What I push against, blindly

I understand that the world was nothing, a mechanical chaos of casual, brute enmity on which we stupidly impose our hopes and fears. I understand that, finally and absolutely, I alone exist. All the rest, I saw, is merely what pushes me, or what I push against, blindly — as blindly as all that is not myself pushes back. I create the whole universe, blink by blink.  — An ugly god pitifully dying in a tree.

— from Grendel, by John Gardner

Queer (quotes) :: William S. Burroughs

What Lee is looking for is contact or recognition, like a photon emerging from the haze of insubstantiality to leave an indelible recording in Allerton’s consciousness. Failing to find an adequate observer, he is threatened by painful dispersal, like an unobserved photon. (xvi)

“I glance at the manuscript of Queer and feel I simply can’t read it. My past was a poisoned river from which one was fortunate to escape, and by which one feels immediately threatened, years after the events recorded.  –Painful to an extent I find it difficult to read, let alone write about. Every word and gesture sets the teeth on edge.” (xvii)

The event towards which Lee feels himself inexorably driven is the death of his wife by his own hand, the knowledge of possession, a dead hand waiting to slip over his like a glove. So a smog of evil rises from the pages, an evil that Lee, knowing and yet not knowing, tries to escape with frantic flights of fantasy: his routines, which set one’s teeth on edge because of the ugly menace just behind or to one side of them, a presence palpable as a haze. . . .

My concept of possession is closer to the medieval model than to modern psychological explanations, with their dogmatic insistence that such manifestations must come from within and never, never, never from without. (As if there were some clear-cut difference between inner and outer.) I mean a definite possessing entity. And indeed, the psychological concept might well have been devised by the possessing entities, since nothing is more dangerous to a possessor than being seen as a separate invading creature by the host it has invaded. And for this reason the possessor shows itself only when absolutely necessary. (xix)

. . . This occasion was my first clear indication of something in my being that was not me, and not under my control. I remember a dream from this period: I worked as an exterminator in Chicago, in the late 1930’s, and lived in a rooming house on the near North Side. In the dream I am floating up near the ceiling with a feeling of utter death and despair, and looking down I see my body walking out the door with deadly purpose.

“Raw peeled winds of hate and mischance blew the shot.” (xx)

I am forced to the appalling conclusion that I would never have become a writer but for Joan’s death, and to a realization of the extent to which this event has motivated and formulated my writing. I live with the constant threat of possession, and a constant need to escape from possession, from Control.  So the death of Joan brought me in contact with the invader, the Ugly Spirit, and maneuvered me into a lifelong struggle, in which I have had no choice except to write my way out. (xxii)

*

Moor smiled into an inner mirror, a smile without a trace of warmth, but it was not a cold smile: it was the meaningless smile of senile decay, the smile that goes with false teeth, the smile of a man grown old and stir-simple in the solitary confinement of exclusive self-love. . . . He had pale blue eyes and very white skin. There were dark patches under his eyes and two deep lines around the mouth. He looked like a child, and at the same time like a prematurely aged man. His face showed the ravages of the death process, the inroads of decay in flesh cut off from the living charge of contact. Moor was motivated, literally kept alive and moving, by hate, but there was no passion or violence in his hate. Moor’s hate has a slow, steady push, weak but infinitely persistent, waiting to take advantage of any weakness in another. The slow drip of Moor’s hate had etched the lines of decay in his face. He had aged without experiencing life, like a piece of meat rotting on a pantry shelf.

. . . Actually Moor’s brush-off was calculated to inflict the maximum hurt possible under the circumstances. It put Lee in the position of a detestably insistent queer, too stupid and too insensitive to realize that his attentions were not wanted, forcing Moor to the distasteful necessity of drawing a diagram.

Lee tipped his chair back against the wall and looked around the room. Someone was writing a letter at the next table. If he had overheard the conversation, he gave no sign. The proprietor was reading the bull-fight section of the paper, spread out on the counter in fron of him. A silence peculiar to Mexico seeped into the room, a vibrating, soundless hum. — Joe finished his beer, wiped his mouth with the back of his hand, and stared at the wall with watery, bloodshot blue eyes. The silence seeped into Lee’s body, and his face went slack and blank. The effect was curiously spectral, as though you could see through his face. The face was ravaged and vicious and old, but the clear, green eyes were dreamy and innocent.

Moor went on and on, following the circular route of the true hypochondriac, back to tuberculosis and the urine test. Lee though he had never heard anything as tiresome and depressing. Moor did not have tuberculosis or kidney trouble or undulant fever. He was sick with the sickness of death. Death was in every cell of his body. He gave off a faint, greenish steam of decay. Lee imagined he would glow in the dark.

He froze in front of a restaurant like a bird dog: “Hungry . . . quicker to eat here than buy something and cook it.” When Lee was hungry, when he wanted a drink or a shot of morphine, delay was unbearable.

He nodded to Lee. Lee tried to achieve a greeting at once friendly and casual, designed to show interest without pushing their short acquaintance. The result was ghastly. — As Lee stood aside to bow in his dignified old-world greeting, there emereged instead a leer of naked lust, wrenched in the pain and hate of his deprived body and, in simultaneous double exposure, a sweet child’s smile of liking and trust, shockingly out of time and out of place, mutilated and hopeless. — Allerton was appalled. “Perhaps he has some sort of tic,” he thought. He decided to remove himself from contact with Lee before the man did something even more distasteful. The effect was like a broken connection. Allerton was not cold or hostile; Lee simply wasn’t there so far as he was concerned. Lee looked at him helplessly for a moment, then turned back to the bar, defeated and shaken.

Had he ever met Lee? He could not be sure. Formal introductions were not expected among the G.I. students. Was Lee a student? There was nothing unusual in talking to someone you didn’t know, but Lee put Allerton on guard. The man was somehow familiar to him. When Lee talked, he seemed to mean more than what he said. A special emphasis to a word or a greeting hinted at a period of familiarity in some other time and place. As though Lee were saying, “You know what I mean. You remember.” — Allerton shrugged irritably and began arranging the chess pieces on the board. He looked like a sullen child unable to locate the source of his ill temper.

Lee watched the thin hands, the beautiful violet eyes, the flush of excitement on the boy’s face. An imaginary hand projected with such force it seemed Allerton must feel the ectoplasmic fingers caressing his ear, phantom thumbs smoothing his eyebrows, pushing the hair back from his face. Now Lee’s hands were running down over the ribs , the stomach. Lee felt the aching pain of desire in his lungs. His mouth was a little open, showing his teeth in th half-snarl of a baffled animal. He licked his lips. — Lee did not enjoy frustration. The limitations of his desires were like the bars of a cage, like a chain and collar, something he had learned as an animal learns, through days and years of experiencing the snub of the chain, the unyielding bars. He had never resigned himself, and his eyes looked out through the invisible bars, watchful, alert, waiting for the keeper to forget the door, for the frayed collar, the loosened bar . . . suffering without despair and without consent.

After that, Lee met Allerton every day at five in the Ship Ahoy. Allerton was accustomed to choose his friends from people older than himself, and he looked forward to meeting Lee. Lee had conversational routines that Allerton had never heard. But he felt at times oppressed by Lee, as though Lee’s presence shut off everything else. He thought he was seeing too much of Lee. — Allerton disliked commitments, and had never been in love or had a close friend. He was now forced to ask himself: “What does he want from me?” It did not occur to him that Lee was queer, as he associated queerness with at least some degree of overt effeminacy. He decided finally that Lee valued him as an audience.

My skull changes shape . . . the bones bend

I try to make my music joyful — it makes me joyful — to feel that music soar through the body. It changes your posture, you raise your chin, throw back your shoulders, walk with a swagger. When I sing, my face changes shape. It feels like my skull changes shape . . . the bones bend. “Grace” and “Eternal Life” are about the joy that music gives — the, probably illusory, feeling of being able to do anything. Sex is like that . You become utterly consumed by the moment. Apparently orgasm is the only point where your mind becomes completely empty — you think of nothing for that second. That’s why it’s so compelling — it’s a tiny taste of death. Your mind is void — you have nothing in your head save white light. Nothing save white light and “Yes!” — which is fantastic. Just knowing “Yes.”

— Jeff Buckley

[Quote pulled from Shana Goldin-Perschbacher’s essay “Not with You But of You”]

Each Man Kills The Thing He Loves

*

Yet each man kills the thing he loves,
By each let this be heard,
Some do it with a bitter look,
Some with a flattering word,
The coward does it with a kiss,
The brave man with a sword!

Some kill their love when they are young,
And some when they are old;
Some strangle with the hands of Lust,
Some with the hands of Gold:
The kindest use a knife, because
The dead so soon grow cold.

Some love too little, some too long,
Some sell and others buy;
Some do the deed with many tears,
And some without a sigh:
For each man kills the thing he loves,
Yet each man does not die.

*

[From Oscar Wilde’s The Ballad of Reading Gaol]

Imaginary Bullets

A soldier sprawls in a muddy trench, with the machine-gun bullets crackling a foot or two overhead, and whiles away his intolerable boredom by reading an American gangster story. And what is it that makes that story so exciting? Precisely the fact that people are shooting at each other with machine-guns! Neither the soldier nor anyone else sees anything curious in this. It is taken for granted that an imaginary bullet is more thrilling than a real one.

— George Orwell, from “Raffles and Miss Blandish” (from A Collection of Essays)

On the whole, human beings want to be good, but not too good, and not quite all the time.

— George Orwell, from “The Art of Donald McGill” (from A Collection of Essays)

Beyond Good and Evil :: Selected Epigrams :: Nietzsche

[Asterisks (*) indicate some of my especial favorites. — Dr. Sineokov]

*.63.  Whoever is a teacher through and through takes all things seriously only in relation to his students — even himself.

.64. “Knowledge for its own sake” — that is the last snare of morality: with that one becomes completely entangled in it once more.

***.65. The attraction of knowledge would be small if one did not have to overcome so much shame on the way.

***.66. The inclination to depreciate himself, to let himself be robbed, lied to, and taken advantage of, could be the modesty [Scham: usually translated as “shame”] of a god among men.

*.68. “I have done that,” says my memory. “I cannot have done that,” says my pride, and remains inexorable. Eventually — memory yields.

.69. One has watched life badly if one has not also seen the hand that considerately — kills.

*.70. If one has character one also has one’s typical experience, which recurs repeatedly.

*.71. The sage as astronomer. — As long as you still experience the stars as something “above you” you lack the eye of knowledge.

.72. Not the intensity but the duration of high feelings  makes high men.

*.73. Whoever reaches his ideal transcends it eo ipso.

*.73a. Many a peacock hides his peacock tail from all eyes — and calls that his pride.

***.75. The degree and kind of a man’s sexuality reach up into the ultimate pinnacle of his spirit.

**.76. Under peaceful conditions a warlike man sets upon himself.

**.77. With one’s principles one wants to bully one’s habits, or justify, honor, scold, or conceal them: two men with the same principles probably aim with them at something basically different.

***.78. Whoever despises himself still respects himself as one who despises.

*.79. A soul that knows it is loved but does not itself love betrays its sediment: what is at the bottom comes up.

.80. A matter that becomes clear ceases to concern us. — What was on the mind of that god who counseled: “Know thyself!” Did he mean: “Cease to concern yourself! Become objective!” — And Socrates? — And “scientific men”? —

*.81. It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even — quench thirst any more?

***.83. Instinct. — When the house burns one forgets even lunch. — Yes, but one eats it later in the ashes.

.84. Woman learns to hate to the extent to which her charms — decrease.

*.85. The same affects in man and woman are yet different in tempo: therefore man and woman do not cease to misunderstand each other.

86. Women themselves always still have in the background of all personal vanity an impersonal contempt — for “woman.” —

****.87. Tethered heart, free spirit. — If one tethers one’s heart severely and imprisons it, one can give one’s spirit many liberties: I have said that once before. But one does not believe me, unless one already knows it —

**.88. One begins to mistrust very clever people when they become embarrassed.

.89. Terrible experiences pose the riddle whether the person who has them is not terrible.

*.90. Heavy, heavy-spirited people become lighter precisely through what makes others heavier, through hatred and love, and for a time they surface.

****.91. So cold, so icy that one burns one’s fingers on him! Every hand is startled when touching him. — And for that very reason some think he glows.

.92. Who has not, for the sake of his good reputation — sacrificed himself once? —

.93. Affability contains no hatred of men, but for that very reason too much contempt for men.

****.94. A man’s maturity — consists in having found again the seriousness one had as a child, at play.

**.95. To be ashamed of one’s immorality — that is a step on the staircase at whose end one is also ashamed of one’s morality.

**.96. One should part from life as Odysseus parted from Nausicaa — blessing it rather than in love with it.

****.98. If we train our conscience, it kisses us while it hurts us. Continue reading

The Chemicals Between Us

It may be, indeed, that the differences between us lie not so much in the nature of our respective experiences as in our fashion of describing them.

— A. J. Ayer, from Philosophical Essays

It’s Hard to Forgive Others for Being Like Ourselves

For Kundera the way to overcome the urge to domination is to realize that everybody has and always will have this urge, but to insist that nobody is more or less justified in having it than anyone else. Nobody stands for the Truth, or for Being, or for Thinking. Nobody stands for anything Other or Higher. We all just stand for ourselves, equal inhabitants of a paradise of individuals in which everybody has the right to be understood but nobody has the right to rule.

*

Elements of what we call language penetrate [so] deeply into what we call reality that the very project of representing ourselves as being mappers of something language-independent is fatally compromised from the start.

*

Accept the position that we are fated to occupy [. . .] the position of being beings who cannot have a view of the world that does not reflect our interests and values.

*

Like relativism, but in a different way, Realism is an impossible attempt to view the world from nowhere.

*

[All of the above are Richard Rorty quotes]

No Such Thing as Language

We should realize that we have abandoned not only the ordinary notion of a language, but we have erased the boundary between knowing a language and knowing our way around the world generally. For there are no rules for arriving at passing theories that work. . . . There is no more chance of regularizing, or teaching, this process than there is of regularizing or teaching the process of creating new theories to cope with new data — for that is what this process involves.

There is no such thing as language, not if a language is anything like what philosophers, at least, have supposed. There is therefore no such thing to be learned or mastered. We must give up the idea of a clearly defined shared structure which language users master and then apply to cases . . . We should give up the attempt to illuminate how we communicate by appeal to conventions.

— Donald Davidson, from “A Nice Derangement of Epitaphs”

Existentialist Ethics

. . . not only do we assert that the existentialist doctrine permits the elaboration of an ethics, but it even appears to us as the only philosophy in which an ethics has its place. For, in a metaphysics of transcendence, in the classical sense of the term, evil is reduced to error; and in humanistic philosophies it is impossible to account for it, man being defined as complete in a complete world. Existentialism alone gives — like religions — a real role to evil, and it is this, perhaps, which makes its judgments so gloomy. Men do not like to feel themselves in danger. Yet it is because there are real dangers, real failures and real earthly damnation that words like victory, wisdom, or joy have meaning. Nothing is decided in advance, and it is because man has something to lose and because he can lose that he can also win.

— Simone de Beauvoir, from The Ethics of Ambiguity

Gloomy Passivity

A young man has hoped for a happy or useful or glorious life. If the man he has become looks upon these miscarried attempts of his adolescence with disillusioned indifference, there they are, forever frozen in the dead past. When an effort fails, one declares bitterly that he has lost time and wasted his powers. The failure condemns that whole part of ourselves which we had engaged in the effort. It was to escape this dilemma that the Stoics preached indifference. We could indeed assert our freedom against all constraint if we agreed to renounce the particularity of our projects. If a door refuses to open, let us accept not opening it and there we are free. But by doing that one manages only to save an abstract notion of freedom. It is emptied of all content and all truth. The power of man ceases to be limited because it is annulled. It is the particularity of the project which determines the limitation of the power, but it is also what gives the project its content and permits it to be set up. There are people who are filled with such horror at the idea of a defeat that they keep themselves from ever doing anything. But no one would dream of considering this gloomy passivity as the triumph of freedom.

— Simone de Beauvoir, from The Ethics of Ambiguity

Quantum Mechanics of a Lonely Heart

. . . the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help from pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.

[From Matthew Arnold’s Dover Beach]

Contra “Rule Seventeen: Omit Needless Words!”

Brevity is a great virtue [. . .] yet it may be overestimated. The reader’s mind must be permitted to eddy around the subject. . . . [Yes, brevity is a virtue,] but we must not make a fetish of it. . . . Must one never say great big dog because great equals big? Nay, it is a mark of man’s overflowing vitality and sheer joy in emphasis to say great big dog.

— Edwin Herbert Lewis

[Courtesy of The Boston Globe]

Don’t forget to bring a towel . . .

All great things are achieved in a light heart
— Ramtha

In formal logic, a formal signal is the signal of defeat: but in the evolution of real knowledge, it marks the first step in progress toward victory.
— Alfred North Whitehead

NASA astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell came to this conclusion on his return trip from space:
“In one moment I realized that this universe is intelligent. It is proceeding in a direction, and we have something to do with that direction. And that creative spirit, the creative intent that has been the history of this planet, comes from within us, and it is out there — it is all the same . . . . Consciousness itself is what is fundamental, and energy-matter is the product of consciousness . . . . If we change our heads about who we are — and can see ourselves as creative, eternal beings creating physical experience, joined at that level of existence we call consciousness — then we start to see and create this world that we live in quite differently.”
[From the BLEEP Book]

I am looking for a lot of men who have infinite capacity to not know what can’t be done.
— Henry Ford

As the bonfires of knowledge grow brighter, the more the darkness is revealed to our startled eyes.
— Terence McKenna

Philosophy is written in this grand book — the universe — which stands continuously open to our gaze. But the book cannot be understood unless one first learns to comprehend the language and interpret the characters in which it is written. It is written in the language of mathematics, and its characters are triangles, circles and other geometrical figures. Without these one is wandering about in a dark labyrinth.
— Galileo Galilei

Refusing to make any simplifying theoretical statements :: Philosophy and/as/of Literature

Why should it be evident that simplicity and theoretical abstractness are desiderata in a piece of philosophical writing? Couldn’t a text be a work of moral philosophy precisely by showing the complexity and indeterminacy that is really there in human life, and by refusing to make any simplifying theoretical statements? . . . By saying only what can be said and by refusing to say anything simpler, less storylike, than human life is, the novel does make a philosophical claim (about the human truth and, implicitly, about the limits of theory) that could not simply be paraphrased in a nonnovelistic text. (For such a text can so easily claim, in and by its very style, that complexity is reducible, even if its content denies this.)

–Martha Craven Nussbaum (paraphrasing a point made by Cora Diamond) [From the Vol. 15, No. 1, Autumn, 1983 issue of New Literary History]