Funny how we all expect to agree about things that have happened.
When I was in Cuba last week seeing their perspective of the revolution there compared to my previous understanding of it was fascinating.
Last night I had a very different response to the film Dunkirk from many of my friends and I have enjoyed the resulting conversations about why. In helping me understand my reaction Patrick Lambe used the word "artifice" and Dave Snowden added "...the movie, which is of course an artefact so should demonstrate artifice ..."
Having done two stints of jury duty I am forever aware that even our own stories about what we think we saw happen in real life are artifice.
I am currently thoroughly enjoying Tim Garton Ash's book Free Speech much of which is about the challenge of agreeing to disagree in what he calls "cosmopolis" - the highly connected but fragmented world we live in where we are having to learn to deal with difference and often extremely polarised perspectives.
We fret about being in a "post truth" world. Was there ever a truly shared version of the truth? Can there ever be? Should we treat it all as artifice?