“perhaps our arrival at interpretive conclusions participates in that process and affirms the inescapability of attempting to read the world in an empowered way, even if we are always missing the point”
-Anne McConnell, Approaching Disappearance–
But then there is a reality to writing – the unexpected, the making-up, emergence and invention. I believe in it, in spite of my theories, in spite of acquired knowledge. Something like the terms of paradox. Little matter, much substance (not really).
For fun, let’s say (in the manner of a credo):
- “I believe…
that language is a socially constructed resource recursively constituting and innovating meaning potential
- “I believe…
‘the notion of meaning potential can be characterized as a heterogeneous totality of knowledge of conventionalized patterns of normatively correct situated verbal behavior which manifests itself and emerges from social practices of a given social community’ (-Mika Lahteenmaki)
- “We believe…
that actual meanings are emergent from meaning potentials – are jointly created – recursively and interactively dependent – in their situatedness and perspectivity, unique and irreducible
- “We believe…
‘reality works in overt mystery’ (-Macedonio Fernandez, via JL Borges)
- “We believe…
that to live ‘is to make all these repetitions coexist in a space in which difference is distributed’ (-Gilles Deleuze)
- “We believe…
that living occurs via the ‘conservation of autopoiesis and the conservation of adaptation – a constant and mutual structural coupling of continuous transformations betwixt organisms and environments (envorganisms)’ (-Humberto Maturana, Francisco Varela, Paul Kockelman)
- “We believe…
in complexity and meaning, difference and repetition, redundancy and novelty, structures and contingencies, openness and change
Measures of reality (situated and perspectival…partial and relative to) – our As-if-oscope and Toxic spoon-deep. A hurly-burly and chaotic entanglement – intertwingled – adjoined in movements (writing of writing) to use an outdated metaphor: textuality and trace.
- “We could believe…
that ‘texts record the meanings we make: in words, pictures and deeds…shaping and shaped by our social relationships, politically, as individuals as members of social groups’ (-Jay Lemke)
That no effect is not mutual, recursive, intermingled and intertwined. Life is ambient, writing of writing.
In other words.
- “We believe…
that ‘Art is difficult’ (-Viktor Shklovsky) and meanings dialogic/multilogic / multimodal/multivalent (-Mikhail Bakhtin, Gunther Kress, Bruno Latour, semiosis)
Empiricism regarding ourselves is impossible (the situation and perspective necessary are not available) so we rely. i.e. we need one another and beyond. Envorganisms, we. We believe (we could say. I might).
“When we leave each other, we leave.”
A text composed is intertexuality – an Irish monk illuminating a copy; a modern blogger mashing-up – bricolage, meaning – I write, WITH.
To say I instantiate a social practice. It becomes.
Thank you. And welcome.
-a glyph is a hunt for optimism-
Slideshow of works cited: