Thursday, March 17, 2016
To say that we should lose all objectivity is a nonsense.
Without objective all hope is lost.
We play constantly with scaring ourselves with "conceal - reveal" with ever diminishing returns.
Conceal - Reveal.
Presence - Absence.
With no point(s) by which to orientate.
We lose our minds.
We sink into oblivion...or fascism.
Where there is life we may will hope.
Hope is the hump of a camel throbbing between our thighs the time of a blinding storm.
Is this to become camel/sand/man assemblage or a heroic fight against the odds?
Can the two be disassembled?
Would Sean Penn's "Into the Wild" be Malick's fragrant "New World" with masonihilistic bravado?
Is Inarratu's "The Revenant" some sort of survivalist "Death Wish" - a sadocolonialism in furs?
What do such depictions of nature say of our nature...of our grasp on our reality?
Can empathy only ever be subjective?
If we are subject to nature, do we lose all objectivity?
If we abandon all grasp on objectivity do we lose all hope for compassion?
Is forgiveness to accept that we may be more than just beast?
Is our nature only read in tooth and claw?
Do lines of flight continue beyond a (our) vanishing point?
“there is no line separating earth and sky; there is no intermediate distance, no perspective or contour; visibility is limited; and yet there is an extraordinarily fine topology that relies not on points or objects, but rather on haecceities, on sets of relations (winds, undulations of snow or sand, the song of the sand, the creaking of the ice, the tactile qualities of both).”
Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari. Mille Plateaux.
[Found in Deleuze and Space. The Smooth and the Striated.]