| 
              
              
              “The wages of meaning is death.”Maythil Radhakrishnan,
              
              
              
              
              
              from 
              
              
              
              God's Fossil
 
              
              
              A lot of catalogue essays these days are rather tautological; they 
              simply describe what is readily apparent to the eye, but with all 
              the obligatory bells and whistles, - the Cultural Studies frame, 
              the overwrought prose style, the topicality of the works in 
              political terms and their proportionate desirability in market 
              terms, and so on and on. In this essay, I have not touched upon my 
              photographs at any length, since it has been said by people wiser 
              than myself that one should never trust what an artist has to say 
              about his or her own work. I have rather tried to set out the 
              questions, - aesthetic, philosophical, political, - that I have 
              been preoccupied with over the last two or three years; they form 
              the implicit background against which the photographs presented 
              here were conceived, executed and presented. What relationship 
              this has to the work, will, I hope, be evident enough from the 
              essay. If it is not, that is also fine, since the viewer can then 
              use his or her imagination to interpret the works as they see fit, 
              which makes the whole painful exercise of writing this essay 
              completely irrelevant, which is perhaps how it should be. 
              
              
              What is the relationship between the world, in its concrete 
              materiality, and language, an abstraction? We grasp 
              the world through language, - or to put it another way, it comes 
              to us as a representation, mediated through language which, far 
              from being a pure or neutral agent, is always already ideological. 
              Thus experience is always partial and the entry into language, 
              which makes us subjects of the world, necessarily comes at a 
              price, - perhaps the reason why the French philosopher and 
              psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan said that (to paraphrase) “The word is 
              the murder of the thing”. This entry into the Symbolic order of 
              language and subjectivity is what Lacan, extending Freud's 
              insight, called castration. What is severed is, to put it somewhat 
              simply, the link to the maternal 
              
              
              Thing1, - an irretrievable domain of plenitude and wholeness (that 
              he called 
              
              
              jouissance), 
              - which however persists (or 
              
              insists, 
              as he says) in the Real. According to Lacan, the Real is “that 
              which resists symbolization entirely”; -i.e, that which is 
              unrepresentable. 
              
              Unlike 
              the Western philosophical tradition in which experience is almost 
              always mediated through language, Eastern philosophies such as Zen 
              Buddhism entertain the possibility of returning to the Kantian 
              thing-in-itself beyond the world of Appearances. One can find here 
              a whole metaphysics of the dissolution of selfhood, - insofar as 
              what we call the self is itself the assumption of a 
              socio-linguistic mandate, - from the momentary Satori in which the 
              screen of representation falls away for an instant permitting us a 
              glimpse into an other order of Being, to Nirvana, which has been 
              described as a state of total immersion, bliss or pure 
              
              
              
              jouissance. 
              In one tradition, language blocks access to the thing-in-itself, 
              whereas in the other, it is possible to transcend the world of 
              appearances through an arduous regime of spiritual and mental 
              training, but where the experience itself remains unrepresentable.  
              
              
              Contemporary 
              scientific discourses also often foreground the impossibility of 
              communicating its experiences in the medium of language. This is 
              not simply a question of the specialized expertise involved that 
              makes communication with the wider public difficult, but of the 
              problem of the logical bases in which language is itself grounded. 
              At the extremes of observable phenomenon, at the opposing yet 
              interconnected scales of the very big (the level of Cosmic events) 
              and the very small (the level of the sub-atomic particle), it has 
              been noticed that things move in mysterious ways, contrary to 
              expectation, - where one finds that the Demiurge resides in the 
              shape of a paradox, and where one discovers the aporias of 
              infinity.   
              
              But there is another sense in which 
              language meets its limits in everyday life itself, - in, for 
              instance Death, or in a related vein, in a traumatic encounter 
              that cannot be adequately integrated into the Symbolic universe, 
              and the ensuing derangement of the psychic and linguistic 
              life-world of the one who suffers it, resulting in madness, 
              psychosis and even suicide. Part of the fascination that death and 
              madness have exercised over artists and writers is surely the 
              fact, to use a Kantian metaphor, they are Sublime, - i.e, they 
              mark the limits of language and expressivity as such, and is the 
              point at which representation breaks down. As Lacan says, it is 
              the function of beauty to reveal man’s relationship to his own 
              death2.  
              
              
              But language itself, to cite Heidegger, is mankind's revenge upon 
              the intractable fact of its own mortality. Faced with the one 
              certitude that life has to offer, Death, as well as the pure 
              contingency of an obscure, obdurate universe, - or, in a literary 
              register, the capriciousness of fate, - to which we are consigned 
              while we are alive, it is language that holds out the possibility 
              of Meaning, of making sense of that which follows no human measure 
              or law. Thus, without language, existence itself would be, 
              literally, unthinkable. Yet, as many philosophers have already 
              pointed out, this is also the function and the origin of the 
              Transcendental Signifier (God, Nation, Party, Dollars), - to erect 
              an Entity over the abyss of non-meaning around which our 
              aspirations can cohere. 
              
              
              The transcendental signifier exists at the conjunction of Language 
              and Power, and, to take up a theme dear to post-Colonial 
              theorists, has been shown to be instrumental in the erasure of 
              difference, of reducing the Other to the status of a non-Subject 
              by equating it with nature, the primitive and the animal. The 
              relationship between language and power here is strictly 
              dialectical; language (or a particular discursive regime) confers 
              the mandate for the exercise of power (and along with it, 
              violence), which in turn enables the ‘truth’ of that particular 
              rhetorical game to be established in the first place. Language is 
              what separates us from the animal kingdom, but it is also the 
              source of our Hubris and the arrogance with which human beings 
              have treated the entire planet. 
              
              This 
              is perhaps the reason why there has been the recent turn, in 
              philosophy, to ‘the question of the animal’; thinkers as diverse 
              as Derrida and Deleuze have spoken of the necessity of 'becominganimal' 
              (which also accounts for their common interest in what they call 
              Kafka's zoopoetics). It is also what the poet and writer Maythil 
              Radhakrishnan3 alludes to when he writes that “I survive / God and 
              the meanings of man, for / I am the poet of dragonfly’s wings, / a 
              crab’s shell, a snake’s moulted skin, / a spider’s web.” It is the 
              assumption of the subject-position of that which is powerless or 
              mute, or has been deprived of a voice, and has thus been silenced 
              and eradicated, but which in its own selfless way sustains the 
              very fabric of the universe. Another way to interpret the Lacanian 
              Real would be as the (intangible) Silence without which language 
              itself would not be possible. In Kon Ichikawa's The Burmese Harp, 
              - perhaps one of the greatest anti-war films ever made, - a 
              Japanese soldier who gets separated from his platoon becomes a 
              Buddhist monk (more through accident than by intention) after 
              traversing the destroyed landscape in order to rejoin his company, 
              where he experiences, after the fact, the psychic desolation that 
              war brings about. He would like to return home with his fellow 
              soldiers, but compelled by the twin imperatives of duty and 
              necessity (to bury or cremate the war dead as they lie festering 
              all over the beautiful Burmese countryside, which quickly turns 
              into an obsession), he decides to stay on. At a fundamental 
              semantic level, this is a clear illustration of the Lacanian 
              deathdrive, - the compulsion, which comes from an other place, 
              that makes us do things that have no rational significance. But 
              the greatness of the film also lies in the way in which it sets up 
              a relay between silence and an entire complex of other signifiers 
              (death, patriotism, honour, duty and friendship, among others). In 
              the film, the Real is the naked horror of the war itself, which 
              renders the protagonist mute4 in the face of the meaningless 
              suffering that he sees etched into the very face of the landscape. 
              But like Antigone5, in assuming a position that is neither 
              dictated by self-interest nor by altruism, but which still does 
              not originate in the wounded conscience and goes as well beyond 
              the call of the Big Other6, and which thereby radically reworks 
              every standard of human satisfaction, - proclaiming a kind of 
              
              
              
              amor-fati, 
              
              
              if one 
              likes, since he already 
              belongs to the dead, - he attains freedom, in a manner of 
              speaking. 
              
              
              April 2012Vadodara
 
              
              
              Sathyanand 
              Mohan is an artist and occasional writer. He lives and works in Vadodara. 
              
              -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
                
                
                1.  The Thing, being a 
                lost (obscure) object is both the object of language and of 
                desire, which perpetually circles around it (as the Drive) 
                without ever attaining it.
 
                
                
                2.  For Lacan, madness, excommunication (in the sense of 
                being made a pariah), etc, are also forms of death, - of death 
                in the Symbolic order of social interaction.
 
                
                
                3.  Maythil 
                Radhakrishnan (b. 1944) is a Malayalam poet, writer, essayist, 
                computer programmer and amateur ethologist. The poem cited above 
                (God's Fossil) is one that I got from the internet. For this 
                essay, I had tried (unsuccessfully) to translate some of his
 other poems into English, but this one gives as fair an idea as 
                any other of the enduring themes of his work. It is a 
                translation by
 the Malayalam poet K. Satchidanandan.
 
                
                
                4.  Figured here at 
                many levels, but particularly underlined in his inability to 
                communicate to his friends his reason for not returning home, as 
                well as in the self-abnegation implied by his monastic vows.
 
                
                
                5.  So central to 
                Lacan’s ethics as the embodiment of one aspect of the Real, - 
                that of its lethal Desire (which he enjoins us to be true to, 
                even if it destroys us) which is perhaps the only thing that can 
                carry us beyond the blandishments of the Symbolic dimension.
 Antigone's purity is because of her unwavering commitment to the 
                Desire that is 'in her more than herself'.
 
                
                
                6.  The social desire that is expressed through the 
                Symbolic order, -i.e., the domain of law, morality and 
                consensus. |