shakey ground
Friday, September 16, 2005
 
12.~~~~~~~~~~~


Pointless beauty


If we live long enough, and can remember the beliefs that held our lives together at earlier times, we might come to realize that we now occupy a spot 180 degrees from where we once were. And to the extent we can accept our changing without self-judgment, we might see that these positions do not fundamentally contradict each other but form a greater unity. For this to happen involves another requirement, something like suffering and isolation because of the road we have chosen. It strips us of the arrogance of belief, of the prized and confident status of the "true believer" in oneself, and leaves us with a clarity of vision that can come no other way, and can only barely be communicated. The most important change that evolves is how we are with who we are. Instead of inhabiting a house we choose, we realize that we are the house we have not chosen.


Perhaps as we pass deeper into life we come to what looks like the end of a road, where we turn around and greet ourselves now coming towards us, our many selves, with joy and understanding. I’m so glad to see you again, we might say.


When I was young I wanted my life and work to have meaning, to have a point, to represent me. I wanted to have some place in the world that would produce an effect that I would judge as good. Money, fame and respectability I saw as pointing towards goals of individual security that were of no use to me since they were of so much use to the world. I wanted something else, that did not benefit me personally but served a higher purpose than my private existence. I was suspicious of all personal benefit beyond my basic survival needs. Political work, organizing for revolutionary change, came to fill that need, at a time when revolution was in the air. What I scorned about art was that it seemed to serve the very society I wished us to change, and the artist was one more functionary, including those who said art had some benefit in changing society.


That revolutionary dream and movement collapsed; in doing so it revealed to me that the turning of the world was in charge of my self-definitions. Out of a need for something to sustain my spirit I began to play music, and I entered a new dilemma. I refused to call what I did art, or myself the artist, but rather one who played music to pursue his pleasure, which was to improvise freely. Of no use to society, this could hardly be called a role or profession. The improviser was the one kind of musician that could not, certainly in the 80’s in America, be considered an entertainer. We were unpaid, and I at least had no expectation of ever being paid. We had no audience, only listeners, often reluctant; we played as an activity and did not fulfill a genre. Each time I saw a partner turn in the direction of entertaining, as a so-called underground artist or a more conventional musician, I felt abandoned and isolated, and realized that I myself could only be a fraud at that game.


After envy and rage at the music world, time and again, comes the realization that I have another place for myself, a place in myself, that I betray but is ultimately inalienable. This is a place that has no name, no identity, and so is pointless from the perspective of the world. I have come to name this as the place of beauty. Pointless until it yields things called art, as pointless as religious experience until it yields religious belief, or love until it yields a relationship, rage until it finds the target of anger, or life until we are gripped by the fear of death. To the desire to be special, to excel, to create something, it has nothing to say. Art teaches us things, can be judged, analyzed so that we can benefit from it, and its practitioners are valued by reputation if not by money. Beautiful is an adjective we can apply or refuse to award to things of art or nature, a matter of taste and dispute. Beauty, however, is a place that is no place. To come from beauty is to have nowhere to go.


To say these things does not create a better world, any more than playing gives the world more beauty.


For years I refused the word beauty because I could not free it from the social meanings it has been given, could not make it my own word. It was a word I would have to define in order to satisfy others. I was under the spell of ideology, of society’s control of language; like the word “God“ (and how many other words!), I did not dare “beauty” to be determined by my experience. I adopted the scorn for the word common to the avant-garde, suspicious of conventional sentiment and feeling, from which it vainly and tragically hopes to free itself. It turns beauty into something so rare and precious that none of us would dare claim to be engaged or associated with it; at best it can be an achievement of past culture. But if beauty is no thing and has no place then it is available to all at all times. That which has no future or past can only be present. When we ask ourselves, why are we playing?--and pause a moment, really needing to know--then we realize it is not to create any thing, but to enter and experience this barely nameable place that has no place except in our experience.
 
Saturday, September 03, 2005
 
11.~~~~~~~~~

Nothing is profound in itself but in the gaze that looks in a certain direction and finds no end. Looking into an open well that the light does not penetrate, you strain your eyes to make things out in the dark. After a lapse of time when you are patient, you can make out something dimly, but even so it seems you are gazing at nothing and everything at the same time. The dimness brings the imagination into play; you participate in what you see. You might try to convince others of something you think is profound, but you are only trying to arouse desire, or to find those who gaze in the same direction and can share the experience. We are fascinated most by questions that cannot be answered, whose every answer opens the door of the question further rather than closing it. The door comes off the hinges, then the jamb is removed, finally the wall itself is seen to be permeable. What is profound is what we most want to get inside of, and there we will find ourselves lost and yet strangely at home, searching and at peace at the same time. We want to get inside and then find ourselves engulfed, swallowed in the abyss.

The desire for depth contradicts the fear of helplessness when we are lost, when we feel that what is around us is harmful because we haven’t nailed things down. This is a fear men especially don’t like to admit; our job is never to be lost. Others around us want to make sure that every question is productive in a way they can follow. In order to accommodate them we will mask our gaze as the desire to understand and control, to come to conclusions that can stand on their merits without us. Or to satisfy our self-image that we “make a difference”, which means, to leave some valued mark on the earth before we die. But when our gaze into the deep does come to the point of conclusive answers it quickly becomes dull, bored, without imagination. Philosophy, religion, music, art, the academic world--what doesn’t succumb to this?

For some, the desire for revolution has been profound, for no one can tell us what would happen if people were to believe they could choose the shape of their world. Revolution has been a space of dreaming and adventuring, and will be again. A certain imagination is opened by the thought of this, a door no one knew existed until the French people opened it in 1789, not knowing where they were going. But to direct and administer a revolution demands one answer and must put an end to all questions, and eliminate those who would continue them. That is why successful revolutions like the French and Russian lose their depth and become, as everyone says, a mockery of their origins.

God too is a word that for a few still stands for the unanswered question, the search into depth. God is a word of imagination and myth, which means that an endless number of stories can be told, even contradictory, and they all work to point us to our depths, where we cannot recognize ourselves. To turn the word into the source of explicit answers for everything, from the beginning to the end of time and being, is to presume that no unanswerable question ever has a right to be asked. From this viewpoint it is foolish, weak, and even evil to have any unfathomable depth inside us that needs searching. All that depth is projected onto a Father who most of all will protect us from ourselves, the depth of self-knowledge. He will pave over the depths as if they were so many potholes, filled to enable the smooth flow of our traffic. To have such a God, which is the God of religion, is to look into a bottomless lake and see only our reflection.
 
Someone once asked me, "How can you be so sure of yourself?" The kind of certainty that reaches the level of expression is only through active self-questioning, not the presentation of ideas that look convincing (the job of lawyers). Toleration and pluralism begins at home, far better than tolerating the fools we run into. In the home of the mind we let the fools in the door and have a good laugh-and-think time together.

ARCHIVES
July 2005 / August 2005 / September 2005 / December 2006 / January 2007 / February 2007 / March 2007 / September 2007 / May 2008 / December 2008 / March 2009 / May 2009 / January 2010 / April 2010 / May 2010 /


Powered by Blogger