Abstracting consists of the ability to recognize the simplest essence of an object or subject, and to distill it down to its core nature.
Perhaps the most well-known abstraction made with regards to the study of history is the one referred to in the patterning exercise, but simplified here to state, ‘History repeats itself.’ This condenses all the complexity and perceived differences taken with regard to the study of history. However, I would like to use one that is more rich and descriptive, and gets to the basic nature, the essence of an idea in few words. It is Churchill’s description of the Soviet Union as: ‘… a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma;…’ This quote itself does not pretend to have an answer, and it leaves itself open to interpretation. Yet it fundamentally describes Russia and the difficulty that outsiders have in understanding her and accurately represents the words of Root-Berstein; ‘…(abstraction) is a process beginning with reality and using some tool to pare away the excess to reveal a critical, often surprising, essence. It is the inexact, imperfect nature of the analogy that allows it to bridge the known and the unknown in the first place. Analogies, as imperfect correspondences presumed in spite of difference, help us make the leap from existing knowledge to new worlds of understanding that no other mental tool allows.’ (p.143) This is what Churchill’s description does, it gets to the essence of Russia’s inscrutability, that what you see immediately may not be the whole story. The abstractions that I have chosen both come from Russian literature and tradition and represent this impenetrability. The first are Matryoshka dolls; these small wooden dolls, each of which conceals progressively smaller ones, implicitly acknowledge the impenetrability of Russian culture; that which is seen conceals the remainder. |
The second is a poem by the author Yevgeny Yevtushenko, who was a one of Russia’s best-known poets in the 50s and 60s;
Give me a mystery - just a plain and simple one - a mystery which is diffidence and silence, a slim little bare-foot mystery: give me a mystery - just one! - Yevgeny Yevtushenko (b. 1933). "Mysteries," st. 10 (1960), trans. by Dimitri Obolensky (1965).
This poem seeks the antithesis of Russia, which is anything but plain, simple, diffident or silent. It tries to convey his desire for simplicity, which completely underlines the fact that in the Soviet Union/Russia, nothing is ever simple or straightforward.
Abstracting, and analogizing, are important for leaders as it allows them to break down complex events and ideas into more basic, easy to understand concepts that can be to sold to the public. It lets them eliminate all the chatter and focus on a core idea in very complex situations so as to reach decisions more quickly (‘containment’, the need to check the spread of Communism, required that we help Vietnam.) However, this can have dangerous ramifications if decision makers’ abstracting is inaccurate, causing them to focus just on similarities, while the actual essence is different (again, the belief in the Communist ‘monolith,’ that all communist regimes are the same, practically predicated that the US engage in Vietnam when the reality was quite different.) Many popular movements and political campaigns also resort to abstracting in order to provide non-specific ‘vision,’ thereby strengthening their image as leaders but also allowing for enough vagueness so that people can choose to interpret the idea in the way that best suits them. Martin Luther King Jr. in his ‘I have a Dream’ speech masterfully used both abstract ideas (the ‘dream’) and analogies (the Declarations of Independence’s promises as a ‘check’ or ‘promissory note’) to argue for equality and racial harmony,
(click here for the link to King's speech http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smEqnnklfYs);
while Obama’s ‘Change we can believe in’ was completely abstract. What change? How? Yet it was persuasive and successful.
Now, for a present day analogy of Churchill’s quote…the TURDUCKEN!! It’s a chicken, inside a duck, inside a turkey.
Give me a mystery - just a plain and simple one - a mystery which is diffidence and silence, a slim little bare-foot mystery: give me a mystery - just one! - Yevgeny Yevtushenko (b. 1933). "Mysteries," st. 10 (1960), trans. by Dimitri Obolensky (1965).
This poem seeks the antithesis of Russia, which is anything but plain, simple, diffident or silent. It tries to convey his desire for simplicity, which completely underlines the fact that in the Soviet Union/Russia, nothing is ever simple or straightforward.
Abstracting, and analogizing, are important for leaders as it allows them to break down complex events and ideas into more basic, easy to understand concepts that can be to sold to the public. It lets them eliminate all the chatter and focus on a core idea in very complex situations so as to reach decisions more quickly (‘containment’, the need to check the spread of Communism, required that we help Vietnam.) However, this can have dangerous ramifications if decision makers’ abstracting is inaccurate, causing them to focus just on similarities, while the actual essence is different (again, the belief in the Communist ‘monolith,’ that all communist regimes are the same, practically predicated that the US engage in Vietnam when the reality was quite different.) Many popular movements and political campaigns also resort to abstracting in order to provide non-specific ‘vision,’ thereby strengthening their image as leaders but also allowing for enough vagueness so that people can choose to interpret the idea in the way that best suits them. Martin Luther King Jr. in his ‘I have a Dream’ speech masterfully used both abstract ideas (the ‘dream’) and analogies (the Declarations of Independence’s promises as a ‘check’ or ‘promissory note’) to argue for equality and racial harmony,
(click here for the link to King's speech http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smEqnnklfYs);
while Obama’s ‘Change we can believe in’ was completely abstract. What change? How? Yet it was persuasive and successful.
Now, for a present day analogy of Churchill’s quote…the TURDUCKEN!! It’s a chicken, inside a duck, inside a turkey.