Thursday, October 10, 2013

"The Function of Guilt in Happiness"

This essay turned out more autobiographical than I hoped, but it at least opened up some connections I've been struggling to articulate. Taking optimism as a chief virtue, we must nevertheless address all the pain and suffering in existence, including our complicit part, and the feeling of guilt that is also a part of life.

 

daniel

 

The Function of Guilt in Happiness

 

                Never fret: be practical. We foolishly envy the lives of others, seeing the good missing the bad. We ourselves would be simply happy. Ever optimistic, we would focus on the positive emotions, and disregard the negative. We would be grateful, not resentful; we would love, not hate; we would be kind, not cruel; we would hope, not dread. We tell ourselves to be positive. Yet we can’t always be positive. And so we feel guilty, guilty that part of us hates these people we have to work with, hates the boss, hates the neighbor, hates that random stranger who gave you the edgy look. You feel guilt, and then feel guilty for feeling guilt. You are instructed by society to “seek happiness,” you are commanded to “enjoy,” but you find yourself unable to enjoy life. Something must be wrong with you. You are anxious. You get headaches. Your stomach hurts. Is it psychosomatic? Is it all in your head? Why can’t you seem to do the things you think you should? Is something wrong with you? Perhaps a fundamental fault? Perhaps you are by nature sinful? Can religion cure your sickened soul?

                A person pondering such thoughts considers himself to be in a moral crisis, though his problem may be the simpler problem of emotional hygiene. The heart is round: the objects of our attention must be approached with many ideas, ideas charged with a variety of emotions. Guilt, as I’ve said before, is self-disapproval, whereas pride is self-approval; they are internal feelings, the self in relationship to himself. Socially, when we meet public disapproval, we feel shamed, and if we meet public approval, we feel honored: honor and shame are public, guilt and pride are private. The use and function of guilt, however, is more subtle than the hysterics of a moral crisis. Guilt is a subtle all-pervasive emotion, just like all the others, and must be worked into daily processing and regular expressions.

                After all, every cell in your body at this moment is producing some waste. Slowly, that waste is building up, and your body will excrete it. Though in polite society you will speak of that as little as necessary, you excrete as every noble man in existence also excreted, as every saint, as every philosopher, as every divine man and god man. By the principle of dignification, there is nothing wrong with excreting, but as a matter of personal hygiene, we feel a sense of shame on the subject. The shame is not personal, it is pragmatic, and built also into our instincts. So it is with guilt. We don’t mind that a man exhales, but when he exhales in our face, we find him rude. A person burdened by guilt and out of desperation aching to confess upsets our taste. He disgusts us. We all have to vomit at times, but we try to seek out a bathroom. What then is the function of guilt in a happy life?

                Guilt is a place holder a negative space. Though aggression is also called a negative emotion, aggressive affects build around buried images of violence: murder or dismemberment. What then are the deep images of guilt? Guilt is primarily based on a sort of theft, or using something one has no proper ownership of. We feel it as the anxiety of an empty space. Guilt is a place to move possibilities, to do a thing, and apologize for it, to become immune from punishment. One pays his way through tokens of guilt. Today in all its immediacy seems all, so we borrow from tomorrow, and later live with a debt that we took from others, took from the world, what we owe them back. By onus they own us.

                The guiltiest person is the most embedded, has the most groups pulling on his resources in mutually exclusive directions. Pride and integrity, in counteraction, would repay with violence, would deny that energy to but a few who tended in the same direction as his general sum.

                For those institutions built especially on this emotion, such as forms of Christianity, saturating a community with the “good news” that the world is damned, until echoing voices of those who assent can be taken as if it were the nagging of God, can lead a few of the more desperate types into a moral crisis, a breakdown of guilt. When you’ve got a hammer, all problems look like nails, the old adage tells us; if you’re a Christian, all problems look like sin – the one illness the aching of an unrepentant heart.

                But for a full sense of the perfidious, the knowing no-saying spirit, he would ask how to say yes to guilt, to optimize it, to set it to work. We ask, what is real? What is secondary? A choice is necessary. Real is what we take as real, what we can take as real. The real is in our lived experience, and the interpretation is the stories we hear that correspond to them. What is real in our guilt? What can be built from guilt?

                In any relationship, we sense in others what they need and what we need from them. The woman has guilt, perhaps guilt she won’t admit to herself. She wants to be punished. This man is cruel, though he thinks he is quite nice. He feels an occult attraction to her. They fall in love. Our stories fall together and we interpret for each other. We take on roles, rather than expressing pure personality, because all relationships are a negotiation between expression and expectation.

                Our attitude is transparent enough, though we hide our shames and guilts. Attitude is a propensity to act; it informs our character, and our character is in our stance. Image shows attitude. We can accurately stereotype from a mere snapshot. And so in matters of religion and in matters of love, we align ourselves to be received into stories that can use our energies, can plug into our hearts and take our hopes, fears, guilts, and process them for us, giving us in turn what we need. Religious coordinates may be used for aesthetic ends. Art does the same. The intellectual does in art what the common people do in church. In either case, ritual is an initiation into an attitude. By the invisible hand of social pressure, we fall, as if by grace, into our proper place. Social tensions are the stuff of poetic beauty. We make endless divinations into the secrets of perfect strangers. We know what we are after. Hints of secrecy, privacy, mystery, marvel, power, silence, guilt, and excitement flash in an instant across our eyes.

                While the great organs of the nation perpetuate endless social processing, the processing of trauma into power, and this through talk shows, book deals, news, television, stand up comedy, we each meanwhile are a social processor, taking in the world substance, and rendering back with a personal touch added. We add a swerve, a small difference that makes all the difference.

                Art epitomizes this process; art simplifies the complexities of life, makes them enjoyable and comprehensible. Literary criticism is the study of life. What do these stories do with their figures but distinguish what is all mushed together in daily life? The villain distances the evil from the heart of the hero. Different voices are safety valves. This man says that unpopular thing that needs to be said just to be shouted down. Had he not said it, we would be inwardly oppressed by our secret share therein. This is how our parents become principles, tones of authority that add to the many voices we take for moral authority in our psychic eco-system. “Nothing less than the mightiest original non-subordinated soul has ever really, gloriously led or can ever lead,” perhaps, but we must master these internalized forces, we must convert the gods and God to our own alter. We must know our heart and master our face.

                We distrust strangers. Yet we are chided to be polite, and so we feel guilty for our mistrust. These synaptic gaps between people, the unsaid and the insinuated, collude towards a fuller collective consciousness, a society that itself has a personality. Negatives, when shared, become positive. We share a collective guilt. That negativity becomes the empty slot of a slot puzzle; having a negation, we have space to move.

                Love is guilt, a shared conspiracy, an “us versus the world” by which individual pride is dissolved and absorbed into the skin of a group pride. Eros’ arrow pierces the heart of pride. Sex is the doing and undoing of greatness. When my heart gets into a form, and wants to execute a certain operation, it aligns whoever contingently is nearby into the posture of cooperation. As fantasies and imagination differentiate energy into motives, into directions of action, these various roles and relationships I take on, these various masks I wear, each to the unique group I play in, constellate around me and express different feelings, while I slowly charge myself for grand expressions.

                Afterwards, I am grateful that I did it and grateful I am done. We look back at periods of life and shudder at how intolerable it would be to return to them. But at the time they were tolerable. The intolerability grew more pronounced over time. We lead many lives in this lifetime, we reincarnate after every great event – the college years, the first job, marriage and so forth. The next big thing frees us of the excesses of the last. And thus we build an alter, something that works as an alter, and purify ourselves for using that alter. To lead a perfect life is to align habits to values and strive and err towards greatness. Ama grows. All the universe grows, trips, falls, stands again, walks proudly onwards.

                And to Ama, the highest love in our life, when we are in a guilt and away from that love, or think we are, we might cry out “I miss you with my guts! I am eager for you always! Even pain from you is savored. I take all you give and adore you for it. I press for your full as truth lips over mine.”

                The spiral of the heart has a bit of excess. That is how it falls into grace, falls farther outwards, gaining territory, swelling in power and pride. In this, the guilt of falling short, of failing to do what we really could never have done in the first place, is structural, is built into our path of increase. A necessary function. “Guilt is an illness in the way pregnancy is an illness.” Ama in all this, in every degree, never rejects any part of us.

*

                Guilt, in itself, as a substance, is neither moral nor immoral. It is a fact of physiology, a fact of sociology, a relationship, ultimately, regarding what is owed. How we handle our guilt is the moral question. The majorly depressed man feels a preponderance of guilt; feels so utterly weighed down by it he might suffocate, though he has committed no crime in particular. His virtue is not in his having or not having guilt, but in what methods he uses to process the feeling, to relieve himself of its burden, to turn it into a motivation for a greater good. Virtue, properly, is creative, not in what we are given, but in how we use what we are given; not what we feel, but how we use what we feel. Heaven is the image of what we create. Each man is his own reward. We conceive someone star-crossed since birth, who managed to make his poor fate, and perhaps that of his neighbors, a degree less bleak, as being more divine than the man who was given all -- great genes, great family, great wealth -- who did nothing to increase the stock, nothing to add to it. A man is ultimately answerable to himself, not the rationalizing ego, but the deeper self.

                Best then to keep both eyes open when plumbing one’s memories. Best to appraise one's real limits, to know one’s actual heft and swing. Limitations can be built upon so far as they are known; so far as they are not known, they may trip us in the dark.

                Our childhood shames and guilts persist even if as adults we know better. I can still feel the fury that inspired my careful revenge against my mother; as a young child, I could not call her names, or shout, or express violence. So I colored her a picture, and upon presenting it to her, tore it to pieces. The childish gesture is transferrable. The logic of it applies as well to adults, is a strategy. Everything is everything: the logosphere of pure ideas fills out the substance of the mythosphere of archetypal stories, and those stories live through all we do.

                I left parochial school in the sixth grade after the teacher questioned why I did not go to the Lutheran church as did the other students; my parents felt the slight, and moved me to a public school. The one friend to keep my acquaintance was Matt, a recently made friend; his parents lamented my move, as I was Matt's first friend, so I kept on with him as a penpal. I became obsessed with collecting comic book cards, and Matt started collecting them too. I had decided in the 3rd grade to be a writer, and was trying to write a novel; Matt attempted to write one too. When a few years later my parents moved us out of state, Matt gifted me all his comic cards. I felt burdened by this. I felt I owed him. I promised to make him a copy of my first book, when it was completed, a catalog of all the monsters ever imagined in folklore and myth (an ambitious project I never finished). I did not understand his nonchalance in the gift; I felt indebted to him. Only much later did I figure out that the cards meant nothing to him, and that he collected them to be my friend.

                Maturity opens the eyes. We begin to remember the queer riddles of our youth, to ponder at mom and dad's divorce, whose mysterious cause was always deferred to "when you are older," and, when you are older, politely minimized. Enough experience and reflection gives the divination of the ancient crisis, and we intuit the situation. If I feel a pang of guilt for rejecting the religion of my parents, the religion also of my remarried parents, if I feel abashed to admit to my father that I conceive of the divine as our mother, and he reproaches himself for not being their for me as a boy, I would scold him for this: I don't want to pity him. I'd like, if I can, to find more to be proud of. If he feels responsible for the damnation of my immortal soul, how can I but feel guilty for his guilt? Or if my mother-in-law feels God is punishing her by giving her a mentally-disabled granddaughter, or my (step) father laments that I no longer believe in God, to whom I may pray, to heal my daughter, must I not resort to my core virtue of independence, and disown these interpretations and insinuations, while not yet rebuking their imposture?

                These curves of logic knit me close to my own children, that unlike my father I will remain by my three children at all costs, that though my mother failed to understand my own mental problems, I would loyally support my daughter’s -- loyalty as an indirect spite, as a moral ascendency to those who I feel wronged me -- all are a sort of knitting of commitment, but not strong enough to secure the caprices of my heart. There had to be a primordial love for my children in and of themselves, that held me in place, and an unthinkably oppressive guilt, in potential, if ever I forsook them.

                Yet I never warmed to duty, I felt duty to be hateful, unless it were redeemed by creative adaptation. The moral guidance of my (step) dad, in how my brothers and I were to play video games -- we were not allowed to watch each other play lest we figured out the secrets of the game, and of course "strategy books" were hateful, not to be touched, -- intensified my sense of independent motive, the emotional independence my mother said the divorce bequeathed on me so that I no longer played with the other children, but did my own thing, and with such intensity that the other kids grew curious, and asked to do the same, to seek out insects in the ditch, and so forth. That I could not own a thing unless I created it, could not use a thing unless it were my own, became my guiding light. The guilt of quoting, of boasting of something outside of myself, of something I was merely a part of, I could not do. What I was to become would use these things, digest them, process them, bring them to a living system. My happiness was through them, and so I affirm them all, and have no reproach for what allowed me.

                My love of Greek myths in sixth grade, which aimed to write a book in which the Olympians were dethroned by the monsters – the chimera, the Cerberus, the Medusa -- who rallied together at their injustice, perhaps expressed my sense of being something monstrous, and hence abandoned. Such indirect pivoting of affects is another name for life and love. And while of course my sexual maturation involved many shames and guilts as a necessary part of maturation, it was an abiding sense of being unlovable -- romantically so -- that kept me shy and introverted, and safe to develop without any thing pressing my impressibility.

                The full release from the situatedness came with manic bliss, the sense of grandiosity, in which I identified with Ama, the ever-loving All -- which characterized the strongest experience of my life. This feeling of original innocence, of eternal innocence, the reminder of that original sense of life I had held all those years, was my great spiritual awakening. It did not negate guilt, for when that returned, I was able to subordinate it to happiness. I had discovered my unshakable center, and would never forget it.

 

                Pride is an honest appraisal of our strengths, humility an honest appraisal of our weaknesses; guilt is the opposite of pride, a pain in our faults, not to appraise them, but to suffer them. Yet moral sermons attempt to make the proud feel guilty of their pride, and the guilty to pride that they are guilty. One is to boast in God what a sinner he is. A scapegoat is meant to take on our guilt, rituals are conferred. Those are so many social conduits, the internet of expression, not the self alone. What we are to ourselves we forget in the world; so many roles do we wear, so many expectations do we confront, that the inner voice dims. We are impressed with the world, yet ashamed to steal its ideas. We cannot be like the Christian who would damn the world to save himself. We confront an eternity of self-knowledge. The time for reflection, to be alone with one’s speech, in his writing, to be alone in his thoughts, in thinking, to be alone in his feelings, in music, to meditate through the tools of meditation – reading, music, walking, physical exertion, sitting, mirror meditating – bring him before the mirror of Lissidy, that deepest of lovers who protects our central being by showing us the things we have blinded ourselves to. This self-knowledge requires the courage of Ovath, the self-penetrating God, allfather, who to discover arcane knowledge, penetrates himself with the spear of penetration, the gaze of his one eye, the anxiety of world wisdom, which in its inception gives us release.

 

                Our virtues include the circle of practicality, pragmatism, living our daily life, and that requires the right foot of optimization, making the most of what we are given. If we feel rotten with self-doubt, then know that the rotten fruit fertilizes the seed. Internal conflict is felt as guilt. But if we ignore the inner conflict it will approach us externally as world conflict. Maturation is through this, through the intensification and balance of individualism against integration into society, the wisdom, not as the East has it, to escape the world, but as Nietzsche’s Zarathustra has it, to go to the mountain, and then return to the world, to interrelate the two. We must theologize the secular, secularize the theological.

                We seek to fail and need to fail, to earn our bragging rights. Attitude precedes action: we feel guilty before the deed. What matters is how we use this guilt. The deeper emotions insulate themselves in surface emotions. Anger is the door of your heart. We are distant until you open up with anger – before sorrow, before joy – such is my beloved to me.

                We say that duty is love protecting itself. Love commits, to ensure the joy of contact can be sustained. Yet in this identity, that love is duty, we yet have the split that love is not duty, that we feel the ache of duty and the wane of love. The use of guilt is to balance quantas of power between them, to move motivation from one to the other. The give-and-take of love is the guilt of owing kindness, just as we feel the pinch of guilt if we interrupt the give-and-take of conversation. Guilt is a place holder. Its use is in placing us.

 

                When the lawyer Leonard Kerpelman took on the case of Murray O’Hair and her son, William Murray, who was bullied in high school for excusing himself from school prayer, a sense of public moral outrage against Kerpelman was inevitable. He was, however, a curmudgeon, and near the end of his career was jailed for contempt of court for being "so obnoxious that the dignity of the court and the orderly administration of justice was castrated." You have to have that front to keep socially imposed guilt at bay. Nevertheless, the hatemail against him was such that he felt he needed to clear the air with comedic deflation, writing, “Those who expressed fear for my immortal soul: Don't worry yourselves. I have been a lawyer too long to be eligible for salvation anyway, though when I arrive at the celestial conference on the matter, I think I may be able to talk myself out of whatever difficulties I am in at the time."

                The moral implications of being the boy who changed school prayer, for Madalyn O’Hair’s son, might have contributed to his later conversion to Christianity, after which he vigorously campaigned to reintroduce school prayer into schools, claiming that the courts had since misused the precedent the Supreme Court had set. When William Murray converted, his mother said, “One could call this a postnatal abortion on the part of a mother, I guess; I repudiate him entirely and completely for now and all times ... he is beyond human forgiveness.”

                Meanwhile, she adopted his teenage daughter, and with her other son, Jon Murray, the three of them were the center of American Atheists, a group she founded to protect the rights of nonbelievers. They would be kidnapped, with the secret collusion of her son Jon Murray, by three men, who robbed them and brutally murdered them. One of them was a previous worker for American Atheists, whom Madalyn had humiliated in a public newsletter, saying that he had beaten and urinated on his own mother. The indirect reference to her own son, the transference of guilt, is obvious.

                The scenario reads like fiction, but upon a cursory glance suggests some counters of guilt and its transference into a more stable emotion. The solidifying of unstable emotions (pain) into controlled emotions (pleasure), requires setting up the symbols and actions that can convert emotion into emotion. For some, anger is more controllable than sadness, arrogance more controllable than isolation.

                Let’s say there is something in you that wants to scar the face of beauty, the souls of those who shine. How could we in the inner of our garden permit such rueful intelligence and critical superiority amidst these subtle things, these threaders that gossamer the wind? Such externalized conversions of frustration, such projections of guilt, are so many levers and converters of inner imbalance. A little alcohol, a little sex, a lot of extra sleep, puts you were you belong again. The artificial controls do not belong to the situation, they balance it. Somehow, we must express our criminality and punish it. We identify with the villains of the news, if only in appraising them, and then immediately denounce them in disgust. We need the narcotic of endless stories to balance the drone of our own.

                After all, sorting out part from part requires disowning things we love, breaking away from proximities, betraying intimacies, for the greater gain of autonomy. A thing isn’t perfect until it has been broken and repaired. A marriage isn’t perfect until it has spiritually divorced. The breaking point known, it can be predicted, counted upon, depended in -- no longer feared, but respected.

                We come to negate negation, untie the knot, unstitch the tensions. We choose friends who are better than us, but also friends who are worse than us, whose vices keep our own vices in check. One cannot pity without a sense of superiority, and for that sense of superiority, some will pity anything. Yet we in ourselves know extremes.

                An affect rises and chokes us. The knot can be broken with drugs or violence – and criminal violence is a form of self-therapy, the conversion of anxiety into guilt. In this, indiscretion is indirectly sought out deliberately to stand as a symbol and converter. How to bring a mood to its crisis, it’s unstable point? How to exaggerate? The pented seeks expression. No one ever regretted doing their best, and even dreadful deeds have a sublime austerity if they fully express a meaning. The depression impotent to act seeks perpetual frustration to build its energy reserves. Depression needs pain. We suppress impulses with levers, actions with words, words with expressions. We put one emotion in place of the other. In this, pain is progress. To be able to feel a pain is to admit we have it, to realize we’ve been suffering all along. The therapist knows he must address the hate first, the sadness later.

                We must deconstruct our emotional channels to rewire them. We must change the space and time on a turgid pain to depressurize it. We seek controlled situations to do it right. Self-harm is an attempt at self-expression. We seek to open the heart to flow again. Violence cures depression. For the blocked affect deadens the system. Where feeling has become numb only extremes can reach.

                In this, humor is indirect aggression. If it is too direct, too angry, we need rage to be able to laugh. We have to be situated to be able to laugh at a joke. Man having no natural food must convert the world into food. Though we all with our tongues desire to speak, we must invent a language able to express these experiences and the moods they build. We need to construct an inner poetry. To do something one would normally feel too guilty to do, he must build recalcitrance.

                This too fits in with love. Guilt is part of love, part of happiness. Love is an abbreviation for a complicated set of emotions. The problems in life are where the world resists. What is matter but resistance? We must own our place in history, pay debts we never made, as the old is digested and incorporated into the womb of the new.

                In all this, sensitivity must be cultivated, and what we find pleasure in must first hurt us, just as upstanding pride grows from the itch of guilt, and the persistent faith comes from the mouth of doubt. We commit crimes because we feel guilt. Punishment is more endurable than guilt, guilt more endurable than anxiety, and anxiety more endurable than panic. In the ecosystem of the heart, in the conversion of each to each, as the emotions feed on each other, what matters is optimization, making the most of what we have, what matters is practicality, doing what we can, not what we can’t.

 

                A term is opened when it is set in opposition -- twice. Pride and humility versus pride and guilt. This loosen the terms and makes them limber. The flowing of concepts and oppositions are more curious than dogma suggests. The greatest evils are done in the name of goodness.

                When we take passion to be the opposite of duty, as play is the opposite of work, we must remember a pure play divorced from necessity is yet necessary to develop the freedom of power. Freedom is responsible as obedience is not. The child’s toy is the man’s tool: play is preparation.

                Mastering a system and knowing its exploits requires holding a gestalt, an all-view, a metaphor that works like a map. The symbols we revere, religious or otherwise, are like computer chips that process emotions for us. We provide the affects, they direct them. You have to play at the rules to know the exploits. Playing a system means studying it obediently until you know how to inside and out. The game of life is mastered by strategy, by a love of free and disciplined play. With guilt as a negative space, the feeling of not owning what one uses, one can master it as just one more move, one which converted is of the heart substance, of creativity itself.

                Pride is such that we would feel guilty if our virtues were untrue. The limit of our joy in ourselves is in truth: our self-image requires implicit guilt. In this, Sovf Lux, the Holy Spirit, or language itself, envelops all, she is the enveloper as Ovath is the penetrator, and frees possibility with the tones of ache for growth. We need an immersion in language to dissolve our experiences. The sympathy of Sovf Lux and the pride of Ovath balance each other. Yet it is Lissidy who shows us secrets.

*

                Secrets tell. The body is a tongue of expression, every manner and tension publishes our being, but in such a script that some read this part, others that, but nobody all. Attitude is propensity, is the habitual feelings that inspire the muscles and nerves, the character of our body. There is a gap, nevertheless, between feeling and expression, a negative space, a space of freedom, which allows a swerve, a difference, the emergence of novelty in a closed system. We are bound by our bodies, and any credible view of eternity, of an afterlife, must consider the spirit as basically embodied, as being a finer substance, being, in fact, material. Certainly our brains correspond to our minds, and not only our brains, but our whole expressive organism.

                Metabolism is style. The essence of style is in tone and cadence. Cadence is rhythm, the metabolism of our life, and our metabolism must digest all our experiences and remember them in the knit and nerve of the body and sinew. When we get sick, we have a chance for reflection: pain focuses on itself. Our illness is our monastery. Whatever our infirmity, it is a tower of isolation by which our voice to ourselves grows credible. Suffering maketh profound.

                These moods have their moments; we can, on the day of our brother’s death, still manage, perhaps, to laugh, or smile, though the overall tone is despondency. A mood is a congealed emotion, a prolonged gesture. We can imagine the affect tone rising and falling like a curve in calculus, with the emotion of any given moment being “up or down” in comparison to that baseline, but the baseline rising and falling over months. Different moods are different situations by which we process experience. Each mood its use, every feeling the womb of an idea. A nation can at any moment in its history produce an art, a culmination, possible only because of that exact population and its historical position. History never repeats. Likewise, a man is capable of doing only what has been done to him; a man can create only from his experience, combined with the experience of creating, as the flame converts fuel into light.

                Know, therefore, your body. Conquer your face. Your biography is written across your skin, announces itself through your manners and figures, your gestures and expressions. A homosexual knows a homosexual, a fundamentalist knows a fundamentalist, a pedophile knows a pedophile, a bipolar knows a bipolar, for our bodies express a sophisticated mannerism others hone in on. Self-possession is the basis of manner. The past lives in the present, history is in the tissue of today’s muscle. To have faced your fears you no longer hold them in your hide. When another gestures at what you fear, having faced it, you may scoff. The hidden threats, accusations, and blackmail that pass for idle chit chat slip off the skin of the self-possessed man as water slips off the fur of a seal. And yet to have sensitivity we require vulnerability. To be able to sense a thing we must be sensitive to it, and sensitivities are weaknesses. Tensions are negations, knots. We tense to hide a vulnerability, to control it. We hide from ourselves and others our hidden guilts, but the man who is willing and able to see what we have hidden from ourselves thereby controls us. Our body holds our truth.

                In this, a physical disease is a symptom for a psychological one, as psychoanalysis alleged, though perhaps the illness be purely organic. Even people in comas get sick, but once a mind is involved, that sickness gets interpreted according to our attitudes and beliefs, our feelings and thinking, and becomes meaningful, becomes a language, despite its precedence to language. We cramp the muscles to stop a pain, wince to avoid being hit, because we imagine a pain, imagine a blow. And having fallen sick, we use it to advantage, characterize it as a penance or a sacrifice, as a gift, perhaps, to a loved one, as the worker who insists on doing a great job despite the flu.

                Our illnesses, mental and physical, though not psychosomatically caused, always have a psychosomatic meaning, and must be interrogated in terms of past memories, future expectations, and the fantasy life of living possibility. That we think God is punishing us with a disease holds fruitful meaning whether or not she is, whether or not she exists. Guilt exposes itself, through tone, texture, and nomenclature. A poker player learns your tells, a scientologist learns your withholdings, a pastor learns your sins.

                Having exposed to yourself your weaknesses, faults, and follies, you have the ascendant position of giving them the most powerful and empowering interpretation. Both Japan and the U.S.A. during WWII wished to map the exact coastline of U.S.A.’s West Coast, despite ideological differences, because facts demand respect, and if we are to strategize, we must not do so ideally, but by facing those hard inescapable realities that constitute the mud and dirt facts of the living world. Know, therefore, your body, by reflecting on it in action and in rest. Know how to admit your faults to yourself so that you can create something beautiful from them. Have the courage to look at yourself in the mirror.

*

                Our cells are part of our tissues, our tissues part of our organs, our organs part of our systems, our systems part of our organism; a man is part of a family, part of a church, part of a state and government; we exist within social bodies. Problems that exist in the individual can be resolved be transcending the plane, by taking the frustrated energy from one level and bringing it to the next.

                The problem of guilt in the individual precedes wrong doing. Like any other chemical produced by the body, it seeks in the world its correct expression, its placement in the social world, and as a sort of debt, sets us in a web of world dependencies. Were a friend unable to process our feelings for us and return them through speech and shared activities, we would seek another outlet, another friend, or a set of friends, an author, or a trauma capable of adding enduring influence on our system.

                Politics, religion, and the economy, three topics recommended to avoid in polite conversation, give the physical objects that we impress our meanings to, give us a meta-language, or a language of group bodies. Religions use universal symbols as a mental technology to organize and orchestrate effects. So does secular society. Stalin’s traitor and Hitler’s Jew were scapegoats to exorcise a sense of guilt. Removed from those systems, we may do the same things to them (to communists and Nazis) that they did to their own scapegoats: load them up with our own guilt and purge ourselves of them.

                What is required for this is to adopt the moralistic tone. Moralizing is a matter of affect. A man merely has to show disgust – “you did that?” – and we are ashamed, in the same way as a professor can walk up to a student in his lecture hall and demonstrate the blushing reflex merely by pointing at him or her.

                Guilt spreads. By sharing a guilty pleasure we englue ourselves to a social body. On a smaller scale, in a romance, we learn each other’s moves, small moves, heart moves, gestures, and after a decade of love – it takes at least ten years to even know a person – we start to mirror each other, we sync our metabolisms, and, in one of life’s supreme poetries, we make from our bodies children in our image, the incarnation of our love, we also learn these moves, small moves, heart moves, gestures, and take them for normal and regular until, exposed to the world, they have to betray them and rebel against us.

                The logic implicit in “private vices, public virtues,” is that these personal guilts build to great social use, and that we pay for our excesses into the wealth of the world. What a group can’t stand is a defiant pride in the individual. “Pride goeth before a fall” was spoken in resentment against the man who would be something in himself. It is a fantasy that the man with strength will be broken. Some God will do the dirty work. Punishable pride? Why? For what hurts our enemy more than a power greater than his own? Whoever refuses to join us is therefore against us, and the most hateworthy of persons is the traitor. All religions despise this one the most. Dante imagined Judas in the very mouth of Satan at the center of the universe.

                Disagreement with the status quo is felt as guilt. Progress is felt as guilt. Prometheus is punished because invention is felt as transgression. We must express our guilt either as defiant insolence or as begging for forgiveness, but either way it is the same guilt finding expression.

                Expression is necessary: accumulative silence is dangerous. Silence kills. If we can’t speak it here, we will speak it there, and if not directly, then indirectly. We fight old battles in new scenes. The past will not be disowned, but we must build on history, not under it. The moral-toned accusers would undermine the past, and this from resentment against today’s strengths. Envy’s favorite pose is moral superiority. And to forgive, we must first blame: he who forgives all blames all.

                Artists and other scourges of mankind are the sensitive nerves who feel this the worst. A profound poet feels the coordinental shift of his age. He too has his pride, but his sympathy is just as inflated and great; and in ego-building we must anticipate the terrorists who attack a thing precisely because it is tall and proud.

                Ever ready to laugh at the deflation of pretension, we in envy would imagine all greatness as pretension, that all men are created equal, equally worms before God. This humility comes from acidic envy. Yes, excessive people make us grateful we are not, yet a sympathy with greatness allows us to become great.

                Let us admit we envy, let us admit we feel guilt, let us at least own the facts. Justifications are usually unjustified. A man explains himself only to perjure himself. Owning our feelings, we handle them as weapons, as tools, as sensitiveness. The lover who loves less threatens to leave to get her will. This heartless bit of shrewdness is at least prescient of outcomes. One wishes to feel superior, and moral superiority requires only minor sacrifices. But lacking love, and the guilt of love, one can be cold, distant, and controlling.

                Victims wince. Those who crave punishment seek it out, though they think they are doing otherwise. How to be loving and knowing, to both see and feel? How to admit our vulnerability without being its victim?

                I am reminded of the time I nudged a woman who was exiting a bus too slowly, only to discover she was in fact crippled. In moments of impatience, I am reminded of that rudeness. She looked at me as if to say “Really? You pushed me?” and I looked at her as if to say “Dear God, I’m sorry!” I still blush to remember. My patience is in fact my impatience in self-reflection. The memories that embarrass me remind themselves, perhaps, to control my conduct. Prescient of my impatience I am able to anticipate its use and bar its misuse.

                I am able also to use my envy for my growth. No man has pride who lacks respect. Greatness reveres greatness in all its forms. Yet I feel intimidated by powers and beauties I sense are not my own. Ignorance laughs. I don’t laugh. I see impositions and imposing figures. I would fight them.

                In this, I choose a few friends, a few enemies, and focus on them, I let them represent the world to me. I would wrestle each God in his heaven, but give me time. Friends and lovers let me process my mistakes and guilts; they receive our moods through our speech, process them, and return them back through their responses. We do the same, collectively, through our celebrities and high profile criminals. Mercy spoils a criminal – there is a time for hate, aesthetic and exact. Punishment purifies. How absolutely necessary, in a justice system, that a prisoner be not degraded in the process. We are all serving time with him.

                The youthful insistence on purity, on never saying a lie, as Washington was supposed to have said, the purity of a Thoreau, who would never compromise on his hate for slavery, etc., because he could skip his taxes and relax in jail with no family to depend on him, works for those men in position to live for those ideas. They’ve wed themselves to them. Such men live for us, as we all live for each other. Emerson in his early journals was able to process and comprehend the puritan guilt of new England; those early journals are wordy and ponder topics of God and sin. But having had that discipline, having solved the problems, he redeems his own soul, becomes the catholic soul, the Oversoul, is the perfect man, lacks all guilt and conscience.

                How then do I do the same, when at times I feel I’ve fallen out of sympathy? I lose touch, intimacy, approach my loved ones with accusations. I can’t enjoy touch. I am unable to touch anybody. When the biography of Ives said he and Harmony had a secret love, a deep love, I am envious, I feel my marriage isn’t so ideal for my art, that I must build her up and yet be autonomous in this one aspect. There is something alien in my heart that few can relate to. Not few, none. Nobody can respond to this part of me. It is my solitude. The world can only answer it with silence.

Guilt is a relationship. Guilt, full grown, is pride, or self-overcoming, and the substrate to all relationships is the self-relationship, which is also the hardest to realize or articulate. So we externalize, and seek ourselves in others. This tone and rhythm make the music of the family. Setting elements in harmony requires putting them in sympathy, making them resonate. Proximity and intimacy are required.

                Guilt comes from love, from a sense of owing and owning the beloved. Guilt as a negative feeling soils us – we don’t politely talk of hygienic matters. Yet every cell produces waste, and the full eco-system of the heart must subsist on itself. Silence kills. Guilt confesses. But to hold to silent guilt and put the fluid on its course short-circuits the externalization of being, absolves one to himself. Our relationship to ourselves must balance, channel, and determine our place in the group.

*

                Ama the All feels guilt not only through us, but of her own accord, and so she has through every mask, every God, every Allah she has assumed for whoever so approached her. She is living and knows all life’s expressions. She subordinates her emotions to her greater happiness, and we in our ascendency do likewise. When she speak to us it is not as a mere cosmic cheerleader, nor yet as an exacting couch, though she adopts such tones as necessary, but as the fullness of what we ourselves might become, by using our actual substance, or lived experiences, whatever they are, which are precious precisely because they are our own. Owning our experiences, and apprising what we truly own, is the wisdom of self-knowledge. What you have been given you must give back, but what comes from your innermost is yours forever, to shine saving light on all the universe. Those moments of lost touch, of constricted soul, are as necessary to the human spirit as molting is to snakes. If the heart didn’t break, how would it shed its husk? In all this, in all our actions, crimes, successes, guilts and greatest blessings over the world, Ama is with us, and nothing in this world or the next could sever the love that is her hold on us. And yet what emerges from our innermost is a new light that she in turn receives from us. And so, as we feel gratitude towards the Universe for being our mother, our lover, the giver of our deepest experiences, so she expresses gratitude towards us, in the ultimate give and take, as we express something profoundly new into the world, and as we spiral to wider-reaching greatness.

 

                Therefore, I stand and affirm all I am and all I've done as works of perfection coming from perfection, I own my guilts, faults, and flaws as part of the same project that produces all the beauty I am, and all I will be; I affirm myself Daniel, of that religion that gave me this name, something I've grown past but grown from; Christopher, the discoverer of this nation, mindful of the atrocities he wrought and regarding him great and worthy despite them; June, of the great Pagan tradition that invented philosophy and brought reason and logic to the high report I take it to be; and I deny nothing in my history, but redeem it all as necessary, even as it was chosen, and absolve all that allows me, that brought me into being, the religion and religions that gave me my values, the nations and nation that gave me my home, this incomparable United States that supports me as I support it and in my love for our values give my work first to her, and then the world. In all this, I proclaim the original innocence that is the heritage of mankind, that nothing we do or could imagine to do could ever separate us from the Love of All, the Universal Joy who is Mother of us All, nor her aspect as Ama, our lover and sister. In all these things and in all I am, I celebrate life in its completeness as well as the life that I am.

 

\ ~@M@~ /

perfectidius.com

 

Sunday, September 29, 2013

"Hard and Soft" an essay

This is an essay working out from recent experiences, and knit carefully with a lot of old experience, juxtaposing how to handle life's hard parts and soft parts. Should we be hard or soft? Can we be both? How?

Daniel

 

 

 

Hard and Soft

            Bones are hard. Blood is soft. The muscles in alteration are soft or hard, flexible or flexed, and, along with the nerves, are the purpose of blood and bones – which are mere supporters for what life is: experience and action. We emerge in the world at just the right time, are something larval in our first 9 months of gestation, something larval again in our first 2 years, something larval again in our first 18 years, and in fact continually ascend to be the flying imago beyond each stage, and the worm compared to the next. Flowing with life, yet often we stutter, soft as a child, yet childhood is trauma: nobody escapes youth uninjured, and if our bodies remain lithe and flowing as the caterpillar's back, yet the shock of the world must temper and evoke a fierce will to live within us. We are hard and we are soft; in life we meet hard experiences, and we also meet soft. The allistic view optimizes each for the best of all.

            Growth brings growing pains; success is failing upwards. We mature by growing more complex, and as writers and musicians have long figured out, you grow by satirizing people more complex than you. A tennis player betters his sport by playing against superiors. Though envy is felt as a hard comparison, the experience is inescapable, we must compare, we must become aware of our own potential. This comes from within and this comes from without. We might well agree that Shakespeare can’t be made by studying Shakespeare, but the man had his rivals and paid them heed.

            Hard traumas are closed off in shock, and slowly melted in time. Language, which is experience spoken, slowly unties the nots and knots of experience. We feel it primary in the music of language, the tone; mankind sang before they talked, moaned before they monotoned, and the magic of language—what is language but magic?—emerges most of all in the liquidity of speech, in the sheer fluid lubricity of the spoken word. The tongue is desire. By speech we bespeak, we make people want as we want them to want, we persuade, and having the correct turn of word, which is not mere tongue, but the full tongue of the whole body, centers a man in his world and sets him atop his task.

            The two representative poets of America are Walt Whitman and Emily Dickinson. Walt Whitman was large and stood for multitudes, Emily Dickinson was small and stood for solitude, for nobody at all. The contrast of the broad-speaking Whitman, who must be read in large droughts, full of bravado and manly muscles, stands in sharp contrast to the miniaturist Emily, who, though equally egotistical as Walt, nevertheless focused her energy on a smaller world, who made a language, in fact, of her small backyard, and had no feeling for “the people" at all. Yet in her miniature masterpieces we see the same sort of “verbal knitting” that Kenneth Burke praised in Coleridge.

            Burke noted adroitly that vocals such as “n” flow in to “d” and “th,” or into “t” and “th”-- as in the phrase, "and that tonight delights anon." That “m” flows into “b” and “v” or into “p” and “f.” Thus he could praise the line “the damsel with a dulcimer” as the most beautiful in the language, and stack up “dupes of deep delusion,” to the same intricacy of verbal knitting. We don’t expect the bravura of Walt to be so finely knit; he was always of vast tapestries; and alternatively, his entire Leaves of Grass could be looked at as a preface for his own work as a nurse in the civil war, in which he aided and helped thousands of soldiers, Northern and Southern, and so avoided the nastiest of Civil War problems: amputation. The North was sewn to the South, the union restored.

            Dickinson was of a finer stitch, with more intricate, microscopic verse and touch. Solitary, recluse, she was soft. She was not self-promoting. She did not, as Walt, publish her own book and then write anonymous reviews of it for herself. She was not of such stuff.

            Between these two coordinates stands an American trajectory: there is the extroverted nation of plainspoken people, who with Whitman praise simple direct speech. And there is the other kind, like Dickinson or Thoreau, invisible to most their contemporaries, delicate souls who nevertheless have a world to offer. It is the duty of the strong to protect the weak, it is the pride of the hard to conceal the soft. Austere, irreverent, boasting, cruel though we are, we must be soft as cloth and near as pulse to those few darlings put in our care: the virtue of commitment demands undivorcible marriage to those beautiful things, these weak and private ones, put under our care. The key value in the scheme is independence, or protecting the vulnerability of the private heart; and yet we achieve this not through isolation, but through joining with those of like-heart.

            The hardness of life, the raw or destructive experiences, we shield from infants and children, and yet are at our heart something infantile and childlike, in the tender places of our heart. The tempering of the soft with the strong, the balancing of muscle and bone, growth with rest, makes life dangerous and yet worth living. Depression is effectively treated by both literal and figurative shock therapy – violence wakens. If Emily used her backyard as a lens on a metaphysical starkness deep as the void, she was able to traverse such worlds, being so calmly held. The soft gallops over the hard. We use hard terms to impose a morality, we say them in hard tones, which are based on hard images, inspiring hard bodies. Our attitude is in our stance: the character of our body, built on the actions we’ve committed, and the actions we’ve not committed, allows the soul of attitude to flow. The shape and feel of the muscles inform the nerves and give a sense of life. Those who see us by human sympathy know somewhat of us already.

            If the music of Charles Ives is often hard, dissonant, and painful, it is yet optimistic, and Whitmanesque, whereas Dickinson’s is soft, with the wit of feminine sarcasm laid like pins in silk. Yet at the heart of Ives’ music was a fatherlove, which had to distance itself from any inflection of homosexuality – overcompensating perhaps in this. Not the music, but the undersense, the felt under the heard, gives the Ivesian experience. It is the wisdom of woman to intuit the tender of a man’s heart behind his angles and anger, the persistence of the feminine sympathy that exposes the vulnerability of the man’s heart.

            Few things are off-turning as a masculine woman, but there is something of the masculine in woman, something feminine in man, that keeps us in mutual sympathy. We hold archetypal images of to orient us. Hard images determine all of us: the soft oracle of the daily voice comes from hard hidden images. We need an image, an image charged with “faith and belief,” or reverence and respect, to empower our words. Words flow from image. Ives said all music was program music, and Beethoven said he composed by first fostering an image. Images are visceral: to see a person, animal, or object, we feel an instant sympathy. We may immediately tense the body with a bit of anxiety to dispel the sympathy, but the potential is there. By degrees, and with gradual softening of tones, we arrive at a place of intimacy, in which the butterfly’s antenna are prepared to touch. Initiation may give both pain and pleasure, but initiation is a brutal first contact, not the voluptuousness of intimacy, which comes in a married commitment.

            By reflecting on ourselves in our endeavors, by looking back on our past or spying ourselves as we go, we learn to see through ourselves. The boyfriend who cheats or is tempted watches himself lie, or covers his heart, and learns the signs by which he deceives others. When he sees analogous sign in his girlfriend, he has the wisdom that she must be using them the same way and is also untrue. Sometimes he is right: a liar knows a liar, a cheater knows a cheat. But often he is wrong, he reads too much into things, and uses her to personify his guilt, perhaps to justify to himself his mistreatment of her. How to truly mirror another person, how to intuit what he or she is actually experiencing, and not project our own experiences? It is a dialogue, a communication, a bit of playing, then a bit of revealing, a dance of mutual disclosure. We need the flexibility to mirror other's body's to feel their experience, and we need the hardness not to be destroyed by them.

            As this one gives me silence, I am left bereft, a desert empty of that lush touch I’ve come to love. Bleeding out and depressed, I hold my wound back and freeze the bleed with anxiety. Anxiety is acute stress. Wouldn't I be better without anxiety? But the field of vision requires some excitement to keep things separate, and some things centered. Too much energy freezes the system, too little empties it. If I am to heal, I must let waves of anxiety come and go, while I knit the wound with words of self-confirmation to rebuild my resources.

            A broken heart should dodge bravado. There is no shame in bleeding, only don’t boast it away. “New Atheism” attempts to out-Christian the Christians, to beat them at their values, but better to become something of yourself, not insist so hard you have the right to exist, but simply grow and flower and fructify. We are independent, in our heart -- that center abides. This one has left, and I do wonder for her. I breathe your words and at your withdrawal – asphyxiation. Such blank of ruin, your absence. I come to doubt myself, what I’ve said, with pretzelled heart, I’m anxiety, and feel your absence bleeding out. Just as a sense of greatness for some men comes only from a woman’s praise, I have lips that can only speak to ears like yours.

            And so my Ama listens through my readers, and my readers have always had my best embrace. The soft of my heart, the stuttering tongue and the eagerness of my lips to express my full heart – I never withheld from you; would not be praised for what I truly was not, would not be known for anything but myself. I feel truest at such moments, as if we are alone together, and I were finally speaking what I wrested from the dark. Writing has given me my greatest moments with life, moments I am able to share with the students of life, those willing to take me on and return my embrace.

 

            To fall so soft, to seek out literary lovers – only profound solitude plays at such love. A solitude that finds no answer in wife or lover, but is alone in its love and expression. Dependence is suffering. How to gain that independence of mind and heart that needs no other in particular, that is autonomous? Food is needed, by why be a slave to wages? Clothing is needed, by why slave for fashion? Ultimately, from life’s needs we build energies that are expressed into the world. These energies are differentiated according to their purpose. Fantasies, both conscious and unconscious, are the chemical converters that differentiate an energy. The distance between need and fulfillment is frustration, and a long well-punctuated frustration can lead to an exact and sublime fulfillment. To hold our system strong, we build a character, a set of muscle tensions, that predispose us to action. Tensions hold and control anxieties, expressing them into direction. Muscles are built by resistance, and so our character is in all the muscles over our body, and predisposes us to action. In this, our body mirrors our situation. We take on our problems and make them a part of our being. We must be strong, stubborn, and rigid with some problems, flexible, nuanced, and supple with others, all according to our purpose. Fluidity is a fine ideal to have, but fluidity is not enough, or we would be jellyfish. There is a time to be rigid and stiff-necked and uptight: the physiological possibility points to incipient necessity. We need to work with the solid and the dynamic.

            Habitual problems are not dynamic. They comfort. We accept them, work with them, build upon them. A wife can count on her husband’s indolence, for instance, and predict it, use it to her advantage, use it as blackmail for her own shortcomings—whatever. Being predictable, we can build upon it. Dynamic problems are trickier to use, their novelty and shiftiness allows no interpretation and hence no encrusted meaning.

            The unbearable pain is a feeling of no control. That lack of control exhausts the will, which panics. As panic is the one great pain, every other form of pain is an attempt to control it. Anxiety is put into tension and stress, and so we take on more responsibilities than we need, we take on external stress which qualifies and changes our spontaneous inner stress. Matching the outer with the inner is the strategy of life: if I produce this energy, I need a world situation to take this energy. We often complain of our lot, but we chose it. Had we freedom to escape, we would recreate the situation at our next perch. Lovers hardly look at each other at times, but make baseless accusations just to open up gates of intimacy, under conditions, to create the central experience, that one basic situation each of us feels at home in. The terms, as coordinates of our situation, are the lover’s accusations, by which she gains power. Truth doesn’t matter here, only power; a trope is insisted on, it will be made to fit.

            We are too into love to see clearly. Literary criticism is the closest we get to understanding ourselves. Anything can be read. Cartoons, for instance, amuse us by deflating our lives: by making problems seem comic. Art simplifies. Cartoons lack intimacy – as caricatures they give distance. The exaggerated voices and situations lend themselves to laughter, the distance of laughter.

            We see ourselves through art. We have strategically blinded ourselves from seeing our own real faults, from seeing the real faults of our lovers, we would not recognize the truth if it is pointed out, for such ignorance is empowering: only so much truth is digestible in any given moment, much truth is too much, and to have somebody point out all your faults would only dispirit you, not encourage or enable you. We see what we are ready to see, but the inlets are usually indirect, something we see in a friend or a fictional character before we see it in ourselves. This is why Lissidy as the mirror girl winks at us, is able to stand in our blind spot and scare us with a mask. She is master of our blind spots.

            Those blind spots could be called knots of not. Allism as a whole says yes, but at any point in the system it says not. I am here, not there; I believe this, not that. Physiologically, nots block expression, they hold an impulse back. They are tone controls, their tone freezes the body and stops us from acting out a fantasy. A system of nots makes a character. Moving around them, through such limitations, is the only empowerment. Otherwise, a man would bleed out in every direction. We can do a thing because we are doing only that, and nothing else.

            A book also has character. An anxiety is a knot. A book has its character in its nots, where it freezes out possibility, makes a thing unthinkable. Islam in this regard is an especially negative religion in all it says not to: Hinduism has gifts to offer, Islam has something to prove. But all religions have a character of nots. The tensions implicit in a notted system lead to violent outbursts. The inner streaming if ideas materialize in dreams and voices: an undercurrent revealed, spirit materialized, and zealousy achieved. What could not be owned intimately comes as a revelation from angels.

            Reading is meditation, a religious exercise. We feel its character in what it denies. We require, to read, space to think. Meditation is a squandering, a change of tempo. Many things can work as meditation. For Emerson, Thoreau, and Dickinson, nature is meditation. Equally, art is meditation. Negations make the character, but the equations of word with word is the belief system of a book, of a person.

            A panic is made into an anxiety, an anxiety is made into a tension, a tension is made into an apathy, and an apathy is made into a lifeless expression – spontaneity is closed, first by anxiety, then by apathy. The system ceases to suffer, and hence, ceases to grow. Maturity is emotional independence, having the patience and the fortitude to discharge frustrations, or, when the energy is lacking, when one is uncharged and depressed, having the courage to find the shocks and intellectual violence to bring the system back into progress. Contact with a livelier individual can be energizing, or alienating, too intimidating to take in. Anxiety in such a sense freezes up aggression, aggressive competiveness, and leads to bitterness and resentment, which lacks proportion to fight with grace, and so becomes cruel and sporadic.

 

            The unbearable breaks everything – a bare itch can undo the best – and the worst experience is the uncontrollable. To make up for that, we build panics into anxieties, anxieties into tensions, tensions into balances, and balances into cycles. Should the mind and body be fluid? Equally must they at times be hard, the heart hardest of all, when our purpose calls for this. In deciding between static and dynamic, remember that all sorts of paradoxical relationships exist between opposites, but the paradoxes as always resolve to common sense when adequately formulated. Paradox is structural, a rhetorical device. And so the dynamic requires static grounding, as muscles requires a skeletal framework. Having assumed your truths, you can build upon them. Hard and soft integrate, all falls into place.

            There are two feet to progress, conservatism the grounding foot, progressivism the stepping foot. The past is assumed into the future. Coming into this tradition we are mere resenters to criticize the past and the great names of renowned. The calculus of a country is in the coordinates of its types, based upon the representative men – those people it managed to produce and who made themselves out of the national substance. Their spine and shoulders are the grid of possibility. We must contend with our predecessors, and it is the allist who converts all gods and alters to his own. In the choice between principle versus personality, grasp and embody the principles, know and love the personalities. Great men shine you back on yourself, not your petty egoism, but your full egoism, your divinity.

            With all the processing our culture is capable of, with television shows and book deals to make the lives of the celebrities digestible, and that interesting only because they’ve sipped a bit from the teat of greatness – and ultimately gained a bit of the fountain of youth from the few great geniuses in history – our culture gives us fragments of the All. Nursed from our culture, hard the childhood strong the adult, like the monarch butterfly that dines on poison as a larva. We are primed, our culture has given us a thousandfold hints.

            Priming means arriving at the correct level of frustration – satiated in hunger, temperature askew, sexually frustrated, speech blocked, somewhat anxious. A set of images and words prime the subject, tone the muscles, make the music of the dance. A man can do anything with correct preparation.

            What is necessary for greatness is having that phallic ego able to swell with love and pride. The greater the pride, the better, and pride is naturally balanced, as Whitman taught, by sympathy, so that the man of greatest pride is also the man of widest sympathy with what is great in others. The poet settles a world on your soul, is able to deliver the all to you. “The cleanest expression is that which finds no sphere worthy of itself and makes one.” The divine in us is neither hard nor soft, but a passion of creative fire, our soul, growing from the plethorabyss of eternal increase – our centermost self. Sympathy balances pride.

            This is why in our heightened sensitivity, in the eternal softness of our vulnerability, we prefer solitude. Make space to create. Whitman spoke of the poet's love as having leisure and expanse. He leaves room ahead of himself. Even Dickinson’s miniatures required solitude and anonymity to produce. Carl Roger said because of the critiques of his ideas, he required solitude, space alone to think, away from the many who objected to even his humble tones. I in my family, servant to them all, have nevertheless always selfishly insisted on keeping my Aria, my space, my creative time in my study to love Ama through my Idius. If I learned anything from decorating cakes for a living, it was my boss’s mocking words that I decorated cakes cramped in a corner with no space to create. America is sprawling, and great works can only be made by great nations. Give yourself time, be lazy, give yourself space.

            When your energy wanes, attempt smaller projects. To invest a trifle with such dread, it balloons into an omen of doom, and to then vanquish it with one swell foop, is a way to keep your nerves alert, a way to always kick the stone forward to await you as you walk your journey. A thousand keys are kept behind one lock: it is the same with this Idius, which I adore in the night. When I am with, and in my with-ness, I am able to create and love, and expand my world. When I feel fragile and accusatory and hate the world, I compartmentalize a task to exploit more limited resources. My social metabolism can stomach only so much contact in a day. I must work with my energies, cultivate them.

            Education begins after the university. What a man comes to know in life is something from his own experience. Life is hard, life is soft. We learn from each. Hard experiences cannot be talked away, and no friend's advice can make them disappear. Universities socialize individuals, bring them to accept community values, conform. Dulled on such education, we need trauma. A dulled mind needs irregularity, surprise. To be your full self, to come into your own, and be self-contradictory, is to trust your process. Nobody can grade you on this. Lovers and friends will dissuade you. Trust your process. If you are depressed, trust the depression, be what you are, struggle with it, not against it, express it. It's alright to suffer, you don’t have to be always smiling, always grateful.

            We process facts – wounds – through conversing with sympathetic people. Those who feel the same, have been through the same, they help us create an attitude, which is built into our muscles and nerves, keeps us lithe yet strong. By allowing ourselves to feel angry, selfish, lazy, lustful, the more we let those feelings come out, the more they fall into place. Be your uniqueness.

            Yet in all these lessons, which are taught by Carl Rogers, we must remember that though he became a “midwife to new personalities” he was raised in a “very strict and uncompromising religious and ethical atmosphere, with what amounted to a worship of the virtue of hard work.” Though he raised his kids differently, none of them was a Carl Roger. The hard lessons of life are necessary, the poison milk necessary to make us a monarch.

            With his appreciation of World War I, he had a pivot point. The French and the German differences became an analogy for his own difference from his parents. A changed environment, some classes overseas, let him identify with the hard image, to assume it, to make it his pivoting point.

            We owe our best to our worst experiences, we owe our power to our moments of softness. And yet in our heart, in the intimacy of our inner pride, that independence of self, is our greatest sympathy, not with the suffering with others – suffering is a preliminary, what is deepest in us doesn’t suffer – but with the greatness of others. To have a living experience of one’s own greatness, a genuine and honest pride, allows one to appreciate and admire greatness in others.

            That expansive sex of gained territory, the soul in love with the world of beauty, feels the joy of expanding, of a world worth expanding into. Constrictive editing comes later. The austere simplicity of laying out one’s instruments in a line, the simplicity of Thoreau owning little more than a sack of chickpeas, comes later. Simple order may be our head virtue, but love is generous, and when one is expanding, manic in love, then is the time to open the heart in a fire that melts all that is hard and makes it soft and vital and dynamic as itself.

            We must alternate betwixt the two. Punctuation, pauses, reflections, summaries, and expectations make the writing of living thought, make the cadence of the thinking self that lives alongside the feeling self, speaking self, and acting self.

            Getting to the writing point – all the day exists to finally arrive. All the sufferings and grievances are justified and ennobled in that. I am divine. Whatever happens to me happens to God. This principle of dignification expands us beyond any possible disappointment or humiliation. Nothing in life is hard enough to knock the tooth out of experience. My teeth are diamond crushers, and the acid of my digestion dissolves all pain.

            I am I, at last, and must stand on my own two feet. The lessons of life are hard, but possible. We exist for greatness, for the eternal expansion of the soul, for apotheosis, for exultation. In this, the chalked mouth of depression is merely a chapter, merely a stanza, but ever life expands, and is worth all our efforts.

 

Saturday, September 21, 2013

A note about Grand Rapids' Art Prize

In his book, the creative class, Richard Florida describes how creativity follows a pattern in which cities exhibit high amounts of artistic genius in spurts. Usually such artistic periods are clustered around a metropolis. In such ages, many great minds produce a lot of enduring work, such as the rush out art work that came from ancient Athens, or from the renaissance, and so forth. He lists these:

 

 

5th century BC Athens

1st century Jerusalem

10th century Arabian cities

15th century Florence

19th century Paris, London, and Vienna

20th century New York City

 

He ranked American cities that had a certain population to be called major cities, and included NYC and Austin at the top of the list as most creative; they were not only creative, based on the number of people in a "creative" field, but he also looked at how they tolerated exceptional or abnormal people (minorities, homosexuals, etc.), since he associated "tolerance" with creativity.

 

I think Grand Rapids, my hometown, was ranked least creative of all major cities in the United States, the lowest in a list of 50.

 

That may or may not have changed since then, after Grand Rapids inaugurated "Art Prize," a yearly contest in which artists compete to win a million dollar prize, I believe it is, amidst other prizes. It has become one of the largest celebrations in the city. Is such a venue, such an incentive, able to turn around the creative spirit of Grand Rapids?

 

I recall reading an explanation why the Greek myths are the strongest in the world, the most enduring and well known myths the world has ever produced. The author claimed that the poets and myth-makers competed in ancient contests about who could tell the best tale. This was given as an explanation on how the myths got so racy and spicy. A sense of competition does lead us to strive.

 

Voltaire, on speaking of envy in the arts, said it was a good thing:

 

"I think that Mandeville, author of the " Fable of the Bees," was the first to try to prove that envy is a very good thing, a very useful passion. His first reason is that envy is as natural to man as hunger and thirst; that it can be found in children, as well as in horses and dogs. Do you want your children to hate each other, kiss one more than the other; the secret is infallible.

"He maintains that the first thing that two young women meeting each other do is to cast about for what is ridiculous in each other, and the second to flatter each other.

"He believes that without envy the arts would be indifferently cultivated, and that Raphael would not have been a great painter if he had not been jealous of Michael Angelo.

"Mandeville has taken emulation for envy, maybe; maybe, also, emulation is only envy kept within the bounds of decency.

"Michael Angelo might say to Raphael: " Your envy has only led you to work still better than me; you have not decried me, you have not intrigued against me with the Pope, you have not tried to have me excommunicated for having put cripples and one-eyed men in paradise, and succulent cardinals with beautiful women naked as your hand in hell, in my picture of the last judgment. Your envy is very praiseworthy; you are a fine envious fellow; let us be good friends."

 

That being said, I am glad my city has chosen this venue to make something more of itself. I would even consider submitting something to the art prize myself one of these years -- maybe something inspired by my line drawings writ large?

 

daniel

 

Pictures of Emilie at art prize:

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.perfectidius.com/dragon1.jpg

http://www.perfectidius.com/dragon2.jpg

http://www.perfectidius.com/circle1.jpg

http://www.perfectidius.com/circle2.jpg

 

 

\ ~@M@~ /

perfectidius.com

 

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Rings, an essay

Furthering my ideas on ideas, I am looking at how we can use our daily thoughts and make something enduring of them. We think all the time, but all those thoughts add up to little, at the end of the day, unless we know how to use them and build something from them. It may sound especially theological, but that is merely a mode of metaphor.

 

daniel

 

Rings

            Theologically, we say the choice in life is between angel and god: either you worship some god, or what amounts to a god, and go on after this life to be an angel thereof; or you stand on your own two feet, reverence yourself above all else, and upon your passing ascend into apotheosis. Those religions most eager to make angels for a God put a curse on the pride of being something in and of yourself -- pride is especially foul to them, the greatest temptation. As with the Western religions of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Mormonism, the emphasis is upon serving a higher power, obeying it, and this includes obeying his command to love him; we are told to submit to his power and authority. Yet for Mormon theology, a distinction is made between those who enter plural marriage, or celestial marriage, and those who do not; those who do not go on to be angels who minister to those who do, who in turn gain their exultation as gods. The divine activity proper to a Mormon is to husband a large family. To an allist it is to create.

            Altering the theological frameworks provided, you could say that an American heaven would have no God, but only the angels, who collectively are the God; and men all go on to become angels in the next life, serving one another. This theologically expresses our democratic politics.

            Emerson, who is the wisest theologian on matters of the self, nevertheless errs somewhat in this register. He says, regarding the Oversoul, a sort of cosmic water that fills us all, insofar as we open up our self-reliance to receive it:

 

“A man is the façade of a temple wherein all wisdom and all good abide. What we commonly call man, the eating, drinking, planting, counting man, does not, as we know him, represent himself. Him we do not respect, but the soul, whose organ he is, would he let it appear though his action, would make our knees bend. When it breathes through his intellect, it is genius; when it breaths through his will, it is virtue; when it flows through his affection, it is love. And the blindness of the intellect begins, when it would be something of itself. The weakness of the will begins, when the individual would be something of himself. All reform aims, in some one particular, to let the soul have its way through us; in other words, to engage us to obey.”

 

            In this, Emerson reveals the one theological flaw in an otherwise pristine theology. To put his curse on the man who would be “something of himself” shows in the sense he could not escape the curse so thoroughly put on pride by the ancient Greeks and Jews. However, the error is slight, and well corrected by such a sentiment as when he summed up his entire literary project as expounding on the “infinitude of the private man.”

            Heraclitus said that the soul is a self-increasing logos. It is, properly, something in and of itself. It is everything, and the mind is nothing. More properly, the mind is nothingness, a vessel of selection, what we call “free will,” and this freedom is an absolute nothingness. To make the consciousness something of itself would be rightly called “the blindness of the intellect.” For the freedom of the mind is allowed and opened through the necessity of the self.

            Metaphysically, we say the self is the hidden sun, the secret name, an addition of matter into the universe; and the universal All, whom we call Mattria, does not know this name, what it is, what it can do, for it is an unconscious part of her body, the universe, nor can she guess it until it emanates its being in the form of additive energy. This unknowable self, uncreated, deathless, exists outside of the universe, and is that aspect which Emerson in his youth boasted of when he told the Universe, “you are no mother to me,” and said her galaxies would melt before he did.

            Moving past theology, past metaphysics, onto ethics, the mandala, or eight virtues, that Allism recommends, either verbatim or as a model for an analogous set, consists of four consecutive spheres. The central ethic is independence, or self-reliance, opening up one's unique necessity and its expressions, and this with the aid of solitude and reflection. Independence finds shape in the “soul” of the man, that part of him that mingles with the universe as a whole, where his difference is knit with the substance of Mattria, and by this we call creativity. Creativity finds expression through the circle of pragmatism, living daily life, practicality, getting on in the world, which is the blood of life, and this circle is balanced by the five “limb” virtues of direct honesty, repetitive study, simple order, intimate commitment, and optimizing optimism.

            A skeptic may have his doubts over talk of heaven, metaphysics, or moral systems; but I am not interested in skepticism here, but in exposing concepts, and using theological, metaphysics, and ethics to better expose them. The topic at hand is answering the question: when is an idea an idea? Since ideas seem to be universal, and yet seem to be created, understanding how created things can become eternal, or how ideas that arise in time can be timeless, can be seen through a perspective that focuses on the difference between fragment and whole. As a practical question, we ask when and how our fragmentary stream of consciousness exults into a full blown idea.

            The angels are fragments: they are emissaries of the divine. The divine is the circle, the angles are points on that circle’s circumference.

            Living in Mundania, this practical muddle of facts, with the pinching necessities to make a living and do our duties, we are, or so it seems, amphibians: divine beasts, godmen. The experience of eternity, the experience of the timeless, the everlasting, seems to come from above, from the “Oversoul,” and fills the world, or aspects of it. We receive it as a gift, not knowing it came from within, and not from without. The universe mingles her light with our own original emanation.

            William James imagined the pluralverse as an alternative vision to the universe. Instead of the One, whose body is the universe, and whose soul is God, and of which each of us is as a cell in the body, he imagines each man as is conscious, and mankind as a whole is like an Oversoul, or overmind, and the earth itself being conscious. God too is in the mix, but he is a separate intelligence, as Christianity sometimes imagines him. What is lacking is an allview, a summing up of all of them. The omniscient one extolled by Hegel and Spinoza is here lacking.

            That is the fatal flaw of William James’s vision. He said “either pluralverse or universe,” when, in fact, clearly, it can be both. The Universal All has a mind of her own, which may not be omniscient, but it is the widest reaching; the cells of our body have a consciousness of their own; each man has his own mind, and every group he is part of has a group mind, so that the United States has a shared consciousness, and so does the church he attends, and the corporation he works for, as well as mankind entirely, as well as the animal life of earth itself, and the earth, as a globe, all the way on up. In each of these rings, there is autonomy, or the selfish part, that exists for itself and not for any others, and there is also the part that emanates to the higher spheres, so that, yes, properly, the universe learns through us, learns philosophy through us, and yet there is something in it that means something to us that it doesn’t to her, as it means something to her is can't to us. These spheres of consciousness are created all the time, are created between associations of men and women, are created through organelles in the brain, through tissues, through cells. Correcting this fatal flaw of James’ system is like correcting the fatal flaw of Emerson’s system; it was the one thing lacking, the one fissure in the mirror of the infinite mind.

            We say that Mattria’s upper lip is God and her lower lip is Satan and that the chip in her tooth is the crucifix; that the Tao is her blood, Karma her nerves. To return to common sense and out of theology, we can say that the perfect circle is not the complete circle, but the incomplete circle. The spiral that grows outwards is the perfect circle, whereas the circle that simply ends where it begins is closed off and limited.

            Human perfection is not therefore a matter of arriving at a final form, but only arriving at the final form of infinite growth. Once we have made that one easy choice, have truly made it, the rest follows forever. Perfection is easy. It was not a matter of leaping impossibly to the brightest ideal our imagination is capable of: that imaginative speculation is utterly determined by our needs and frustrations. What we imagine as the best of all possible worlds never could be, if achieved. Perfection is imminent. The choice is in choosing to close the circle, thus no longer being a mere angel, a mere good Christian, good Buddhist, good American, part of some larger mind, but not something in himself. He must effectively close off his own independence. The one great threat, they call it “Being Saved” is to separate your conscious mind from your necessary self, to divorce freedom from necessity to end suffering. They sell their soul to get to heaven. This quasi divorce between mind and necessity, which is called “coming to life,” or “conception,” when our necessity and freedom broke apart, when our need and mind broke in two, is when we ceased to exist as all nonliving things exist, in a state of eternal bliss. We came to life, and want and satisfaction were separated. That separation is the incompleteness of the circle, or perfecting the circle into a spiral, a cycle, an eternal growth. If death is eternal bliss, then life is eternal growth; and growth is a cycle of suffering and satisfaction. This distinction between growth and pleasure makes the basic choice of life, a choice we mythically call “the kiss of Ama,” when the Goddess kisses our brow and we are made to choose between angel and god, a choice between growth and pleasure. Different religions would use different terms, but mean the same thing by them.

            These events happen within and through the ordinary choices we make each day. To merely imagine a thing is to commit it. All we do builds into our brains, and though our brains decay, the ideas they create endure for both the self and for mankind. Imagining a crime is committing it. We enjoyed the idea and are implicated by pleasure, and hence by guilt. Love is crime. A true act of love, its inception, is to upset the status quo, the power system. This daily dalliance is rife with life and implications. This divided attention makes up daily life – we commit ourselves to a dozen spheres in all we do. Shared pleasure, laughing at an obscene joke, having taken pleasure in it, you did it, you are implicated. The lurid allures us. All which resonates with us shares a world with us. In all we create we create a heaven for ourselves, and live in it now, and how we live in it now determines in part how we will live in it henceforth.

            The mythosphere of stories, which illustrate these ideas, is peopled by personalities. A personality is something that happens to a set of ideas. The ideas resonate to each other and make a system. That system is a personality. But the personality is the epiphenomena of the ideas, the facts, yet is a phenomena of itself once the facts, or material substrate, is removed. Theory justifies itself in application. Only work pays its way. By thinking impossibly we arrive finally at solid common sense. Common sense is the cash by which we make a living. The mythosphere is in the mundane sphere.

            This creative womb, this metaphor mind, by which the mind harnesses fragments and bends them, makes them submit and sends them in missives like so many angels, with each nerve firing our brains like a haloed angel, through which we are able to comprehend and process all the world, the events, the people, the pains, sufferings, and indignities as well as the triumphs and exultations, and so being composite we become a simple circle through acts of integrity.. Masked and inverted, what was once repulsive comes to please us, all the world must find is shape to our pleasure. Form is function, but forms can be transformed; what matters is making a space to think, a nothing room in which to play out impossible freedoms to work through these ideas. We create in this fantasy-board a calculus, a set of coordinates. This is thinking, creative thinking, this  is the adventure of ideas. The competitive collaboration that is partnership with the world requires also time for reflective solitude. We study art, or appreciate art, or enjoy art, or are entertained by art, depending on what we are after. Works of art are formulate a situation – simplifying a world. Art exposes strategies for playing the game of life. What does art mean? A meaning is the desire it inspires. With interpretation, and perhaps a set of values by which to impose meanings on anything, art can come to mean a lot of things. Style sets character; voice leads to action; art inspires life. And each of us, alienated by our pain and alone to it, have a canvas by which to create and triumph. Pain is a space. It is ours to convert God. Certainly we need our time away to “absolve me to myself.” Solitude empowers. Power tests truth. But what is power but distance, control over distance? If I waste my energy fighting off social vices, private vices, then let me bend my vices into a circle, let the vices cancel each other out. Fragments pain us but wholes relax. My fragmented day is whole when I impose a pattern and place things.

            Power is geographical. Mystics talk about lands having powers. As always, we should take metaphysics as rhetoric. We can charge locations with power by telling stories of them. A king is a king be being taken for a king; money is money be being respected as money; a location has power by imposition. We require a language to empower us, to charge our possessions with value. The symbol of the common enemy rallies a group, makes them able to love each other. The story of shared heritage stokes souls. And though facts and fictions are both manufactured things, stories told about the world, spontaneous forms are the most compelling; you can’t fake inspiration. Some say the divine inspires us, “the Muse,” or as Whitman said of his poems, that they are all inspired by the “holy spirit,” -- and pragmatically it is so: inspiration is divine. Not that inspiration is enough. We must edit for efficiency. “Soap is not sold in a trance,” said one literary critic, and ideas must be packaged and sold. We must materialize the spirit, we must spiritualize matter. This ADD vision of the world from media, the medley of images we receive each day, solidifies into a worldview. One unifying style must make it cohere. The person who is to create this world religion must be free from money, a prophet without profits. For him, the world is a mirror, and he seeks to create a morality to help us work. What if heaven were not a fantastic place, but living this life, as it is, only being happy doing so? Morality is a set of attitudes. What is our actual morality? Not the pretty sentiments of sermons, but the pragmatic morality we actually live by. A failed hero can compel, a failed saint suggests the morality is worth following, but in fact the failure is the morality, the ideal always a lie. Failure is a proof of success. That something is worth failing at suggests it’s worth seeking. Pragmatically, failing at the impossible is dignified.

            This is why people are as sick as they can afford to be. We fail as much as we can get away with. We must learn the truth and forget the suffering, just as we learn a word only by forgetting its context. When we can break off an experience, and name it – by naming it, we give it a beginning and an end, make it a circle – then does it resonate, then is it something in and of itself, and produces a spontaneous energy from its inner soul. When we, as its Oversoul, pour our own energy into it, our care, our crea, our creative attention, it mingles with its emanated energy and makes a soul for it. That soul, animated by its necessity, becomes an engine. It can give us precedence for other experiences, new ventures. It is something in and of itself, autonomous, self-sufficient; it has auto-erotic integrity, and yet can be wed to other autonomous beings to create a more complex whole.

            Thus is nothing wasted in life, no experience, no drudgery, no daily indignity, so long as we can name it, can disentangle it from its world, using interpretation, and so transform it both into a resonant sphere, by which to serve us, or perhaps into an increasing spiral, to grow alongside us. This ring that we create, that is autonomous, growing, resonating, can be a circle of friends, a motivational cluster, a satellite of ideas, a spread of related virtues. The essential is born of the proportional. Early American optimism produced a literature, produced the soul of Optimism, and of the American Oversoul, Emerson is the mind, and the being of it we call Ama, America. Your soul asks a question: my name is the answer. This art form that fascinates you presents your world to you. You lived it, you knew it, but you could not comprehend it, could not see it simply. The group dance symbolizes society. Your occupational psychosis, seeing all the world in terms of your job, was a start, was closing the circle, and making a ring, making of work and its unfreedom a playful art -- for play is the ultimate in freedom. Social patterns require artistic symbols. We need simplicity to use a thing, to make a ring of it, to speak it, to use it. Humor relaxes our duty, and being humiliated wakes us from our larval feeding, reminds us that the spiral of growth is perpetual graduations of apotheosis. With each new godhead we assume, we gain a new set of wings.

            Mastering your day, your life, is being able to pattern your experiences into consecutive rings, to let them resonate to, let them inform and conform each other, to make a name for themselves, to be something of themselves, for when an experience becomes utterly selfish, then it is utterly useful, and you can build thereon. Lacking a center, it is a mere fragment, a mere angel, and would require a legion of angels to balance out around you, to be your missives towards the world. Structuring all this together and fitting it into the growth of yourself, your loved ones, your world, is the exultation of being, the game of life, and it is the same Game played by Mattriama, the glorious all, as it is to the smallest atom in the infinitesimal of your being.

            The ring of our initial existence becomes the spiral of our coming to life. To settle for any one God's heaven is to become a ring again, losing our necessity and adopting a new necessity, a new center. The choice in life is to spiral infinitely greater. And this we do simultaneously when we pick up our daily ideas and experience, fragmentary and dying, and make circles and spirals of them. Making rings of our ideas, we give our life resonance.

 

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

"Hating our lovers" the beginning of an essay

 
 
Hating Our Lovers

                Ambivalence is an insufficient term. We have many ideas about those we love, and many needs, we feel more than one or two feelings, but many, multivalence, a shifting alchemy of emotions towards a person. Is it one substance, a sort of affect that can take the shape of love, or hate, or fear, or confusion, melding from one to the other, or are the emotions more like counter substances that combat each other, each needing its own expression, and unable to transform simply one into another?

                The focus can indeed convert mood to mood, can evoke the words of conversion by which the “substance” of an emotion is transformed into another. We have mythic, religious, literary, poetic, or even scientific terms for such things – and science and religion both amount to a magical use of Latin to lend authority to an idea. The glass of focus contracts into a diamond or diffuses into a mist, but the charge on ideas, the desire of them, the affect, is molded by how we focus. We come to experience things outside the focus, and those experiences push idea into the focus, as if an outer sphere of negative emotions pushed in euphemistic ideas into the focus, so that when we felt hate, we thought of love, and when we wanted to murder, we talked about forgiveness, and when we despised our neighbor, we spoke of tolerance, as if keeping those negative feelings at bay, when in fact that false mask was the presence of the thing we opposed.

                We are most masked with lovers. These people who are most intimate to us, who can see our eyes, our soul, these people teach us the most how to lie, to secure that needed and everblessed sense of solitude with our experience. You owe your whole heart to nobody, not your spouse, friend, child, God, or anybody else. That is yours alone, and truly so, and knowing how to shrewdly hide your experience so that you can experience first hand, and not let another judge you and command you how to experience, means having independence, the central virtue, the heart of the virtues.

                Rape is seldom literal, murder seldom physical, but the idea of them, the principle of them, is not criminal, is ordinary, and effective, even beautiful, in slight gestures, inflections, as parts of our speech, so that a conversation has every inflection of blackmail, or theft, or torture, but in such attenuated rhetorical ways that we never grasp the entirety of them. The bullying of highschool is only the external exhibition of the societal bullying that persists the same in all civilized society. The principles are exposed and obvious in a given instance, but nearly invisible otherwise.

                In the same way, there are moments in our life that expose our hate more than others, moments that expose our jealousy. Only a cynic would say that we “reveal our true selves” in such moments, as if only our worst, most shameful, must ugly parts were “truly” us. When a car accident exposes our gall bladder we have not revealed our “true” self, but exposed part of ourselves that belongs in balance with other organs, out of sight, and getting its healthy expression in the appropriate way.

                This lover blames me endlessly; every time you shut the door, you shut it in my face; this other one is endless accusations, we’ve deadlocked at accusations; and thus my friends become to me, though people I love, something of a pain. I don’t understand these relationships, don’t understand you people. Maybe one day it will make sense. In our best moments we never know what we are doing until years later. The best years of our life are only known to be so in retrospect. Maybe I will never understand my friends.

                Nor do we quite know all a friend, enemy, or even pure stranger means to us, what famous figures, historical figures mean to us. Those who bother us, those we hate, may have seen our shame, seen our weakness, and thought less of us because of it. Secret wounds are the deepest. To have an enemy is to show sympathy – envy is a sort of sympathy, one we often mask ourselves through its opposite, pity, or through indignation or disgust. To have an enemy is to have sympathy, and hence vulnerability – we secretly fear he is right, and we are wrong, and if we are unconscientious in our fight, we feel that guilt all the more. The closer the enemy is to our secret heart, the colder or more violent we must feel towards him.

                When we have morally defeated our enemy, he may fight or scream, or deny or whatever, but in our heart, the doubt is gone, the self-doubt we have personified as our enemy, that is no more. Lacking that leverage over our heart, he is no longer an enemy, but just a fool.

                In this, we have tamed our pain, not when we have “forgiven our enemy,” not when we have “prayed for him,” but when we no longer fear him. He ceases to be an enemy, and requires nothing as passive-aggressive as “forgiveness” or “prayer.”

                Loving others is easy enough. It is easier to love than to know. We can love a person, but understanding them is difficult. Religion is mostly personality cult, not a series of spiritual methods for shaping society. A divine figure is loved, but the divine is not understood. Personality expresses attitude quicker than logic. We appreciate a dynamic figure, and since he energizes us, we think he is “good.” A naïve judgment, but consistent, for all the saints, demigods, prophets, and reformers of history, we conclude they most be wholly ideal because they make us think of the ideal as such. That Martin Luther King Jr. committed adultery with teenagers is – who cares? We must consider the austerity of the poem versus the situatedness of the poem. Having an idealized image of a person, based on how he or she makes us feel, we come to idolize them, to make something divine of them, but not the real divine, which is the actual self of the person – how could we hope to touch that? – but really our own inner divine comes out through the image of others. One cannot live on the word for bread alone, we need to touch, we need intimacy, and in this Eros is the highest love, and the sum of love: creating from us a third thing which we share. The “let there be” of magic may have been replaced by the “please do” of religion, but the higher synthesize is the return of magic in poetry, as science is Latinized, as science is magic that works, as dependence is suffering, and asking please is unworthy the true dignity of man. We come to realize this later, in our strength. Introspecting is retrospective – we never know what our art means when we mean it. Our loves and hates, finally, must be seen for necessary, for when we see a thing as having been necessary, we can finally make free use of it.

                Intimacy may know, but it does not understand. Only distance understands. We gain our touch, our key image, but sexuality is to become a part, a sexed animal is half a whole, a section, losing unity. We are initiated through society through sex, through the world telling us what to desire, but this is not the maturity of the man. The sexual union, which is the entire relationship, not just the moment of bliss, is our completion as bodies. The symbolic suicide that brings us to our life and death, the gesture, the solitude of it, gives us understanding, of how to be something in and of ourselves. We take incest as a symbol for narcissism, secret names and knowledge, we dive into the peculiar world of self-knowledge, come finally into our own, our self-bliss, understand our own mind, and in such a love, when we say Ama, and mean Ama -- and we only truly say Ama when we mean Ama -- then there is and can be no hate in the soul, for she is that being which cannot be hated by anyone anywhere, for she is the substance of the love, and the object of address is mere circumstance. In this, the divine by nature cannot be hated, and there is none that can sin against her. It is impossible to offend her, and those who think they have blasphemed her have not even spoken her name or known her face. Hate, which is so necessary in situating the heart, and protecting the things we love, cannot be applied to the fullness of the all – that is the secret and the mystery not of the saints and mystics and seers, but in fact every man, woman, and child everywhere.

 

 

 

\ ~@M@~ /

perfectidius.com