There’s something very dramatic and eloquent about finding the culture you belong to, not a culture that you would want for yourself but a culture that is inherently inside you. That is you. In an ideal political discourse, people are finding unity in the idea of distinctiveness, within that circle we’ve accepted our hypocrisy, in that universe we’re all having an orgy at the end of the Soviet square, on the top of the world trade center, in Sandesh Press, above the great wall of China, under the Eiffel tower. The practical world does not bend like that. We constantly are running to create a political & social body of life where the idea of distinctiveness is killed. We all want to feel the same. Memes, music, pop stars. Everything that is not mainstreamed is labeled as obscure.
The death of passion can be seen in the concept or in the notion of fancying art just because it is obscure. We’ve reached a point in popular culture where we feel everyone is just the same, thus we want a sense of pride by doing, being, finding, and consuming something different. The ideal political discourse where there is unity in distinctiveness is now being transformed into practical haughtiness.
I once wrote a story about a state where there is a 2000$ bounty on dogs…The more heads you bring the rich you become. This story takes place in a society where everyone is financially satisfied, there are no economic exploitations and no loopholes in this system and everyone lives peacefully. The bounty is offered by an anonymous organization to anyone willing to kill these dogs.
For around a year there are no remarkable killings, but after that people start to cut these dogs brutally with no regret. All the dogs around the place vanish and then the people protest against the killings of a very cute animal that must not be touched. They protest right outside K.F.C…
There is extended knowledge in an analysis of a thesis of a story, sometimes I imagine a world where there is no subjective outlook towards art because there is no art as such, but only explanation. I might have not written the story mentioned above but only explained it to you, sure there are interpretations still but what if I box the explanation only to facts. there is a narrative and artistic catharsis in finding and creating metaphors and euphemisms, but what if we can cut that to facts, what if there are no interpretations and only facts?
“If you don’t have to pay for the product, You’re the product”
Zizek’ says that Ideology structures our desire. He kills the idea of subjective reality and wants ideology to help us and guide us to this objective neutral truth. Where our desire is not structured with some overarching meaning. The fundamental question drops back to how is then desire, structured? If we can run towards this objective neutral reality, and impose a dystopia where people are happy does It make sense to create art then? Removing every possible equation carefully to create a world made of meaning through explanation of the pieces that we make. What if there is no ‘Monalisa’ no ‘Fight Club’ no ‘Mozart” but only their explanations…Would we ever die then?
Life at Slaughterhouse
We wait at the slaughterhouse,
Once they are done with the goats, they will cut us,
we hope they do it fast, we wait for our turn to come…
I would like to die nice and fast today, and become a better me,
Come again tomorrow and serve again tomorrow.
But the slaughterhouse is old and it won’t hold us for long,
We’ll have to find some real work,
It won’t kill us we would be old again.
Once the slaughterhouse is closed, who will cut us? Who will kill us?
There is a rather peaceful solution to poems that don’t make sense, poems that can’t hold a greater explanation. We simply burn the page and move ahead, write a new explanation, and kill the old poem.
