Friday, July 11, 2008

Follow up to comments on mobility

In response to Chris's comments, while it is true that that one can achieve a kind of "mobility of imagination," nothing compares to real human contact and the freedom to come and go at will. I am quite aware of the shortcomings of technology, and even literature, to fill the necessity of real, face-to-face contact, as I have been alone all week/weekend and am starting to unravel, thread by thread (the husband's been gone 7 days now working on one of the fires). I think that this scooter gives the elderly (or otherwise incapacitated) the ability to be independent and make contact with the would outside their homes. I cannot imagine being both alone and trapped, unable to leave for even the simplest of errands.

On a side note, this conversation reminds me of the "Unexamined Life" cartoon from last week. It's important to live your own life, and not just pass your time living through the images or stories of others. You can become lost in a story, and it can become part of your history, but I believe that it's preferable to balance that with "real life." You can read about love, and adventure, and whatever else, but that does not mean that it should replace the loves and adventures of your own life. I'm thinking about writing in the future as a career, and I feel like I need to experience life to write with more heart. Reading the works of other is beneficial, of course, but just not enough.

As to the involvement of technology in this physical mobility, and its resulting lack of purity, if you will, I think of a similar example in my own family. One of my cousins is currently pregnant, and is insisting that she deliver her little son at home, without any drugs. The woman is insane. I asked her, "Would you wash your clothes in the river?" to which I got a confused look and a confident, "No, of course not." To me its the same thing. We have washers now, so no one would dream of hand scrubbing their clothes is mucky river water. Why would you ignore the presence of hospitals and wonderful, pain numbing drugs? It's just ridiculous. The scooter is an invaluable resource to those who could benefit from it, and therefore should be embraced.

As to the allowance of these on the island on Lake Huron, although I am not that familiar with the situation, I think it would be insensitive to restrict access to those who are disabled just to make it "motor free." I realize that not everything can be wheelchair-accessible (ie hiking trails, mountainous areas), but to deny the elderly/disabled from this situation seems a bit extreme. Perhaps they could provide free "pushers" to assist the disabled if they are so adamant at keeping the island "organic."

1 comment:

Christopher Schaberg said...

I take your point entirely that "nothing compares to real human contact"—but I wonder what the limits of this are? What constitutes "real human contact," and doesn't this vary from person to person? Isn't any living human experiencing "human contact" with *something*?

Furthermore, you seem to think that certain forms of "human contact" (such as a woman's experience while in labor) *should* be mediated by technology: isn't the 'contact' between a mother and her child more 'real' without drugs (that precisely lessen *feeling*)? Or are these just different experiences of reality? Perhaps the problematic word here is 'real'. How would we ever be able to decide what counts as real, and what counts as less-than-real? (And is there a more-than-real?) Who would have the authority to decide these things? Isn't the point, rather, than people have different experiences of reality? For instance, when you think of river water, you think of "mucky"—and when I think of a river, I picture water much colder and clearer than the water that most people drink. Obviously, we've had different experiences of different rivers; but this does not mean that one is more 'real' than the other. Do you see what I mean? Similarly, your idea of what it means to give birth is different than your cousin's—but this does not have to mean that one is 'preferable' and the other is 'insane'. They are different ideas, based on different experiences. The difficult part of 'difference' is that you have to be able to trace and articulate the contours of different conceptual terrains, rather than automatically see difference in terms of a vertical or hierarchical system. Just because two things are different, it does not mean that one is 'better' than the other—difference does have to result in power struggles or stark separations, but could rather result in increased communication, negotiation, and interaction between people. This is complex stuff! And I'm just thinking 'out loud' here.

Finally: I like the "organic" baby link that you end with! I think I will get one of those T-shirts for my newborn little nephew, whose parents can't stand 'organic' trends. Thanks for taking on this difficult subject, Colleen.