Quick Links
Categories
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
XML/RSS Feed
Other Heathen Blogs and Journals
Caryatid's LiveJournal
Boars Heart's LiveJournal
Orn Ransom's LiveJournal
Thorolf's LiveJournal
Falki's LiveJournal
MacRaven
Seledréam
Vanatru's LiveJournal
Expanding Inward
Boars Heart's LiveJournal
Orn Ransom's LiveJournal
Thorolf's LiveJournal
Falki's LiveJournal
MacRaven
Seledréam
Vanatru's LiveJournal
Expanding Inward
Links of Heathen Interest
Other (non-heathen) Blogs
Subscribe
 |
 |
Technorati
Blog Value
My blog is worth $1,693.62.
How much is your blog worth?
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Apr 26, 2006 10:02 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Apr 26, 2006 10:02 PM
Attempt #2 at Household of the Homeless
I realize that my first attempt at writing about
this subject was less than stellar. That's why I'm going to try
again.
The sagas demonstrate to us that the basic element of heathen society has always been the household. This was the collection of blood and foster kin living on a specific piece of land. In Iceland, slaves could be considered extensions of the household as well. The individual is important only in his role as part of the household, and one's role in a household was demonstrated by responsibilities met within that household.
That's a hard thing for us moderns to accept, at least here in the States. We have grown up being taught the values of individual liberty. Our modern society hates the group and loves the individual. A perfect example of this: Star Trek. (Disclaimer: I don't consider myself a Trekkie at all, so any misrepresentations are my own fault for not really liking the shows in the first place. Except for Voyager, but only because I think the female captain was hot). On every one of the series barring the original, sooner or later there appears an enemy known as the Borg. They are a collective group that shares a group mind, and are horrible because of their lack of free will, as well as their tendency to "assimilate" other species into their own.
Why are they so horrible? The Borg violate our ideas of freedom as an individual quality. Granted, they are rather gruesome, and they don't offer a choice to other species before they are "assimilated." However, the underlying theme here is reminding us that individuality is more important than any sort of group dynamic.
A household doesn't function exactly like a Borg collective, of course. One doesn't give up one's thoughts or opinions upon joining or building a household. The trick is that only through doing one's part and meeting one's responsibilities to the household can one be truly free.
In a way, this is similar to the previous entry I wrote on "Community vs. Self-Reliance" (that was the one with the math. I promise not to pull that out again). In a way, a household is a small community, and the community at large is made up of these households.
Which brings me back to people like myself: Do we count as households?
To elucidate the question: generally speaking, a household is based on a piece of land or geographic location that is owned or rented on a permanent basis. The members of that household work together to do what needs to be done to keep it functioning, and have their own sets of behaviors that are acceptable (for a more detailed explanation of how a household functions, see the Seidhman's Manifesto, available here. I don't agree with everything he says, but his household description is valid to me). It is, in short, a home.
I have no home, really. I travel all the time. When I do have an apartment, it is paid for by my employers. Even discounting the fact that I live with no one else, how can I consider myself a household?
I certainly don't belong in my parents' household. That would require being there more often than I am, as well as meeting responsibilities within their household. I don't really do that. Nor can I consider myself a part of any of the KOSH households. Most of the members are non-blood family to me, but that doesn't make me a member of their households either.
Perhaps I need to re-examine the function here. The bottom line, as it were: A household takes care of the responsibilities and needs of its members. Everything else is just gravy. Certainly things were different in times of the Sagas -- the idea of someone not living on a patch of land wasn't in their mindset. There were lots more things then that all households have in common. Today we are diversified, even to the point of someone like me, who has spent no more than eight months living in the same location in the past 5 years.
I alone am my household. I see to my responsibilities and my needs. I may have no house, no permanent dwelling location, yet I am always together with the other members of my household (being me, me, me and.... oh, that other guy... me). Someday I may join a larger household, but for now, this is me.
Does this make me a rabid individualist like I spoke against with regards to the Borg metaphor? Nope, not really. I'm willing to join another household if it were the right thing to do, but I'm not going to force myself into someone else's. That would be the true act of the rabid individualist -- pushing in where one is not needed, thereby adding to the burden of the entire household without consideration for what is best for them.
There. It took two attempts at writing it, but I arrived at an answer I can live with. Comments? You know what to do.
The sagas demonstrate to us that the basic element of heathen society has always been the household. This was the collection of blood and foster kin living on a specific piece of land. In Iceland, slaves could be considered extensions of the household as well. The individual is important only in his role as part of the household, and one's role in a household was demonstrated by responsibilities met within that household.
That's a hard thing for us moderns to accept, at least here in the States. We have grown up being taught the values of individual liberty. Our modern society hates the group and loves the individual. A perfect example of this: Star Trek. (Disclaimer: I don't consider myself a Trekkie at all, so any misrepresentations are my own fault for not really liking the shows in the first place. Except for Voyager, but only because I think the female captain was hot). On every one of the series barring the original, sooner or later there appears an enemy known as the Borg. They are a collective group that shares a group mind, and are horrible because of their lack of free will, as well as their tendency to "assimilate" other species into their own.
Why are they so horrible? The Borg violate our ideas of freedom as an individual quality. Granted, they are rather gruesome, and they don't offer a choice to other species before they are "assimilated." However, the underlying theme here is reminding us that individuality is more important than any sort of group dynamic.
A household doesn't function exactly like a Borg collective, of course. One doesn't give up one's thoughts or opinions upon joining or building a household. The trick is that only through doing one's part and meeting one's responsibilities to the household can one be truly free.
In a way, this is similar to the previous entry I wrote on "Community vs. Self-Reliance" (that was the one with the math. I promise not to pull that out again). In a way, a household is a small community, and the community at large is made up of these households.
Which brings me back to people like myself: Do we count as households?
To elucidate the question: generally speaking, a household is based on a piece of land or geographic location that is owned or rented on a permanent basis. The members of that household work together to do what needs to be done to keep it functioning, and have their own sets of behaviors that are acceptable (for a more detailed explanation of how a household functions, see the Seidhman's Manifesto, available here. I don't agree with everything he says, but his household description is valid to me). It is, in short, a home.
I have no home, really. I travel all the time. When I do have an apartment, it is paid for by my employers. Even discounting the fact that I live with no one else, how can I consider myself a household?
I certainly don't belong in my parents' household. That would require being there more often than I am, as well as meeting responsibilities within their household. I don't really do that. Nor can I consider myself a part of any of the KOSH households. Most of the members are non-blood family to me, but that doesn't make me a member of their households either.
Perhaps I need to re-examine the function here. The bottom line, as it were: A household takes care of the responsibilities and needs of its members. Everything else is just gravy. Certainly things were different in times of the Sagas -- the idea of someone not living on a patch of land wasn't in their mindset. There were lots more things then that all households have in common. Today we are diversified, even to the point of someone like me, who has spent no more than eight months living in the same location in the past 5 years.
I alone am my household. I see to my responsibilities and my needs. I may have no house, no permanent dwelling location, yet I am always together with the other members of my household (being me, me, me and.... oh, that other guy... me). Someday I may join a larger household, but for now, this is me.
Does this make me a rabid individualist like I spoke against with regards to the Borg metaphor? Nope, not really. I'm willing to join another household if it were the right thing to do, but I'm not going to force myself into someone else's. That would be the true act of the rabid individualist -- pushing in where one is not needed, thereby adding to the burden of the entire household without consideration for what is best for them.
There. It took two attempts at writing it, but I arrived at an answer I can live with. Comments? You know what to do.
Posted: Wed - March 24, 2004 at 02:30 PM