Tuesday, September 10, 2013


The interior has been seen as a repository both of the singular and the collective. Could a gaze into its silvered depths yield a fulcrum of being, though that fulcrum would, of necessity, be indeterminate or will it be a form of navel gazing, a profoundly solipsistic immersion in the unconscious that yields rich subject matter but proffers no larger narrative.

The individual is a combination of the contingent and the communal, as acknowledged. It logically follows that though individual experience is singular it contains within itself, nascent blueprints that would make it resonate and relatable to other people. Experience as integument sheathes but billows. Its ebbs and flows, contractions and expansions, retractions and progressions are blent with an expansive structure of continually proliferating consciousness composed of arabesques that are part of a mosaic, indivisible yet conglomerated.

Consciousness, by itself is shaped by forces, norms and ideas that precede it. Yet these phenomena are reconfigured and rendered appropriable. We shape phenomena in as much as they shape us. It is thus perhaps ineluctable that the collective consciousness is an accompaniment to the individual. Would it not follow, therefrom that the possibility of regression and advancement are contained in the individual consciousness ? The new form would locate aspects of being that arose out of a dialectic between the past and the future, underpinned by the present. It would, it channelled usefully create out of this paraphernalia a wholesome mode of being that partakes of the past, informs the future and makes the present protean and kinetic. Experience also works through negation so that should the surface be inimical to the depth it will nonetheless be, despite its opposite nature, a commentary on the very depth it negates. And especially at a time when experience itself has splintered and fragmented and alternative narratives are being explored. An erasure is exposing the power politics behind the original impulse to erase.

Yet this fragmentation is not cohering into a mosaical whole but subdividing further into more compartments. The competing need for an authenticated story has proffered the postulation that ontology is a construct but it has, in the post structuralist parlance, paused at this interstice of telling and acceptance. It hasn't progressed beyond that.

And therefore the stress of a new form would circumvent such a possibility of stasis and suspension. Consciousness is to explore not only the manifestations and workings of its coordinates but its very own nature, its very own telos. Can such a supra self consciously self conscious exploration yield any answers? It is doubtful if it would. But the cornucopia of a kaleidoscopic past, replete with its comminglings and negations, intersections and ricochetings, disavowals and acknowledgements would be a dense tapestry of various temporal points in time where various ideologies, defense mechanisms and survival possibilities reposed. If the present trend, carried to the future hypothetically is a blueprint then so is the past a blueprint, a lesson in how, with a renewed consciousness of consciousness its impulses and propensities can be registered, absorbed, understood and rendered appropriable. The newer form would not merely be content saying 'this is the truth' or that 'this irreality is our only reality. The new form would always ask - 'what next' ?

No comments:

Post a Comment