book blog 2

So... While reading this book, I've already mentioned the fact that it was as much
biograohical as it was autobiographical, I began to ponder the idea of group biography
and where the self is located in such a method of analysis, I've already mentioned the fact
that it was as much biograohical as it was autobiographical. While it is evident that
within each page there happens to be a piece of autobiographical information usually
presented in the form of 'Name:what this particular person remembers about this topic' I
can't help but affirm that this book is just as much bio as it is autobio. The self lies
within a little phrase that is enclosed by phrases about someone else that is surrounded
by a story of a group of people. Or maybe, an idea that I find interesting, the self
is the group and, as with all of society, without those around us we, as a the self, is
nothing. I mean if you really thik about it. Any of the members of Monty Python could be
an absolute nothing without the others, living in a cardboard box without a real story to
tell. While I am refering to famous people and their potential to not become famous, I am
also refering to the idea that any single person, based on the theory of nurture over nature,
is a product of their socity so that their story is constantly interlinked with the story of
everyone else. I guess this might border along the lines of our discussion on biogaphy vs.
autobiography