Google+ Followers

Saturday, April 19, 2014

Linear Or Circular Continuity Versus Pure Randomness

Linear Or Circular Continuity Versus Pure Randomness

We have "classics" in the art form, because we do invent an unnatural, and fantastical world in which we are able to step in the same river more than once.

It is easy for us to look at Hollywood and place the full blame on the heads of the various studios for producing and reproducing what have proven "successful" in our minds and hearts and their bank accounts, but the responsibility belongs to us, all, for fearing to live in a world where pure randomness is naturally embraced, and linear or circular continuity is abhorred.

Case in point:  I was watching an interview with the award winning Nigerian novelist, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, where she was asked about a writer's workshop she leads every Summer in her homeland, and she told the interviewer about having more than 2,000 people apply for 20 spots or seats, "and about 15% of the applicants' writings were rubbish," she said, "people who just imagined they were writers, but the rest of it were people who deeply cared about storytelling, read books, and interested in bettering their writings."

So, then, a formula, which is linear or circular, used to validate writers arises:  read the "classics," have a good memory, and be willing to follow traditions, and standards to some comfortable deviation or parameter that has been well established or tested before, like when Hollywood screen-tests its movies before releasing them to the public or larger audience for profit.

Could one, who had not read the "classics," not taken proper grammar classes, not taken any proper writer's workshop, be taken seriously as a "writer" by the elite, the "masters?"

In the end, we do not want ever to veer off too far from tradition, culture, standard of what has been "successful" or accepted by the majority, the elite, or the "masters"--yes, they are mostly inherited men--of a specific field or profession; thus, we create and recreate that fantastical river in which we could step in twice with full apriori knowledge, experiences or mere comfort for comfort's sake.

And the insight or the conclusion, the only one possible to draw, is that our wanting to hang on too tightly to tradition, standard, and culture in order to create and recreate an orderly linear world of apriori experiences is what propagates racism, and all the other "isms" we want to dismantle in our lifetime. Well maybe, what it will take is for us all to realize that we are living so unnaturally, out of fear of not being able to control our external and internal world.  In other words, we fear randomness, and therefore, have set up a fantastical world in which we merely reinforce the human brain's unnatural predisposition for linear or circular continuity, and inadvertently, its aversion for pure randomness.

Everyone of us, human being, has a lived, experienced story of our own, and that is our artistic carte blance, our human validity, and full right to be writers, regardless of conventions, usually set up unnaturally by those in positions of power to dictate to the rest of us what course or means to be used to attain our goal, and usually those means, skills, tools, or rules are kept as secrets by the ones who create them to separate us and maintain control over our stories of lived experiences.

Our very humanity created and recreated is about linear or circular continuity, as we perceive it or able to make sense of it:  created over time, ages which we perceive mostly as linear for our human brain loves linear or circular continuity (the-sun-rises-in-the-East syndrome, I call it); now try to imagine if one morning, the sun did not rise in the East, all of a sudden; how would our human brain process, make sense of that?  We would all freak out, to say the least!

And that is why (insight) when a group of us, for example, the Civil Rights Movement, wants to change that linear continuity, we need to meet that resistance, always, to change with empathy and agape, for it, resistance to change, in general, is in/with all of us, human beings--to see one's self in the other always, in every case.

With agape,

No comments:

Post a Comment