The language & ideology of silencing voices. Ugh..h..gh
Can we live , and can we art-i-culate? are not two but is one question. Yes, only one which sure has many answers, more than one explanation; but the question is one and inseparable one.
Loss of articulation is the loss of life and the loss of life is the loss of articulation and this is an endless with many an ends. That is where language is ide-o-logi (ideology) laden. What you and I say and (dis)agree on is not the idea but its logic or logistics. You and I live in the same material world but we do not share the same material world. That is the real difference and irreal similarity.
Then your experience and my experience co-happen, co-exist, and may co-relate but may not co-ordinate. This difference of (in)equality requires different articuation by art, by language, by physical action. Although physical action, as a principle should be the first in order, in the postmdern 'civil' society of indirectness physical action[the most impulsive one] the most natural one is the last choice. Language is, therefore, in the middle of the most direct and most indirect and symbolic; langauge is then life itself , living itself, art itself and at the same time, is none of these in the post modern.
The silence is the end of life, end of language, end of logic, end of every thing. In the postmodern the question is -to speak or not to speak!
sukhdev
Posts
