El hombre totémico y sus físio espacios del ejercicio del poder

1)Odio iconoclasta, Lluis de Foix (La Vanguardia, 4mar15)
Las destrucciones de piezas de arte en tiempos revolucionarios o en guerras de conquista suelen ser motivadas por el odio hacia el adversario, lo ajeno, lo que se sitúa en la zona enemiga que hay que eliminar.

Y respecto de cualquier tiempo anterior y más allá de una fisiología del ahora que es mía y que considera cualquier imposición conceptual mayor un ataque desde este punto físio nuestro del ahora-precisamente porque el pasado es una abstracción ciertamente poderosa, tendida sobre mí en todo su peso-si es que le presto demasiado atención…

Por eso me son sumamente molestos los objetos reales que remiten de hecho a ella-a una lógica compleja porque abstracta que me obliga a esforzarme en mi autocomprensión propia como producto nosotros mismos de estructuras y planos mayores, culturalmente y en el tiempo…

Pero que nosotros no somos productos de nadie:

Por eso nos cagamos y meamos en todo lo que no se subordine a nosotros y el físio momento actual,

Una fisiología temporal-histórica que es nuestra-no os quepa la menor duda, hijos de puta y putísimos cabrones….


2)LA SUPERVIVENCIA SOLO FISIOLOGICA HUMANA EN LAS PELICULAS
APOCALIPTICAS
Una regresión a una físio-antropología apenas mediatizada por idea alguna ni concepto ya propio alguno del yo en sí mismo-salvo respecto a eso del comer y que no te coman.

Y la fisiología humana posapocalíptica es en realidad una físio-racionalidad pre-civilizada, anterior a la agricultura-y previo en rigor a la individualidad en sí misma conceptualizada que es la conciencia humana-puesto que es solo a través de las interrelaciones pisco-afectivas humanas con el otro que he de comprenderme en mi propia individualidad en base a la existencia real y cercana-compenetrada-con otros seres humanos,

Porque si es el hambre que me motiva, lo que anda, nada y vuela a la cazuela-y lo mismo incluso respecto de los seres de carne y hueso que hablan, dado que en tales circunstancia ya no hay razón alguno para hablar ya más nada:

No hay en efecto necesidad de grandes relatos abstractos de ninguna clase que siempre sujetaron al hombre, desembocándole irrevocablemente a mediatizarse a través de cualesquiera ficciones antropológicas-pero siempre literarias-respecto de sí mismo, finalmente.

Porque dentro de la fisiología antropológica humana solo del hambre, lo que cuenta son los distintos orificios corporales humanos-los tuyos y los de cualquiera con el que te topas,

Y muy lógicamente el hambre te dice que un bocado de comer es igual que cualquier otro, al final, dentro del horror humano solo fisiológico de una antropología de solo sujetos y objetos-de carne y hueso y diente y uña hasta el final…

¿Qué necesidad hay entonces de un concepto mas elevado y mediatizado de autoconocimiento propio que decimos individualidad y como requisito simultaneo de cualquier apenas incipiente peso de moralidad respecto del transcurrir temporal humano?

La individualidad como conciencia humana-ellas ambas son precisamente estorbos respecto de una fisiología posapocalíptica y antropológica, hasta ahora solo de Hollywood, claro.

(¿Unas palomitas?)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DblvhECdws0
_______________



( 16mar15)
Sobre Ortega y Gasset (La Deshumanización del arte, 1925; La Rebelión de las masas, 1929)

El físio-primitivismo histórico
-El de todo fisiología humana viva e individual;
-Pero entonces (como ahora) una físio-racionalidad desasida-de haberse zafado-de una conciencia histórica asumida, no solo combatida;
-Y como en consecuencia de esto, una tecnociencia desbocada, solo utilitaria-en esto también solo fisiológica y vital al mayor físio-disfrute del usuario como una antropología light pero siniestra en su capacidad de destrucción:

El siglo XX: del físio-disfrute a lo gangsteril de Hobbes como espacio humano en sí-y núcleo real y rector al mísmismo seno de la civilización…


Ortega y Gasset is Spengler (1921) and man cannot live beyond his physiology (physio-rationality)
The dehumanization of art is the de-physiologicalization of artistic representation at the time historically and thus a realm itself as symptom between the divorce of the common man from higher forms of physio-rationality, and about 10 years before the actual rise to and consolidation over the German state by Adolf Hitler-through the common man and the de-rationalization (physiologicalization) of everybody else.


La verdadera filantropía psicológica y personal del hombre rico
Es la elevación del hombre físio-vulgar en ilustrado,
Y no la ropa que me obsequias-ni siquiera la comida que donas con fines antro-reforzantes,
Respecto de algún estatus quo solo tuyo, finalmente.

El hombre machadiano que siempre va contigo
Y cuyo soliloquio es efectivamente el verdadero secreto dialogado de la filantropía,

Esto que es la bondad y ternura respecto finalmente del físio-yo de cada uno auto y respectivamente,
En el sudor, sangre y lagrimas propios de cada uno como ser físio-racional, vivo y humano,

(Además de otros flujos corporales que aquí y ahora non digo)


Harvard Divinity School PhD and Clergyman (at the Hill)
The shell game tactic of exploiting not knowing (human, physical limitation of percerption in the end) to prime and set just the doubt of what cannot be seen, touched or bitten into;

To create lacunae as points as space of doubt in which God can be pumped into more seriously as real intellectual propostion:

You can’t prove God doesn’t exist, so I get to say (seriously) that he does/could-because your perception is limited.

Or you ponder perhaps in the end nothing at all of any real seriousness nor importance, in final, resigned intellectual claudication except for what you can in fact control,

Becuase the contemplation of the power of God is cryptically the neverending obsession of man and his own sense of powerlessness,

And it is the real politik gangster in the end to whom we were all to pay homage, historically and in our vitality…

That’s all-and behind the smoke and the mirrors of the Wizard dwarf of Oz

(Who only illusorily ever got out of Kansas, anyway himself!):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fa4HUiFJ6c



El uso nuestro de la semiótica de Anna Frank
Texto como un universo que espacialmente es solo una casa que remite, sin embargo, al mundo histórico entonces actual-y muy intensamente para nostros a los mecanismos y logística después conocidos para el mundo entero de las campos de exterminio Nazi (que en la obra en sí son solo presentidos y como una forma en realidad de siniestra alusión y suposición basada en el rumor en la mente de F. y otros personajes que ella menciona o describe).

Una imaginaria de confinamiento claramente geométrico, de seres humanos dentro de estructuras oscuras de líneas perpendiculares (una casa, los cuartos rectangulares o cuadrados-visibles como también los espacios secundarios y escondidos) es el mundo por F. novelado (descrito) que es asimismo el fondo real y la imaginaria que tenemos nosotros y según una semiótica cultural occidental de la experiencia real, humana de los campos de concentración y exterminio Nazi:

Dos planos distintos respecto de la relación entre dos puntos reales y geográficos diferentes, pero idénticos, sin embargo, en el plano semiótico nuestro de imagen-y como uno cuanto solo extensión del otro-curiosamente diferentes asimismo en lo temporal y que solo nosotros unimos desde la perspectiva histórica que ni F. ni los suyos pudieron tener objetivamente y fuera de la físio-aprehensión en la que vivían, sobre la que se tendía solo la amenaza del rumor ominoso y de aniquilación:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7aDstrDMf0
[14abr15]

______

(18abr15 )
La comunión nuestra en la culpa y Las tres versiones de Judas de Borges (1944)

GOD—MAN
NO SIN—SINFUL
NO SIN [MEANS] NO MAN
NO SIN [IS] GOD
NO SIN [IS] NO REDEMPTION AS HUMAN WORK IN PROGRESS TOWARDS GOD.
NO SIN [IS] NO LIFE GAME FOR INDIVIDUALS IN REGARDS TO THE COLLECTIVE GROUP;
NO SIN [MEANS] NO ANTHROPOLOGY.

Inferences
Anthropology makes systemically viable the subordination of physio-rational man in his bodily individuality to the possibility of collective stability through time; anthropology is thus a game whose semiotics (‘instructions’) must be learned and internalized-but foremost and at the outset staked on the physio-collateral of the individual’s fear of opprobrium (primeval abandonment in contexts of forces of human, natural selection by the group the individual belongs to):

Sin becomes a physio-semiotic catalyzing agent underlying and backing the anthro-life apparatus itself-because the whole thing has to taste of life and death and of the greatest perceived seriousness to the individual,

And it does-and not only in just Christian-based anthropological, human contexts.

Because the physio-rational and human semiotics must always be unfailingly physiological also-otherwise life does not taste of life.

Meditation on Borges:
Jesus is without sin, and therefore is truly not man-and so God as and through Christ, is still God, not truly the son of man;

Thus the figure of Christ almost seems to require of Judas as the true state of human misery and abjection that God would have to assume also,

To truly know and be of the nature of man.

It is then that Christ would surely have to be closer to the figure of Judas if Christ were in fact God encarnate in man and as the son in the misery also of man (deceit and betrayal) which generally as sin as the nature and natural state of man (because he dies), is the human, Judeo-Christian link to the divine, in the first place.

The semiotic and most effective paladin as figure of this particular life game that is Jesus Christ as rock star before the eyes of the faithful,

Is thus lent real psychological depth in the figure of Judas as subtle and veiled avatar himself of God and even over Christ as a more serious embrace of the burden of human, moral being…

But the Christ sells better in the physio-hearts, mind and perception of man crushed in life by the terror of his own finitude,

Still today, but even before agriculture and always at the core his very physio-biology.


____________
http://www.ciudadseva.com/textos/cuentos/esp/borges/tres_versi ones_de_judas.htm


[22abr15]
Bullfighting is Baseball
Art VERSUS the physio-systemic and one-dimensional-because bullfighting is art, whereas Baseball is physio-engagement for individuals who really have almost no working understanding of art at all but who are equally enthralled visually with images in the mind of the human anatomy as power, and control as-at deeper phsyio-psychological levels-basically an activity of physio-contemplation and esthetics, though they have not the slightest rational notion of this intellectually, and prefer naturally to see and understand themselves as fans and supporters and followers of a sport or competition;

But bullfighting is an art, and so quite obviously it requires a greater complexity of approach on the part of the spectator, because he or she must embrace the complexity of the multi-level and estetics versus just phsyio-engagement (and they do!)

And of course no food is sold by vendors in the stands at bullfights to people wearing team logo-types on their heads as hats or on their shirts and jerseys, though you may discreetly bring your own wine; and there are no giant-screen TVs, either, flashing giant commercial blips in the slow moments or during pauses,

Because bullfighting is physio-engagement that is subordinate to the tension of the esthetic, and it is that tension that takes real priority over everything else, finally-to be assessed finally and in regards to power, control and form according to the individual bullfighter’s skill, experience and his particular touch that only experience can bring:

I am speaking of the human figure, always and unfailingly at the center of everything (what else is there, really?)

So Bullfighting is a serious thing, in this sense.

Because it is important to take yourself seriously,

Contrary to what Coca-Cola or the Disney Corporation et. al might tell you or imply subliminally through their commercials, products and physio-narratives in Orlando, USA.
_________


Blade Runner (1982)
The programming of the fear of opprobrium in androids (who are also sadistic)

Holden*: You're in a desert, walking along in the sand when...
Leon: Is this the test now?
Holden: Yes. You're in a desert, walking along in the sand when all of a sudden you look down and see a...
Leon: What one?
It was a timid interruption, hardly audible.
Holden: What?
Leon: What desert?
Holden: Doesn't make any difference what desert... its completely hypothetical.

[But not to an android (or computer-based mind) for there are only a limited number of deserts in a topographic sense on Earth or in reference to any possibly known and commercially exploited planet (theme in the film); clearly, for such a computer-based physio-rationality, there is no possibility of referring to a desert as hypothetical-even programmed scenarios run over and over again by big, mainframe computers can only be really understood as hypothetical from the standpoint of the computer’s human programmers and those who then interpret the data the computer produces. The hypothetical does not exist for a computer; only human beings hypothesize, ultimately out of a need to-but computers do not know need.]

Leon: But how come I'd be there?
Holden: Maybe you're fed up, maybe you want to be by yourself...who knows. So you look down and see a tortoise. It's crawling toward you...
Leon: A tortoise. What's that?
Holden: Know what a turtle is?
Leon: Of course.
Holden: Same thing.
Leon: I never seen a turtle.
He sees Holden's patience is wearing thin.
Leon: But I understand what you mean.
Holden: You reach down and flip the tortoise over on its back, Leon.
Keeping an eye on his subject, Holden notes the dials in the Voight-Kampff. One of the needles quivers slightly.
Leon: You make up these questions, Mr. Holden, or do they write 'em down for you?
Disregarding the question, Holden continues, picking up the pace.
Holden: The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over. But it can't. Not with out your help. But you're not helping.
Leon's upper lip is quivering.
Leon: Whatya means, I'm not helping?
Holden: I mean you're not helping! Why is that, Leon?
Holden looks hard at Leon, a hard piercing look. Leon is flushed with anger, breathing hard, it's a bad moment, he might erupt. Suddenly Holden grins disarmingly.

[Is this the fear of opprobrium and phyio-insecurity of a the moral VERSUS taste for the sadistic in the android’s programming (Leon)-Why aren’t you helping, Leon?; Because if you actually like seeing it suffer, there is no possibility of your being among us, Leon…]


POWER PLAYS
You may take differently motivated forms of satisfaction at seeing the turtle suffer-because you can, it is not you-it is an animal-or because precisely because you are supposed to help it, you don’t as a way of striking at society as a force of destruction over you through your own terror of opprobrium;

And a non-rational animal as scapegoat who bears the brunt of a conflict that is hardly in any way at all its own, is of course basically immaterial, except in how the individual extrapolates this to human circumstances (that even a suffering animal will certainly bear on in the contemplation of it.)

All of this, of course, would be easier for everybody in terms ultimately of human consequences if it were the sentient, especially rational organism’s suffering that truly compelled people, not just the fear of opprobrium in the mind of the human beholder.

Why do human anthropological systems tend NOT to place human suffering itself at the center of moral rection, not the internal fear of abandonment (opprobrium)?

Probably because it (suffering) is too overwhelming-at least originally, historically- to be at the fore and center of collective life and systemic, social cohesion. More overwhelming, however, is probably the fear of ostracism, opprobrium (abandonment) in the very DNA of the human, physio-rational organism that arose through contexts of human-on-human natural selection before agriculture...

But there is also the appeal to the right (rational) way of doing something, which in Spain is exactly the way God orders that things be done, any way,

Como dios manda.

Even an "atheisist" understands and will you use him or herself this expression…

Because life is certainly better for everyone when rational, logical coherence is demanded of and by one and all- including collective and corporate entities of commerce and government-as a core component as well of physio-semiotic mechanisms of social rection that hold the individual also to the interest of others, not just what your own gonads would have you whimsically enact out through the circumstances and lives of others,

Because the logical corollary as opposite to things done right of (como dios manda) is exactly that which pushes people to a conduct of lo que te salga de los cojones;

And in Spanish society this is a problem-this is anathema and perhaps the greatest, most savagely hurled insult one can verbally fire at another human being as accusation and in the exceptional circumstances (for Spanish culture) of intense sarcasm when it is said and in the tone, manners and gestures of the speaker…

(Whatever)

_________
*Holden: this character always vaguely struck a resemblance in my mind to the actor William Holden (physically and in the tone of voice), but because he is clearly secondary and a delivery device to a higher complexity of plot, I never was even aware of the character’s name…

[28abr15]



Capítulo VIII del primero libro del Contrato social de Rousseau “Del Estado Civil”:
Este tránsito del estado de naturaleza al estado civil produce en el hombre un cambio muy notable, al sustituir en su conducta la justicia al instinto y al dar a sus acciones la moralidad que antes les faltaba.

Codificar su comportamiento en términos morales:
1)-Sobre el miedo del individuo (presente en el mismo ADN humano) de abandono-oprobrio y rechazo-por parte del grupo colectivo del que depende;
-La adhesión básica y obligatoriamente del individuo a la semiótica del mismo grupo del que teme el rechazo y consiguiente defenestración.

2)Sobre la raíz físio-psicológica socialmente (experimentalmente) adquirida de empatía (el contemplar el sufrimiento de otros seres humanos-incluso en su propia furia y en la agresión ejercida sobre otros como también una forma de aflicción y padecimiento respecto también del mismo agresor).

3)Sobre la necesidad y compulsión de vivir del rigor lógico y la coherencia racional en detrimento de la una antrodependencia de ritual cuyo fin es precisamente el aligerar al individuo de tener que entender por sus propios esfuerzos físio-cognitivos el mundo humano y natural que le rodea y del que depende;

4) Sobre la obligatoria conceptualización de su propia individualidad como asimismo objeto de los sistemas mayores humanos de los que depende con el fin de disipar quizá la mayor espejismo la experiencia histórica humana que es el de su autonomía individual real-pendiente todo ello, claro, de que se le enseñe a conocer y comprender su propia individualidad a partir de y en cierto sentido frente a dichos sistemas mayores humanos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya0cHhZaxIs


[1may15]


Oscar Romero: Nuestro paladín épico de la físio-pequeñez humana:
Espacio que ha de estar sujeto sin embargo por magníficos horizontes lejanos de promesa, lucha y cumplimiento final.

Relación entre lo fisiológico (percepción humana, el físio-allanamiento del individuo) que es el Kerigma y una semiótica físia pero progresivamente más intelectual-racional que es el Catecumenado;

Los sacramentos que son la ritualización vienen a ser la unión de ambos planos entre lo fisiológico y semiótico-una físio-semiótica (ideas, conceptualizaciones hechas físio-corporeidad)…y el problema ya entonces (de siempre) es el sistema humano en sí en el plano diacrónico en su sustento, manutención, y físio-renovación a través del tiempo respecto del individuo…

Los Señores de Xilbabá romanos y la tensión teatral-moral de nuestro arzobispo ante sus feligreses sedientos de justicia presos también y a la vez del aburrimiento.

Qué es la iglesia: Instrumento de posicionamiento fisio-intelectual de autocontemplación para:

-Cautivar en su grandeza y complejidad ante la contemplación del indviduo físio-local y simple;
-Para unir el sacerdocio local con feligreses frente a un poder rector semiótico estructural pero no físio-inmediato y local; un triángulo al cabo, del cual un punto físio-real del mismo puede lícitamente buscar su propia enaltecimiento vigorizante a expensas y por medio del segundo no presencial, respecto al tercero tambien físio-real, físio-presente.

Ameneza romeriana y efectista también del “campo protestante”: Y lamentar, al mismo tiempo, que muchas confesiones cristianas que creen que es traicionar al evangelio el preoucparse de las cosas de la tierra. Desgraciadamente el protestantismo que más se ha extendido en El Salvador es éste, que considera casi a la Iglesia católica como que se ha hecho comunista y que se aparatdo del evangelio.

Nos da tristeza, también, que por seguir esta línea alienante, que no molesta, no inquieta las injusticias de la tierra, muchas confesiones protestantes encontraron en el régimen oficial el apoyo que se le negó la Iglesia. A la iglesia se le persiguió porque predicaba la justicia, el orden en el pueblo, y a los protestantes no se les ha hecho más que ventajas, precisamente, por adormecer al pueblo…Ojalá, pues, que esta misión que ha enviado a El Salvador y a Centro América el Consejo Nacional de Iglesias de Estados Unidos, haga despertar a nuestros hermanos protestantes de su adormecimiento de una falsa espiritualidad. Y esto lo digo con más razón de nuestros católicos que están pensando todavía que el evangelio puede prescindir de la justicia en el mundo, y no es verdadero evangelio de Cristo aquel que no se preocupa de la realidad en que vivimos los hombres de la tierra. [Homilía del Segundo Domingo de Adviento, 9 de diciembre de 1979]

Pues una fisiología protestante no es lo mismo que una físio-semiótica católica que precisamente pretende al menos una conceptualización de justicia como tensión más allá de hecho y necesariamente de solo la experiencia fisiológica humana y por muy vigorizante que ésta pueda llegar a ser aun en su mayor y casta ejercicio de devoción…

Y la figura de Oscar Romero-postulo yo-es la conciencia y consiguiente esfuerzo lógico por superar lo físio-pequeño en sí con al menos una tensión semiótica y físio-vital (también) por agrandar el universo necesariamente sujeto y limitado humano como única manera verdaderamente que el hombre tolere su propia pequeñez y físio-real, físio-vital minucia existencial.

¿Qué le vamos a hacer?

Y parecería de cualquier forma imprescindible en este sentido el fundamento moral respecto de la vida y una cierta dignidad sin duda del ser humano sobre y por encima de solo su fisiología.

Para eso la semiótica, amigos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V88yyayq6AY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya0cHhZax Is


[3may15]

_______________________
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Señores_de_Xibalbá



Blackness was a virtue (in a world of steel-eyed death…)*
-Because it allowed for it (“two its” structure: it is worth it)
-Because it allowed for virtue;
-Because virtue was made possible by it…

1)Darkness (‘not fully knowing’)
....................“Virtue”
............................Rationality (coherence)


Semiotics (human systems of adscription of meaning-symbolic, conceptual and narratives) are probably founded either on some form of ultimate moral assessment and weight as tension-in some way or another-or technically as some form of appeal to reasoned-probablaly empirical-logic.

Virtue is not necessarily reason, and so a cultural darkness as of a not fully knowing (and hence not ultimately fully rational human space) requires finally of the moral as necessary impostion in regards to collective existence sine qua non and because there is no other means as appeal to some form of higher oversight in regards to the physio matters and affairs of human beings:

Some form of morally postulated, social and semiotically contrived virtue in this sense (according finally to whatever logic) becuase a strictly empirical-based sense of logical coherence is simply not availibe-is shrouded in a darkness that is beyond the reach of man’s ability to truely know.

But the social consequences certainly never were a joke.

And the possibility of more elaborate, higher and more refined notions of just simply common sense required always some form of a secular faith of knowing (even if it was religious, it still had secular, social consequences);

And just as religiones might adapt their own dogma to changing states of human understanding (the garden of Eden becomes some variation on the Big Bang theory), knowing itself a fictional narrative in its semoitic nature, had to also adapt to technology:

Revise, in this sense, the notion of common sense in Western man, over the mellenium since Greece-or just contemporarly as of, say the European Middle ages and Renaissance.

And however fickle it may have been, in its changes and progression (surely), it was also in many ways constant, always as of basic, physio-corporal, bodily human experience.

It still is.

2)But common sense, just like a religion in itself (is this not a semioticworking faith people actually live in without fully understnading and which they take for granted?) also had to fictionally ajust itself to changing conceptualizations people eventually had no choice to understand but as real-more empirically true in terms of former understandings and wether they orginally opposed them or lived under the influence of people who did.

And suddenly even for the religious today, there is also the appeal for all of us to the logically, technically correct-generally of science but really at the core also of human, collective experience as at least that which we are to understand as viably real probably most of all because it is practically-evidently-understood as real (and then you can adjust your poltical-religious life-narrative and idenity mechansims accordingly…)

And knowing and just coherence, no longer needs of virtue itself!

Or at least personally, I prefere virtue surely only when there is no option as recourse to coherence:

Because I am a man of civilization and I understand the need to embrace my own physio-rational nature as a way to live atop of it-beyond it necessarily and into the realm of what is coherently correct,

Even when coherence certianly becomes in some way more painstaking and requieres simply more effort.

I don’t have a toilet in my living room, either-but not because I live in shame of my junk and bodily, physio underbelly as living being,

But because I like to have people over for coffee.

(There is a big a difference!)

Virtue only when there is no possibility towards logical imposition-I always say.

Because coherence is man’s deliverance, finally that does not come easy.

It is not so supposed to.

______________________
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelter_from_the_Storm


LEILA GUERRIERO 3 JUN 2015 - 00:00 CEST
…Hace tiempo, un escritor amigo me dijo esto: “Sólo cuando sé que mi hija está condenada por mí, que la traje al mundo para morir y acepto eso, es cuando puedo ser su padre de manera cabal, liberándola y liberándome”. Habituarse a una hermosa risa humana, a un cuerpo vivo, cuesta muy poco. Dejar partir, en cambio —dominar el arte de perder—, cuesta la vida. [end]

Life is just to die?
Biologically as member of a species, but not for human beings who depend-profoundly-on the collective, living groups they are part of;

Because man needs to be and not just is in the way animals are-because of his physiological nature (physiological even in regards especially to his very rationality and thoughts) man must be by doing in an ever postponed becoming as activity and the subordination of his bodily vitality to some form of projected idea, purpose or reason he is to understand as his and in his being part of-in one way or another- the broader human group he lives among and interacts with as his own spatial, bodily medium of the physio-inmediate,

No matter how supported that understanding may by distant points of more remote semiotic force and identity-much in the way Judaism would survive in its bibilical narratives of captivity as subordinate cultural group-but only bodily-to the broader societies and authority of biblical Egypt and Babylonia-through in fact the aggregate social bounty and manna these societies produced materially and in terms most surely of food itself and even you were a slave,

For the desert of freedom as flight out and away from at least the minimal material comfort of basic bodily subsistence your integration afforded you (and even as bondage, in some way), could not be without manna from another source finally,

From even god himself-if necessary-because the bodily becomes once again and always cornerstone to any postulated, higher architectures of semiotic understanding and comfort,

‘Cause people will do anything for hamburger if they are hungry enough and for wont of anything else…

But this does not mean that they forfeit their identities through their collective stories as group so easily, and even captivity.

What are the stories of Black America and its historical subordination to a consumer and Cracker Babilonia-and the hurt the need to avoid the pain of further, ferocious, physio-inmediate violence became in itself as life?

I know those stories.

Because I got close enough to feel that pain in my own vulnerability myself, and to the same form of violence as suffering as life under only the physio-imperative of desperate, material want,

While the real, predominately white society-in its new cloths and shoes-makes its hasty, hasty way to work every oblivious work-day morning and beyond…

Always hasty, always in a hurry and oblivious...

(Un Dorito?)
__________________


El yo semiótico y ajenado cultural
Quiere decir como relato de autocomprension personal tendente más bien a lo extrínseco según lo que uno se sabe autoafirmar respecto de sí mismo a través de los otros o el medio social;

Y no de forma intrínseca, independiente y autosuficiente:

Un yo fisiológico que se acaba semiotizando por medio de lo ajeno y collectivo, pero irremediable y ferozmente sometido al terror físio-racional del oprobio y abandono por parte de ese mismo medio humano, collectivo-desde en realidad el momento de nacer y respecto el trato solo corporeal dispensado inicialmente por la madre.
(7jun15)
__________________



Fear of and human fascination with Depth

Sol de invierno (A.Machado)
Es mediodía. Un parque.
Invierno. Blancas sendas;
simétricos montículos
y ramas esqueléticas.
Bajo el invernadero,
naranjos en maceta,
y en su tonel, pintado
de verde, la palmera.
Un viejecillo dice,
para su capa vieja:
«¡El sol, esta hermosura
de sol!...» Los niños juegan.
El agua de la fuente
resbala, corre y sueña
lamiendo, casi muda,
la verdinosa piedra.

1) Imágenes: un efecto panning como si de una cámara filmográfica se tratara: Sol (del titulo); punto geografico, físico (el parque); y a partir de ahí paisaje invernal (blancas sendas; simetricos monticulos y ramas esqueléticas) que permite a partir de ese punt0 la introducción de su contrario como al menos promesa: en el invernadadero naranjos en maceta (que son susceptibles al frío a partir de cierta latitud en Andalucía, del sur y subiendo hacia el norte y por tanto no se pueden plantar en el suelo); y verde el tonel de la palmera (tambien bajo el invernadero y primado para cuando llegue su momento de renacer…); un señor mayor (pequeño desde luego en su solo corporeidad que brinda sin embargo al sol) pero el contraste a modo tambien como anteriormente son los niños que juegan: y un juego de contrarios como balance compensatorio queda establecido del invierno yermo repescto de la primavera, y de la vejez física humana respecto de las siguientes generaciones humanas…

El agua de la fuente y como imagen final queda ya enaltecida más bien como sonido y tambor del paso del tiempo-verdaderamente, un reloj o pulsación fatídica que carcome todo, pues es lícito concluir que por donde uno repose los ojos respecto de todo lo que alcance a ver a su alrededor, detras de cualquier objeto y relacion que percibe y trace, detras y como en acecho está la misma finitud inexorable-un tigre que acecha, si uno lo mira bien y sabe distinguir los señales del verdadero campo de profundidad que es hermano gemelo a la sombra del mismísimo ser (esto es, el no ser).

2) A Hype of The Finite
(As Totemically Defined and Drawn Power Space)

And so power becomes the writer’s (subject-agent’s) control over the totemic itself, just as the greatest danger for the wielder of totems (the military/corporate psychologist as operative) is the human subject as target who is able to wrestle from the oppressor dominance over images, so too does the writer finally impose himself over the threat of depth itself (permanently in its spatial innuendo as presence over all things organic); and it would seem no higher can he go in his attainment through dominance-truly-of vital, existential security for I am master in my understanding-and in my positioning of you before-the truth of your world in its temporal axis…and you can run, but cannot hide!

Literature is also really about man’s possibilities of perspective-not only anthropological but simply physical as limitation and necessarily only a partial knowing, for man would always need some form of aspiring beyond what he is, as in fact how he has always managed to make bearable just his physio-inmediate, bodily limitation,

Knowing as of limitation is a shell game of sorts that people are driven themselves to play.

And power becomes the totemic for man as wielder and stitcher himself of images, for this is the real space of the mind that he actually inhabits in just his rationality, anyway.

And the hype-a certain visceral thrust and affectation-as power space becomes man’s using his own terror of death itself-and not God or the afterlife and not just the bitter fruit as organic demise-fear of death that ends up finally being a fear of depth (of any kind because it all seemingly goes back to the same thing):

Death as physio-totemic figure of the mind, so she (man) can feel the weight of something;

Life can also be made bearable through the mythical, in whatever way through the flatness of anthrodepence that sees no longer finally as its very aspiring; but that is an aspiration to entertainment and a kind of maintenance of ultimately just phsyio invigoration…

And dark brother nihilism is just a step behind that guy-you know that…and so staying vitally just beyond his reach is at least something you can keep yourself busy with (seriously!)

_________________


LARRY HOLMES CORNERSTONE MEDIATIONS
And prevalecer is not the supremacy of the victor (Darwin), but is really the weakness of the others that becomes the means and medium of dominance itself in regards to a common threat as force of destruction over different and on some point distinguishable competitors,

Outside, of course, of human and cultural institutions that in whatever anthropological manifestation and avatar, historically, have never tolerated mechanisms of natural human selection in regards to the living, human medium-because of tabu, basic and functional respect for human life and especially the pain of violence and loss of fellow human beings violenetly felled and ripped away from one’s physio-immediate, living reality;

The reason itself that human evoulution stopped, especially as of agriculture-and the pain that religion and elaborate forms of spiritual-semiotic belief systems specifically catered to out of desperate, desperate human social need towards the imposition of some form coherence and logic,

Whether real or not, for its function was to explain man’s physio-nature through some form of rules and consequences that essentially allowed for close human interaction by necessarily containing the violence and the fury of human physiology and physio-rationality-necessarily as prohibition that always is also a form, finally and in some way of accomodation of that violence,

Through chiefly human logic structured around the spectacle of controlled images and contemplation of power, violence and imposition, in one form or another,

So as a source (specifically) of phsyiological invigoration-but that is for the most part semiotic and imagery itself-real actual phsyical violence is normally held in check and at bay in regards to the systemic living of human life, day in, day out and over time.


LA FITNESS HEALTH CLUB SAUNA BUGS
And the hours of the day the suana is effectively in operation are probably between 5 in the morning to 10 at night, at whatever degree of elevated temperature suanas are typically supposed to have.

But the existence of insects one can see crawling along the lines of floor tile (while you sit there yourself staring down and sweating) might very well mean that this group of living organisms-because their reproduction rate must be seriously much faster than that of mammals or, of course, people-has ended up darwinistically adapating to a 17-hour heat period that would have to be considered much higher than what is normal for this particular geostationary point on the globe;

That becuase of this permanente change and circumstance to a living group’s natural medium, this particular species could easily have mutated-in some slightly different way-into a different life form and species surely not listed as of yet in whatever insect register and manuel of local insect species…

I mean that’s certainly the inicial conclusion I come to:

And the understanding of life generally for all natural species is one of only transitory definition, in regards to a living groups’ posibilites of relating to the natural medium and the changes that medium is susceptible to.

And so of course that would make human culture itself (in whatever historical form, mode or avatar) something very close to the denial-real and violent rejection of-what is the normal mode and modus operandi of the force of biological life on Earth,

Because survival of life is in its very ultimate indefinition and ability, thus, to adapt and potentially be of another form (because it is never fully defined), but that human beings, however, certainly do not ever really live their lives in indefinition at all:

Indefinition for people is generally always calamity.

But through this exercise of logic as meditation, I know firmly at least one thing and that is the almost sacred-like quality of human societies historically that become the living defiance in the face of the very inhospitablity of the force of nature and biology on Earth.

And I take a very real comfort in my own steadfast, intense desire that this were understood by more people, as a concept of real personal power and impostion that should be of their own understanding as human patrimony and light,

Towards ultimately greater forms of human integrity, stability and security out of an efferently proactive individuality itself, that takes more than what is just given to it for some form of monetized consumption of even ideas themselves.

Or, how about a little more learning as living as really the greatest reinforcement of the self, and not so much learning to just get a job and towards just a bodily, physio-conformity to the living, human structures of only just material need as infalibly just human economies of scale and finance?

Because somebody else is always going to have to take care of you if you can’t.

(I know that, too)

[26jun15]