What Comes First?  XHerakleitos - 8/20/10
            Priorities are clearly out of whack, things aren't 
              working. The slate is more blank than usual and here comes the question. 
              We usually don't ask it so much as it comes at us with a 
              harrowing, gut level aversion to creaking, rusty hinges swinging 
              emergency's door wide open. Contingency can abound coarsely enough 
              that no plan holds up, as if reality had a hole in every pocket. 
              What comes first now? There's no quick answer. But if timing is everything, one can't 
              tarry with it forever. 
             Sometimes you just have to move without a clear answer. 
              And for the sake of the kids, one may need to pretend to know. When 
              they're experienced, they'll understand that not even trial and 
              error can gain purchase unless some moves are made.  
             One philosopher once made a similar point, characterizing 
              another's fear of error as a fear of truth. In their own way each 
              wrestled with first questions, what comes first, and how really 
              to begin. Philosophy struggles to remain in the question... 
              But, whatever that means, if we are really struck and stuck with 
              this question now, what's more annoying than philosophy's 
              inaccessible torsions, what's more obvious than its exorbitant irrelevancy? 
             Economic trauma nationally.. globally. The sublime 
              confidence in markets and hyper-consumerism swept into a torrent 
              of uncertainty. A climactic clusterfuck, where all of us catch up 
              to scientific consensus that we've been unconsciously terraforming 
              our own planet. Nuclear genies popping out of too many bottles - 
              and a palpable sense that this is only one facet of a technological 
              overload to any regulative faculties. Meanwhile, in a strange market 
              for answers, religious extremism and slick bombast blooms in a petri 
              dish bereft of any rational immunology. Science can't answer our 
              deepest questions, 'politics' has become synonymous with 'bullshit', 
              "breaking news" is broken news, and kitchens once alive in the art 
              of healthy discourse are running wild with cockroaches and vermin. 
            
               "There's flies in the kitchen 
                I can hear 'em there buzzing  
                And I ain't done nothing since I woke up today. 
                How the hell can a person go to work in the morning  
                And come home in the evening and have nothing to say"  
             
             Can we fashion anything like an Angel from Montgomery, 
              discover some transcendental pardon from this sentence, or are we 
              doomed to believe in this living? Amidst bewilderment 
              sliding into torpor, we want to believe there's a diamond hiding 
              in the dust. I want to say there's an echo, maybe just a latent 
              reverberation of what really makes us ourselves. 
             If we experience those unforeseen, beautiful moments 
              where we see ourselves in another - and know with some crazy certainty 
              that they see themselves in us, then we're both alive to something 
              amazing. In the advent of that weird mutual ken, a kind of recognition 
              we recognize even if we can't quite put a finger on just what it 
              is, there's a solvent that cuts the rust of dogmatism and paint-by-numbers 
              ideology. There's a catalyst for ritual, tradition, and language 
              to rework itself. There's an answer to the question of what comes 
              first now. We could be missing it, and dimly trying to find our 
              way back to something we already know. But it's a damn good answer 
              nevertheless. Because whatever the larger problems, getting out 
              is going to take allies - or at the very least is in some manner 
              connected to working with others. 
             Even with this provisional answer, we're thrown into 
              philosophy like it or not. When things are so bad we're hit with 
              terrifying intimations of the need to question and rework our most 
              basic premises, philosophy throws itself at us. But oh no... its 
              dated wardrobe of anachronistic costumes, the horror of the abstruse, 
              of an alienated discourse inside museums where "infinity goes up 
              on trial". And yet, insofar as philosophy tries to keep itself in 
              the question, perhaps at its best it could mean nothing more esoteric 
              than trying to hang on to a critically important pulse hitched 
              alongside and running counter to any scheme of reason wherein we 
              might get trapped - a cultivated infusion of the Mona Lisa's smile. 
             At some levels I think we all get this. Everyday 
              we're moving in and about a constellation of ritual enactments, 
              loose roles and figurative frames. Generally we see incompetence 
              (and fear becoming prey to it) in two ways: Either someone is too 
              engrossed in one frame, oblivious to shifting gears when appropriate, 
              or too disengaged from any particular frame such that they 
              can't get any traction into what is really going on. You can't get 
              too drunk with the swill of any one joint, can't zone out altogether. 
              We have to check either possible fate. 
             The secret sauce for that balancing act may be a 
              challenge to talk about, but one can see it. It shows itself 
              already in small children playing, almost naively able to negotiate 
              the rules of role-play games, slide into the parts and bounce back 
              out again. In one turn suspending and tooling the game, in another 
              letting go and suspending disbelief. Amidst this dance, the kids 
              who get stuck in either extreme aren't much fun to play with. 
             "You've heard the 11th Commandment haven't you?", 
              my Grandfather would ask the bent out of shape Baptist Preacher 
              in an oft repeated story. "No such thing", says the Preacher. "Oh 
              yes there is: Thou shall not take thyself too damned seriously". Let's 
              borrow a youthful spark of wonder and hold it like a vaccine 
              against taking ourselves and any one story too damned seriously. 
              Let's remember that mutual zone of recognition where the "we" happens, an 
              ironic cogitamus ergo sum, a "we think therefore I am". 
             Up against all we face now, then we might really 
              appreciate the truth of fiction, know ourselves better, and keep one
	      step ahead of dogmatism. It could well be the first thing in 
	      learning to laugh again. 
 |