meaning of life

At what point did we come to realize individual human life has meaning, that our brief existence meant something, or that it should. At what point did we gain self knowledge. How or when did we grasp self awareness and introspection to help us along in our search for that something. Spend our lives searching. We honed our ability to transmit ideas about our existence and in so doing left a trail of evidence. Arts & sciences, architecture, music, oral and written histories - basically we built meaning into our species existence. All that we do gives meaning to life, to make sense of it. Find any purposeful idiom. But what if, at the end of the day our efforts, mundane or lofty come to nothing at all? At what point in human existence are we okay if life has no meaning and we’re okay with that. Self revelation. Humans survive with or without looking for or finding the meaning they seek. Thrive without it - it’s an innate ability.

Human Behavior & Spectacle

Human behavior, conundrum that it is, posits the question whether humans are born with a moral code in their DNA or if it’s cellular development, like a muscle. Is it confined to a singular part of our brain, a one spot stimulation? We create ethical systems because we sprint the good or the bad track but this dichotomy has stumbling blocks. The singular source of religious ideologies and humanities studies is human behavior - we give it value and negative/positive exponents.  Does negative behavior merit more notice, grab our attention over positive? If so, why this tendency? Ours is a never ending search to understand human existence. We look to artists, poets, intellectuals and scientists for their expertise, interpretation and accumulated knowledge in our attempt to grasp the perplexities of human ethos. 

We are possessed with a desire to unravel earth’s fascinating story because we’re basically curious creatures who want answers. One question leads to another:  Is earth the only planet where species use other species to survive in the harsh game of life? Understanding that the human and only the human documents acts of horror of its own making, a perverse, morbid, pathological practice and peculiar trait. Have we been this way from the beginning, surrounding and immersing ourselves in the horrific? Vivid depictions fascinate us, the long trail of disturbing evidence holds our attention. We’re burdened with our sordid history. To grasp the gravity and the heaviness of this burden we only need to look at the archive - art in all its forms turns out to be our species show and tell. Imagery, printed word and recorded sound all prove what we’ve been up to. They give a grim accounting of us.

Visual documentation alone should serve to build a strong and unsurmountable barrier to prevent future humanity’s misdeeds and terrible consequences. Images of horror brought about by past and present wars should remind humanity to protect future generations from itself. Photos witness the wantonness and ugliness wrought by cruel behavior as readily as they underscore the promise of basic kindness. Photos bear witness to the human cost of war, document its blood saturated path. Images stick to the brain and never leave. Humans often turn to blind faith believing there is a better road ahead but our story has never been transparent. 

Humans search for answers. Our sensory system is attuned to be alert and on guard. One basic question comes to mind - is humanity divided into two camps: kind and cruel? Our story reveals basic answers to this question in stark display.  It’s a conflicted account of us, one that underscores the truth: that some humans are not kind or compassionate beings as there is a group of those who engage in cruel behavior and seem to enjoy doing so. Fellow humans and other sentient beings of the world fall prey to this nefarious group. Imagery alone provides an eye-opening revelation as to how we conduct ourselves. Easy to be kind, puzzling not to be. It’s not a balancing act. When and under what circumstances caused humans to engage in gruesome acts or is it just the nature of the beast? However, and my point: of all the species inhabiting earth, humans not only engage but indulge in torturous and cruel behavior. It’s evident in our visual record - paintings, drawings, photos, theater, cinema; and we write it down - violence spread across pages of literature, history, television screens, newspapers and the internet. It saturates our biography. One side of humanity kind, the other cruel, like a split personality.

This brief commentary has to do with observing the dark side of human behavior, a complex gnarly subject flooding our senses. An exposé of sorts. We find graphic depictions which bear witness to humankind’s penchant for cruelty, a disturbing peculiarity of the species all laid bare before us. Humanity’s biography lays out a gruesome thesis:  Human cruelty has to do with spectacle and only humans are drawn to it.

A particularly odd and troubling human trait because humans not only create the spectacle but relish in it.  At what point in our existence did this happen? The moment we populated earth en masse, established societies, built specific structures? Exploiting the planet’s natural resources for our dark deeds? Think of Roman gladiatorial games, those elaborate, engaged spectacles taking place within an amphitheater. The circular or oval graduated seating was designed for maximum viewing and audience participation. Another example is the bullfight arena with its graduated slope. Its construction creates a type of one point perspective directing the wildly cheering audience to the toreador’s elaborate staged choreography. All eyes on the action and auditory levels attuned to the exact moment the toreador deliberately provokes and pierces the bull. Violence, spectacle and extravagance for human consumption.

Religious iconography also serves as archetype for violent spectacle. Step into the interior of any magnificent European Gothic cathedral to sense that you are a mere human swallowed up by its massive space. The spatial design creates emotional rapture so the faithful become overwhelmed. The mathematical perfection of Gothic architecture alignment with the heavens was specifically mapped to guide the faithful to the ubiquitous crucifix. This was a particular torturous execution method used by the Romans, notably Spartacus and 6000 crucified slaves; Jesus of Nazareth suffered and died by it. For early christian missions a deadly bane. Both crucifix and cross are emblematic of Christianity. Beautifully tiled cathedral pathways lead the faithful to the crucifix. Lines created for advantageous viewing of the muscular sinuous tortured figure stripped down to a loin cloth, the cathedral’s center stage, so to speak.

Sans human figure, the cross shape itself - be it wooden, metal, or any number of materials, epitomizes a human tendency for religious fervor and zeal for the graphic display of suffering, torture, death. The cross dominates skylines and/or worn around necks as jewelry in close proximity to the human heart.  It epitomizes religious themed art, architecture, and music underscoring the faithful’s obligation and commitment.  It’s a dominate icon overtly inviting piety. No nuance here, it’s inspiration by way of the spectacle.

Our collective human quirk is to gather and look on, seek out grisly spectacle, the forbidden. The Parisian street became theater for J. I. Guillotin, the French physician’s design - the guillotine. Dr. Guillotin exemplifies humanity’s effort to construct an effective murderous contraption to kill humans en masse. The Revolution’s victims and fellow Parisian citizens bore witness to his invention, a most baneful machination. Beheading Marie Antoinette lasted just moments. Decapitation held audience, her fellow citizens. So too, the crowd gathered to witness the final moments for Anne Boleyn, her plight’s end, the result of her downfall at the King’s court. All bore witness to her beheading, all eyes followed the trajectory of the sword blade’s swift and effective action. The sword itself given a story of its own as to the quality of steel, precision and effectiveness. Burning at the stake was a particularly gruesome execution. Death was not swift nor expedient for Joan of Arc. Joan, the warrior, champion of king and country, betrayed by both king and the church, suffered a most horrific death. Set afire tied to the stake surrounded by her accusers and crowd was meant to be ignoble, to dishonor and completely humiliate the courageous young woman. The site of this horrific deed remains today an architectural landmark. Who finds solace here.  

Photography sweeps away the veneer that clouds and fictionalizes traditional visual art forms. It led to film and video; moving imagery adds potency. The photo gained a certain status as a truth teller offering us the real thing we see.  It set standards and established patterns and is possibly the most influential medium of modern times. However, it’s a troubling one. Waves of human suffering, displacement and torn cities, battlegrounds become soul shattering spectacle photographed and filmed. Those seeking asylum peer through barriers, eyes full of trepidation encircled as they are by the stretched eviscerating barbed and razor wire - the most malevolent barrier invented by other humans. Photo and film document what plagues the modern world. Images confront us, poke our conscious, lay bare the danger within, what humans do to each other. They give evidence of death and prison camps, rape, torture, enslavement, deadly border crossings, overloaded boats adrift at sea and never ending conflicts. Television screens disseminate what’s troubling the earth - countries rife with trouble within, school shootings, murdered children, unspeakable grief of parents and families and communities, lives torn apart by bullets. Photos, film, video modern marvels invented by humans picture those who suffer cruelty. In the frame the suffering stare back at us. World view is biased, not absolute but truth be told. 

Documentary film attempts to offer truth, moments of reality. Entertainment film exploits facts, fictionalizes and distorts reality, offers pretense to ensure audience enjoyment. Movies, film, blockbusters become spectator fodder based on actual or fictional events. Cinema fabricates death, suffering and violence for an emotionally charged viewing experience. Think of war movies, “Saving Private Ryan” or “All Quiet on the Western Front” for example, which engages the audience with vivid depictions of conflict, gory scenes of battlefield injury and death. The big screen encapsulates human behavior, fiction brings it forward. It entertains or disturbs us. So too, televised series based on themes about human conflict and misdeeds amuse viewers sequentially. An ongoing pleasurable viewing by subscription. Do we even blink? 

At what point did we become aware our behavior had consequences. The Code of Hammurabi establishes ethical  guidelines, gives us one of our earliest behavioral studies. The Ten Commandments address specific human behavior. Visual arts expose human nature, its dark side on view. We leave a trail of tears. Evidence abounds, widely distributed: religious and secular stories full of strive, conflict, beheadings, television news, fiction, cinema, published photos of the newest death chair contraption showing off its innovativeness; and museum galleries, lavishly curating famous art picturing gruesome suffering, death. Our senses wowed by the spectacle of it all. Imaging, creating and promoting the spectacle of horror, suffering and death is the singular human onus. 

fictional fem

fictional woman or cultural actor; her story via literary character types, dramatized gender roles - mysterious or fallen woman; mysterious woman creates tension & drama; shadowy in comparison to fallen woman’s stark visibility & emotional tension

for example:

I) Bertha: Jane Eyre - Charlotte Brontë, characters: Jane & Mr. Rochester and Bertha, Rochester’s wife, a character not merely eccentric, she’s forbidden, a contagion. Madness surrounds her, why else would she be locked in a room set apart from domestic activity - a haunting, untouchable & malevolent character. We never see her as victim. Bertha’s madness, central to intrigue, sets the pace. Problematic literary character. Self immolation releases Bertha - subsequently Mr. Rochester & Jane benefit from her catastrophic end

Is there connection, or empathy, or depth to a character like Bertha or is she a repellant.  How does her characterization reflect the social/cultural history of the era

Does Bertha carry the weight of British empire in that a female protagonist carries particular racial/social constructions; bears the weight across culture & time & place; establish patterns:  

  • feminine personification related to the colonial period

  • a depiction based on social/cultural/racial bias 

  • bias generates perception of the feminine other 

  • Bertha’s problematic - set up for dire outcome

  • colonialism 

  • plantations & slavery

II) Nana: Emile Zola - Nana character: Second Empire & courtesan life; her gender specific character, sexualized, staged, alluring, and dangerous; mirrors or, conversely, carries the weight of Second Empire social and cultural milieu; Nana the temptress, decadent, danger to Parisian society, a contagion, suffers violence and assault; both victim and vamp; problematic & complex; her fate - pain, suffering, disfigurement and death of Nana’s once seductive & valuable - profitable body. Does fictional death work as an antithesis for social and/or cultural apathy

III) Blanche: Streetcar Named Desire, Tennessee Williams character- Blanche DuBois; desperate, needy, sexualized, unredeemable; lacks self control, clings to a fabricated, delusional past; sought shelter with her sister Stella and Stella’s husband Stanley; Blanche unwelcome, met with hostility, suffered violence, humiliation & sexual assault; Blanche retreats into madness — insanity the gender specific ultimate finale. But does she have the last word? is it left to a stranger to offer kindness, mercy, redemption or salvation? Does madness offer physical shelter or mental freedom from cruelty, brutality? Blanche the problematic - ostracized victim within specific era re: America’s economic, cultural, class, and gendered milieu

The protagonists: Brontë’s mad Bertha, Zola’s decadent Nana, Williams’ ostracized Blanche. We’re privy to their story.

  • the feminine of the species given particular enigmatic portrayals; burdened with social and cultural mores; restricted to portraying type; ie. gorgons, haloed virgin saints, fallen woman, insanity, hysterics, temptress; Eve - female personification of human fallibility - it’s her fault humanity thrown out of paradise & consequences i.e., human suffering & death   

about that photo

Tourism photography looks at the world with preconceived notions about unfamiliar subjects. It’s imagery fictionalizes person, place or thing through storytelling. But this we know. We automatically scrutinize. Photography - a content rich chapter in the book of humans - carries a heavy weight, burdened both with an empathic eye tied to an inevitable prejudicial bent.

Tourism photography pictures a world apart from the ordinary. A human dwarfed by a giant sequoia, or the minuscule figure visualized as a mere dot poised atop a panoramic landscape, mountainous terrain or sand dunes without edge. It provides escapism’s framework, a visual reprieve from the mundane.

snapshots collect like curios discarded to memory

"intersection"

Walking is great for meditation - every step filled with thought, questions & curiosity. Things come to mind, for example, word choice: How or why has the word “intersection” entered the discourse in every day speech and/or discussion? Have we entered a phase of being unwilling to come to the point of the matter? Have we hit a void? It’s a good word, descriptive noun and all that. However, are we that complicated or do we like to think of ourselves that way?

Saturday post

Freedom and responsibility go hand in hand - one does not exist without the other.

Absurdity is a human thing.

Photography & industry ushered in an unprecedented world order, call it modernism.

the need for perfection, 

bombarded as we are with

echo plaguing our cochieas 

repetitive insistence to strive for perfection 

like our lives depend on it

and it alone

how is the perfect human gauged

morally, physically, who or what sets the norm? 

other humans? 

is there a moral high ground?

an unrealistic standard based on mathematics, 

an algorithm

is perfect possible in a world of improbability