Whither

who are you
and who are we
do i read you right
and can u see thru me

i want to be close
but run back when i am
do i fear you
too near to you
or i cant remove my skin for you?

or do i really see
that this cant be
and this closeness i feel
cannot thus reveal

if that is so
again, who are we
can i come so close
and remain unchanged

How natural will be a return to nature?

Can we really live among nature, and yet remain exactly the modern, free thinking and liberal people that we as those who live in cities. This is not to say that there are not already a lot of people living with nature - either because they traditionally do or because they choose to.
Even so, I wonder at the sutble changes such  shift of venue will bring and even demand.

There must be a reason for instance why civilisations spread in the plains and why the mountains, world-over remain ways of escaping civilisation for a while. And why further, that those mountain dwellers who get exposed to the life of the plains, are transmuted forever, unable perhaps then to share the same vibrations with their hills that they hitherto did.

The plains then, seem to be the site of the establisment of cities. Cities, primarily, are spaces of visual sensousness. it can be argued that man, who seeks sensous pleasure in varied forms, finds the city to be one such place that leaves him secure, satisfied and yet safely seeking more, thus making cities the ever burgeouning grounds of opulence or or enterprise. This may explain further why the metro or the mall are conducive to the city. It may explain why, when i escape the city and begin to miss it after a while, I find solace in the mall.

If by going back to nature, man must forgo these means of directing his desireful energy, then will these mean that man will need to mutate into a different kind of being. No more will such a life give out a flaneur or art critic. The sense of distance from one's object of pleasure, seems to be central to city life. Wit such closeness to the land, how does man maintain the individualistic and free sense of humanness?

We may recognise what violence lies in this sensousness of city life and we may thus proceed to discover different ways of living and being. But, if we really sincerely take these step ahead, do we really know what mutations we are going to undergo?

Being free, thinking free, theorising free

Is sociology an inherently conservative discipline? Nisbet argues how its very inception is flavoured by the nostalgia for community and sacredity. Ranciere's book i am reading indicates that the new sociology emerges in France after the setbacks faced by the left. In this backdrop, argues Ranciere, does Bourdieu's work emerge - presenting to us a cynical explanation of inequality, leaving us almost trapped in its very existence. Of course, both these kinds of conservatisms are quite different, but perhaps share a common spirit.
I wonder (and this may appear cynical too, but i hope does not remain so) whether most grand theories and perspectives in the discipline are marked by a kind of conservatism. Rather, i think this word is insufficient, even misleading. I want to indicate a seeking of comfort in theories, categories that give us as intellectuals a means to explain the world around us. It makes us believe that we have access to a more exalted, a more secret understanding of the world. In this sense, is sociology, psychologically wanting? Is it driven less often by the higher emotions of wonder, humility and openness and more often by judgement and a missionary zeal? What do we know after all about non-sociological ways of explaining the world? What place can we give them? Are we not often in the business of indoctrination? What for instance does a term like 'patriarchy' do for us? Have we perhaps got stuck with the category, and not moved further on the paths of inquiry? Have we shaped our world on the basis of the very categories we formulated to explain it?
The attempt to explain the word around us, is a profound need for us. Most of our knowledges, our sciences, natural or social are attempts to do so. While, they could perhaps be empowering, they seem to be double edged. You never know when they begin to offer comforts, illusions. Taking us away from the real questions, leaving us fighting with misleading shadows...