The aporia or obstacle to Louise Banksâ eventual learning-to-use such 4-dimensional logic is-&-was, in the film, her own worded worldâand especially (in her own worded world) her sense of herself as a particular and particularized/particularizeable âá´á´Ęęąá´É´â (rather than, instead, something or someone in #flux, in perpetual #progress or #process ⌠that-is-to-say as an ongoing â#individuationâ rather than straightforward â#individualâ). ⌠Once her sense of straightforward self is discerned as something âporousâ, the aporia disappearsâor is at least overcome (âŚshe becomes, as such, #over¡human, #Ăźber¡menschlich as Friedrich Nietzsche would have said, and she âopens up her theatre-eyeâthe great âthird eyeâ that looks out into the world through the other twoâ). This entails a kind of passivity, I suppose, since it necessitates a sort of letting-go (or what Meister Eckart, prior to Nietzsche, called Gelassenheit and Abgeschiedenheit: the âletting-goâ that is itself a âletting-beâ allowing something like the fullnessâmaybe the excessâof âbeâing its place, its play, in time).
Since in this 3-dimensional world I am currently out-of-time (having reached the maximum time-allotment for the á´á´É´á´Ęá´É˘á´á´ part of this Babson-College session), perhaps Iâll close with reference to another filmâone that wasnât included in your readings-or-screenings (which you can view at your leisure or pleasure later on, if you feel so inclined or enlooped) followed by one last nod (one final reference) to the Illegibility readings [[love that phrase]], acknowledging-of-course (with respect to the reference to yet-another film) that Iâve made reference to a number of films that werenât on the reading-or-screening list: films like #Dune and like #Tenet, in addition to the reading/screening-listâs #Arrival. ⌠The other film to which I want to refer is that of Guy Ritchieâs #Revolver, which also deals with a situation wherein its protagonist (a con-man by the name of Jake Green rather than a linguist by the name of L Banks) has to overcome particular/particularized âpersonhoodâ, individual/indivisible âidentityâ, in order to escape the confines of his own âconâ. In #Revolver (a film released in 2005), just as in #Arrival (released in 2016), âfixedâ rather than âfluidâ notions of âthe selfâ (âunderstanding âselfhoodâ as something altogether âindividuatedâ-in-the-present rather than always in-the-process-of-âindividuatɪɴɢââ) keeps everything âfixedâ-in (and âfixatedâ-with) the âÉ´á´á´Ąâ, inextricably âpinnedâ or âboundâ to what we now think that we know, closing-off the outside, the unknown, or what I jokingly called the monstrous âNot-Yetiâ in my uploaded #Future_Philosophy videos. ⌠Overcoming the self, both in the overman/overhumanism of philosophers like Nietzsche and (at least in the case of #Revolver) director/cinematographers like Guy Ritchie, opens in its negation a kind of Keatsian âÉ´á´É˘á´á´ÉŞá´ á´ á´á´á´á´ĘÉŞĘÉŞá´Ęâ or Meister-Eckhart-like âGelassenheitâ, allowing in this weird undoingâthis abnormal abnegation/âAbgeschiedenheitââa glimpse at the surreal theatre-qua-theory of futurity âin formationâ (quoting William Allen, âthe form-without-form of negativityâs exteriority in all its evasion-of-relationâ). ⌠The future âin formationâ, the future in its becoming, is basicallyâfrom our 3-dimensional perspectiveâwhat the future âÉŞęąâ: it is #larval, both in the sense of still-#unformed (still-in-#formation), and in the more strict etymological sense of #shrouded, #clouded, covered-over or #masked.
When the philosopher RenĂŠ Descartes wrote (just prior to publishing his 1626 #Rules_for_the_Direction_of_Mind and 1636 #Discourse_on_Method) that he was entering onto-or-upon the great stage or theatre of World Philosophy as all actors do: that is, #maskedâ(his words were âlarvatus prodeoâ: âI advance #maskedâ)âhe was acknowledging that his public #persona, his public #identity, was a #cover (a cover-story) underneath/behind/beyond which, in truth, lies ęąá´á´á´á´Ęɪɴɢ á´Ęęąá´. Descartes admitted that such a mask, such a masking, allows him to cover-over his shameâagain, as á´ĘĘ âactorsâ-or-âperformersâ do. In his book #Illegibility, William Allen touches upon this when he writes about what he calls âontological shameâ and explains (on page 3 of our readings) that âshame would then be the corollary of futurity.â When we speak of, or theorize, futurityâat least from our limited 3D perspectiveâthere is (or there should be) a feeling of shame, a feeling that something is being lost or glossed-over, abandonedâperhaps because every formulation of the future denies the future its status as not-yet-formed/Not-Yeti, as if we are tired of waiting for (or âawaitingâ) the future, and abandon the wait (the waiting) altogether. Perhaps theorists-of-futurity should be more like Didi and Gogo in Beckettâs #Waiting_for_Godot (here referring to the most well-known work of the novelist/playwright Samuel Beckett), who, even when they think of doing it (or resolve to do it) never actually stop waiting. The Irish writer Samuel Beckett and the French writer Maurice Blanchot haveâor rather, hadâmuch in common, including a fine (refined) sense of #waiting, and, in waiting, of #boredom (which the philosopher Heidegger called âthe ground-mood of Beingâ): boredom to the point of #dread (or if you prefer, as Heidegger himself may well have, of â#existential dreadââfor isnât that what lifeâs all about?, what life really âisâ?: a #waiting?, an #awaiting?). More to the point: isnât this what âthe futureââfuturityâis all about? As William Allen puts it in the quotation from Blanchotâs #Awaiting_Oblivion on page 7 of our readings, âthe source of all waiting [is] the future.â ⌠This does sound very much like a 4D statement (âthe source of all waiting [is] the futureâ), and one that throws the question of waiting into a whole new light (again from page 7 of our readings): âIt is thus not a question of waiting for the event to happen ⌠but rather of waiting as a mode of experience of that which does not take placeâ but nevertheless allows everything to take place (and take time). ⌠Thereâthanks for allowing this little talk to take place (and take time).
* [[á´É´á´
á´ę° á´á´É´á´Ęá´É˘á´á´ / Ęá´É˘ÉŞÉ´É´ÉŞÉ´É˘ á´ę° Ęá´á´Ę-Ęá´É´É˘ á´Ęá´ęąęą á´
ÉŞęąá´á´ęąęąÉŞá´É´ á´É´á´
á´É´á´á´á´á´ÉŞÉ´É˘]] * :-)