"Whether it's the judgement of a monotheistic god or just a restoration of the cosmic balance..." An aside here, but reading this line, I realise that I increasingly view this either/or as akin to waves and particles. Both are functional descriptions which bring different aspects of the same mysterious process into view.
Yes, sure, but the point is that there is nothing inherent in words that are contradictory to McGilchrist's larger point. He lists countless examples of authors and works that he considered "balanced".
i have three hypotheses that i'd like to learn more about:
1) minority-literate cultures have a fundamentally different experience of reality than majority-literate cultures.
2) language develops differently in majority-literate cultures than in minority-literate cultures, with minority-literate cultures tending to preserve more evocative language than majority-literate cultures.
3) in post-digital cultures, we can't separate the platonic ideal of "writing" from the effects of the internet and social media. our contemporary form of "writing" is fundamentally different from somebody using ink and parchment a thousand years ago. the psychological impacts of living on the edge of a maelstrom of socially-obligated content production are only just starting to be appreciated, and i think that dynamic has fundamentally altered our relationship with reality in ways that we haven't fully recognized.
Yes! The first two are beyond hypothesis, but In so far as they help develop the third, this is really important work. If you aren't familiar, I'd recommend Ong and Abram for the first two, Barba-Kay for the third.
I’m so glad I stumbled upon your “work”, more bricks in the tower it may be. It’s attempting some honesty in a sea of lofty promises. Excited to follow along!
Do you remember the distinction Vanessa brings in on the opening page of Hospicing Modernity, between using language to "word the world" and using it to "world the world"? For me, that's the way of slipping the trap you're naming here. There is another way of using words that isn't tower-building, but it can take some trickster energy to find it. It's like a little door that moves around when you're not looking, so it's never quite in the same place twice.
i haven't read Hospicing Modernity yet, but it's moving up my reading list quickly. i'm always a big fan of both trickster energy and doors that move when i'm not looking... just a different kind of writing discipline that i have to develop, which is both exciting and daunting.
I deliberately disengaged completely from the news and all current-bullshit-associated sources (of any political bent) and a big side effect was that I felt like talking online less, even in other places such as this or on my 'stack
"Whether it's the judgement of a monotheistic god or just a restoration of the cosmic balance..." An aside here, but reading this line, I realise that I increasingly view this either/or as akin to waves and particles. Both are functional descriptions which bring different aspects of the same mysterious process into view.
Write more tragedies, of course
dunno... i think if i wanted to write more tragedies, i'd go back to journalism.
Yes, sure, but the point is that there is nothing inherent in words that are contradictory to McGilchrist's larger point. He lists countless examples of authors and works that he considered "balanced".
i have three hypotheses that i'd like to learn more about:
1) minority-literate cultures have a fundamentally different experience of reality than majority-literate cultures.
2) language develops differently in majority-literate cultures than in minority-literate cultures, with minority-literate cultures tending to preserve more evocative language than majority-literate cultures.
3) in post-digital cultures, we can't separate the platonic ideal of "writing" from the effects of the internet and social media. our contemporary form of "writing" is fundamentally different from somebody using ink and parchment a thousand years ago. the psychological impacts of living on the edge of a maelstrom of socially-obligated content production are only just starting to be appreciated, and i think that dynamic has fundamentally altered our relationship with reality in ways that we haven't fully recognized.
Yes! The first two are beyond hypothesis, but In so far as they help develop the third, this is really important work. If you aren't familiar, I'd recommend Ong and Abram for the first two, Barba-Kay for the third.
excellent! thanks for the recommendations, i'll definitely check them out.
I’m so glad I stumbled upon your “work”, more bricks in the tower it may be. It’s attempting some honesty in a sea of lofty promises. Excited to follow along!
May as well enjoy our utter stuck-in-the-quaking-mess-ness.
doing my best! thanks so much for reading, i'm glad you found something worthwhile in it.
Do you remember the distinction Vanessa brings in on the opening page of Hospicing Modernity, between using language to "word the world" and using it to "world the world"? For me, that's the way of slipping the trap you're naming here. There is another way of using words that isn't tower-building, but it can take some trickster energy to find it. It's like a little door that moves around when you're not looking, so it's never quite in the same place twice.
i haven't read Hospicing Modernity yet, but it's moving up my reading list quickly. i'm always a big fan of both trickster energy and doors that move when i'm not looking... just a different kind of writing discipline that i have to develop, which is both exciting and daunting.
https://youtu.be/iZa2FC3iYpg?t=4591
that's the one.
were you offline for a while?
I deliberately disengaged completely from the news and all current-bullshit-associated sources (of any political bent) and a big side effect was that I felt like talking online less, even in other places such as this or on my 'stack
good to log off periodically for sure, glad you got a break. welcome back (?)
Listen to Peter Hamill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8MDXHCg9d4