Saturday, January 18, 2014

Ontologizing Australian Culture

It's funny - tokenism.

It's my decided view at the moment that one huge lump of manifold Australian culture is utilitarian unassumingness. Withholding and withstanding, with/with and holding and standing. An old person doing a hand stand. Epistemological to the point of youth and freedom that is wasted on the old.

A lack of ontology. The large thing that is large is not only an icon of holiday proportion - it's the Big Other. A kind of psychological Big Brother but more about Darwinian anxieties of status where difference is equalised into a flat epistemology but which is though not identical to pluralist egalitarianism.. Some of you would know that in psychoanalysis the disappearance of the Big Other is the end of analysis. If you don't have that big other to overshadow you as monster master signifier you're old and free.

The artistry is then to assume this unassumingness for adaptive success in the wide flat epistemology where withholding and withstanding are not only a stoic badge of courage but a willingness for oppression as mark of physical strength. Mental strength is slowly entering into the equation but only because of the hidden fact that most of our flat epistemology have quietly gone through mental illness and will joke with Robert Welsh that you're suspicious too but withholding is paradoxically ill enough to legislate culturally "I don't know how to have an internal life". Ontology being just silence.

It's why Australian poetry is rural, pastoral as a guide. To tease an ontology is the quiet. The culturally integrated voice of David Malouf, the collegiality of quiet consensus by creeks. That tender rare masculinity - that by its rareness connotes value. Quiet is the value and so thus is unassumingness. I guess in the spirit of Lacan the end of the not-necessarily-Orwellian big Other is not self-same as party time. It's the quiet of Curlewis Creek or the mute boy in an Imaginary Life - you're either told to shut the fuck up or more integratively, be a linguistic gem, the strong silent type with women falling all over you - cute fantasy from an Imaginary Life...

Why quiet I don't know. Is there an audial tumult to this big cultural demographic I examine? Is loudness (via, say, cosmopolitanism) the denied term because of a cultural hyperacusis?

There's a millenium of monastical practice to bond cultural quietism - an entirety of nodding pastoral caring approval. Maybe the world isn't modern or the section I'm mentioning anyway. As quietism continues its cement march through corridors of power and it returns to the consensually agreed beginning of democracy - in Ancient Greece, where quiet was literally, political idiocy.

And I have no remedy, legal or philosophical. It means I also carry no poison. So the manifesto for the ontologizing of where I live which seems to have not much of it. Talking of being, as opposed to knowledge and technical stuff like how I put scoops on my Torana SLR vintage muscle car, is not the same as whinging or navel gazing unendingly uselessly. It's scientific. For a culture where loudness is a automobile motor yet research excellence is within Biology and it's offshoots like biomedicine and biomedical engineering. The cochlear implant - why Australian? Perhaps the cultural quietism....

The quietism, even with correlational philosophies of mind with Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett (now that's a huge guess so please feel free to delete at least Daniel's name but it won't affect the point), is much like the joke

"X is asked to pick one of three doors by Satan for his brimstone eternity. Door 1 sounds of chaos, 2 pain and screams, 3 though is a low quiet thrum. On being thrust into Door 3 X is up to his lower lip in shit and the others quietly say "don't make waves".

Opposing - Beckett says if you're up to your neck in shit you might as well sing. Scientifically - the peak wisdom of cultural quietism is the misguided mentoring of "observations affecting systems so please, no observations."

We are immersed in observation. Observation is actually fabric. There's no outside to it. It is embedded. Observation doesn't require what we call human - observation occurs whenever there are two electrons present. That is basically the whole universe except for modern experiments of atom splitting up to photon isolation requiring incredibly complex machines and more money than one countries defence budget - like the Large Hadron Collider.

So praising the engineer is kind of redundant but it does keep war and the global economy going and local culture understands the garage. But even an engineer would say - oh the Large Hadron Collider: the company who had the cheapest quote using the cheapest materials and labour got the contract, and heads shake. Back to fatal correct quietism even for the engineer. It all ends with a whimper sayeth TS Eliot.

Engineers are used to being told they're idiots, idios in the Ancient Greek, and become very quiet. The people who rebuke them are architects and scientists. Just ask them, any of them.

And what's being said is observation is ubiquitous. No need to hide heads in sand - we have to knowledge, we have the technology. Time to be ontological like they always were in cultures that pick up women easier than you.

Ontology, that is. Coming out of the Continent, the USA and UK.

And now - well Australia cos we are young and schweet

and yes, it's a project, the cultural ontologising of the fair wide brown land - not only cultural, scientific and philosophical but political as the experts become more and more bureaucratic and celebratedly cruel and big Othering to the law, and say, visa laws or land laws, employment laws and health laws

but hell, even engineers know you can change a law. Taking it all lying down is usually what's done but when they take the entitlement away of lying down and 4 weeks holidays, then navel gazing about science, quantum and being the best you can be cognitively or with wellbeing, is another way to be.

You know Frank Sinatra sing-sang that song well on the all the world's stages - dobedobedo too, Australia.

One ontological point at the moment, from Levi Bryant, is that difference actually makes being. No wonder, perhaps then, Australia never pondered ontology much, traditionally


2 comments:

  1. Hi Ariel,

    Australia has a mix of unassuming quietness and Otherness and delightfully so. I come from the Dutch culture- but Australian born. One that sometimes speaks arrogantly but one that is also radical and grass roots.

    DAVID MALOUF said about our cultural language,"I think language is the most important way we have of defining ourselves and as people we share a language with people that we not only understand what they're saying, but we often understand what they're not saying and that happens even when you have languages as different as Australian English seems to me to be from American English.

    I mean we share a language, but we don't speak the same language."

    It is a great point of difference to know ourselves and our ontology and resulting epistemology. Yes, we are still forming...but isn't that great. Give Australia a chance to go through our adolescence.

    Good onya mate!

    Jan Cleveringa
    @jancleveringa
    #jancleveringa

    ReplyDelete
  2. thanks for your comments Jan. In the tradition of Foucault's geneaology, power is always at play. So I am doing this too - for a chemical and pixelated purpose - this writing to act as an accelerant to an Australian Ontology.

    Of course, there are Australians in the field and many of them as is also traditional of those who make culture end up living overseas perhaps because they simply can and there's no dining table romanticism and school-of-the-air nostalgia. Malouf's point is well taken as he writes of Babylon.

    Philosophy though is distinct in its self claim. It's not only writing but it is a literal rigour, logic, rhetoric, construction and revelation were truths are formed in some practice. Literature, poetry and art can be all that but it's not the literal rigour - the dialogic, the metaphysical, the cosmological arguments that astound with it's prosaic. Wittgenstein wrote the Logico Tractatus and he architectured and built a house considered and icon of minimalist architecture, almost a kitsch novelty...his philosophy though is not kitsch. These are the similarities and differences because all these fields though sharing practice or abstract virtues perhaps are not self same - only an abstract expressionist would argue that amongst their slippery bongos and java in their office - the cafe.

    So as another agent of Australian ontology (vis Agent Swarm) I establish an online presence for Australian ontology. Perhaps it's a deluded and fanciful flag on Iwo Jima in the re-emergence of cultural war in Australia.

    I love this place so it's why I contribute this. Australia has an incredible strength in scientific disciplines - biology, medicine and engineering are swinging way above their weight. In a corrupt way I could say we have the technology to correct Jean Paul Sartre's astigmatism and forward a distinct realism coming from John Anderson's Australian realism, towards contemporary speculative realism and object oriented ontology.

    I would be happy to age Australia a few years to at least its majority - but seriously I think we're already there if we're cynical enough to have chosen a neoconservative government. Now, that's big and bad ;)

    Join The Australian School of Ontology on Facebook.

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/669048959784709

    ReplyDelete