Not sure if this is the write place to post my own writing. Intend to cover more specifically philosophy and post modern topics. Tried posting it on writing forums but with little response.
The concept:
I am a fine art student and have come to think that a lot of my subject matter, largely conceptual dealing with theme’s ranging from the self to post modern modes of thought to ideas surrounding paradox, duality, science and religion could equally effectively if not more effectively be addressed through writing. I already write books of notes and relate my ideas through essays so a logical step seems to explore a purely written form.
I don’t want to write a philosophy/psychology/science etc. solely academic text, I also don’t want to proclaim in anyway my conclusions or thoughts as a definite answer but as a subjective train of thought. I also want to build up an impression not just of my ideas but my interactions with those around me, their personalities and my own.
I want to avoid writing in the overall structure of a narrative or argument, more in fragments, instances, interactions, reflections which at once are autonomous and make up a whole. Structured quite like some of Nietzsche’s philosophy written in segments.
A collection of brief events, thoughts, interactions and concepts which work as a whole but also individually.
Here’s my try at three chunks: one personal/emotional, one philosophy/psychology/art, one political.
Feedback on the idea and/or the writing would be greatly appreciated.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I look at Hatt sat beside me mouthing the words of the Sublime track she played every morning in our first weeks together when we only had her laptop for entertainment. 'You killed that song' my strongest association, not memories of that happy and exciting time when we fell in love. Why do I deny myself sentimentality so easily grasped? Obstinacy, a refusal to back down even though no one else cares or the comfort of viewing something in a singular and definite way, even reducing all thought on the matter down to four words. Such simplicity is an anchor in a sea of contradictions, complications and layers, one which I have dislodged by acknowledging its existence. Ignorance is if not bliss at least a good defence against yourself.
Hatt however relishes in the familiarity of the song and the memories of friends and times it evokes. She does not then go on to think how these memories are mediating her experience of the song and combining in an emotional response that could have very little to do with the music. I admire her, she empathises in a way that I rarely approach and does it naturally even instinctively, this gives her a warmth and engagement that make her overwhelmingly charming.
We are on the train to Devon with the intention of having some 'wholesome fun' but the underlying knowledge that we are destined to end up watching dvd's at five am doing drugs to keep us awake. Although in Bristol we generally avoid this sort of outcome; when faced with a place you spent many years ignoring through drug use and the people who helped you, the weight of the past is against you. This statement evades personal responsibility and denies any chance of self control, both classic addiction strategies. I know this, but still take comfort in it. I am sure we will fit in a cliff walk or two and a Hockings ice cream to make us feel better about the situation when we get home. I am glad I still don't live in it.
“From a low hill in the Athi plains of East Africa I once watched the vast herds of wild animals grazing in soundless stillness, as they had done from time immemorial, touched only by the breath of a primeval world. I felt them as if I were the first man, the first creature, to know that all this is. The entire world around me was still in its primeval state; it did not know that it was. And then, in that one moment in which I came to know, the world sprang into being; without that moment it would never have been.” (Carl Jung – insert page number etc here…..)
Jung manages to be at once inspiring and self indulgent, I suppose philosophers and psychologists putting forward their all encompassing theories must be to certain extent or at least when they are trying to be definite about anything as Jung was. It is not of course the ‘post-modern’ way but although never ‘correct’ this definite self belief or at least the projection of it allowed unfettered forging ahead of ideas. It also allowed the reader to become involved and romantic about the notions not detached and obsessively analytical, it had more joy. This in mind I try to read Jung with a duality of thought, first involving myself, giving myself up to the ideas; then stepping back and picking out whatever survives my cynical detached analysis as worthwhile.
So, the grandeur of that moment of realisation and consciousness, harking back to that first magnificent moment linked across time, a magnificently romantic and poignant experience. The first moment however was undoubtedly not cherished or pondered over let alone basked in because it was experienced by an individual who’s absolute priorities were ‘Food, Shelter, Reproduce’ and the rest of his existence, knowledge, thoughts and actions revolved these priorities. He would have realised that he and everything else existed and gained consciousness to facilitate his survival not gain a deeper spiritual self awareness. This said underneath the grandeur and assumptions what I think is really valid is just sitting and noticing everything being still and clear of mind and absorbing your surroundings be they the Himalayan peaks or your park. This sort of almost meditation on something natural and linked to times before all our modern day worries can bring about a deeper understanding of ourselves and the world around us although likely not one as self important as Jung’s, it can simply calm and relax us or it might just make us bored. We are probably capable of all three. I suppose I am being a little belittling, deliberation on the nature of consciousness is a vastly interesting and stimulating subject with absolutely no chance of a definite answer, which makes it all the more appealing.
It is another of Jung’s ideas that really fascinates me ‘the collective unconscious’, the whole concept, how he discovered it; all really satisfying and conceptual in a spiritual way. What I picked out as useful in my fine art practice though is the simple methodology of taking cultural artifacts (he used myths) stripping them of all specifics and cultural detail leaving the basic themes which are common across many cultures and speak of their values and their relation to a primordial state. I picked films as in our media saturated culture they sum up and influence a more general set of values from a culture than religion does. I picked Bond, Kung Fu and Westerns as symbolic of each cultures idealised values and once applying Jung’s methodology I was left with ‘Hunt, Kill, Reproduce’, the basic survival pattern of purely predatory animals like lions. More primitive than any primates and far less complex or ‘human’ than the myths Jung analysed. I set about making work illustrating this idea and the themes around it; I won’t bore you with the details, look at the art.
“Peace hippy”, I jump a little as one of the tramps from my street looks at me in a casually confrontational way, he makes the peace sign with his grubby worn hand. He looks a bit punk, a bit traveller and clearly wants to make his presence, his judgement and his difference known. Startled I blurt out “alright mate” my standard response and walk on by, I am used to ignoring people, a skill I have honed living in the city and I do not dwell on the matter. Three asian boys are walking along behind me; “lets go back, come on” evidently his shock tactics had delayed response till after the moment was passed, or perhaps false bravado “what did he say?” “Peace Indians!” “Come on lets go back!” I glance around the smallest of the three teenagers has stopped to solidify his suggestion, but his friends walk on, he runs to catch up his stance aggressive and proud, happy he has proven himself the toughest. As I walk into the underpass and they carry on I hear something about Islam. I am divided on how I feel about the incident my first reaction is to judge their behaviour by how myself or people I know well would react. I have been mistaken as Dutch on holiday more than once and never showed any anger; anyway rising to that sort of behaviour is not going to get you anywhere. The aggressive, immature fools I think dismissing the tramps role as standard. But then I have little or no religious tendencies and besides language few patriotic sentiments, these boys could have strong feelings about both of these things. Where however does this line of reasoning take me, accepting any action by people not sharing my values as acceptable or dismissing any action I cannot empathise with as wrong. I am viewing the world from a fixed subjective viewpoint, to actually ‘put yourself in their shoes’ is impossible in any way more real than a thought process. I can see myself being equally offended by someone claiming to know exactly what I am thinking or someone disputing a viewpoint or action of mine. However empathy is a vital human characteristic. I stop thinking about the matter, to suppose that there is a ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answer to the overall issue or even any specific example is either naïve or arrogant and it could be an endless debate, also after this ramble I now lack any decisive feeling on the incident in question. I walk on into town to carry out my trivial chores, I might make it nice by stopping for flapjack and tea at the market, no wonder Hatt says I act middle aged.