sensing faculties have become dulled

by A. Samara

The burden of productivity welds our bodies into cages through necessity and socially induced anxieties/perceptions of worth through the two way mirror of social feedback paranoias induced by hyper-digital culture. There has to be a back n forth between the concrete/micro/local and the social/macro that makes for a projection of persona that allows for a proper trajectory towards 'healthy desire'/actualization. Where am i/why am i here but like actually here in this chair in my house and so on. What resources are at hand in this situation? What is the social cost of this situation/of these resources as used...

With art and thought we reach towards gnosis - an actualization of self-referential concrete relations of our 'unique abstractions' yet this process is routed through alienation and anxiety. The fear of success due to shame. There is a need to rectify this fear or shame through the use of "art" or concrete manifestations of the individual persona's 'unique value' in a manner in which allows for that becoming to be 'smooth' (in the Deleuzian sense), to be not trapped in cycles that lead towards failure and the perpetuation of frustrations. Waste can become fertilizer yet the dog will still bite no matter how tame and cute it seems (particularly when its sensing faculties have become dulled). This violence needs to be redirected through communication. The sublimation of desire through language: a cybernetic structure of semiotic cues to reroute the rage of the impotent (which is not a powerlessness). However, this can beget the giving away of power to a tyrant (as we have seen in politics) but there is the tyrant of the automated urge (unawareness of self-will) as well, a sadness-consumption feedback loop for example.

The goal is to sustain ataraxia, this is impossible, given the systemic state's forced instability or quasi-parasitic adherence to the persona (particularly in the case of the socially discontent {"us"}). There is a soft edge of control and it is where causality begins to blur in the assemblage. Improvisation and collaboration take on important roles here where maneuverability = freedom. This is a range of motion of/field of kinematics: the topos of where the subject and object are in contact and semi-autonomous relation. Like contact improv (increased range of motion via sharing of weight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcrbIdY3HZc. "listening to the ground through another person" it is possible to share weight through motion towards mutually beneficial systems which are in continuous flux or 'tend towards dissipation and change' yet remain above a threshold of symbiotic mutualism.

Autopoiesis relies upon an outside yet the outside is integral to the structure of the system: "the CNS is completed outside the body". Through this line of thinking senses are navigational and become the morphological determinants of 'how fast can this thing move' and in what direction(s)... Affect in this way is a highly abstracted yet remarkably sensitive system of linguistic-proprioceptive interplay as well as a dynamic social feedback interface (albeit relative and perspective dependent which makes it heavily reliant on translation). These translations are persona specific communications of languages that a person can speak through and with. They can be these fluid/improvisational/dissipative collaborations of structural becoming/attempts at mutual gnosis and micro-social shared ataraxia(s). Meditation is another example of this however where contact improvisation differs is that these are physical social systems in motion. But the banal offers the hard problem. How do we meditate while we move and talk or how do we go about maintaining ataraxia in the digital-social-capital machine in our home/body? How can we use our motion to change the function and structure of this machine/does this structure allow for the realism of the flux of becoming ... or how does gnosis socially port to the real?

Language similarly seems able to contain a high degree of continuous flux without generating undue constraints except through the implications of ideology and the content of social contexts. These social contexts are /real/ saying the word faggot is indeed an implied violence that disallows a collaborative integration of the out-group caused by the social implication which reciprocates negatively to a 'loss of mobility' via the rupture of this unsublimated 'rage of the impotent'. There is a blame inherent in this exposed hatred/rage which positively reciprocates with its own impotence via the outsourcing of agency that relegates power to an 'out of bounds' zone or away from the projecting persona. A reversal of the mytho-poetic framework if the centrality of autopoiesis is predicated upon the self-mythologizing function of the persona-subject in order to obtain greater degrees of power via mobility or range of motion via extension of agency into the abstract-historical present; this outsourcing generates the same framework around an 'occulted' power structure and this denies the persona agency while also paradoxically becoming the arbiter of the possible 'reach' of this assemblage of agency. This assemblage however is always already a collaboration. The question is: is it symbiotic or parasitic and what are the means of producing situational valances (in situ combinations of force-motion) that deny these parasitic relations. How do we leverage these 'techne of abscission' (how to burn the mental forest floor)? To do this in a way that denies the parasitic relations upon the persona via "abstract phase space ‘cancer’" or ontological baggage (dead weight) that act as agency vacuums.

We do have finite resource available within the local zone of interplay (kinematic field, range of reach, etc) which is 'the banal'. This realism of banality forces the persona to take on the overcoded constructs that limit mobility and collaborative optionalities. Reactions which are over-induced via the spectacle and capital-related social(media) anxieties, especially when paired with non-social gnosis and a bad media diet, may become extremely constricting. Art practice strives to sit at this boundary yet remain grounded in the concrete via communications of the incommunicable (enunciations of what is beyond language) via speaking through actual/literal objects. The practice becomes a refinement of a personal language or gnostic semiotic system, a language which remains 'unique' yet portable to/with the social real. Here the importance becomes the social function. What does the art communicate and /how/? There are many ways in which a process is able to speak for itself. Contextual material use or The use of process itself as material/output: non-product based practices that remain within the diffuse space of non-objective object/experience, such as the relational aesthetics movement. However this does not invalidate objective product based practices due to the semiotic depth of the historical contextualization as a lasting effect of the art object as an ‘obelisk of thought’: the physical manifestation of an abstract potential which comes in contact with the real (just as spoken word does). The effect of which is to reciprocate with its materiality through a symbiosis with the social body via the (gnostic) persona. This can inflect the mytho-potential dynamics of the real thru quasi-magickal materialization of abstractions via the destruction of their non-being or potential thru a concrete 'statement' which creates place for itself. The transmutation of this will-to-form via practice in relation to the social over time seeps into cultural narrative or social conversation. This seepage can be used like hyperstition to inflect the narrative to direct it towards symbiosis with the personal and vice versa. To create its own frameworks of contexts that port with the gnosis which induced its creation which may then in turn perpetuate its autopoetics. The integration of social aesthetics as productive practice can bridge the abstract-real "problem" of form (see kandinsky). With a social body as microcosm such as subcultural chat rooms there is an ability to share gnosis via objects (media/info/words) and to inflect, sense or move this body. To "turn on" appendages previously inaccessible via the individual persona. These 'comm networks' become like fungi that connect a plant to a nearby watershed that allows for it to obtain nutrients out of reach of its roots. Similarly there is a density of connectivity to 'cross-phylum' neighbors or 'others' of all kin(d)s. This is a diffusion of persona a becoming through the ‘pink goo’ yet without the toxic tar/gunkification of increased viscosity/stickiness of the diffuse fluid assembling of digital cultures. To shed the archetype of identity through a shared language of ongoing diffractions (a mapping of interference): gnosis in constant contact with the social body as a 'toxicity’ or porting test. An experiment in assemblage oriented becomings. Diffusion of the responsibility of production as a product itself which in turn allows an increased range of motion in the social body as well as the persona both physically and in the mytho-poetics of abstract phase space. To properly leverage abstraction it is important to reduce the projection from potential. (the meaning of N-1) Reality minus abstraction is a concrete projection. The real already contains the multiplicity of potential in motion. Working by way of subtraction is the destruction of non-being as word/object (art). Diffraction then can be seen not as frustration leading to impotence (the inability to overcome the objective) but as an illumination which lights up a path or shows an impasse. These illuminated paths or walls are that of the ‘labyrinth of the real’. Yet it seems possible to become in a manner that is diffuse via a social body in fluid communication (of systemic interplay) which simultaneously 'lights up' greater portions of the maze. Offering to us a collective navigational system to increase confidence and mobility of both the persona and the social body.