Protected: A Tribute to Georges Bataille.

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Protected: Iker’s Dream: Everyday Interpretation (1)

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Protected: Iker’s Dream

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Eros’ Mischief

Allow me to take you on a journey, grab a seat and you might possibly need a seat-belt – it will be a bumpy one. We are dirt cheap, all of us. We are the cheapest beings on the planet. We have no elegance, we lack daring, we lack passion, we lack what some would call naive foolishness. The kind of naive foolishness that makes every breath worth having. The kind of passion that enflames a heart and warms all that comes into contact with it… we’ve become cold creatures with every thought that tries to divorce itself from this necessity. We are all planets – where is the sun?

Iker was accidentally reading the following from a fascinating little soul…

—-

What Tarquin said where the poppy blooms was understood by the Son, but not by the messenger.

….

A young lad falls in love with a princess, the content of his whole life lies in this love, and yet the relationship is one that cannot possibly be brought to fruition, be translated from ideality into reality. The slaves of misery, the frogs in life’s swamp, naturally exclaim: ‘Such love is foolishness; the rich brewer’s widow is just as good and sound a match.’ Let them croak away undisturbed in the swamp. This is not the manner of the knight of infinite resignation, he does not renounce the love, not for all the glory in the world. He is no trifler. He first makes sure that this really is the content of his life, and his soul is too healthy and proud to squander the least thing on getting drunk. He is not cowardly, he is not afraid to let his love steal upon his most secret, most hidden thoughts, to let it twine itself in countless coils around every ligament of his consciousness – if the love becomes unhappy he will never be able to wrench himself out of it. He feels a blissful rapture when he lets it tingle through every nerve, and yet his soul is as solemn as his who has emptied the cup of poison and feels the juice penetrate to every drop of blood – for this moment is life and death. Having thus imbibed all the love and absorbed himself in it, he does lack not the courage to attempt and risk everything. He reflects over his life’s circumstances, he summons the swift thoughts that like trained doves obey his every signal, he waves his rod over them, and they rush off in all directions. But not when they all return as messengers of sorrow and explain to him that it is an impossibility, he becomes quiet, he dismisses them, he remains alone, and he performs the movement. If what I say here has any meaning the movement must take place properly. For the knight will then, in the first place, have the strength to concentrate the whole if his life’s content and the meaning of reality in a single wish. If a person lacks this concentration, this focus, his soul is disintegrated from the start, and then he will never come to make the movement, he will act prudently in life like those capitalists who invest their capital in every kind of security so as to gain on the one what they lose on the other – in short, he is not a knight. Secondly, the knight has the strength to concentrate the whole of the result of his reflection into one act of consciousness. If he lacks this focus his soul is disintegrated from the start and he will then never have time to make the movement, he will be forever running errands in life, never enter the eternal; for at the very moment he is almost there he will suddenly discover that he has forgotten something and go back. The next moment he will think it possible, and that is also quite correct; but through such considerations one never comes to make the movement; rather with their help one sinks ever deeper into the mire.

So the knight makes the movement, but what movement? Does he want to forget the whole thing? Because in that too there is a kind of concentration. No! for the knight does not contradict himself, and it is a contradiction to forget the whole of one’s life’s content and still be the same. He has no inclination to become another, seeing nothing at all great in that prospect. Only lower natures forget themselves and become something new. Thus the butterfly has altogether forgotten that it was a caterpillar, perhaps it can so completely forget in turn that it was a butterfly and that it can become a fish. Deeper natures never forget themselves and never become something other than they were. So the knight will remember everything; but the memory is precisely the pain, and yet in his infinite resignation he is reconciled with existence. His love for the princess would take on for him the expression of an eternal love, would acquire a religious character, be transfigured into a love for the eternal being which, although it denied fulfilment, still reconciled him once more in the eternal consciousness of his love’s validity in an eternal form that no reality can take from him. Fools and young people talk about everything being possible for a human being. But that is a great mistake. Everything is possible spiritually speaking, but in the finite world there is much that is not possible. This impossibility the knight nevertheless makes possible by his expressing it spiritually, but he expresses it spiritually by renouncing it. The desire which would convey him out into reality, but came to grief on an impossibility, now bends inwards but is not lost thereby nor forgotten. At times it is the unconscious workings of the desire in him which awaken the memory, at others it is he himself that awakens it, for he is too proud to want to let the whole content of his life seem to have been but a fleeting affair of the moment. He keeps this love young, and it grows with him in years and beauty. On the other hand, he needs no finite occasion for its growth. From the moment he made the movement the princess is lost. He needs none of this erotic titillation of the nerves at the sight of the loved one, etc., nor does he need in a finite sense to be continually making his farewell, for his memory of her is an eternal one, and he knows very well that those lovers who are eager to see one another one more time to say farewell are right to be eager, right to think it will be the last time; for as soon as may be they will have forgotten one another. He has grasped the deep secret that even in loving another one should be sufficient unto oneself. He pays no further finite attention to what the princess does and just this proves he has the movement infinitely. Here we have the opportunity to see whether the movement in the individual is proper or not. There was a person who also believed he has made the movement, but time went by, the princess did something else, she married, say, a prince, and his soul lost the resilience of resignation. He knew then that had not made the movement correctly; for one who has infinitely resigned is enough unto himself. The knight does not cancel his resignation, he keeps it, just as young as in the first instance, he never lets it go, simply because he has made the movement infinitely. What the princess does cannot disturb him, it is only lower natures who have the law for their actions in someone else, the premises for their actions outside themselves. If, on the other hand, the princess is similarly disposed there will be a beautiful development. She will then introduce herself into that order of knighthood whose members are not admitted by ballot but which anyone can join who has the courage to admit him- or herself, that order of knighthood which proves its immortality by making no distinction between man and woman. She too will have kept her love young and sound, she too will have overcome her agony, even though she does not, as the song says, ‘lie by her lord’s side’. These two will then be suited for each other in all eternity, with such a strict-tempoed pre-established harmony that were some moment to come, a moment with which they were nevertheless not concerned finitely, for in the finite world they would grow old – were such a moment to come which allowed their love its expression in time, then they would be in a position to begin precisely where they would have begun had they been united from the beginning. The one, whether man or woman, who understands this can never be deceived, for it is only lower natures who imagine they are deceived. No girl who lacks this pride really knows what it is to love, but if she is so proud, then all the world’s stratagems and ingenuity cannot deceiver her.

In infinite resignation there is peace and repose; anyone who wants it, who has not debased himself, can discipline himself by – what is still worse than being too proud – belittling himself, can discipline himself into making this movement, which in its pain reconciles one to existence. Infinite resignation is that shirt in the old fable. The thread is spun with tears, bleached with tears, the shirt sewn in tears, but then it also gives better protection than iron and steel. A defect of the fable is that a third party is able to make the material. The secret in life is that everyone must sew it for himself; and the remarkable thing is that a man can sew it just as well as a woman. In infinite resignation there is peace and repose and consolation in the pain, that is if the movement is made properly. I could easily fill a whole book with the various misunderstandings, awkward positions, and slovenly movements I have encountered in just my own slight experience. People believe very little in spirit, yet it is precisely spirit that is needed to make this movement; what matters is its not being a one-sided result of dira necessitas; the more it is that the more doubtful it always is that the movement is proper. To insist that a frigid, sterile necessity is necessarily present is to say that no one may experience death before actually dying, which strikes me as crass materialism. Yet in our time people are less concerned with making pure movements. Suppose someone wanting to learn to dance said: ‘For hundreds of years now one generation after another has been learning dance steps, it’s high time I took advantage of this and began straight off with a set of quadrilles.’ One would surely laugh a little at him: but in the world of spirit such an attitude is considered utterly plausible.

Infinite resignation is the last stage before faith, so that anyone who has not made this movement does not have faith; for only in infinite resignation does my eternal validity become transparent to me, and only then can there be talk of grasping existence on the strength of faith.

[Fear & Trembling, Soren Kierkegaard]

—-

Iker reading this dropped to his knees and began to weep. He saw his life come to fruition in these words. It tore him inside but with each tear he experienced a relief, a sense of composure, a sense of togetherness that he could not explain. He got up, dusted his shoulders, cut loose the strings that were pulling the limbs of his heart and continued his journey. He waved with a tearful nod at his Ilsara, she had been the messenger all along, but he never knew this, he was lost in her reflection – hopeless mirror that he is. He realized that he was the Prince, and Tarquin had sent him the message.

Love is either this risk, this pang of existence, this hurling into the abyss, so that in a moment one gains everything… in one breath of air one gains their life without a single sigh… or it is nothing at all. It is this or love has never existed, simply because it has always existed. Love and Faith are closely enmeshed, one cannot live and be in love without these two compatriots, this eternally wedded couple.

The Lover’s Maxim #1

Two halves do not always make a coherent whole, but two wholes always make an interesting pair.

The Eternal Struggle of Humanity

*Ok Fred, you’ve persuaded me. Even though I do not see a possibility of this happening in this way, it is perhaps the best way.*

People are torn asunder by themselves. People’s biggest battle is not the world, but themselves. People even in this time and age suffer from the debris of customs, alas, from customs themselves. People must find a way to sever themselves from jealousy and their need for love in another. People must find a way to not seek their identity in another, or they will never know happiness with another or with themselves. People’s struggle is this: they cannot find themselves in themselves, they must always seek themselves in another. People need to break this vicious circle, or they will never be happy. They must find a way to love themselves; regardless of anyone else.

Now more than ever woman needs man, to help her realize this. And man needs woman to help him realize this. This and only this is where and when man/woman must prove himself/herself, all other proofs are idiosyncratic and nauseating. Now more than ever man/woman must be strong enough in him/herself to allow her/him the space to be her/himself without him/her or anyone else in the world. People must attain their individuality independently of other people especially him/her, so that she/he can more fully experience life, herself and him (and vice verse). They must do this or else they are doomed to never become a woman/man, and remain a little girl/boy through their fear and desire for secutiry. Security will kill them, because it allows them a way to escape from herself and run into another, a mask, in the form of him/her or a simulacrum they have created for themselves to hide from themselves; from facing themselves.

This is the eternal struggle, and one hopes for the birth of a kind of man/woman that can allow and aid this to happen, one prays day and night. For the cornerstone of humanity is not philosophy, not science, not politics etc… but the constituents that make all the prior and humanity itself possible: woman and man, and/or, man and woman.

Craig-Martin: an Oak Tree, courtesy of Fracture Mechanics

Here is Martin’s Question and Answer regarding the piece:

 

 

Question & Answer by Michael Craig-Martin

 

Q. To begin with, could you describe this work?

A. Yes, of course. What I’ve done is change a glass of water into a full-grown oak tree

without altering the accidents of the glass of water.

Q. The accidents?

A. Yes. The colour, feel, weight, size …

Q. Do you mean that the glass of water is a symbol of an oak tree?

A. No. It’s not a symbol. I’ve changed the physical substance of the glass of water into

that of an oak tree.

Q. It looks like a glass of water.

A. Of course it does. I didn’t change its appearance. But it’s not a glass of water, it’s an

oak tree.

Q. Can you prove what you’ve claimed to have done?

A. Well, yes and no. I claim to have maintained the physical form of the glass of water

and, as you can see, I have. However, as one normally looks for evidence of physical

change in terms of altered form, no such proof exists.

Q. Haven’t you simply called this glass of water an oak tree?

A. Absolutely not. It is not a glass of water anymore. I have changed its actual

substance. It would no longer be accurate to call it a glass of water. One could call it

anything one wished but that would not alter the fact that it is an oak tree.

Q. Isn’t this just a case of the emperor’s new clothes?

A. No. With the emperor’s new clothes people claimed to see something that wasn’t

there because they felt they should. I would be very surprised if anyone told me they

saw an oak tree.

Q. Was it difficult to effect the change?

A. No effort at all. But it took me years of work before I realised I could do it.

Q. When precisely did the glass of water become an oak tree?

A. When I put the water in the glass.

Q. Does this happen every time you fill a glass with water?

A. No, of course not. Only when I intend to change it into an oak tree.

Q. Then intention causes the change?

A. I would say it precipitates the change.

Q. You don’t know how you do it?

A. It contradicts what I feel I know about cause and effect.

Q. It seems to me that you are claiming to have worked a miracle. Isn’t that the case?

A. I’m flattered that you think so.

Q. But aren’t you the only person who can do something like this?

A. How could I know?

Q. Could you teach others to do it?

A. No, it’s not something one can teach.

Q. Do you consider that changing the glass of water into an oak tree constitutes an art

work?

A. Yes.

Q. What precisely is the art work? The glass of water?

A. There is no glass of water anymore.

Q. The process of change?

A. There is no process involved in the change.

Q. The oak tree?

A. Yes. The oak tree.

Q. But the oak tree only exists in the mind.

A. No. The actual oak tree is physically present but in the form of the glass of water.

As the glass of water was a particular glass of water, the oak tree is also a particular

oak tree. To conceive the category ‘oak tree’ or to picture a particular oak tree is not to

understand and experience what appears to be a glass of water as an oak tree. Just as it

is imperceivable it also inconceivable.

Q. Did the particular oak tree exist somewhere else before it took the form of a glass

of water?

A. No. This particular oak tree did not exist previously. I should also point out that it

does not and will not ever have any other form than that of a glass of water.

Q. How long will it continue to be an oak tree?

A. Until I change it.

—————–

This is my comment to solarflea:

What an insufferable man, haha. Yet, because of this I am drawn to trying to understand his point. Funny thing really…

What is going on here? How has he made a glass of water on a shelf into an oak tree? I feel like just getting in there and starting from what we know, seeing if he would agree. There is the perception of a glass of water (on the shelf), everyone would agree, and at the same time there is Mr. Martin saying actually no, it is an oak tree. What does a mind do (my mind anyway)? It stops, computes what it’s just received and then formulates a picture of an oak tree. Once it’s done this, it juxtaposes this picture with the picture of the glass in front of it. In this juxtaposition it looks for similarities and differences (homogeneity/heterogeneity). If it finds any of the former, it draws a comparison; any of the latter, it moves away in ignorance and quite possibly annoyance (e.g. fuck off mate, you’re an idiot).

Now what happens when any comparison that is made by the viewer is rejected by the creator (Mr. Martin)? The viewer enters what psychologists call cognitive dissonance and repeats the process over in search for the homogeneity. This is because the viewer is heavily invested in knowing Mr. Martin’s comparison, even if it was absolutely arbitrary and there is no comparison – which is probably the limit of the viewer’s thoughts. This reveals the biggest thing about what a mind does and what it is invested in. A mind knows that absolutely no homogeneity will be drawn between two things unless it is in there somewhere; no label of one thing will be added to another which is different unless there is a similarity somewhere between those things. What is one to think in the presence of this insufferable man who just pushes the viewer further into a solipsistic state, or rather to be a little fairer, into a completely subjective state. It’s as if Mr. Martin wishes to stress the point that language is not communication at all, if anything it is miscommunication. This is a mind’s way of trying to make Martin objective, because it is necessary to the mind that Martin is objective, that Martin is calculable and predictable.

Anyways, I can go on and on… I’ll stop here and hear what you reckon.

 

Philosophy’s Promise

Philosophy needs to stop incestuously courting Science to the point where it seeks to become it. It must consolidate and collaborate with Science, but it must always seek to surpass it. Science may say ‘what is’ very well, and Philosophy can draw the boundaries of the possibility of what is, to what can be or become, so that Science can adequately extend itself without going too far and needlessly. Science needs a guardian angel, one that it can employ in the form of Philosophy.

Contemporary Classical Dating and Courtship… part 1

Here lies a setting not so unfamiliar, or so I hope; a setting that we have been a part of, or one that we are aware of. The atmosphere surrounding our two companions is dense with desire. In a moment, all is negligible except these two human beings of the opposite sex, that are getting to know each other in a quasi-traditional phenomenon we prefer to designate the mundane word, ‘date’. All seems normal; our humble and nice fellow Martin is enjoying a non-threatening cocktail with our fervently desirable and savvy lady Elyse. Sitting facing each other, Martin is drinking an illustrious Mojito Royal and our dear Elyse has requested an unusual, yet tactical, virgin Bloody Mary. Martin, leaning more forward than one would appreciate, expressing a closed body and a tender aggression that persuades Elyse to bring her slim shoulders back to her chair. Martin’s gaze is one of admiration mixed with smug success, while Elyse accidentally betrays a certain discomfort and almost haughty demeanour with her own. There are of course more to our two current subjects and the situation, much more beneath the appearance of the situation; the appearance deludes, and this delusion makes one yearn for an unfolding. One ardently desires to unfold the thoughts and agendas of each of our two subjects, and through this road perhaps build a better understanding. It is perhaps most rewarding and most noxious to attempt to bring to surface what is hidden behind phenomena. Non-the-less, it is desirable and by this desire one can proceed to the unfolding, head high.

Adjacent this scene sits an observer, a perceptual subject, someone that manifests the causations, elusions and illusions that are fertile in such ‘normal’ encounters. Try and imagine being able to see more and deeper than usual, not just what is present to you there and then, but what hides underneath it. Can we be bold enough to say that that is the truth or the essence of the phenomenon; why the phenomenon is? Further, can we be bold enough to say that our perceptive comrade, Mr. Jabin, serves as a medium for the unfolding? Mr. Jabin encounters this truth of the phenomenon and shocks our modest Martin and Elyse. Anyways, the rest of this post will proceed in dialogue format.

Martin: What a lovely night, don’t you think?

Elyse: I agree, it’s beautiful.

Martin: You know, when I asked you out, I was rather worried you would say no. There was something about you that put me in anticipation.

Elyse: What do you mean?

Martin: I don’t know, you appear very together and sure of yourself, so much so that made me question my self-assuredness.

Elyse: Really, I didn’t know I did that to people; you’re the first to make it apparent. I wonder if everyone feels the same.

Martin: I wouldn’t know, but I’m glad I’m of some use.

Elyse: …

Martin: I am sure you’ve experienced this question before, and who hasn’t, but I will try to make it as interesting as I can. What is your great contribution to our humble world?

Elyse: I don’t get it; you mean what do I do?

Martin: (Nods)

Elyse: Oh, I am a beauty consultant for a modeling agency; don’t know if you’ve heard of it – Slim and Slender?

Martin: Right.

Elyse: Yeah, I mostly deal with make-up and skincare.

Martin: How did you get into beauty consultation?

… After an hour and twenty minutes of two cocktails, endless probing questions by Martin and Elyse asking no personal questions in return; Martin will ask the most penetrating question that will pierce right through the date for these two. He gazes at his watch and proceeds…

Martin: How would like to go to a club? I have some friends that are meeting up in central.

Elyse: No thanks, I should really be getting home; I had a nice time though. I will call you sometime.

Martin: Why not?

Elyse: It’s just getting late you know, I have arrangements for tomorrow morning, and I’ve a long day.

Martin: Oh come on, a couple of hours won’t hurt. Plus you’ve got nothing to lose, you’ll meet new people, go to a lively environment, you won’t even feel your fatigue. I promise to get you back home a.s.a.p. to sleep in time for tomorrow.

Elyse: Really, Martin, thank you but I’d rather go home and spend the night in.

Martin: Come on, don’t be boring, and live on the edge a little. Come out and have a great time.

Elyse: You agree that all night I’ve asked you no questions, I’m sure you’ve wondered why; after all you appear to be an astute fellow.

Martin: …

Elyse: So here is my first and only question of the night to you, Martin. From this, I will know all I need to know about you – or maybe I already know who you are and what you are about, and this is just me seeking an affirmation. Tell me Martin, why do you really want me to come clubbing with you?

At this point Martin is flabbergasted, unaware of where that came from and fully aware of the intention. He sweats ever so slightly but inside he is steaming, he knows not what to say.

Martin: … I want you to come out and have some fun with me and a couple of mates; that’s all.

Elyse: Have fun with you and your friends? Or you hoping that they will sell you to me; tell me how great a lover and person you are. Or maybe your friends are just an excuse and you just want to have some fun with me?

Martin: … No.

Elyse: Listen, I am not stupid, I would have thought that my having no alcohol the whole night was obvious enough. I know what you want and I know what I don’t – you are the latter. Nevertheless I want to be sure, so answer my question, why do you want me to come out clubbing with you?

Martin: I…

Mr. Jabin: …Want to sleep with you.

Elyse & Martin: …

Mr. Jabin: My apologies, I didn’t mean to eavesdrop, but my dear you changed your tone so much and with such assured aggression that one cannot be blamed for their inappropriate interest. Anyways, I am Mr. Jabin; kids call me Mr. J – makes it easier.

Elyse: Elyse.

Martin: Martin.

Mr. J: Well, Elyse, Martin, I was wondering if I may buy you two another round? You both fascinate me and I wish to talk to you on the duration of the round. Elyse you’re drinking a bloody Mary right? And Martin, you’re enjoying a Mojito?

Elyse: Yes, virgin bloody Mary, thank you but I was about leave.

Martin: Mojito Royal, thank you but I think I should get going, I am meeting my friends in a half hour.

Mr. J: Virgin bloody Mary, now there’s something you don’t hear everyday, and Mojito Royal, I wonder what the difference is. Anyways, I urge you guys to stay just for this drink; you may enjoy what I have to say. The duration is entirely up to you, after all, it’s only one drink, and then you can leave. I even promise to pay for both your cabs.

Elyse: I don’t know…

Martin: You’ve got half an hour from me.

Elyse: Alright, I’ll stay too. What have you got to say old man?

Mr. J: Excellent. I must say, I was inspired by your honesty Elyse, and your forward yet reserved attitude with Martin. Martin, I was fascinated by your guile and subtlety; it was obvious that you cared about Elyse’s feelings. Yet both of you are here, both hoping for something, both carrying something with you and both attempting to get or achieve something. I will talk for a while because you’ve limited my time, so please I urge you to stop me if you feel that you need to say something. Was this supposed to be a date?

Elyse: Yes.

Mr. J: Then it clearly didn’t go very well, or rather as you both have hoped it would go?

Martin: No.

Mr. J: I see, so this is what you hoped for – that the date would go well, yet at the same time it isn’t what you hoped for is it guys? You both had different ideas of what you hoped would happen. Martin had a different picture of you before he came here and as did you Elyse, otherwise you would have not agreed to the date.

Elyse: …

Mr. J: Here’s what I think guys. You’ll both go away and think about this date. This is elementary stuff, you both know this. Both of you are affected by this encounter. Both, I would say, are disappointed by it. Yet, will any of you two ask yourselves why? Perhaps you both will and settle with the answer, “It’s her”, or “It’s him”. Once you’ve made this claim, there are two ways you can go, either, it’s ‘her’ or ‘him’ just the once, or it’s every ‘her’ or every ‘him’. You’ll both, or one of you, eventually come to the conclusion that it is the counterpart’s fault, due to the frequency of the encounters – due to the fact that it happens all the time and with many others.

Elyse & Martin: …

Mr. J: There will be one of you, and I am willing to place my money on Elyse at the moment, although this is usually Martin’s question, who will ask eventually “what if it’s me?”, and from that moment a whole new world unfolds. From there, the person that asks, either changes for the good or the worse. We shall not consider that phenomenon as that would take much too long. Yet, I want to bring this back to why this failed. If I ask you why, you would both say that it is because you are incompatible, or that the other is x, y and z negative things. I will boldly say however, that you are both wrong. Incompatibility is an illusion, and, x, y and z are false judgments.

Elyse: What?

Martin: What the hell?

Mr. J: Exactly. I thought the same when I first heard these words; allow me to elaborate. Let’s ask you then, Elyse do you like to be happy, to laugh, to be loved and to feel that you are successful in what you do?

Elyse: Yes, of course.

Mr. J: I see, how about you Martin?

Martin: Yeah, definitely.

Mr. J: So you both want the same things. I ask you then, where is the incompatibility in this picture? If you both want the same things out of life, why would you ever feel that you are incompatible? It is not incompatibility, even if you show me something less universal and more particular about your desires that makes for incompatibility, it is still not the reason why this date failed. Again I will not go down the road of more particular desires and incompatibility, because that is a question regarding relationships, and this is merely a date. It isn’t judgments either; none of you have known the other long enough to make a real and concrete judgment about the other that stands. Even if you did, I would challenge you to think about the notion of change; no judgment about a human being’s personality is concrete, because that person can change. If it is none of these obvious and common things, then what is it? Why does most dating go wrong and rarely breed that most desired emotion of ours called love?

Martin: What if we do not care and just wish to move on with our lives without pondering on things so deeply? You know, some of us just don’t have the time to think about these things.

Mr. J: True, very true. You’ve spoken like a modern man; I respect your insufficient time to ponder on these problems. Tell me though Martin, how many hours a day do you spend thinking about these things, thinking about encounters with women; and with your friends, what you do talk to them about. Tell me, how long did you spend thinking about your last failed date, and how much time did you waste on recurring thoughts that did nothing for you but inspire emotions you couldn’t control or you didn’t want? They say 98% of our thinking is useless.

Martin: … I never saw it like that.

Mr. J: The same goes to you too Elyse, unfortunately nobody is exempt from this, me included – obviously. We waste time thinking about our opposite sex, yet our thinking is never constructive, all we do is feed the already apparent polemos between the sexes. Polemos means war in Greek; I really like the word, there’s an elegance to it.

Elyse: It’s true; all women converse about is men and they’re always asking each other ‘why did he say this, what did he mean; or why doesn’t he do this or that’?

Mr. J: Exactly.

Martin: Men too, but we don’t really ask that many questions about women; some of us though, just say nothing because we don’t have anything to say, or boast about our encounters. Makes most of us who are not that good with women feel inferior, and so we desire to be like the boasters. The only way we know to do this is through thought, we think situations to the bone, and we bleed them dry with alternate scenarios and fantasies – the ones amongst us who can think anyway, the ones that can’t just settle for calling women sluts or bitches and moving on.

Mr. J: It is curious indeed. The one thing we desire the most and spend most of our time thinking about, we can’t get right. We are truly ignorant. The boasters you mention Martin, or rather and more accurately the ones who are good with women, fall under two categories: the liars, which is self-explanatory, and the lovers – although I would not expect a true lover to boast about his encounters with women. The latter are the more interesting, for they have mastered this realm we call dating with their seductive ways. For true lovers though, there’s something sacred between them and the feminine, a bond that they cannot explain and wish to not explain lest they lose it. They are master seducers, geniuses of the art of love – the one first brought forward by an illustrious Roman called Ovid. There is way too much to say about lovers, I wish not to go down that road. Instead I want to tell you guys bluntly, that dating doesn’t work. It is not your fault Elyse that Martin wants to have sex with you, and it is not your fault Martin that Elyse doesn’t want to see you again. Both of these dilemmas stem from a broken arrow, an arrow that is meant to represent the traditional and straight movement that a man should follow when he is to meet a woman – the arrow of courting. This arrow does not serve its purpose anymore, it cannot pierce a heart and cause love, it pierces a heart and causes misery, pain and polemos – after all arrows are meant for war. Unfortunately, courting is broken, it is wrong, and it doesn’t work anymore. You simply cannot court a woman from the off, wooing is reserved for a time where wooing was rare. Wooing a woman from the off will only succeed if she is not really a woman.

Elyse: But I want to be wooed.

Mr. J: Of course you do, only a fool would deny that, it is not what I was implying. Rather, who would you prefer to be wooed by, somebody you know well and you like, or a stranger you just met?

Elyse: Somebody I know well.

Mr. J: Precisely; and Martin is a stranger you just met. Nonetheless, back to courting. Courting has one intention, sex. No courting would happen if sex was possible without it. The meta-reason for courting is sex, regardless of the other reasons that stem or arise from it, such as love, marriage, relationship etc. There is an order of primacy here. The main motive for courting is sex. You both know this, if not consciously then unconsciously, that you’re both here tonight to negotiate sex; as if sex needs negotiation. You both want it and that is true, almost every human being wants sex at some point in their life, because if human beings didn’t want sex and were happy in themselves, then human beings wouldn’t exist. If I could have sex with myself and be satisfied, then there would be no need for you dear Elyse. So courting is about sex, and that means a date is about sex too. You’re both here carrying something, and that thing is this idea that this could lead to sex, and you both want sex otherwise you wouldn’t agree to be here tonight. The reasons why are not for this post.

Elyse: Wow, you think really deeply.

Martin: Yeah, is this healthy?

Mr. J: (Smiles). You’re both here to negotiate sex. Martin is here to get laid and Elyse is here to get laid too, but Elyse has more to guard against (and more options). She has to guard herself against the non-thinkers you mentioned before Martin, the boasters too; not to mention other girls and their words full of ‘humility’. She is afraid of many things, things that you wouldn’t understand, because you’d have to experience them, as her, to be able to unfold them in such a way that you would understand them fully. All you can do is manipulate the situation and work around it (which is what the lovers do), never understanding it in its totality, for that you would need a revelation, an unfolding; and you cannot unfold what it is like to be Elyse without actually being her. Anyways, I digress, back to the point. Elyse has many things to guard herself against, and the situation she finds herself in is not exactly one that she finds easy to do that with. She is aware of what you are expecting Martin, she is aware of your presuppositions, your assumptions, about her coming on a date with you; she is after all, a rational being.

Martin: It is true, I was attracted to Elyse, but I didn’t want to sleep with her… see I can’t even say that because I did want to sleep with her; but not straight away you… I can’t say that either because I do… Damn you old man, I’m digging myself a hole here and you’re not helping.

Mr. J. & Elyse: (Laughter)

Elyse: No he’s right, I was fully aware that you wanted to sleep with me, I’m not an idiot, and it’s precisely why I came here tonight and let you court me – I was attracted to you too and I knew exactly how far we could go in my mind, but it didn’t go according to mind or rather it went as I would have expected. I was trying to make it obvious to you that I wasn’t going to be that easy, by acting disinterested and also not drinking alcohol; even the drink I bought was thought out. All was to show that yes I am interested but you have a lot of work to do if you are to get what you want. I did all this however, not realizing that it is what I wanted too, but… I don’t know what to say because anything I say will be an excuse or a masquerade for the fact that I wanted to sleep with you too. Mr. J is right. The thing is, we want sex too, so badly, but we are afraid of all the consequences that come with it, and for us there are many more than there are for you guys. I think that is why I am like this, but I don’t wish to be. I don’t sit there and think this through, no, it is a feeling more than anything – so ingrained in me that I don’t even notice it; it’s like second nature to me.

Martin: Wow, I never saw it like that. I am stunned. Here I was thinking all along that women are like this by nature, thinking that they don’t like sex as much as guys; or they are naturally annoying about it, but in reality they’re not. I see now that men brought this to themselves. Why didn’t I see this before…

Mr. J: It is truly remarkable viewing the faces of people who witness for the first time an aspect of themselves they did not know was there. The look on their eyes is at first one of horror, then this moves into despair as they begin to reminisce the countless times they’ve entered experiences without realizing that this aspect was ruling their actions unconsciously. Finally, after this turbulent and albeit painful catharsis, you witness a freedom and wonder in their eyes, as if they have gained their innocence back somehow, or almost as if they’ve winded back a few years right there and then.

Elyse: I don’t know what to say…

Martin: Me neither, I came here tonight to meet a girl; I ended up meeting myself.

Mr. J: There is so much more to say, but I think the rest of it you can both think for yourselves. After all, I cannot give you it all, some revelation is required on your part through your own thoughts and experiences. Time is up, I have done my bit here, and I’m eternally grateful for your time. Now, to your taxis, as I promised.

 

Contemporary Classical Dating and Courtship… part 2

The Story

A cold wintry Friday afternoon brings with it promises of excitement, beer and business transactions of a different sort to those of the mundane corporate deals that haunts people Monday to Friday, 8am-5pm. These transactions are mutually distinct, yet genealogical; distinct in their plane of being, and yet they come from the same roots, the roots of deal making. Their distinction is so obvious that most people pass them by as normalities, as natural ways of being and engagement. Yet, the outcomes of these deals are always overlooked, and the similarities to deadened business are made redundant as if by accident, as if they were not there, as if by unconscious processing. Mr J.’s pondering never seizes to amaze even him as he is viewing people gathering in crowds and packs, flocking ever so conspicuously from pub, to bar, to club like mindless zombies. Their eyes dead from the tiring week of soul draining repetition, their gaits full of emptiness and each one homogeneous to the next – the women with their high heels, the men with their shoes, and all of them look like a perfect split of two, male and female, each individual under that genus exactly the same as the other. They’ve become nothing but numbers and particulars for universals, nothing but a walking price tag as they await entrance into a venue (usually a club or bar). Some are accepted and some reject, the latter have a price tag that does not coalesce with the expectations of the venue, or in other words they are there without the pleasant company of women, and no women means no spending on trying to get them drunk. The reciprocal greetings and name exchanges, that is today’s social interaction, ultimately become whispers that are salvaged by the wind, leaving behind them a perplexed look mixed with the shards of social discomfort. As Mr. J.’s witnessing this same-shit-different-day experience, he is wondering if any one out there is even capable of at least slightly seeing what’s right in front of them? He wonders if the rigor mortis that has spiritually befallen upon the empty yet animated carcasses, has a source – a cause? That is altogether a grand question and one not worthy of experience and answer on this night alone, so he abandons it. The moment he makes this decision, he turns his head slightly to the right and finds himself driving down a central London road and witnesses something very fascinating - an exotic dancers’ bar. With this observation he gets a tug in his belly, an inward thrust that runs up to his chest and causes a sensation akin to chilly water splashing on someone’s bare skin. Immediately after this, he knew what this meant.

He parks his dashing car in a car park nearby and gets out making his way towards the bar. The doors are protected by two inscrutable and powerful men, the scene reminds him of the movies he watches about the days of the Roman Empire – two guards standing erect with shields and spears crossing one another in a way that signals an X, a no-entry. He makes strong eye contact with one of them and after a little small talk he is let into the abyss of pleasure. The atmosphere is infected with the smell of money, alcohol and depression. The mood emanating from the performance stages is an exact antagonism of that flowing from the seats. When desire for the body meets with desire for abundance, it leaves a taste in one’s mouth that is either repulsive or sexually igniting. One has abundance but has not the sexual fervour, the other has the fervour buts lacks the abundance. Place them together under a context of legality and witness a dance of hollowness; when one vacuum meets another that is its polar opposite, it leaves a residue of bitterness in the observer.

The atmosphere drains him. The men are dealing even after their hours of corporate deals are gone, they now deal for their peace of mind. All has become a massive market, a big sales campaign – from selling and buying money, to selling and buying bodies. Their brains are consumed with the one thing that they know best, how to exchange perfectly; how to get and give they’ve mastered to perfection. It becomes an algorithm for all aspects of life; an algorithm that is the cornerstone of any and all pleasure possible to them. They have sold wonder for abundance, and with the winnings they are stuck only being able to exchange goods that leave them in an endless spiral of ample pain, and otiose pleasure. Possessed is the word that enters his mind when he thinks of a description for the looks in these men’s faces.

The dancers, ah, they are all the same, yet all different. Their looks all converge around the following words: drained, hollow, apathetic, seductive, unaware… The words end as he searches for more and more to bring to light a picture of what he sees. One thing on their minds: the abundance and freedom to follow. The moment this thought left his mind, he became silent and his gaze met a dancer’s with an innocent movement. She noticed something different in him and his gaze, and at that instant she looked away and he could feel the discomfort, even if the others missed it. He saw her cheeks turn slightly red and her dancing becoming ever so slightly out of tune; she didn’t look back in his direction again. As this scenario departed he noticed a man leaving with one of the dancers out of the front door. At this moment it hit him hard, and like an epiphany descended on him from above, he realized why he was there. He left the club, paid the bouncers and waitress for their service – even though he left his drink half finished – and got in his car. Looking at the dashboard in contemplation, picked up his mobile phone and made a reservation at a middle Eastern café in Edgware Road for a table and a strawberry shisha; he was to make his way there to continue his writing.

Arriving at the place in Edgware Road, he couldn’t help but let a smile ignite his face as he witnessed an overabundance of couples out on dates. To his right was the most conspicuous couple. The woman, beautiful, a real siren and a voluptuous appearance that could strike any man down – or up. The man, young, successful and possesing a charming look. Pondering a little on tonight’s events, he thought about the one thing that really has become of great interest to him lately – contemporary views and norms of dating. From there he began writing his thoughts down.

The Thoughts

Most of our social world is a proper representation of child-adults, because there are two kinds of ages: chronological and psychological ages. The former is obvious, all it represents is the progression of time; the latter denotes growth of the mind and thought. Thus, it is easy to have child-adults in our humble, ‘westernized’ society. Courting is the beatitude that brings this social atrophy to the fore. First and foremost, dating and courting here are synonymous in their goal, but not always in their action, dating is a part of courting; courting is similar to the bigger picture of the act of dating. Second, the ‘dating’ or ‘courting’ spoken of in this entry is that orienting around the classical notion: man asks woman out on a date (usually dinner), woman accepts, man pays for everything, woman is treated ‘lady-like’ and woman does not give herself up or get physical until ‘x’ (usually 2^nd/3^rd) date. This is the general contemporary assumption of the view of ‘dating’ with a classical modification, or approach. Still in this enlightened day and age, most men lead with this assumption on their sleeves; that they need to do the above in order to be in a relationship or get close to a woman. Fascinatingly, most women also accept this generalized assumption, even though deep down they ‘feel’ how ‘well’ it works, what it implies and just how sufficient it is in its telos (end/goal) of bringing people closer.

Why does one court, what is the intention of courting? The answer is categorical; in other words, there may be many reasons why one person would court another, but they all converge into one meta-reason; a fundamental reason for courting. This meta-reason is sex. Behind every person who wishes to court another, or who wishes to be courted by another, is sex. At times this may be hidden or not conscious, and is the case for most of the population of which women are major participants. Most of our humble ladies are unaware of their desire for sex, or perhaps my being a man cannot know how much a woman desires sex when she wishes to be courted. On account that I am a man, and I am unable to ever know what women in general think about the subject, unless I am a woman myself (no matter how many of them have told me they really like sex), I shall opt for the safer route and say that most women are quasi-conscious in their desire for sex when being courted – even though there is a great number that genuinely like sex (I’d say all). Men however, which I am fortunately subjected to, I shall not be so lenient towards. We want to have sex, simple as, and behind every woman we wish to court, or have courted, and every dinner we buy for her, there is a desire for sex. We acknowledge this, we know this to be fundamental, and those of us who choose to think otherwise are mostly in denial, or fortunately enlightened. Thus, I wish to answer the question why courting, with the following meta-answer, or major genus of which all other answers come under: simply the unconscious/quasi-conscious, or the conscious, desire for sex. We want sex and the socially acceptable way to getting there, short of her being labeled the tremulous phrase ‘too easy’ or word ’slut’, is courting.

No dating would happen if we could have sex with ourselves and be fully satisfied with it, or if we just didn’t like sex at all. What then is different to sex with someone as opposed to with oneself? – is a grand question, but not tackled here. To say that you date someone you do not wish to sleep with, at some stage or other, is akin to saying that you go to an indoor swimming pool without the intention of swimming. Courting, mummy and daddy says (implications of societal norm), is the proper way for a man to meet a women (aka, to f*ck). “No sex, unless you date him, honey, unless he buys you dinner and flowers or proposes to you etc…. (you name it)”. “Son,” she/he says with exclamation, “you must treat a girl nicely, you must take her out, buy her dinner, flowers … (you name it)”. Thus, ingrained in us is a socially acceptable way of the two sexes to meet; a good way for the good boy to meet the good girl.

Now if sex is the inevitable goal of courting, then can there be any real difference between dating and prostitution? They both have the same telos, but the only difference is that one ‘guarantees’ (I would say that’s a complete lie) a closer bond between the daters. How often do we find a gulf of discomfort and a feeling of “who the hell are you” between two people who have been in a relationship for, sometimes as much as, ten/twenty years? Can we not agree that this gulf of discomfort and acrid feeling is akin to the relationship between the client and the prostitute, in fact some client-prostitute relationships may probably be more concrete and have a higher understanding. Some may argue people change, others may say it’s the persons’ fault not the dating process and others may even say that I am just speaking utter crap. I implore you to reconsider however, I don’t deny any of your objections; what I do deny is the intended overlooking that perhaps, just perhaps, it’s not only the persons but actually a mixture of both.

In prostitution, one sees a woman that is available and asks for her price for a night, or if she allows, several nights. She names the price and he pays, they go away to a room, do what they set out to do from the beginning of the transaction process and then leave; most likely they meet again next week, depending on his experience and her performance, and/or his good behaviour. In Dating the man asks the woman out and she accepts or rejects, usually accepts if he’s not a complete freak, and they go out. He pays for everything and they leave, they do it again and again and again, and then as if by magic they have a relationship. Now this relationship will continue as such if she’s a good girlfriend or if he’s a good boyfriend, or if they are both lonely and think there’s nothing better out there. I see no difference between the two; the only difference seems to be in degree, not in kind – relationships through courting are just a tad more complicated, not different.

A

If the prostitute gets bland and it becomes too repetitive, then he finds a new one; if the girlfriend becomes boring or too much like a mother, then he cheats or leaves her. When repetition meets desire, the cancellation is a form of devastation to one party.

B

If the client is not paying up properly or he hits her, then she leaves and calls her pimp; if the boyfriend is not being the kind of guy she expected or is violent, then she inevitably leaves with hatred or repulsion, and she calls her friends. When expectation meets disappointment, the dissolving of a bond is excruciating to one party.

A & B

What is the similarity with A and B, what does A and B tell us? A and B both are mirror images of the same phenomenon concealing the same underlying progression, and they both reveal how a person enters a ‘deal’ about sex, and the continuation or repetition of sex over a period of time: they enter it with ‘their’ needs in mind, with ‘their’ desires and bodily/personal passions as ruling agents. Relationships when viewed from this perspective, seize to be about the other person, and become about ourselves. The moment you’ve done this, you’re not in a proper relationship strictly speaking, to lead with yourself in a relationship is to destine its destruction. This does not imply that we should avoid putting ourselves first, but it does imply that in a relationship there are two people, not one. Thus, before we even contemplate being with someone, for goodness sake, we need to find out who that person is and make the relationship about them, and allow them to make the relationship about us. This idealism (in the common sense meaning of the word) highlights the importance of a relationship as a mutuality, not a reciprocity – the latter implying a give and take aspect that is similar to a business transaction (the distinction I will speak about in another post).

Dr. Dean C. Delis wrote a book called the Passion Paradox, I read that book at the tender age of seventeen, and I was blown away. A beautiful book that encapsulates modern relationships bluntly and in a way that makes you relate, but to my taste it was too evanescent. His descriptions and evaluations were fascinating and they altered the way I saw things immensely, but they missed something, his doctrine wasn’t complete. He contended for the interplay of power over the relationship between the two daters; arguing that one person has more power over the relationship than another. In other words, one person is more attached to the relationship than another, he called, if I recall correctly, the weaker of the two the Lower Power Person (LPP), and the stronger, the Higher Power Person (HPP). The higher power person, if he/she left or ended the relationship, then the weaker was left distraught. The paradox, if I am not mistaken, lay in the effects of leaving a relationship or ending it before the other so that one may feel more like the HPP; whoever breaks up, whether they were a HPP or LPP, always ends up leaving as a HPP and the other as an LPP. The concept that did all the work in his doctrine of relationship dysfunctions and dynamics was the notion of attachment, which of the two was more attached to the relationship than the other; and this was the basis of the passion paradox. His perspective, although enlightening and mighty persuasive to the common relationship participator, it lacked the prior and necessary conditions for most modern relationships, which could have been an immense contribution to his understanding of the paradox: in other words, he did not consider the effects of contemporary views of courting in the built up of relationships and the link to the consequent dynamics. How important is a relationship’s beginning to the middle and end? – is a question that I think Dr Delis could have, and perhaps should have, pondered on immensely. After all it is courting that is the lending hand of almost all relationships.

It is a volatile matter this; I acknowledge that. I also feel like I am inspiring pessimism by creating such links and by just stating an objection without actually providing an alternative: it makes me feel like scum. For this I am apologetic. My intention is not to break or leave in a mess (it is not in my nature), but rather to create anew, to provide an alternative; I shall and I will call it Romance. In part 3 I shall try to discern the meaning of this aesthetically affluent, albeit wrongly contaminated, word.

—-

There’s a lot on here I left vague or not spoken in detail about: it’s hard to be concise when you’re a thinker, even harder when you’re discussing controversial topics that leak into other topics that are even more controversial. Should you feel the need for a further insight on the current thoughts, simply ask me with your comments and we’ll have a pleasant discussion on the matter.