Giving a response is dependent on
the dreams engendered, multiplied by what the other is saying, the words, the semantics. A dream
prompted by the shape, softness, hardness, penetrability, force of those words
that hit, blunder, batter, seduce delicate tissue, tough ligament, overused
muscle, alert for the possibilities of a dream that fits in with my
preconceptions.
Being creatures of myth – a
mythological being like Walter Benjamin taking his ‘strong opiate’ – is suicide
a medical condition (is there nothing that is not a medical condition?) – is it
the end of the road – was the road closed and in what way – merely an
accidental overdose? – all we’ve got is what fits in best with our myth of WB
plus our current preoccupations. Uncle Wally, what were you up to?
I love it when I’m watching some
serious TV documentary and the presenter is airily dismissing (old, outdated)
ranges of thought as so much myth and at the same time maintaining with a
straight face the truth – the scientific
truth – of what she/he is saying. A bit of research, a bit of theory and hand
it over to the PR department, the ad (wo)men. As though we could be anything
except caught in a current (ok, it is generally wilfully unconscious) myth.
Surely this is something that I
have to engage in personally – the seemingly arduous task of establishing
(spinning – sounds so easy, doesn’t it) a regenerated myth of myself. What
dream-form should I base it on? It’s got to fit even if it’s approximate to one
or two details (research, evidence based). And then I have to repeat it to myself and others until it
becomes more or less real. Hopefully more. We might even come to regard it as a
true picture.
Somewhere in here is the delight
of discovery, the accidents that turn on the lights. The creation of the
dream-form must (I think) come from those happy accidents. Pay attention.