That film could have only been made in one country and one country alone - a country just as perplexing as its cultural merchandise, at least to outsiders. While studying abroad at Oxford last semester and in my various travels, I always found it difficult to explain to others my experience of America at Princeton. America, to me, is the most progressive nation on earth in a plethora of ways: For instance, no other country even comes close to having a viable candidate for the head of state who, decades ago, would have been an oppressed minority. Not the countries of Continental Europe, which for all their vague and outmoded cultural pretensions are still mired in racism and xenophobia: where l'Orient is the fetish du jour to be consumed with a macchiato and Thai Art refers to the kind of thing fat German men travel to Southeast Asia for. Almost-but-not-just-yet Britain, whose remarkably resilient class system still occasionally privileges some over others. And certainly not China, that bull in the superpower shop, which lamentably still thinks that a hundred smiling, waving children out of some undoubtedly worm-eaten Maoist guide to imperialist propaganda will suffice as the face of progress.
But how, then, to explain the endless debates about abortion, religion and guns - debates that reached real consensus decades ago in the rest of the free world? How to grasp that the cultural superpower that churns out the most subversive and reflexive pop culture in the form of "American Dad" and "30 Rock" (eat that, French New Wave!) is also the country that harbors the right wing bigot that is Ann Coulter? How to fathom that the nation with the most diverse and fascinating urban population is also the country that still denies fundamental civil rights to gays? And how to comprehend the fact that the land that invented jazz, gender performativity and Google is also where the nominally intelligent Ms. Snow White, having awakened at arguably the best university in the world, is only interested in talking about her seven "petites morts" at breakfast?
The simple truth is that I find this utterly inexplicable, and after having muddled through my fleeting student life here, I have come to regard this as the enormous paradox that is America. I don't expect to ever understand it, simply because I am not one of you; I shan't even pretend to. I've already tried to string together the few things I do understand: that America is an idealistic nation where people stand up admirably for what they believe in. That nothing can really be taken seriously and that everything is ironic by default because all, in the somewhat misguided spirit of Voltaire, are tolerant of even the most repugnant ideologies. Paradox again!
Well, perhaps it doesn't matter. America still remains a relatively dynamic nation to us outsiders, as I continue to tell others, whatever its shortcomings - shortcomings that are universal anyway. Its paradoxical nature has been a dialectic that, as history so far has shown, can bear the strangest and yet most compelling fruit. The alternative, after all, may very well be to do as all other has-been civilizations have done - wilt in complacency. And perhaps embracing paradox is simply the best way to go about life in an age where Romes are being built every millisecond and not putting all your eggs into one basket guarantees a breakfast. I'm not trying to trot out that tired cliche about the benefits of debate and diversity of opinion (because that, in impenetrable circularity, is yet another matter of opinion, no matter how many Ivy League administrations endorse it).
As paradoxes go, maybe that increasingly inevitable McCain presidency that the rest of the world would regard as the final nail in America's coffin will, against all odds, result in a backlash of enormous social progress. Who knows? Yes, that spoonful of sugar goes down strangely with the medicine, but just swallow the damn thing already.
Johann Loh is a senior in the philosophy department from Singapore. He can be reached at loh@princeton.edu.
Want to be a ‘Prince' columnist? E-mail opinion@dailyprincetonian.com by Sept. 25 for details or an application.
Read More
Why can’t lecturers win the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching?
Jerry ZhuLet’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Let’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Princeton’s administration of justice is Trumpian
Frances BroganThe disparity between the University’s approach to Giberson and its approach to pro-Palestinian protestors reflects a concerning trend of appeasing an increasingly emboldened right rather than resisting the threat it poses to academic freedom and the wellbeing of Princeton students.
Secular Opening Exercises? Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
Frank StrasburgerThe secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
The secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
