Barry Brummett and a Football Game

My job as a sports radio producer and host has given me quite a few real life examples of some of Barry Brummett’s ideas from his essay “Some Implications of ‘Process’ or ‘Intersubjectivity’: Postmodern Rhetoric”. Within the essay, he writes about relativism in terms of reality and postmodernism, among other things, and why such ideas are important in the grand scheme of rhetorical theory.

Within his writings, he discusses the relationship between an observer and an object. Brummett writes that “[o]bservation cannot be value-free” and that being detached from an event “would mean no observation at all”. His argument is that “[o]bjects are not observed entirely in themselves and apart but as part of some background or context” and that “to be observed is to be different for the observer”.

Basically, the crux of the argument is that it is virtually impossible to come to a universal truth out of an event or a series of events because of the context that those events provide. The memories of the same event for two different people could be totally different, depending on the perspective and individual facets of memory of each person.

When discussing Clemson’s loss to Georgia Tech over the past three days, there have been a plethora of opinions bantered about concerning the defeat and the reasons why it occurred. The ideas run the gamut, from the defensive scheme to the running backs to offensive ineptitude and many, many more.

In reality, there is probably a combination of things that contributed to the loss, but each fan has his or her own interpretation of the events that preceded the eventual outcome. Therefore, a universally accepted truth could not possibly be reached. The truth, while complex, may never be fully understood because it requires more human analysis than is possible.

It is my job to officiate discussions like this one on a daily basis. This job becomes difficult because the opinions involved are coming from people who are not detached from the situation, as Brummett puts it. As a matter of fact, there is such a sense of attachment that emotion often runs rampant and can pollute facts that could lead to a more salient resolution.

I have my own interpretation of events, but my viewpoint is just that: an interpretation of something that happened under the universal rules and laws of existence. How we interact with these rules and laws directly reflects the story we tell about a game or any other event where perspective is necessary for understanding.