juneliceKnowledge is best described as a facilitator, a vital engine on the media literacy offense, facilitating the flashy scoring of Understanding. Knowledge on its own has little value: anyone who's gone through the school system can tell you that the worst courses are the ones where the terminal bouts don't test comprehension of the material, but your ability to regurgitate knowledge. Knowledge cannot be mastered--it can't even be improved upon--it can only be accumulated. Just like a good pass-first player: knowledge may be best conceptualized as a key, but only understanding makes up wondrous room on the other side, with its bounties of complex analyses, rich interpretations and observations in the labyrinthine, ever-shifting realm of perception. If you're a borderline narcissist like me, there is no worse feeling than being knowledge checked by someone, who then feels they've gotten a fastpass ticket to believing they are smarter than you. It's like losing RPS to someone in a Fighting Game because you don't know how to throw the figurative paper (perhaps because I'm a tad preoccupied getting literal paper), but without knowledge we would never touch the feeling of toxic euphoria in learning that check and leaving them in the dust forever. Of course you should be happy to find a challenge and learn new things from your friends, rather than tipping into neurosis at the sight of someone with a higher power level than you. For the media connoisseur, knowledge exposes us as Gokus and Vegetas. If you're a Goku, little is more exciting than the great unknown. If you're a Vegeta, nothing can make you hate yourself more. For those highs and lows, knowledge earns a seven, but not the video essayist's half-dozen, rather the mark of a truly polarizing, divisive concept.
No comments yet
Sign in to comment.