What size is this phenomenon - the mask? We can discuss the mesh size and importance of many different plans; culturally exclusive use of the mask as a common denominator, historical events, private versus public use where the mask is used to change shape and personality. There is also reason to wonder at the phenomenon and to issue a position on the mask's existence and legitimacy in a modern society.
The mask is used to let the wearer be seen in another light, or in any case to express what you want to be, as one might wish you were: The vicious bear the asset mask, the good the evil, the old generation wear the youth him, the youth will appear and so you could go on. Similarly, the mask has historically been used for different things; Carnival mask was used, and still used to signal to everyone on just this one night of the year is equal - owner and slave have equal status, often even switch roles so that owns man waiter slave mask worn over the masked ball, where identity is concealed from the partner, and the question here must be whether we can recognize him if it is carrying on a mask? But first and foremost is the mask used in daily life where it can be used as a cloak to change one's personality. Examples of this use of the mask, we can find examples among many in the world of literature, the novel "American psycko" by the American writer Bret Easton Ellis whose protagonist, Patrick Bateman, using the proper functioning of outer life, where he works on Wall Street, moving in expensive clothes, and in general cultivates a carefully calculated style mask on a daily basis to hide his extremely dark side as the nocturnal and narcissistic serial killer. Here the mask is used, because society does not accept the person's home; the night bestial murderer who kills himself loose on society's losers: The homeless, prostitutes and drug addicts. It thus becomes necessary if existence must be maintained to create a mesh of lies. But here is the mask, however engrossing and impossible to put to the side. Lie collect liar and swallow this.
Because I believe that the use of masks in daily life is the biggest, is apparently linked to the fact that it is often an invisible mask. In all other cases, the mask itself, which is the cornerstone; carnival outside decorations and masks would only be a spectacular form of street disorder - if the demonstrators by the clearing of Ungdomshuset had worn costumes with big feathers, festive little dresses and colorful and glittering masks, had shocked and enough attention has been considerably smaller, and it might even be able to force a smile, masked ball without the mystical element would simply be a trivial dance with renowned partners, but the mask used in daily life have a more shady lives. The worn when something should be ousted, stored away or when something other than what you are, be made manageable. Lene Henningsen writes the text "Why is the mask so fascinating" about various topics concerning the mask: The mask is a weapon, a change of persona, a withdrawal or whether it has the more positive purpose to act as a human cocoon - a place where man could develop into something more beautiful and pure, like a butterfly perfect development of nasty and introspective caterpillar to a beautiful and colorful butterfly, a laboratory where human minds changed? The mask is in my eyes not a cocoon - so it has been determined. There rarely develop something beautiful in a human cocoon; isolation promotes only the isolates from isolation. Mask as a hiding place is not good. Should it be discovered in oblivion corner would not be a self is found, but the creature you have created for themselves and by themselves. The most natural, and indeed clean, a man is not wearing a mask: The newborn child or the wild animals bear mask.
The issue is the human person, the mask is an acquired characteristic, cultivate it through experience? I am inclined to see this on the mask. As a human subject line of defense, acting as a shield against other people. The human being is the basic principle of selfish and so cynical. Humans have purely mental has not changed since our origin small hundred thousand years ago, we are still in the same mental state as we were back then there were only two important things in life: survival and reproduction. The same two basic instincts that make human beings to what we are; driftsdyr. This is reflected in our cynicism, which in turn is merely a survival instinct. "Survival of the fittest" has Darwin's friend, Scot George Maxwell, once formulated - this is certainly also for the people and in all our ways. So where animals do not need the mask, it has other forms of armor and defense: The turtle with his mighty shield and thick skin, goat, with its graceful speed - but these defense methods are more directly oriented: The shield protects against the claws and beak, speed protects against minor Rapid hunters, but man's enemies are ourselves and our own species, and it is rare that we need armor or speed, the human damage being caused is of a different nature, evil, lies, deceit and psychological violence is the common human cargo. As I said before bears infant child does not mesh, but why is that? I can only see it in the extension of the child as such has no enemies. The mother must be enough to protect the child, give it food when it is hungry, put it to bed when tired and to put clothes on it when it freezes, and in addition, there are no natural hazards. Thus, the child, like the adults do not need protection. Child's mind and mental state is tabula rasa, a clean slate to be filled with impressions and expressions. The child looks at the world with fresh eyes and innocence. The experience is not the human competition is going on around it: The parents' dispute over the authority of the struggle for adoption, the abuses are waiting around the corner and all the other hardships a man must go through. I do think also that the mask is subject to experience what a newborn child is not carrying. Is this child grow up to near perfection, security, health, familial closeness and security, since the mask will only be a small and less significant part, but is harsh and brutal childhood, sexual abuse, beating and neglect, the mask may be the only defense it work will create. There will be a human cocoon, which will only lead to the creation of something worse, a human mentality Snow graduation.
But the mask is not necessarily used only as a defense. It may equally be used to attack, "a weapon" by Lene Henningsen puts it. The second of the aforementioned human instincts is to offspring in the world. And this must use a male mate, and here is the human struggle up again. But again, we differ significantly from the animals, we can not just get one she knows to be the largest feathered splendor with the most imaginative colors and pure muscle in exaggerated dimensions are not enough, there must be something else. And here comes the mask again into the picture. Carried to impress, and mostly to be impressed with anything the wearer of the mask is not already: The intellectual mesh that comes in a package deal: Horn glasses, turtleneck, pipe and visit Paludan, head mask which is to be steadfast even in the most rocking situations and to maintain an overview of unimaginable situations, the revolutionary young Che Guevara printed on the jersey, black hair and piercings, the good father figure whose personality is reflected in the care, good pension and a detached house from hell. But we are not pale to impress. We expect these properties of the "type", and redeemed they do not bother, we do not have a debate, do not want to vote for him, cheer the revolutionary or to get married with the man. This creates a pressure that weighs on everyone, an expectation that pressure can force the use of the mask - generate the conditional defense of human character as the mask is.
Lene Henningsen sees the mask as ineffective if it becomes an integral part of man and it is partly true. The mask as self-sustaining element becomes invalid, and such would Carnival mask not be exceptional if it were worn the year 364 other days, masked ball spell would be broken if it was customary to dance with the mask, so that way it is true. But the mask modifies only the form as soon as we move into the private human sphere. The mask as invisible object is still a mask, and the transformation is that it is unknown - perhaps even the medium itself. That power would be to be two places at once, targeting the usual meaning of the mask, the mask as a costume. But the mask is worn daily, there are still two sides, however, is the power here in that it functions as a mirror where the viewer sees it he is accustomed to seeing when the wearer looks at both sides.
But what role should the mask be in a community? And there is a livelihood for a living without masks? And the degree to which mask is acceptable? I will try to answer these three questions in reverse order. There are many different masks, the obvious is the physical masks that Carnival mask that radiates celebration, freedom and joy, make-up mask that covers more than one imperfect, minorities sometimes exaggerated ornamentation in national costume and the autonomous mask that hides the identity when it is convenient . These masks are not in my view such a right to kill - of course it would be utopia, if the mask completely be able to shirk, and all would be known by their home, all be equal, but we live now, even in a society where man will always fit themselves, and in some way to try to assimilate, and an equally large group will go the other way and differentiate themselves from the rest. The less obvious stitches are the stitches that dress when you want to change. It is difficult to generalize in this area, but when I see it as a human subject, it is difficult to prohibit or otherwise prevent. And while there is also a fascination in this maskebæring. Lene Henningsen calls it "... When you put the mask If we so civilized, I or one adds to the fear of discovery? ... Would it be to hold out? [the living without masks]. "fascination is the importance of the mask - and life without stitches, which also leads me to my next question: Can there be existence without masks? No - the mask is both human and historical condition: When the first humans "developed from monkeys consisted mask, as in monkeys, to be the biggest, the strongest and the most fearless, it was nothing we could be. And was not this, then you had to act in good faith, you set a facade. In our time is mask the human fortress, it is a condition for survival, just as it was for the cave man, the rules are simply amended. My last question, I sometimes let stand unanswered, since I can only answer for myself. The mask plays the role in society that are the subject of the human contact. If all wearing masks of the mask being and self-resistance value removed. But take the mask upper hand, and the wearer is unable to distinguish mask from the interior, it is a siding - we would rather not see too many Patrick Bateman's running around the streets. Society must make room for the mask, because society is not existing without it. But a society without masks would not be better, I can only guess. I do not think you can override human impulses in an attempt to create a utopian society. It's been tried before, but without success. For example, the communist regime of joint property. The human instinct is to own and rake-off. The error and failure of this form of society was reflected in the fact that corruption and human exploitation flourished. "I smile when I'm angry, I cheat and I lie" (Leonard Cohen). This quote by Leonard Cohen summarizes my whole point. Man is an operation being who is guided by survival instincts. This operations management enables us to clothe ourselves masks and lie when necessary, cheat when there is reason for it, and to falsify his feelings at the contradiction in that smile when anger flares in one. All these properties are created from human survival competition, a rat race which is in turn opskudt of our livelihood, and justifying it.
