In Reply to: Re: The essence of property? posted by Cindy Chan on November 19, 2001 at 07:57:27:
I believe that this points to the diversity of human experience. We do not value the same things, and what is an integral part in one man's identity forming process is completely irrelevant to another.
: : What are the implications of investing yourself into your property or your land. In several films, we see people defining themselves according to their land and on one hand it seems noble because they have an attachment to their surroundings. However, it also appears hopeless and selfish at times to identify so greatly with your property. Is property based on the memories shared on one's land or an attachment to one's ownings? From a less practical stand point, I think that a rigid self-identification from one's property can inhibit a person from concentrating on themselves as people, similar to the implications of a deep attachment to any material object.
: Actually, on the contrary, I believe that identifying with one's land is an integral part in the identity forming process. Working the land is a very personal connection. Your labor and heart and hopes are spent on the land so that in time a rooted connection takes place. Babies are born on it and families members die on it. Land in this sense is not seen as property of ownership by the inhabitants living on it. Morelike, it is seen as the foundation for all: identity, family, life, and happiness.
Post a Followup