From Thales to Deleuze I have traced the element of water: its descent and depth, it's surface capacity to reflect the light.
The ashes of Derrida, calcined, pulverized fire on human bodies lost in an unspeakable slaughter I surmised, when set in this solution, settled to an unknown depth, and took on the character of depth itself, though only when added to this solution: surface reflections, and the darkness of depth: Deleuze's "Logic of Sense."
Only today when I read Jung did I begin to speculate on what it might be like if this water were set to a boil: until now the solution has not been this animated, nonetheless to add the element of soul to the waters, these dangerous waters... did I perceive they froth and boil, the boiling of images, like the vision of Zosimos, or this passage from the "Psychology of the Transference" concerning the conjunction:
"The psychology of this central symbol is not at all simple. On a superficial view it looks as if natural instinct has triumphed. But if we examine it more closely we note that the coitus is taking place in the water, the mare tenebrositatis, i.e., the unconscious. This idea is borne out by a variant of the picture. There again Sol and Luna are in the water, but both are winged. They thus represent spirit - they are areal beings, creatures of thought. The texts indicate that Sol and Luna are two vapores or fumi which gradually develop as the fire increases in heat, and which then rise as on wings from the decoctio and digestio of the prima materia. That is why the paired opposites are sometimes represented as two birds fighting, or winged and wingless dragons. The fact that the two areal creatures should mate on or beneath the water does not disturb the alchemist in the least, for he is so familiar with the changeable nature of his synonyms that for him water is not only fire but all sorts of astonishing things besides. If we interpret the water as steam we may be getting nearer the truth. It refers to the boiling solution in which the two substances unite." (paragraph 459)
I have come to wonder if this is true of my current discourse with Oppermann, with Deborah, and with my own analyst. In each case the container of the relationship must be built up over years. The resulting synthesis comes from a super-saturated solution, where the matter of the unconscious, the incest of Gabricus is dissolved into atoms and then permeates the body of Beya... and so on... but let me maintain a slightly different course on this matter for the time being.
It is clear that my favorite philosophers have particular elements that they have enjoyed and played with: Derrida has his ashes, the result of so much fire and burning, but the ashes hold soul: these ashes remain (to me at least) as the relatively untainted aspect of Hades, lord and ruler of Dust... not the aspect of Pluto, god of wealth, but the two change into each other: and Derrida has sold a great many books on his ashes.
The firey consumed earth may be placed in still water and become inert, a sediment seeking its own depth, or the solution may be fired, the ashes animated again, given that they have water, and once again we may begin the process of seeing if we can re-animate this dead solution, given the presence of water.
There is the right and the wrong time for this kind of application of heat and steam. The wrong time is irreverent toward the grief implied in the ashes of a burnt out, exhausted, and brutalized life, and this life cannot be made to turn back to more slippery and wet, steamy solutions until its dust be blown about the planet... possibly many times, and lost at the bottom of oceans for a very long while. Still there is time, and there is time in the soul, which takes as long, and only as long as the soul needs to take.
This is the beginning of an article on the Philosophical Water and other elements. I pray that I have psychologized less and shared more.
There are other philosophers who are worthy only to be committed to the flames of continual consumption in our society, who cannot re-manifest even in the electronic flames of the internet themselves, except as the charring logs of consumer capitalism: the so called academics of American "philosophy:" these philosophers are too green to burn very well, so we will have to stack them up on the shelves and ignore them for a while... perhaps in a thousand years a socio-cultural philosopher will find them of interest: but certainly for reasons far different than the "authors" originally intended: one that is sufficiently calcined and patina'd I might suggest.
The point here is that Derrida's ashes is not a final state, and nor is Deleuze's comparison of surface and depth in his Logic of sense, these are stages of a process that goes on and on: you can always remove the firey, transformative element from the Deleuzian meditation. You can remove the water from the Derridean frame: and then there is a certain stuck-ness that begins to happen. Derrida blows hot and dry, ceaselessly and endlessly writing, apparently (Oppermann unfairly calls this chewing gum, but like chewing gum this epithet concerning Derrida... sticks). It is possible for Deleuze that in some sense the solution he keeps diving into (and as a terrifying aside he died by diving off a balcony), and reflecting: still needs to be compacted and brought in in order to express soul.
Soul is related.
Soul may be said to drive the operations of the philosophers. Many will say that the likes of Deleuze and Derrida were white-hot expressions of intensity: but there is always another stage of soul to meet with: the damn thing keeps changing:
Calcinatio
Putrefactio
Solutio
Mortificatio
Nigredo
Albedo
Rubedo
Coniunctio
and so on and on and on.
Like the Tao Te Ching: even the ideogram for the stillest moment of stillness: can only present a flake of a moment among all the other moments of the soul in its endless transformations...
Hexagram 52
"Bound". Other variations include "keeping still, mountain" and "stilling". Both its inner and outer trigrams are (gèn) bound = mountain
The ashes of Derrida, calcined, pulverized fire on human bodies lost in an unspeakable slaughter I surmised, when set in this solution, settled to an unknown depth, and took on the character of depth itself, though only when added to this solution: surface reflections, and the darkness of depth: Deleuze's "Logic of Sense."
Only today when I read Jung did I begin to speculate on what it might be like if this water were set to a boil: until now the solution has not been this animated, nonetheless to add the element of soul to the waters, these dangerous waters... did I perceive they froth and boil, the boiling of images, like the vision of Zosimos, or this passage from the "Psychology of the Transference" concerning the conjunction:
"The psychology of this central symbol is not at all simple. On a superficial view it looks as if natural instinct has triumphed. But if we examine it more closely we note that the coitus is taking place in the water, the mare tenebrositatis, i.e., the unconscious. This idea is borne out by a variant of the picture. There again Sol and Luna are in the water, but both are winged. They thus represent spirit - they are areal beings, creatures of thought. The texts indicate that Sol and Luna are two vapores or fumi which gradually develop as the fire increases in heat, and which then rise as on wings from the decoctio and digestio of the prima materia. That is why the paired opposites are sometimes represented as two birds fighting, or winged and wingless dragons. The fact that the two areal creatures should mate on or beneath the water does not disturb the alchemist in the least, for he is so familiar with the changeable nature of his synonyms that for him water is not only fire but all sorts of astonishing things besides. If we interpret the water as steam we may be getting nearer the truth. It refers to the boiling solution in which the two substances unite." (paragraph 459)
I have come to wonder if this is true of my current discourse with Oppermann, with Deborah, and with my own analyst. In each case the container of the relationship must be built up over years. The resulting synthesis comes from a super-saturated solution, where the matter of the unconscious, the incest of Gabricus is dissolved into atoms and then permeates the body of Beya... and so on... but let me maintain a slightly different course on this matter for the time being.
It is clear that my favorite philosophers have particular elements that they have enjoyed and played with: Derrida has his ashes, the result of so much fire and burning, but the ashes hold soul: these ashes remain (to me at least) as the relatively untainted aspect of Hades, lord and ruler of Dust... not the aspect of Pluto, god of wealth, but the two change into each other: and Derrida has sold a great many books on his ashes.
The firey consumed earth may be placed in still water and become inert, a sediment seeking its own depth, or the solution may be fired, the ashes animated again, given that they have water, and once again we may begin the process of seeing if we can re-animate this dead solution, given the presence of water.
There is the right and the wrong time for this kind of application of heat and steam. The wrong time is irreverent toward the grief implied in the ashes of a burnt out, exhausted, and brutalized life, and this life cannot be made to turn back to more slippery and wet, steamy solutions until its dust be blown about the planet... possibly many times, and lost at the bottom of oceans for a very long while. Still there is time, and there is time in the soul, which takes as long, and only as long as the soul needs to take.
This is the beginning of an article on the Philosophical Water and other elements. I pray that I have psychologized less and shared more.
There are other philosophers who are worthy only to be committed to the flames of continual consumption in our society, who cannot re-manifest even in the electronic flames of the internet themselves, except as the charring logs of consumer capitalism: the so called academics of American "philosophy:" these philosophers are too green to burn very well, so we will have to stack them up on the shelves and ignore them for a while... perhaps in a thousand years a socio-cultural philosopher will find them of interest: but certainly for reasons far different than the "authors" originally intended: one that is sufficiently calcined and patina'd I might suggest.
The point here is that Derrida's ashes is not a final state, and nor is Deleuze's comparison of surface and depth in his Logic of sense, these are stages of a process that goes on and on: you can always remove the firey, transformative element from the Deleuzian meditation. You can remove the water from the Derridean frame: and then there is a certain stuck-ness that begins to happen. Derrida blows hot and dry, ceaselessly and endlessly writing, apparently (Oppermann unfairly calls this chewing gum, but like chewing gum this epithet concerning Derrida... sticks). It is possible for Deleuze that in some sense the solution he keeps diving into (and as a terrifying aside he died by diving off a balcony), and reflecting: still needs to be compacted and brought in in order to express soul.
Soul is related.
Soul may be said to drive the operations of the philosophers. Many will say that the likes of Deleuze and Derrida were white-hot expressions of intensity: but there is always another stage of soul to meet with: the damn thing keeps changing:
Calcinatio
Putrefactio
Solutio
Mortificatio
Nigredo
Albedo
Rubedo
Coniunctio
and so on and on and on.
Like the Tao Te Ching: even the ideogram for the stillest moment of stillness: can only present a flake of a moment among all the other moments of the soul in its endless transformations...
Hexagram 52
"Bound". Other variations include "keeping still, mountain" and "stilling". Both its inner and outer trigrams are (gèn) bound = mountain
But suddenly I worry that everything I have stated up until now is somehow profoundly wrong, incorrect, uncertain. Yes, I am certain of it that you must think no longer of what was written up until now, even as I leave it for you so that you may understand within it the turning point of this contradiction. The greater truth if there is a truth and it is an "awful" truth, is that the emptiness is endless. There is a shadow to this pleroma, an infinity is always endangered of becoming a bad infinity. Endless transformations, Ja, sure, but in the end the emptiness is endless as well, and it is cold as the first clay of the uninspired Adam. This endless pattern gives ground, rather than groundless spiritedness, sublimatio (which is yet another alchemical action) of seeing that the system expands seemingly endlessly... there is a contraction, congealment (coagulatio), revulsion and withdrawing from the scathing trouble of emptiness. Such forced coagulation, withdrawl before the emptiness of being: creates and preserves the troubled self in the shape of human Dasein. Or perhaps the withdrawl before this emptiness, the constant coagulation of time past itself will manifest not only as "human" (perhaps as Gadamer suggests this may have another thousand years to it at the most) but as "other" Dasein that may be invented in our age or beyond it.
In this sense it may be hoped that the "Withdrawl of Emptiness" is not merely the force of "developing civilization" that will somehow conquer the searing force of this vacuum itself... somehow before the emptiness of withdrawl there will be withdrawl of the Dasein that sought to conquer and subdue (and possibly "sub-dude") the advent of this useless and meaningless emptiness.
Now I wish I could write you a melody so plain
That could hold you dear lady from going insane
That could ease you and cool you and cease the pain
Of your useless and pointless knowledge
No comments:
Post a Comment