Thursday, September 5, 2013

ON FICTION PART 2

Having acknowledged that the inner, the interior is a bulwark against the chaos of the 21st century we need to ask why is it that it is a scaffolding. What merit does a descent within possess ? The protean, evanescent nature of externality configures phenomena again and again. And regression, a submergence in chaos is an inevitable accompaniment of intersecting subjectivities whose singularity is held up as a sole defense where the outer has become precarious and uncertain.

To what end will a new interior form work and how much of it is a paean to modernism. The modernists turned to the inner as a result of disaffection with the outer. The post post modern has embraced the outer to negate the inner. Obsequy to cliches is an inadequate representation of truth, however much of a construct it may be . The interior is a repository not just of the contingent but the communal. A selfconsciousness permeates this century. The inner could perhaps be channeled to embrace that self consciousness, rend the intractable veils of self deception and arrive at the core, however indeterminate, of humaneness. Self consciousness of self consciousness can be embraced as a methodology in the new form. The form could reflect, albeit unostentatiously, the workings of the unconscious mingled with the stream of association that underpins the unconscious.

The mind is being inundated with a myriad of tactile, visual and written representations. Consciousness, laden with this cornucopia of plentitude gorges on the constituents but does not register the impalpable significations they embody. Knowledge, in its copious, exhaustible profusion proliferates but doesn't translate into self knowledge. What was anomalous has become the quotidian. The barriers of repression have been cleft and reconfigured. What has become apparent is a disenchantment with the replicating, tautologous structures whose pleasures are often a form both of regression and of arriving at a zone of knowing that is null and void. Forms of knowledge have become both self aware and fragmented. At a time when compartments are putatively eschewed newer compartments are being formed. There has been an unleashing of formal, ingenious experimentation with form and their nuances are commendable but their co ordinates reflect the incertitudes and non ontological reality of post post modern life.

Does a form that mirrors this tenuousness sufficient in itself? Is the inner to be turned to in order to escape the depredations of the contemporary? Is inner consciousness the sole defense against the increasingly subdividing, freneticism of the 21st century. A form doesn't merely mirror but informs the context it emanates from. And it is this aspect of form, its traversing of the singularly collective past by travelling through the inner chambers of unexplored layers of mind to affirm the present that can yield answers. The components of humanity are irrefutably patterned though their manifestations differ. The idea of a primordial reversion to our baser natures is nowhere apparent than now. A new form, a new episteme could deliberate on severing yet asseverate cleaving. A navigation of the past would answer the present. And the past would be constitutive of collective patterns of humanity that underpin the here and now. One is not suggesting that slivers of the past proffer solutions to the future. On the contrary the crenellations of the past would in their expression of our collective humanity, provide a framework to shape a nebulous sense of being and becoming . The inner contains ,in its interstice, a peregrination of metonymy and predicate. In the last piece i argued for a reappraisal of our reappraisal . Here i add to it, a reconstitution, despite its amorphousness,mystery and untapped, unanticipated and unrealized potentiality.

No comments:

Post a Comment