[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.12480787 [View]
File: 65 KB, 800x450, B2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12480787

>>12480683
>>12480727
well, i would just say reducing things to language becomes in the end like splitting the atom. the Word means *everything* to us, the Yes or the No, because at some deep level - the level of the drives, which is where the real insano-motor of capitalism, religion, politics, everything tries to tap into, and succeeds, or fails, in various ways - gets kind of incredibly tangled up. No means Yes, and Yes means No, and this should well and truly fill you with a holy terror if you are trying to decoct some operating system for human relations.

if i was looking for any commonality, i would be looking at phenomena like frenzy, or victimization. Hitler never presented himself as being anything but a victim, this is how he summoned up the intoxicating Rage From Beyond that made him so compelling to the Germans to watch. it was there in Trump as well, as much as it is on the Blue Team also. the Greeks knew that frenzy was going to be a problem for them, and so did the Hindus as well. the Kali-Yuga is named after a goddess who only becomes monstrous after she adopts the clever idea of drinking up all of the blood of a demon who multiplies whenever a single one of his blood-droplets hit the ground. this turns her into a force even Beyond-er Good and Evil than anything Nietzsche came up with. Kali became a juggernaut that danced out the creation (until Shiva intervenes, and lies down, and she comes to her senses...which, frankly, may be so much wisthul thinking, but otherwise the story would be too much of a downer, perhaps).

trying to force the universe into the confines of grammar and representation is basically fusion - or is it fission? let's just say it is Crossing the Streams and leave it at that. we can't do it. we *need* symbolic languages to talk about these things, but therein lies the rub: we wind up with symbologies that we then try to graft onto the world again, in a sense, and sometimes we do this through seduction, or ideology, or advertisement, or whatever. that Gilette, for example, gets sucked into this isn't an indication that it doesn't work, but rather that it does. it certainly convinced enough corporate types to go ahead with it. and because it is a tacitly religious idea, you really can't miss: the Believers will Get It, and the unbelievers will confirm their Unbelief.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]