for him that he went to hear about peace and not war, but this sub-point or whatever one might call it is too pie in the sky for me– it’s almost insulting in the way it treats danger. If your family was killed by American bombs or your dad by terrorist attacks, for example, you likely have some other ideas on danger and appropriate actions regarding danger.
Now, your thoughts, or not — up to you.
January 26th, 2005 at 1:02 pm
Justin- You’re answering my question with a question, but fine — I’m a lawyer living and practicing in the West Pacific– which is irrelevant to the post and any critique of it.
And just to skip ahead a few steps, if I may, I get the “importance of seeing the world” part, that events like 9-11 shouldn’t cause us to draw the curtains and stay home, that we can’t really understand all the dangers out there, etc..
My post was, of course, responding to a sub-point of the writer, an implied point regarding “the bombing” of Iraq and presumtpion about danger. You know, good for him that he went to hear about peace and not war, but this sub-point or whatever one might call it is too pie in the sky for me– it’s almost insulting in the way it treats danger. If your family was killed by American bombs or your dad by terrorist attacks, for example, you likely have some other ideas on danger and appropriate actions regarding danger.
Now, your thoughts, or not — up to you.
January 30th, 2005 at 3:48 pm
Um, maybe someone else would like to jump in? I’ve made it a point over the years not to jump into discussions with lawyers. Arguing with a professional is not exactly fun.