"The human spirit tries to push itself forward without coming
to a perfect portrayal of its own freedom and animated shape, because
it must still remain confused and associated with what is other than itself."
Hegel, quoted in Stanzas by g. agamben
October 1, 2000
There is this about critique (of almost any kind) in conditions of general
prosperity and wealth: it seems like a continual whining and carping to
no good end, a yapping of some mongrel dog which knows no master and what
is more can not even master itself, just doomed to whimper and scurry
from shadow to shadow, in fearful dread of everything and hence needing
to bark at everything that moves.
So for some people plentitude is even more horrid than scarcity. leaving
nothing solid to push against. Which doesnt change anyones mind about
anything. Ones enemies simply go into hiding or into even deeper darker
more widespread conspiratorial shadows. Strangely enough, plenitude opens
up all spaces, even the negative, anti-spaces which prosperity thought
it was leaving behind in its own version of a golden age. (damn, how may
times has the human species gone through this process??)
And of course there are those of us ever vigilant for the (and this should
be apparent by now) ever-present miscreancy of the human race and always
more than willing to point out the problems. And more power to them (met
one at the gallery last night). But to me it is uncomfortably close to
being a cop in some way, its just that they feel god is on THEIR side
(well, dont we all??) rather than the side of power/prosperity. A loop
(or maybe circuitry), which always takes two parties to complete. (in
fact, I can feel someones finger beginning to point at me accusingly right
now
it feels good doesnt it? Its always good to have some solidity
in ones life
)
But actually Im a contrarian myself, to the extent of saying a pox on
all houses. Or at least there is a part of me that is, something obdurate
and obsidian, gleaming like an Aztec knife, something which I only occasionally
get a glimpse of, and even then only out of the corner of my eye. Sometimes
I think Ive made it up (but then I wonder: does that make it any less
hard and sharp? or even more unblinking and merciless than if it were
something found laying around itself like some long forgotten emotion
)
Perhaps my interest in the void, the uncanny, the forgotten but efficacious
past, the subterranean come from that spot
or maybe its an infatuation
with some of those who have come before who, for whatever reason, have
written and pushed that point, a point which is outside limitations while
strangely residing firmly inside the limits, a fuzzy rising wavering heat
wave between the human and its non-
.which mostly resemble each other
very closely.
At any reate, this Left / Right political thing seems to have very old
origins indeed, being seen, iin western culture anyway, with the whole
greek/roman/gnostic/christian thing. i would assume something similar
plays itself out in all cultures though. It seems to be a fundamental
human social property
perhaps the equivalent of slime mold societies
of centralization/dispersion-which is the genuine slime mold society?
both, neither. wheels within wheels.
10.13.00
One of the truisms of the age is that we are far beyond the point when
any one person could encompass all extant knowledge, as was presumably
the case in earlier centuries. It seems doubtful sometimes whether one
person can even keep up with one specialty now.
The question is: is it even necessary now? That is, to have a life of
any consequence: what does that mean now? We would like to pull some sort
of disconnect between wisdom, that thing/style/thought which seems closer
to grace and faith, and knowledge, that event which seems closer to the
machine, or at any rate, to a mode of explication which can be easily
routinized and formalized. Wisdom often seems to have the appearance of
a visitation (or emergence anyway) while knowledge seems marked by a plodding
accumulation. Knowledge seems marked and contained by something which
we could call a manual while wisdom seems to have a much more elusive
quality, one which can be pointed at, embodied, etc.
More positive forms of thought would deny such a demarcation, holding
that patient accumulation DOES lead to wisdom (hmmsort of a Calvinist
/ protestant work ethic there) that wisdom is just a comprehensive form
of knowledge which has reached the end of its gathering procedures and
then draws a conclusion.
well, perhaps it must be so. But that process of gathering in can be a
peculiarly elusive one, and only PARTLY amenable to protractor and compass
(perhaps we would part company with Spinoza here). There still seems to
be a microfine divide between act and deed, between thing encountered
and myself.
The somewhat good thing about being an artist is that part of the definition
(I take it) is that an artist can be an unconscious devourer of milleau,
if the stations can be tuned right (through analogy, metaphor, allegory,
or through some kind of slippage
commonly called fiction, fantasy,
even lying.)
10.14
A good thing about being an artist is that Truth is not necessarily part
of the equation
or rather, it is truth of a peculiar kind.
If there were ever an overused word, truth must be it, meaning something
different to almost everyone. When i hear someone use it, my mind begins
to fuzz over and I can hardly make sense of itand no more so than
when I use. And yet, strangely enough, we seem to suffer from a paucity
of something that we all know colloquially as truth
I take it to
mean then that truth is some sort of bonding agent, something we would
all recognize if we were to see it
oer actually, and here is the
rub, something that we would be FORCED to recognize, something along the
lines of a gravity, some quality imminent tohence somewhat invisibleand
inexorable, something that is not a matter of belief but of necessity.
There is nothing more cloying to certain human sensibilities than such
a (purported) quality, nothing that is more an affront to human freedom
(another flag waver) than Truth . (Notice that i dont say HUMAN Truth-such
a contingency couldnt possibly sit well with seekers after Truth.)
10.18
"interactivity is the equivalent of radioactivity. For interactivity
effects a kind of disintegration, a kind of rupture."
Paul Virilio interview
and
history progresses at the speed of its weapons systems
I really like that first quote
it reminds me of the time I received
an email from someone who had wandered into my journal and who complained
that I was inaccessable, that my email wasnt prominently displayed, and
that hey dude, interactivity is what the net is all about! I replied to
the person but of course I never got a reply back-so much for interactivity
as the truth of the web
.
But yes, I would agree with Virillio that this massive global exeriment
we are involved in as a species is corrosive.
And the fact that something is pleasurable is no guarantee at all that
something is not corrosivelook at the relation between sugar, growth
of bacterial and tooth decay. The only people copasetic about that are
the manufacturers of prosthetics and dentists. (One could even make the
point that much of pleasure IS about dissolution, a gradual or abrupt
cessation of personal consiousness whereas pain signals the arrival of
the all-too-personal and singular
or at least that appears to be
the phenomenology of the two.)
10.18
i pass occasionally, the new Fed Reserve building going up downtown. Its
brutalist form keeps expanding and getting filled in and in a very predicatable
way. No modernist cacophanies here (much less the dissolved and melted
forms of whatever seems to be on the way); nothing but the guarded reserve
of power, money, and its architectural instantiation ever since the greco-roman,
marble. Endurance and longevity, archaic slices of ante-fluvial earth
to designate the staying power of whoever builds the damn thing.
Its a form of megalomania that seems built into the species, and is probably
one of the reasons we got to the top of the food chain, pushing outward
into the regions of the all-too-flimsy and stacking it up, pressing on
it as long and as hard as possible-what better substance to represent
that compression of time and space (and power) than marble. And how interesting
that sand (silicon) seems to represent the antithesis of that, as one
of the most pleniful and broken substances
but also that each grain
is much like the other, thereby creating with multiplicity the same effect
that marble creates with unicity.
The facile thing to say at this point would be that the totalitarian can
arrive in many guises. But there seems something wrong in calling either
sand or marble totalitarian, even allegorically. The older religous view
of that was of grapes being turned into wine. The difference between the
singular and the general is not nearly as clear cut as some ideologues
(including myself when and inasmuch as i am) would posit. There is an
intoxication to the wine which the grape will never know.
Precisely the perennial fascination of fascism (from fascia, to bind together)
though. It seems almost insurmountable in our present form.
robert cheatham
|