“In Notes on the Underground (MIT Press, 1990; revised edition 2008), Rosalind Williams, Bern Dibner Professor of the History of Science and Technology at MIT, examines how actual and imaginary underworlds shaped our attitudes toward the manufactured environments that we inhabit.”
The article, Underworld: An Interview with Rosalind Williams by Sina Najafi, is a very fascinating article discussing the many possibilities of what may be lying beneath the earth. It is questionable of what exactly may be waiting beneath the depths of the earth; perhaps it is Lucifer and the undying fire that torture damaged souls that await many other wrong-doers or mayhap it is just really the subways that occupy the space below and nothing more. The article also goes into depth of many publications of books that idealize their (the authors’) thoughts of the “underworld”. The ideas discussed throughout the article usually circulate on books that speculate the idea of an underworld that, for example, consist of supposedly extinct animals such as dinosaurs that can be found “in a journey to the center of the earth”. As Sina interviews Rosalind on her perspective, thoughts, and ideas on this idea of an ‘underworld, Rosalind gives many speculating views from different authors and the intriguing possibilities of how this underworld that is created affects one’s thought of what really lies beneath. As I read the article, I see the idea of an underworld categorized in science, religion, and fantasy. In reality, what is beneath the surface are old age rocks that contain fossils of once used to be. In religion, it may be a waiting place for the dead souls known as Hades or Hell with Lucifer’s ruling. Then created by imagination, the fantasy aspect comes by with the endless possibilities of what could be down there – it is open for many to imagine the underworld and create a new idea that may never be proved to exist. Therefore, how we think and what we believe affect our way of living. By believing that if there is a heaven, there has to be a hell; so for the sins that we have committed, we are condemned unless confessed or forgiven. If we were to all live by that idea, wouldn’t you think that many would be more willing to do good things or repent? Now if we were only to believe that only subways and other such stuff are the only things that occupy the earth’s depths, what would it matter how we lived?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hey Jean -
It's interesting to think of where we place these domains physically - I guess it makes sense that "Hell,," etc are underworlds, are beneath us, and that Heavens, domains of aspiration, are above. Not sure which I find more terrifying: the isolation, thin atmosphere of space, or the crush of that underneath. I know I do prefer riding the subway to riding airplanes. But don't we tend to attempt to colonize in an upward direction, rather than a downward one? Is this because of beliefs associated with each terrain?
When R Krauss is involved, there is always a lot to write about and it makes sense that your summary tilts toward the generalizing. Would have love to catch details- but then I can read the interview, I guess.
But I'd love to read you attach your sharp focus to details. I appreciate the immersion - that word suggests going under,doesn't it - but, in these responses, feel free to just consider one detail, one idea. No need to summarize entire piece. You could consider Krauss's take on one of the authors/artists considered. Or does she ever get around to talking about specific attitudes about specific built environments?
Your thinking is generously on display here. But how are your thoughts here connected to issues of art making? They start to be, but may be too general. (Or maybe Krauss never connects the dots either.) Or, by starting on a more specific point, your discussion may also work more specific ideas.
Thanks for the time on this though.
Carl
Post a Comment