Old Schoolwork

I wrote a paper in Journalism school titled: "McLuhan and Politics: A Technological Argument for Political Change."

I just re-read it. I have no idea what I was trying to say. Was it so poorly written? (probably). Or is it so context-dependent (the class, the lectures, the bias of the Professor, the readings) that as a school-paper one doesn't expect it to make sense decontextualised? That has never occurred to me before. The Professor said he found it interesting. He gave it 82% (whatever that means).

But it is entirely useless as a piece to reflect upon McLuhan, the medium of Television and the political process in Canada. And that's too bad, because I think there is a good paper to be written on that. Voter turn-out is becoming dismal here, and according to McLuhan, that is to be expected. But I can't remember exactly why, nor does the paper help me.

So, I'm tossing it along with notes and papers and letters arguing against a quota based Affirmative Action policy, notes and assignments on Universal Design, sheets and sheets of paper on drafting principles and procedures, 100's of 5x7 index cards cataloguing songs for Aerobic work-outs and floor exercises, records of work for payment as a freelance broadcaster for CBC radio, and even material on how to write a resume and find a job.

Yes, all of that, in one box emptied today.

Am I freer, now? Have I broken the shackles of my past (if they are shackles) so that now I'm freer to create myself in some new way, beyond the bonds and boundaries the past would determine me to be?
Bosh.

It's isn't the past of 15-20 years ago which shackles me, it's yesterday and the day before. It's the stuff upstairs, not down.