Thursday, July 25, 2013

THE INSERTION OF A QUEER POINT OF VIEW

Your definitions define you
At the cost of what you're not
Yet what you're not is ironically
That in you which you can't do without

Could a latent desire for projection
Produce such alienating results
Could your constant mythologizing
Render you a consecrated cult

Though what you leave out
Asserts itself amid your denial
By attesting to its indubitability
Insists on a reappraisal

We come to be through negation
An absence we metamorphose to affirm ;
The multiple reflections consciousness refracts
 Our  ineluctability  confirms

Your inadequate platitudes
Reveal what is hidden
Within your own aegis
Our reality comes unbidden

Reflections are necessarily illusory
Validating at the cost of erasure of being
Showing the sanguine, repudiating the uncongenial
They, alternate forms would rather not be seeing.

Still we don't use the forms you deploy
To ratify, that you alone exist
By exploring your  apocryphal constructs .
On our coexistence we persist

Love is a definition definitionless
In which, concerning us, you mouth vitriol
But do recall that in  the paraphernalia of existence
Neither you nor we have the right to control.

Sunday, July 21, 2013

THE UNWRITTEN FACEBOOK.

Reposing on the other side of the globe is a beaming countenance. Does its smiling aspect convey an inner composure? Does the striped shirt, studded with black buttons suggest a sartorial proclivity towards the penumbral? Do the deep set blue eyes, with iridescent specks, hint at an unseen merriment or does the whole package of probity, humorous seriousness demonstrate a veracity of being.

Possible, perhaps to discern the depths of being through the lens of the screen. Possible, indeed to extrapolate from the blueprint of one's own being the dimensions of the other. The wall, streaked with variegated posts suggests an air of unseemly ribaldry intersecting with flashes of erudition. The featureless expanse is suggestive of innumerable possibilities. Stippled with different photographs, with a concatenation of differently composed  individuals aspects of profusion, of life stretching infinitely into innumerable configurations, begins to suggest themselves. The ebb and flow of the screen, depending as it does on the movements of the retina recompose lineaments into multifariousness.

Can a face and indeterminate postings, sometimes written circumspectly, at others injudiciously give a glimpse into being. Is the screen a looking glass over the rim of which distinct forms become palpable so that as the image/truth lengthen and gather palpable shape and the eye expands and sighs with imperceptible pleasure at the absorption of myriads of truths about the human condition. Or does the impersonality of the screen render nebulous any pathways of perception. The optical neurons trace out the associations of physiognomy, consciousness sifts through the labyrinth of their inexhaustible richness and as the faculty of reason intrudes an epiphany burgeons and bursts into arabesques of knowledge and singularly collective filaments of perception.

The looking glass, by itself, remains impassive but the transformation of perception it has wrought becomes a way of life. Images refract prismatically, spectral presences gather tangible accoutrements and enfeebled senses, perhaps dismayed with the actual, seek solace by plumbing the mysteries of humankind through the incandescent virtual.

DIALOGUE BETWEEN A STRAIGHT MAN AND A QUEER THEORIST

Straight man- You postulate an alternate episteme, a zone of knowledge beyond what is there. You render permeable intractable barricades and make subjective certain universal truths.

Queer Theorist- I merely render amorphous your self enclosed definitions. By wrenching your solipsistic aegis outwards i i question the narrowness of your vision.

Straight man- But such a vision as i have has been, since anteriority, ubiquitous. The ebb and flow of rational consciousness has crystallized the veracity of our presence.

Queer theorist- Things exist in relation to one another. What there is draws attention to what's left out. You presuppose categories and phenomena as though they were pervasive. All i do is question the universality of your perspective.

Straight Man- Temporality and spatiality are endowed with their own indivisible constituents. An absence, a void of nothingness cannot rear its head and demand presence. You emerge out of the blankness of existential being and make inexpressibly intransigent claims to validity.

Queer Theorist- But ah you see we never assert validity and neither does your affirmation validate us. We interrogate the congealed eldritch architectonic of your obduracy and out of your kitsch representations and stereotypes make a case for the subjectivity, expediency and relativity of your own being.

Straight Man- I notice that you demonstrate a typical postmodern position of indeterminacy. But such definitions as have existed for so long must have a certain significance. Granted that temporality is relative and phenomena uncertain but to assert that our being itself is nebulous is to undermine the foundations of our existence.

Queer theorist- A very impassioned and voluble asseveration but reason itself is a property of the contingent. And foundations are, by their very nature, precarious and buttressed by a false consciousness of chimerical absolutes. Your being, which you fondly posit as eternal is the product of othering, erasure, obliteration and willful negation.

Straight man- But why must we negate?

Queer theorist- A fascinating query i answered at the beginning. Definitions work through negation. A thing is what it is in relation to what it is not. You conveniently repudiated our indubitable authenticity by presuming ubiquity which could only come to be by denying us to be.

Straight man- Well you've always been there and we've been in denial. However what restitution does universality confer?

Queer theorist - It affirms an imprimatur of sanctity and an undeniable authority before which other forms of being are eclipsed. We don't necessarily say we are as natural as you are. We question the ontology of your putative permeation. Once you start going back to your history the temporal vistas will undulate ad infinitum and a search for answers shall yield further carapaces. Best to agree on our mutual unknowingness and coexist democratically.