Thursday, March 15, 2007

Jerusalem & Vienna

To Jussuf and Cain

The overwhelming turning points of the slies do not quite find a place less than restless in the cosmos; this cosmos as Eugen Fink told Heidegger is not the concept of the natural sciences in terms of space - for the dialectic is already broken once one pays attention to the little details of time, so that only the measurement of a world-time is captured while altogether abandoning any pretense at placing the locus of a life-time, it is the framework in which all existence is concerned, wherein it unfolds. Cosmologically speaking both divinities and mortal are entities, "diejenige Seiende" and they do not occupy an space in the cosmological framework as do forces and motions in both Greek and later natural philosophy because in disacknowledging time both of those have completely solved a tension in all affairs human that I've deliberately thrown myself upon.

I reflect on the spirit of poetry and spend endless hours reading poems in languages I know, of known authors over and over and even spend tedious hours with exegetical passages drawn from traditions as diverse as their content. If we are to believe in the fallacy of Western metaphysics or in a different vogue, in philosophy in its most disreputable name then the phenomenology of everyday things in their stale nature as objects of knowledge raised by hierarchies of consciousness should never constitute a problem. But in metaphysics time is not a very important concept and only in an indirect way it becomes a question of ontology, or of theo-ontology; because it is the basic assumption of metaphysics the circular concepts of history and time produced by Greek and Roman authors what assures the sustainibility of the system through immutable hierarchies that are so stale that in the moment you move one concept toward a different place (what our philosophizing does, perhaps the only thing it can do) you've broken the eternity apart, the natural order. The spheres of interaction are organically determined by nature in accordance with a systematic description of their objectivity that is permitted one by reason.

I hold the everyday to be entirely different and very close to almost all of Heidegger's thinking on "averageness"; including the mass man and the mass culture which is the social sphere of the mass man in his alienation. The everyday is a hierarchy only in a symbolic description, in a vantage point that by proxy must be located in equidistant time axes that break apart the unity and cohesion of the present, its internal logic. The poetry becomes strange and rather vacuous, entirely devoid of images and stale; the language misgiven and the revelation of the secret impossible. Only in these philosophical reflection I succeed in conversating with you, in the struggle for a logic that will clear away the fog of memories and hope in their unity of time-frame and separate not the real from the unreal, but the real and the true, not reality and truth - both of which constitute a precondition of philosophy in any of its names, whether reputable or not with the sole exception of metaphysics and dogmatic theology. The truth is the motion force behind any philosophical radicalism, and the constant self-critique, the speaking contra, is the only assurance of this validity. With you I can only speak contra because the mirrors of the ego and consciousness are lifted in order to be replaced by an averageness in the Heideggerian sense that turns modern existence and its contingencies at the same time into the most philosophical of all projects and the least of them all.

I conversate with the greatest minds in the present tense and without any authority of traditions to bind me other than common sense, a logic and a rationality that seeks passionately a place among the elements of love and live. Only in those conversations and moment of absolute thrownness before the raw materials available to humankind I can truly express my thoughts about you, I can vent out my feelings with the most obnoxious anger and without withdrawing choosing the world at once; not as the best of them all but as the best possible one available for "the time being" in an almost complete oblivion of Hell and Heaven. It is a political relationship. Only in the stumbling blocks of philosophz I encounter your disagreements in the flesh and acquire a caustic intimacy with your characters and personality. The meaning is not the same as the truth like Heidegger would claim, and it is this meaning what the correlative development of content and form is concerned with, his edifice is the truth and the time and both concepts happen in the world in de-ontologized manner only in the plurality not of beings but of people. There're no histories to tell, but stories in terms of the life-time, different from the world-time. I can never speak my mind clearly about the value of our organic ties, of our interrelatedness and our whimsically and violently intimate acquaintance; only when you come closer and dwell on the house of Logos, on the light and the thrownness I can express the whole of my being onto you with love and hope. Everything else is a mere dim and faint expression of protest.

It is not in a redeemed world where this possibility by-stands, but rather in the redemption of time, of the individual sketch that has placed the earthly Jerusalem with all the calm of Golgotha in Stephanplatz and yet the Vienna of lights in the urgency of the earthly Jerusalem. In Hebrew "world" is olam, which means also eternity and is the same root of the verb "to disappear"; accordingly a certain Kabbalist said that the different between the time of the world as a place and the time of the world as a construct in the plurality of men is that in the former positions can be exchanged, in the latter this is not important. It is about relationships.

No comments: