The Middle East Conflict

forum “2” – David Grossman: Individual Language and Mass LanguageIn Grossman’s essay “Individual Language and Mass Language” in Writing in the Dark it is important to think on such citations:“And perhaps, then, this is the great question that people living in this age must relentlessly ask themselves: In what state, at which moment, do I become part of the faceless crowd, ‘the masses’ ?” (79)“A good book – and there are not many, because literature too, of course, is subject to the seductions and obstacles of mass media – individualizes and extracts the single reader out of the masses. It gives him an opportunity to feel how spiritual contents, memories, and existential possibilities can float up and rise from within him, from unfamiliar places, and they are his alone. The fruits of his personality alone. The result of his most intimate refinements. And in the mass culture of daily life, in the overall pollution of our consciousness, it is so difficult for these soulful contents to emerge from the inner depths and be animated.” (83)“At its best, literature can be kind to us: it can slightly allay our sense of insult at the dehumanization that results from living in large, anonymous global societies. The insult of describing ourselves in coarse language, in clichés, in generalizations, and stereotypes. The result of our becoming – as Herbert Marcuse said – ‘one-dimensional man’.” (83-4)In light of these citations, what is of utmost importance in how Grossman is distinguishing between individual and mass language? Analyze and interpret this further in regard to at least one of the following ideas or issues: intimacy, consciousness, imagination, and nationalism.  In the context of your post, refer us to at least one citation from Grossman’s essay that further embellishes or illuminates your analysis and briefly interpret the connection and importance of your chosen citation. Finally, how is this problem of language entwined in the Middle East conflict?