Introduction
Proper understanding of the various meanings considered ordinary is a vital task for multiple scientific fields. Several authors have discussed the methods of understanding common sense and its implementation in cultural discussions (Vähämaa 306). Even though it may be complicated to precisely define common sense, it bears special significance for people from different cultures. In this work, the accuracy of Frank Lloyd Wright’s statement will be demonstrated, and the evidence regarding this topic will be presented in relation to concepts of discursive meaning, signs, and societal regulation.
Common Sense in The Short Story “The Ones Who Stay and Fight”
In week 5, a remarkable statement was introduced, and it reads as follows: “There is nothing more uncommon than common sense” (Gendreau et al. 305). In my opinion, this expression is incredibly fascinating as it presents the contradictions created by the meanings of common sense in different cultures. Additionally, I will be discussing the opinion that I worked on for that week to explain the significance of this statement. I took part in Option C: “In Jemisin’s story: why Um-Helat’s way of living seems so shocking, so “no common sense?”, which covers the unusual way of life adopted by the citizens of Um-Helat.
The description of a society formed in Um-Helat is exceptionally striking. Having found a way to eliminate other individuals causing destruction in their world, the citizens of this town chose to implement this strategy (Jesimin). In order to sustain peace and justice, the people decided to dispose of those who transfer dangerous and unwanted beliefs (Jesimin). In the European culture, this decision can be perceived as drastic, as it shatters various norms and regulations about crude behavior that are considered typical. Jemisin’s view on the influence caused by other world’s beliefs can be challenging to understand, as the decisions taken by that society differ significantly from the resolutions that would have been applied in our society.
A detailed explanation of this work requires the implementation of various definitions. I believe that the phenomenon of descriptive meaning can be employed to clarify the reason for such a striking reaction from the viewer (Hall 390). In our society, there is a particular discursive meaning for the word “violence” that can be called universal for most cultures – the understanding that violence is an unacceptable solution for a certain issue (Houdek 281). For an average reader, the events transpiring in the short story can be described as shocking, as a large amount of unnecessary brutality is seen throughout the narrative. Thus, the word “violence” has a figurative definition, a signified concept that applying brutal force can have dire consequences for the people involved.
The story by Jemisin seems to be incredibly fascinating to the reader of our society, as our cultural norms directly contradict the violent approach described. Apart from the descriptive meaning, there are regulations and significations that present violence as a negative concept (Hall 390). Most commonly, violence is regulated by the government and police authorities and is considered a crime with multiple levels of severity (Houdek 281). Moreover, brutal force is always represented negatively by social media and other sources of information, thus following the process of the signification of violence (Vähämaa 306). From our perspective, killing those who hold a separate opinion is a difficult way of resolving the situation, as it is especially destructive and inappropriate. The meaning behind the killings cannot be understood by the reader, as there can be other ways of resolving this situation in a more peaceful manner.
Common Sense and Cultural Differences
Defining the specific attributes of common sense can be exceptionally difficult. I think that the statement presented by Wright is exceptionally precise, as every kind of common sense is different for every community. Some meanings become fixed in certain cultures, stating the norms that are believed to be practical (Hall 391). As common sense evolves during the culture’s development, it can employ various observations, facts, and feelings that are relevant to this society (Hall 391). In the example with Um-Helat, it is possible that the way of life adopted by this culture would have become common sense for all the representatives of this community. In a way, killing the people responsible for destroying the peace can be seen as practical. Eliminating the potential threats to the individuals of Um-Helat is an easy, although the violent, way of establishing peace. Finally, various jokes and proverbs can be constructed throughout the time that this matter is present within this culture, fully including the killings as a part of common sense.
Common sense can vary across different cultures, changing and evolving according to various social norms observed. Even though denotative terms are believed to be natural and universal, some of the meanings behind common sense can be found untrue (Vähämaa 306). As this society changes, so do the beliefs adopted by it (Vähämaa 306). Furthermore, some meanings can be heavily impacted by the representatives of social media, such as news companies (Vähämaa 306). The understanding of a particular event or phrase can become distorted, thus enveloping this company’s views and attitudes towards the issue, but not the actual beliefs of this community (Vähämaa 306). In this example, the individuals affected can perceive the common sense presented by social media as uncommon. In order to properly examine the social values present in a community, one must consider the time and environment affecting it.
Nevertheless, there are several issues that can be noted in the statement. For a person involved in a specific culture, common sense is one of the most undeniable and straightforward truths (Houdek 284). Even though some meanings can be argued by this particular individual, the overall practical implementation of these meanings is highly natural and thus absolute. Saying that common sense will be “uncommon” in this case can be considered wrong. Additionally, it is essential to consider this phenomenon while viewing a particular culture or community (Hall 394). Thus, when suggesting a statement about common sense, one should clarify which society is being analyzed and which definitions and meanings are being included. Generalizing this term and applying it to all world populations at once can be a crucial mistake.
Conclusion
To conclude, the concept of common sense can differ significantly depending on the community’s cultural and historical characteristics. Defining common sense can prove to be a sophisticated task, as various features should be considered in this process. An exceptional example of a contradiction between the ordinary understanding of violence and a society’s actions is provided in Jemisin’s story “The Ones Who Stay and Fight.” The work utilizes the discursive meaning of violence, the processes of regulation, and the signification of this term in order to present an unforgettable experience for the reader.
References
Gendreau, Paul, et al. “The Common-Sense Revolution and Correctional Policy.” Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment, edited by James McGuire, 2018, pp. 359–86.
Hall, Stuart. Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse. University of Birmingham, 1973.
Houdek, Matthew. “Racial Sedimentation and the Common Sense of Racialized Violence: The Case of Black Church Burnings.” Quarterly Journal of Speech, vol. 104, no. 3, 2018, pp. 279–306.
Jesimin, Nora K. “The Ones Who Stay and Fight.”Lightspeed Magazine. 2020. Web.
Vähämaa, Miika. “Common Sense, Language, and Semantic Primes: Liminal or Constant Concepts of Psychology?” Human Arenas, vol. 1, no. 3, 2018, pp. 305–20.