 |
| 2.26.2007 |
| On Death and Morbidity |
The following passage is copied directly from my thoughts notebook. It is the first short essay-like thing I wrote in it and at times is entirely nonsensical and grammatically appalling. The boy mentioned within (now my boyfriend) never in fact committed the act written about; however, the fact of its actuality is extraneous to the point of the essay. [...] denotes unintelligible writing on my part. Enjoy.
It was only when my morbid curiosity resurfaced that it became hauntingly clear that it had never vanished in the first place, but merely subsided. As my clinical depression became more a daunting reality than its lesser predecessor, the ubiquitous daunting possibility, and a temporary religious establishment laid claim to my head; the mere concept of death, in itself, lessened as to its position (and possession) of an existential wonder. No longer holding the place of a great mystery, death became, quite simply, the last item on my to-do list.
What precisely ignited by queer sense of attraction to morbidity is inherently a debate of intrinsic and extrinsic variables. I have come to realise, though, that I have, indeed, morbid attraction. A girl I know told me that a boy I know, and quite frankly, am attracted to...had attempted to commit suicide and [...] henceforth brags about it. This may very well be an unsupported and unfounded claim, but just having heard it spoken, vocalised about this individual only heightened my attraction. Magnified (as in relation to previous magnitude), even.
Immediately thereafter I reflected on the truth that this supposed attempt at killing himself actually turned me on. It certainly came nothing short of minute deliberation to arrive at the conclusion that this attraction would not be in the least bit socially acceptable. In a situation of psychological [...], who does one talk to, and is it even an issue? It's not in a similar vein as the fetish community but rather, merely the probable result of an abnormal anomaly.
What is it, then, that causes the same attraction to green eyes or intelligence or Southern drawls or having a common interest in books or movies? Are these hard-wired into our brain patterns in much the same way that orientation is? One must recall the biological [...] of attraction between the sexes is to propagate the species (and speculation leads to homosexuality as a barrier to overpopulation). Thusly, it would be in our genetics' best interest to lead us to a mate best genetically suited so as to have hardy offspring. So why, I begin to wonder, would be genetics want to draw me to the morbid?
It isn't, in vain, a move of desperation or desire to be viewed as "dark". Let us be careful in the recognition of the realisation of this anomaly. As the recognition and realisation --- realisition? --- is contained, for all the time being, within alluded pages, it comes to figures that there is no present desire to be anything.
It is more an inquiry of continuation of the life journey than "morbid fascination", in perspective. Fascination and fascism share many letters. Perhaps a root in fixation and mental possession? I want so much to know the mental process that accompanies a suicide attempt. How does one decide the manner in which to dispose of themselves? Death, so silent and permanent, ought be achieved by means symbolic. The shotgun suicide so quickly became the trend vanguard. An act now devoid of symbolism other than the emotional hardcore scene.
Why is the subject of death and departure so taboo? Life is the worst STD of them all...sexually transmitted and 100% rate of fatality. The death of a being is inevitable. While it may be disconcerting to attempt to come to terms with the death of the people around you, it should never be a cause for fear of your own death. Such a fear is to be likened to a dear of the sun rising or the Earth rotating. There is really no course of action by which to postpone --- scratch that, no means by which to avoid definite actions integral to the way of the world. Once this utterly desolate fate is reduced to simple a layman's truth, it becomes quite a lot simpler to perform daily tasks sans morbid preoccupation. It is only once someone has accepted the perishing of all things that a so-called "morbid" preoccupation or fixation. [?] Only then can one begin to [...] death from an existential perspective.
Creation and the beginning of space have generally been scientifically worked and reworked until something generally lacking in spirituality and lodged in cold fact were acceptable. The neural processes mapped and named, our breathing and talking [?] and blinking all scientifically supported. Even the means by which an individual can produce and put forth another for the good of the species and the associated maternal instincts.
But no explanation of death is prepared for educational and biological exploitation. There is certainly only one way to be conceived, from a maternal carrier process (left intentionally vague). But the permutations with which this being can be destroyed are innumerable, the possibilities for annihilation so vast that death is always a more random (at least in notion) happening. Almost any situation or object that can be existentially quantified can ultimately result in a death. I'm heard pressed to find any such a universal place where there is no possibility of casualty of death --- quite possibly because no such a palce exists.
What is it that breeds such tendencies? In my family's history, a trend of clinical depression becomes evident. My grandfather committed suicide. My dad sought psychiatric counselling during his lifetime. I can only hope that this trend does not continue to be debateably unique.
Morbidity is arbitrary.Labels: attraction, death, morbidity, suicide |
posted by Ianthe. @ 10:11 PM  |
|
|
|
|
| On The Formulation and Usage of Words |
The following is copied from a notebook I keep in my purse for jotting down thoughts which oftentimes evolve into short essays. Here we go.
Who first put forth the socially accepted dictionary definition of 'arbitrary'? As with all definitions presented, the agreed-upon meaning of 'arbitrary' is, in itself, arbitrary. So when someone says they are 'reclaiming' a word, what really is there to claim? I could decide that the word 'happy' manes 'filled with virulent anger'. Who is in a place to argue a counterinterpretation when theirs is equally arbitrary? The published definition of a word is simply the most commonly accepted.
In this mindset, one could entirely picture the complete and total subversion of modern linguistics. If the writers of the major newspapers and the anchors of the major news networks decided that "chicken" was a definite article and books were called "fries", the public would have no choice but to begin to accept the redefinitions in order to stay in touch with the world around them.
One might believe that this need to keep up with lingua popular is akin to the morphing aspect of slang. "Groovy" and "hip" and "far out" have fallen out of popular use since the end of the 1960s and 70s. When was the last time you called someone a jive turkey? Didn't think so. In the 80s we got tubular and your leg warmers were totally radical. In the 90s you were bummed out (bummer, man) in your acid washed jeans. The phrases in this contemporary day are items like "I heart you" or "fo shizzle". The introduction end evolution of slang terminology that hence permeates our modern vocalisation and usage is quite a baffling topic. Where does it come from?
Media influence in this matter is profoundly staggering. As Paris Hilton coined 'that's hot' or Juelz Santana popularised 'no homo', and websites such as UrbanDictionary.com gained popularity, the lingua popular of this day and age becomes something of a game of Tips --- bouncing back and forth, our language variables feeding off of one another's. Many (American) people I know have begun calling their mothers 'mum' and spelling words the British way simply because one person, and then two people, and soon many people caught the fever that is British slang. Movies and music start the trends. When Snoop Dogg began the appending of -izzle to a word in his songs, who could ever know that it would shape our youth culture?
A culture where 'fo shizzle mah nizzle' actually means something.
There is, in fact, the perfect portmanteau in existence to categorise and label this: slanguage. Not officially recognised by Merriam-Webster, as most slang is not. It would become increasingly difficult to stay accurate, the way slanguage exists: as a living, breathing entity constantly and incessantly rewriting and reinventing itself. "Far out". "Bodacious". "Jammin'". Gone with the raging tides of our world.
Slanguage.Labels: language, linguistics, slang, words |
| posted by Ianthe. @ 9:58 PM |
|
|
|
Tears Shall Drown The Wind |
|
| |
|
|
