The Derailed World
Even as I dare think of Science Fiction today (2008) my thoughts immediately jump to something else. Namely, thinking about literature without having a world in which that literature will be realized – is not only absurd, but it produces quite a different space – it produces a literature which can by no means be the Science Fiction anymore, because the task of the SF was always to supplement the world with some vision of possible advance in perfecting of man – not even by critical disentanglement of the anti-utopia scenario – but today, when the world had disappeared into the worst possible anti-utopia, Science Fiction has turned into a Delphic treasury which only by some incomprehensible miracle stays protected from the incursion of neo-barbarians – the miracle of illiteracy!
If Science Fiction (O, what an unfortunate designation!) doesn’t comprehend the world at the beginning of the third millennia as a toppled down dream of comfortable leisure, in which each man would have time to philosophize and creatively daydream – than it is nothing but plain apologetics of the daemons’ kindergarten in which men are raised to be eternally burning tar in a nonplus maze of post historical hell.
What happened to the genre – break up of genre into genres – is what happened to the world. If the idea of SF was to conquer space (cosmos) with thoughtfulness and collecting experience, the idea of SF as a genre, i.e. a form, produced to the greatest measure a fantasy deprived of nucleus. If by nucleus we mean existential nucleus of man, with full ethical charge, then the genre had found multiple nuclei which simulate ethos: cult, fashion, style, feeling/mood, trend, etc. It played into the hands of the demand – and that is the most dangerous thing for art.
The genre of Science Fiction melded with the consumers mentality and lost its own measure, fiction spilled into the reality in form of unusual – fantastic phenomena. Modern technology made it possible, and this is where the “scientific” from this genre suffused. So Science Fiction actually died – with the exception of a small number of works, which are not anymore capable of ensuring survival for themselves as the basis for a “literary class”. And, this is not a problem only for Science Fiction, but the whole art as it is.
The work of art has the power of a Universal Constant. Works like Iliad, Divine Comedy, Tempest, Brave New World, Heliconia, and many others, precisely define space in which man exists, as well as his potentials. Anyone who read those works and at the same time worked upon himself, philosophized and tried to implement into his practice the experiences described in those works, could have understood that perfection of man exclusively depends on investing the great effort, thoughtfulness and action, into that ideal, so it could become reality, and, eventually, be exceeded. Such an approach to life is diametrically opposed to the ideals of contemporary, global society.
A global society man is a man plugged into a direct current of Edisonian dream – he has been placed at the bottom, to him from above falls the current, turns him on, consumes him, burns him. From him nothing leaves. That is, roughly outlined, a modern man – man-consumer: of some alien sensibility posing as its own: all he has to do is to pick out a genre from some catalogue – just a matter of flavor – and then en-joy.
Such a postmodern Universal Constant in itself has no idea of the center – center is everywhere, energy is evenly distributed, we are all same because we are in the same position, on the same level, in the nest at the bottom, and from above, from heavens, ambrosia falls right into our beaks.
Science Fiction lost the decisive battle. One of the greatest ever protagonists of Science Fiction, Nikola Tesla, presented humanity with alternating current. Humanity powered its mighty industry with that very miracle, but this incredible Tesla-voltage has been, through this machinery, transformed back into the direct current, into the kaleidoscopic mosaic of the final products which find their resonance within the abysmal dumb-heads.
Those are the dumb-headed-parents from Bradbury’s story, idle and cut off from their essence, after whom their own children sent virtual lions – to eat them and so to get rid of them.
So, now, those who ridiculed us for reading and watching all that nonsense… Here, say: I enter the bus, and they all gaze into their gadgets, pick on tasters, read messages, preoccupied with “something” very important, showing interest, talk, in order not to be bored while they travel. But virtuality fell into their hands through the SF of the Bond, James Bond, type, and that is the chum in service of her majesty… advertising machinery.
And thus contemporary man, who enjoys holodecks and utilizes tricoders, never smelled or tasted Science Fiction – he got everything like a sponge up. And we, who spent uncountable hours in company of that noble fiction, now with disgust look at its prostituting.
What had Science Fiction done to comprehend and to sabotage the reality? People got used to diluted, sugarless, decaffeinated, fatless, easy to digest, casual – Marvelized caricature of mythology in which drama and action are both at the same time the expression of frustration and miraculous remedy for it – fantasy has been used as an illusory escape from unpleasant and violent reality of the human being.
Reality relates to the time of living as towards the time-out, there is no time for face off, for a decisive move which wins the match. Machinery is desynchronized, the great ones left the team, strategy has been replaced by tactics. Ball is in the audience. Audience fights among itself.
Lets observe the situation: literature lost the attention of the audience. Here I am not talking about poetry, which was the first to lose attention. New technologies, overpopulated with information, increased pace of time, actually, shortened time intervals into which information is delivered and processed, kick out of the game in totality the written material which demands thoughtfulness – prose, as an encompassing virtual world which ruled for several centuries, stepped back before the aerosolized cyber-packages of which one cannot think thoroughly, because one has to inhale them at an increased rate.
New technologies disturbed the hierarchy of senses. Thought is slow, crippled, nicotine and caffeine have been replaced by synthetic drugs, letters by blinking of screens, sounds degraded onto samples and noise, personality replaced with the profile.
The system with help of scanners oppresses the monad, and it shrinks even more. It’s not that the system will penetrate inside, but it will choke any attempt to reply. The Supreme Monad thus assimilates its parts, organizes them by the Saint Paul principle, marries them, divorces them and again puts them together.
Science Fiction today is a myth. A myth obsessed with itself. It is like overripe fruit, in the barrel, from it one makes eau de vie.
Above all, Science Fiction lost pace with science. Instead of science, it deals with the products, and its futurism is only an over-dimensioned reality. What the scientists pick upon today, SF will find out only after ten or twenty years. When the authors, stupefied by fantasies, finally receive the spam.
Between Jules Verne and today there is no more distance. That is the Universal Constant with which the authors are now enamored, and they no more have creative power.
Homer is at the other side. Even Tesla cannot penetrate the thick blockade. There’s a dim apparition as if shouting something – that is Prometheus, will someone replace him for once?
Postmodernist babbling – authors together with readers! Communication of authors with readers is the worst possible variant of creative action; if the author is not shooting thunders from the skies, it can only mean one thing: he has no strength to ascend and strike.
Great works of Science Fiction? Go on, dig into the past.
I’ll go back to the beginning – a good writer talks of the present as of the worst garbage pile. He talks about everything that is beyond eyelids and cannot be seen because no one wants to see it – and he must want that.
Writer is a monkey speaking from the mirror.
But what is spectacular is the mirror, not the monkey.
I propose to the writer to write about his readers. Even in the form of Science Fiction. We write about the Alien, we write about the Godzilla.
Forget about the Genre
Without creative thinking one cannot reach the concept of a possible future. All that can be done, when one relies upon the existing elements, is the over-dimensioning, distortion or annihilation – of the present. Does an SF writer need a motivation to destroy such a present? For creation of some “other”, if possible “better” present, that is, future? Science Fiction is not about creating all over again some new frames of a cage for the same beast, so the beast will not become bored and lazy. How about picking on the beast, enrage it a little, make her show its teeth and claws, its real nature?
The art is never about things, it is always about man, its being, its essence. Fantasy element relates to tangible reality, not to man. Man is the one who by acting determines himself, and why that is reflected as a created world, is another matter. That’s why in SF the fantasy element has a secondary role, that’s why there is such a variety of fantasy worlds, spanning from the spitting reality to the totally incomprehensible future. What, however, never changes is – man.
And, generally, the idea that the world should be changed, which is the idea realized throughout the twentieth century in such a way that the world became an animated puzzle, and more than that – it has been accomplished that man is totally affected by those changes, and therefore deprived of any kind of identity – there is nothing left in man that is eternal, which defies change.
And thus, Marxism – through the back door, like the blood of capitalism, like some “molecular acid”, gnawed through the firm structure of quality.
And as Pierre Bezukhov wondered – Who kills us? No one, the system… – it is so.
Science Fiction, even though apparently radical as, say, Bakunin, in greatest measure tries to find some “benign” system – as if the system were the one who is supposed to cure people from their cruel nature; and nature too – from stumbling upon itself.
The best SF writers are those “evil” writers, like Ballard or Bradbury, who maliciously describe destruction of human dreams. Lets not forget, from the ideal of “preserving our way of life” to “preserving our dream” the measure is just transformation of words, and words are there to justify the impulse, which in “greater” philosophy is called the will – and in poetical philosophy – the rape.
Warrior’s method proposes one simple thing – discard all that isn’t necessary.
Forget about the genre.
Observing the form of genre, that is like (an audacious metaphor).
Bradbury says: Something Evil This Way Comes. After that, came the genre: some evil which destroys the meaningfulness – that’s why it is evil. It is the genre – horror.
The problem is that horror is not grounded in existence. It only exists in thought. Aberration into this genre is one of the main articulations of postmodernism, the increase of the effect of destruction as of an untamable reflection, and the show is impressive – the whole world destroyed.
Now, in diverse genre production, we look for (fragmented) Science Fiction.
We will find it with Robert Rodriguez, in Planet Terror. True horror is embedded into the very beginning of the movie, as an apprehension – which is the basis of the (artistic) method of “suspense”. Although it is obvious that there is a massive threat from an uncontrollable disaster, the real danger does not appear from without – it exists in protagonists – and becomes more and more apparent as the play rolls on.
Rodriguez reduced the genre of horror onto something completely predominated, deprived of effect; at the same time the movies’ effect has been used to trick the spectator and make him face the what is non-generic, that is, atypical – studied human condition.
As opposed to the often casual, and in great measure postmodern approach of Tarantino, concretely, his approach in the movie From Dusk till Dawn (both of them worked on it), in Planet Terror, the evil is not represented in a traditional (Hollywood) way, as an external force trying to prevail over people and thus destroy them. Evil is already in people, and actively struggling to survive – but the question is still open: against whom, i.e. what?
I take this film as an example because the author maliciously tricked the public which will have its need for the articulated violence “style” satisfied – the Rambo-style of fierce and punishing reaction to essential frustration. This anti-Hamlet method, so indigenous to postmodern sensibility of the “winner”, efficiently conquered the space and established a new Universal Constant: evil without can be beaten – but then comes the silence: what next?
Lets compare Pierre Bezukhov and the consumer of the Rodriguez’s eclipse. Pierre wandered upon the battleground (Bondarchuk painted it excellently), the eye is enjoying the incredible arrangement of violence and destruction, but – soul suffers. Then, isn’t it that human soul caused all this calamity? Tolstoy contrasts it with a strong idyll – but this idyll is actually the false face of human psyche, which Rodriguez so successfully damasks painting his super realistic archetypes, filled with evil to their marrow.
What enables the critical attitude of the author is not description of the play itself, but positioning and interpreting of the cause, which is in greatest measure missing from the contemporary production – nevertheless, it always was like that.
Well, that is exactly what happened to Science Fiction.
As if there were two minds – one which wants to comprehend, and the other one reluctant to make any effort, but to cruise the existing.
This second mind, produces the idea of an improved man – that is the old idea of an Übermensch. But here becomes the problem of interpretation. What “smells” as scientific, today is genetic – yesterday it was ideological – superhuman, today cloneish, borgish, or simply mutant.
Contemporary production barely knows what to do with the “heroic myth”. Heroes always had social function, they were just a little stronger, a little more persistent but didn’t have any special characteristics, except as a gift from gods – but there are no gods in modern mythologies. The role of god has been assigned to the science, and when it is really necessary, to the fantasy. But this is not a simple analogy – today’s god/science is itself in function – here the situation is reversed. The world is turned upside down – gods aren’t anymore the ones who program people, today gods themselves are being programmed.
And ethical moment was always barely visible, both in old and modern times. It was more used like an emotional spice than a motivator. This because the lack of understanding of human condition is also the lack of understanding of the ethos – human condition is determined by the ethos, and if this condition lacks the experience of human totality, the moment which resolves conflicts at the instant of eternity will be lost, and instead of it, another solution will have to be found, another bearer of the process – and that is most commonly a mechanical or physiological prosthesis, often wrapped into a parapsychological hodgepodge.
On the battlefield determined by the postmodern constant rule the following conditions: it is necessary to invent a superior form which will with its actions determine the outcome of eternally even battle between “the good and the evil” – similarly as in one of the latest fantasy works, the Night Watch, of Russian writer Lukyanenko, i.e. the blockbuster filmed after his book (directed by Bekmambetov). The “even” situation between the forces of light and darkness is characteristically dominant. That is the syndrome of the eternal recurrence. Heroes, that is the author, disturb the balance: no one actually believes in it, the effort is towards predominance as the form of balance.
Since ordinary people are free to decide between one r the other variant – a second force tries to deny it – that is the other: alien mind, which rapes. That mind is divided within itself, it simulates the struggle and makes an attempt that its simulacrum prevails as the reality. Division is opposed to the wholeness – in tradition, it is impersonated in Lucifer who opposed the authority/order – not social, but the ethical order. He is actually the one who produces social order.
In art, and so in Science Fiction, there are always two kinds of action bearers – the consumable and the inconsumable. The consumable is the one which needs the prosthesis, the extension, the additional force or organ, to overcome physical obstacles. It is being consumed through the conflict. The inconsumable subject is the one which resolves the situation by comprehension, thus it overcomes the imposed limitations. It is not simply the cunningness of mind but the ability not to be affected – the freedom of people isn’t the decisive moment in the struggle between good and evil. That freedom to chose between these two ends does not originate from ethos. Ethos offers another kind of freedom, the kind which exalts.
The question to be resolved here – the question of difference between these two kinds of freedom – was always the measure of quality of the work of art, especially in literature, the only art enabled to precisely, by using concepts articulate the existential matter.
Freedom to be evil, that is stupid – must be questioned.
The wish to affect others, be it most good willing – will be realized as violence. There, apparently, we get into conflict with the freedom of men to stay stupid. But what with our freedom to rape the stupid? Isn’t that the situation in which we are offered to manipulate and so deny the supposed freedom, as the common good?
If we have already fallen into a dichotomy, the exit is not in the face off by choosing one of the archetype forces – but in departing from that battlefield.
Thus we always have freedom to chose whether we will consider a stupid writer a good writer. If stupid writer satisfies the needs of our stupidity, he will be “good” to us – and so this eternally exploited idea of good and evil becomes a “good”, interesting theme.
Let us now compare Planet Terror and Night Watch. In Rodriguez’s film, good is just a masked evil. Battleground is not on the screen, it descended from it, moved into the spectators. In Bekmambetov’s film, as well as “ordinary” people are passive, so are the spectators passive. All that they have to do is to arrange their impressions and to ascribe the cause of their delight to the author. But what is it that feels good, that causes delight?
That “happiness” which author assigns to his hero, as some providence which saves him, that will to evoke certain emotions – the simulacrum of the purposeful, victorious life – the programmed existential orgasm.
With Rodriguez, the character of scientist is a scientist/brigand who is only interested in profiting from selling extremely dangerous and poisonous substance, and he is very aware of the effects. The state/army, the one which, also defected into the gray zone of banditry, buys the fruits of scientific work, and why: because once poisoned it becomes dependant on the same poison: the society, provincial, stupefied with its own minute, liberal forms with neglected personal aspect, permanently oppressed by character deformations and delusions. The truth that is here revealed to us is horrible – that is the basis of Rodriguez’s horror – the truth!
Truth is that spectacular mirror which is reflecting – human nature!
And human nature is not there, in the mirror.
If we are to admire fantasy, then certainly not its innate logorrhea, sensual seductiveness, but above all its artistic arrangement of fantastic elements through which the author guides his subject. Maybe the best example in using fantasy for artistic purposes are writers like Kafka or Chapek, because in their works fantasy element is an allegorically precise snapshot of the darkest human emotion – the “emotionlessness”.
As I have stressed before, the interpretation is the basis of critical attitude, the whole world depends on it. And accordingly, our relationship to it. If the authors gave up being critical, the compass has been lost – only the fascination with wilderness remains, and the unspoken fact that the world has four sides. And, in this absence of the ethical ground with the author, I see the most dangerous misuse of “freedom” as an idea – the freedom of choice thrown to the audience, empty freedom because the author has no existential experience to offer, only a pretense, i.e. a lie – that “feeling free” is the same as freedom to experience.
And the experience of lie is opposed to the experience of existence.
It is the job of the artist to create an explosive from the given material. Chapek created his krakatit, Tarkovsky had his slow-working mirror, Dick had his psychedelic cynicism, Jarmush has his anti-action modus of the halted time, Olson had projected verse, Kafka – process. The charge that author invests into creation of his work is the explosion of the world as it existed until that moment. That explosion is a new world – a new Universal Constant. Man has that power.
Man has not been defined as “animal with reason”, where reason is the given super-ability, by which one comprehends the forever and ever by God given order, as traditionalists observe it; and postmodernists continue that tradition, only with one difference – they openly speak out what traditionalists, with false piety, shun: God is Us who arbitrarily decide what is what.
Reason really is not an independent center of power, it is a discerning sense, but, somebody else decides how this sensibility will be ordered.
It is artist’s job to organize the world with an explosion, just like Nietzsche recommended. Precise destruction by controlled explosions results in a precise picture of a new space in which one can further build.
If that is what we demand from Science Fiction, then we will be able to clearly see when it disappeared – the moment the truce has been signed – and as in Night Watch, begun the age of dullness, traditionalism, genreism, police which from the twilight zone, similarly as in Dicks Minority Report, projects a “harmonious” order and cuts off every leaf which dares to protrude.
Each work which is about the struggle between good and evil is condemned to failure, if the third man isn’t introduced into the play. That is the greatest weakness of genre in general – because, by definition, the limits of genre should not be exceeded. Does that mean that genre is the product of the police mind?
Today Science Fiction faces a much bigger challenge than before, when the system itself supported “curiosity” of the exploratory spirit. But now, in accordance with the philosophy of Globalism, curiosity is what kills (the cat). Forensics is at the moment one of the most advanced scientific disciplines, and of course, it is well used – in discovering the curious minds, which are predisposed to sabotage the system. Even Heinlein made a note about that in his Glory Road, when he talked about the ideology of security. In global society, the department of security grows with the speed of tumor and at the same time metastasizes. paradoxically, Hollywood is probably the last place from which one may publicly and critically comment on the existing order, and after it there is only the swamp of Internet into which the free thinkers will jump to hide.
On the poetical level the play is with the language, but what is implicit is the play with the meaning, and meaning defines the direction in which the spirit moves. That direction is nothing else but the conduit run – liberation of space by its transformation. Direct speech, parrhesia, is impossible within the system – lets remember, that is the system which kills. Poetical means is the only one which can breath in the strength to the speech, literary speech. That is the charge which destroys the fabric of the world and leaves opened wounds behind:
Towards which the moths fly.
Because new language is learnt by new birth, that’s why creativity is in the way, new language draws the current of life with itself.
The key thing is discarding the language, as unnecessary. This is necessary, even before the probe and analysis. Writer tests himself in unpredictable circumstances, which is, by the way, the best source of fiction. He also discards traditional means like association, allegory, metaphor, parable… it doesn’t mean that they will not appear (as of themselves) within the corpse that is becoming. Literal form itself guarantees the existence of language, only, that language is not conditioned by previous deposits. In the “new wave” within the Science Fiction, most experiments were about new language, which was extensively poetized, often originating from mythological context, in which the language is formed directly about, or from, the characters who by their actions actually create the story (Delany, Zelazny). Speculative fiction also contributed to the penetrating impact of Science Fiction during this soaring period; it introduced the stochastic element into narration and got rid of the classical method of rationalization. Heroes don’t behave rationally, in which case they would not be able to move against the current, nor complete their quests. Even with Heinlein, where there is a lot of idealization, through the idea of longevity bursts out the rebellion against the order (Lazarus Long). His character Mike (Stranger in the Strange Land), a combination of Jesus and prince Mishkin, is in total contrast with the rest of human world. Through him Heinlein offers a personality which is incapable of exchanging, and that is the basic principle of society, but it can only give/take.
The all-out globalization is one of the basic causes of the crisis of art. By eradicating cultural borders various traditions and sensibilities merge together, the quantity of information multiplies in which mass it is difficult to determine the foci. Of all the problems which appear at this moment maybe the most interesting problem is the distribution of quality, since globe as such doesn’t posses a pyramidal structure, and one center can not be dominating enough. Following publications on the global level demands a transformed vision of the world – global doesn’t actually mean “big ball” but “network” with multiple balls/nodes. Does this means the disappearance of cultural centers and foci, in regard to literature, before all, since the film media is still too expensive to be realized on an individual level. But digital technique could bring about a shift in that respect.
In global order the accent is on exchange. How does that function in reality? As mixing of different blood types in one organism – dysfunction at all levels, by activating of the autoimmune system to struggle against itself.
Will Science Fiction, i.e. authors, catch up with reality? Will they understand, finally, how the cultures imposing themselves upon others really behave, when it is known that cultures are actually enclaves, self-sufficient and exclusive?
Globalism has the ambition to create a global culture, as a mix of all existing cultures. It is not creating something new. The result of that cannot be anything else but – junkyard!
This is why those who rule, or imagine that they rule, behave like Noah. They are already building the Ark for themselves, preparing for escape, they are aware of the consequences of their own doing – doing programmed and promoted during last centuries. The myth of the Great Flood, of the cataclysm – that is also a constant, that is the reality being experienced on the humanity level.
The question is, is the solution to be found within the myth, or outside of it?
Maybe now the freedom has come, out of order, that the quiet ones talk about truth. Now when we are done with reading. When no one will be repeating words.
The force that pushes us against the experience, into the damnation of humanity, should be examined. What exactly is more than human? What are denatured animals? What is the end of childhood?
Something like chocolates and bananas of which, after we consume them, simply forget?
Literature does not offer a prescription instead of remedy, it is the cure. But in order for that cure to be effective, it is necessary that it preserves consistency. To not get spoiled.
Of that, of course, the readers cannot take care.
So, I can’t stress that enough, author should never worry about what readers demand, but exclusively of their imperfection which should be superseded, because they are unable to do it themselves. That’s why the postmodernist battle cry: writer = reader is the same as physician = patient!
Also the fantasy equation: Science Fiction = fantasy, suits only those who never knew anything about literature. Don’t forget, this is about practice – reality is practice, it is made of consequences, and responsibility for consequences is upon those who create them.
Who created the Universal Constant and to what extent is this Universal Constant capable of expressing all the force that is at man’s disposal, is the question to be asked in front of the mirror, before the phenomena we are supposed to live with.
The scenario of a “nightmare”
The inertia of the system, the “thing which kills”, cannot be overpowered by moving along the outlined paths – by exercising the right to say what is allowed to be said. The system is defined by its limits, and man, as a separate system, can move within the given frame, but he doesn’t have to. Exploring the limits of the external reality is dangerous, because it deconstructs such a reality, but exploration of humanity has one additional danger – man himself is often considered a part of the encompassing system, it is dangerous to be preoccupied with yourself: because it threatens the others, i.e. the system!
World-Globe, which is the network, in which traveling is substituted with surfing, in which each individual represents a referent point of reflection, because all the voltage is distributed over the surface of the globe and thus everything levitates as if incorporeal – that is the world of Science Fiction in which all historical, social and political modes have been surpassed, and we: exposed to the spectacle – the mirror itself, which only in itself can yet find the cause of the movement.
Such a projecting which finds relief in devaluated spectacle of the postmodern has for its consequence a radical change of view of the authority in regard to its distribution. What today isolates the authority in an increasing measure is the very idea of authority and its positioning into the function “keys” of the system – the real authority is far from what is actually seen. It has retreated from the system, the system exists as an ecologarium or, if you wish, as a moving picture on a screen, and the authority has departed, it can, if it wills, turn its head away, and even turn the power off.
Can a “stochastic man” who kicks on the keyboard describe what is actually happening as what will be happening, so instead of prophecy of the future we have the prophecy of the present, and thus fulfill the purpose of this faltering literary workshop – the anticipation of the actual phase in the humankind evolution understood as a Global System, as a unity of the individual and the social within the media of the Information Network? What is real is that postmodernism understands literature as an “objective projection of the arbitrary”, however, such a vision by no means affect literature as such – on the contrary, what literature projects does affect the world – only the world is not aware of it.
Empty worded abjuration which pronounces “disappearance” of the meaningful can only enchant itself, so in the eyes of the meaningless the meaning cannot be seen. True, it appears as the absence of the value within the global system of exchange, but who says that art is something that can be exchanged? Vision is reality, but there are two kinds of visions – one which fractures in itself, echoing while losing the power, and the other, forcefully imposing itself, and even invisible as it is, determines new limits of the Universe.
Orderliness of the world in regard to the relationship of authority towards it as a product, today has a specific aspect manifesting itself as the avoidance of the contact with the simulacrum. This is necessary, because the simulacrum has no means to comprehend the true position of the authority – and that is the basis of security: escape of the authority from the Global System, because the communication between the nodes can neither be controlled nor can it be projected, and because of that they are on their own in respect to their self-organization, their latent decline into the self-censorship or penetration of protective membranes of the “law and order” force-fields. This charge of the “culture” as a sum of historical experience simulates world’s order, and the authority by its own seclusion realizes itself in the “exile”. Thus authority today exists wearing lab coats, and the world is in vitro.
Politics of today poses in its might, but lets look at the real effects of its global “policing” – it is already obvious that many of the capacities have been breached: prison capacities, industrial capacities, capacities for natural catastrophes suppression, anti-terrorists capacities, nutrition capacities, human rights capacities, capacities…
Globalism ends exactly at the point from which it became – each node is a focal point. In this millennia, at its beginning, it is already clear, trouble spots increase in numbers and there’s no one to put them out. Is this due to the improved visibility? Even if that were the only reason, it still is a new reality – global wildfire, which crossed the borders of the up to date existing political and social theories, so that now it is necessary to develop an industry of those in order to satisfy the daily demand for the explanation of the events – and who will be the one to satisfy that growing hunger? Whose hand will carve new signs onto the glimmering digital tablets?
This I want to say – now or never! If during one moment a whole human phase of development can be digested, during one oscillation of the global self-reflection inside billions of nodes, where each man became a god producing the Universal constant – who will provide the best definition of matter, will Newton’s laws, or Hume’s, still be actual, will the matter-as-quantity produce the quantum leap? maybe the fuel for an Interstellar Overdrive is in that source – in the breakdown and the consequent chain reaction of human comprehension? How will that mutation look like – like descending of God?
Or like an active madness which spreads at speed of new deserts and viruses? Like a nightmare of new migrations through the virtual gates of peoples? Peoples in comprehensions of new cultures, dances, fashions, spawned and eradicated during a moment’s time?
The threatened cultural installations, xenophobic radiation – these are all old diseases causing rush on the thin skin of “political correctness”. But what if the culture itself is the virus to be killed, not the organism to be protected? What is humanity without culture – a skeleton deprived of swollen muscles which are producing work, liberated spirituality roaming incomprehensible spaces without emotions and ideologies, perception of the creative force itself. That which is the world, junkyard of cultures, compost from which contagions emerge, the corpse of the disease. Borrowed wisdoms, memory capacities, those are the bubbles of reality, boils of plague.
The end of history is the result of the loss of linearity, the ability to recreate conditions – that is the basis of the ability to memorize. Now humanity possesses such an ability, to repeat historical experience, and this is why it stopped evolving and expecting to see the so far concealed. Moving around the globe is historical tourism, political systems are the vestiges of the ancient times, ideologies are the temples – which they always were, but now with a shift, observed from the wagons of the derailed world.
Replicators, transporters poetical allegories in the focus of the Science Fiction, but in reality it is much more than: “Coffee, hot, no milk”.
Replication of emotions, those “charges of false existence” – there is not a trace of remembrance, it is simply the recreation of the conditions of existence, and infinite repeating is the ideal of eternity as the raped reality.
Each culture is violence, because it produces the order by means of replication (tradition), with purpose to maintain the conditions of “life support”. But those conditions are difficult to discern from the “means” (of life), and that means is the emotional/ideological charge – that is “the thing which rapes”.
So what is really the difference between the “thing which kills” and the “thing which supports life”?
And in that struggle for “survival” man is simply an expendable thing – that’s what no one wants to admit. Struggle for life conditions, what needs to survive – and man who struggles = sacrificial lamb.
How to comprehend the world, together with people in it, and know what it is that is really necessary and which is possible to preserve? In dealing with myths, urban legends, in ridiculing of characters, in provoking de-cultivation? What does the author of a Sci-Fi work want? To examine himself, to entertain his bro, to help the literacy? Whatever, he participates in creation of a vision which attacks human perception and thus implements man in itself.
Датум последње измене: 2008-07-29 17:12:14