Overlapping concepts using the metaphor of light

May 15th, 2006 Fred McVittie

It is proposed that a key metaphor linking consciousness, presence, creativity, and enlightenment is that of light. Metaphorically they concepts all draw upon the image of moving into the light and out of the darkness.

1. The ‘light’ of consciousness is contrasted with the eldritch (and possibly forbidding) darkness of the unconscious.
2. Illumination is the stage of a creative process when a breakthrough or solution emerges into the light of consciousness, often characterised as a ‘light bulb moment’, or a ‘flash’ of inspiration.
3. Presence is the theatrical phenomenon of being entirely there, in the light of the present moment, (and often in the literal spotlight), as opposed to being partially or entirely elsewhere; in the wings, in the dressing room, offstage.
4. Enlightenment is the state of being in which one can see clearly through the shadows of illusion and ego that make up the world and the self.

This overlap of conceptual structure will be discussed, particularly in relation to the well known metaphorical relationship between seeing and knowing.

Posted in Consciousness, Creativity, Enlightenment, Illumination, Knowledge, Light, Metaphor, Presence, Seeing, Theatre | No Comments »

Slowly Waking

May 16th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The passage from the unconsciousness of sleep to the consciousness of wakefullness is usually characterised as a singular, smooth, largely unstructured or indivisible event. The metaphors we use to describe this passage reflect this general impression, usually drawing upon an image of a single entity (the self) rising from a dark deep place to a higher, more brightly lit place. Typically this transition from dark to light is seen as relatively abrupt, as if one is breaking through a layer of some kind, or rising above a surface (of an ocean perhaps), or emerging from a closed container. This collection of metaphors presumably refers to the physical circumstances of sleep and waking, and is therefore embodied, like all abstract concepts.

Posted in Darkness, Light, Metaphor, Sleep | No Comments »

Extended Illumination

June 7th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The individual creative process is usually described as having a number of relatively distinct phases involving both conscious and non-conscious processes. Most models of creativity include a stage often referred to as ‘illumination’. This is the ‘Eureka’, or ‘light bulb’ stage and is understood ontologically as a moment of breakthrough or transition. This illumination stage does not typically have duration or internal structure, but rather marks a boundary between a stage before the creative insight emerges, and the stage immediately after. The facility for creative behaviour can be greatly enhanced by extending the liminal ‘moment’ of illumination such that it becomes a more sustained mode of consciousness, a form of awareness in which one is ‘primed’ in such a way that creative breakthroughs are potentiated. (1)

The desired state is pre-conceptual and is characterised by the absence of a specific object of focussed attention, combined with a heightened general sense of significance and meaningfulness. When one is inhabiting this mode of consciousness, in addition to a greater facility for creative behaviour, one is likely to experience a number of other characteristic symptoms;

  • A greater awareness of coincidences and synchronicities (and often a greater attribution of significance to these coincidences)
  • An increased sensitivity to ‘luck’, good or bad
  • More frequent experience of synaesthesia
  • Heightened intuitive feelings about others (a feeling of good or bad ‘vibes’)
  • More frequent deja vu and jamais vu experiences
  • Better recall of dreams
  • Increased apophenia and pareidolia
  • Increased visits from the ‘library angel’ (coming across exactly the book you need at the most fortuitous time)

It should be noted, that there may be no real significance in any of these phenomena, and the ‘information’ about the world offered by such symptoms cannot necessarily be regarded as valid. It is most likely that these seemingly meaningful events are simply artefacts of the process, useful for confiming the presence of a particular mode of consciousness related to creativity, but not insights in their own right.

1. This state has been likened to the ‘aura’ which precedes the onset of certain types of epileptic seizure, immediately prior to the ‘kindling’ which marks the onset of the seizure itself.

Posted in Creativity, Illumination, Light | No Comments »

Creativity and Presence

July 13th, 2006 Fred McVittie

There seem to be two key strands of concern that I am developing an interest in, at least to the extent that I keep finding myself at presentations concerning these ideas; these are presence and creativy. I guess something I would like to do would be to find a way of thinking of them as part of the same gestalt, or having a similarity of structure. There does seem to be a relationship of shared metaphor, particularly in relation to the metaphor of light, which (sort of) figures in both concepts. For now, I am assuming there is a link between theatrical presence (i.e. an assessment of presence carried out be an outside observer or audience) and presence as signifying an individual, phenomenological feeling of being exactly here, precisely now.

In performances which have presence, the moment of continuous becoming which marks the ‘being in the moment’ of performance, can be considered as a constant ’stepping into the light’, a state of wakefulness and breaking consciousness.

In creative processes there is (usually) a moment in which connections are made, solutions are revealed, intuitive leaps are made, and this moment is often termed illumination. In this case the light is that of conscious awareness. There is a feeling that the creative process has been proceeding in the darkness of unconscious processing, and that the end result is forced up or brought forth into the light.

In terms of training, assuming that these metaphors have any validity, there is clearly a benefit to be gained by both performers seeking to improve their presence and others wishing to improve their creativity by working on this shared moment of enlightenment.

Posted in Consciousness, Creativity, Light, Performance, Presence, Story, Theatre, Walking | No Comments »

Everything is full of light

July 25th, 2006 Fred McVittie

Everything is full of light, and the objects are holes in the light.

The light of consciousness reflects off the objects of the world, leaving them empty and hollow. I call this reflection ’seeing’.

The sound of consciousness echoes off the objects of the world leaving them silent. I call this echo ‘hearing’.

Posted in Consciousness, Hearing, Light, Seeing | No Comments »

The Extended Space of the Illuminated Mind

September 7th, 2006 Fred McVittie

One of the most common experiences of the mind is that it is an object, like other objects in the real world, located in space, and existing at, or centred on a particular point. We routinely intuit our consciousness and cognition to be located in this single place, exactly here, precisely now. This point is also usually felt to be located at the centre of lived experience; we are the centre of our little worlds. However, there is another conceptual understanding of the mind which uses a very different spatial metaphor, this understanding relating to a correspondingly different form of consciousness to that of the little world and the central point. This formulation does not imagine the mind located within space, or even as somehow expanding, contracting, or moving through space, but rather that space and mind are, in some way, co-terminous. Space, in this model, is not an inert, unstructured void in which the mind occupies a distinct bounded region, but space is mind. Most commonly found in developed metaphysical systems, this metaphor reverses the Kantian proposition that space is a function of mind. The notion of an identification of mind with space as opposed to mind existing at a singular point in space correlates with states of consciousness often referred to as ‘enlightenment’ (which is itself a metaphor for the existence of a brightly lit space in which knowledge is visible). This enlightened space/mind features in a range of metaphysical practices and religious traditions including ‘divine union’, ‘advaita’, and which Newberg (1999) generalised as a sense of ‘Absolute Unitary Being’ (AUB). It may be said to be part of the perennial philosophy indicated by Huxley and others. Neurological evidence for this relationship between space, mind, and a sense of AUB comes from the work carried out by Michael Persinger who used ‘Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation’ (TCS) to affect part of the brain which contribute to our sense of physical location in space. When subjects were affected in this way their subjective experience was of feeling a sense of unity with the world.

Posted in Enlightenment, Huxley, Aldous, Kant, Immanuel, Light, Newberg, Andrew, Persinger, Michael, Space, Unity | No Comments »

Knowing is Seeing

September 29th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The language that we use to articulate knowledge varies according to the form that knowledge takes, the way of knowing, that we are referring to. When we refer to objective, 3rd person knowledge, that which seems to have a clear existence outside of ourselves accessible to independent observers, we use the language of vision; we say that we can see that the knowledge exists. The vision metaphor for knowing conceptualises knowledge as concrete, discreet objects, and places these ‘objects’ of knowledge outside in the world and in social space. The vision metaphor therefore necessarily entails a particular use of spatial metaphors. Entailments of this ‘knowledge as objects in space’ metaphor include such terms as ‘clear’ and ‘lucid’ when expressing the obviousness of the knowledge; the implication is that the metaphorical space between ourself and the knowledge object is transparent. Also, we tend to use terms associated with light, such as ‘illuminated’, ‘enlightened’ etc. to indicate the acquisition of this sort of knowledge, as if the space around us had suddenly become brightly lit, revealing objects of knowledge that were previously hidden from us in the darkness.

Posted in Knowledge, Language, Light, Seeing, Space, Transparent | No Comments »

Why ‘Enlightenment’? Seeing the Big Picture

October 13th, 2006 Fred McVittie

The term ‘Enlightenment’ refers to both a particular period of European history in which rational enquiry and the concept of a human-centred approach to knowledge became privileged, and also to the individual experience of ‘awakening’ that is found in many spiritual and religious traditions including Buddhism, Hinduism, and Christianity.

This term, Enlightenment, is part of a complex set of metaphors which structure our relationship to knowledge. In this structure, light is associated with knowing, and darkness with not-knowing, hence the period preceding the historical Enlightenment is sometimes referred to as ‘The Dark Ages’. This association of light and knowledge may be because the presence of light allows one to be able to see, and in the absence of light one is effectively blind; this then correlates with a related metaphor, KNOWING IS SEEING, in which the abstract concept of knowing is comprehended by a mapping from the visual sense. So when we wish to indicate that we understand something we say ‘I see’, and when we do not understand we say ‘I just don’t see it’. In such circumstances we may even say we are ‘in the dark’.

What the light allows us to see, presumably, is ‘the big picture’; as the parable of the four blind men feeling their way around an elephant, all of whom take away different impressions, suggests, the visual sense confers a unity on experience which is absent from other senses. To ’see’ means not only to experience more but also to experience a unity.

In terms of personal Enlightenment experience, the darkness that one is assumed to be emerging from represents an inability see a unity of self and other, an inability which is resolved by the turning on of the light which allows the unity of all things to be percieved, just as one sees the unity of the world using the visual sense. The Enlightenment process allows this unity to be metaphorically ’seen’, resolving the apparent differences to produce the state of ‘non-duality’ or advaita, or divine union spoken of in scriptures.

Posted in Binding, Elephant, Enlightenment, History, Light | No Comments »

Performing in the Light

February 3rd, 2007 Fred McVittie

The act of performance, standing in the light before a group of people sitting in the dark, is prototypical of a particular moment in the creative process of artists of all stripes, and indeed of all levels of creativity from enlightenment to normal waking consciousness.

Posted in Consciousness, Creativity, Enlightenment, Light, Performance | No Comments »

Tension

May 22nd, 2007 Fred McVittie


The speed of light is the tension of space.

Posted in Light, Space | No Comments »

Unweavable Rainbow

June 1st, 2007 Fred McVittie

The poet John Keats, referring to the work of Isaac Newton, wrote about the dangers of ‘unweaving the rainbow’ in which, through the developments of optics and the scientific understanding of light, the mysteries of the rainbow were revealed. This rational revelation Keats interpreted as an evacuating of the power and sublime beauty of the rainbow. The rainbow itself does not disappear under the gaze of science of course; a full and complete explanation of the mechanisms by which a rainbow is produced, or of how one is perceived, or even a complete neuron-by-neuron account of the cerebral processes which correlate with one’s consciousness of the rainbow, do not remove the rainbow from the sky.

Posted in Consciousness, Keats, John, Light, Newton, Isaac | No Comments »

Dark Light

June 3rd, 2007 Fred McVittie

The ‘projective’ model of vision in which the act of seeing involves the radiation of a beam from the eyes, was common to the Greeks and featured in Medieval texts on optics. This understanding of vision has largely been replaced with a more passive or relational account, in which the light reflected of the objects of the world enters our eye and contributes to sight rather than any light emerging from the eye. However, the idea of there being some kind of ray or light beam emitted by the organs of sight still has a place in the popular and scientific imagination.

A common metaphor for attention is that of the spotlight, in which it is conceptualised that when we look around at the world the light of our conscious awareness seems to fall on the objects of the world, calling them to attention. (See Fernandez-Duque, D. and M. L. Johnson: 1999). Evidently, regardless of its status outside of physical science, the ’spotlight’ of attention still has currency and meaningful value in the phenomenology of consciousness. An additional possible use of the spotlight metaphor, or rather an entailment of the metaphor which has not yet been exploited, is the application of the spotlight metaphor to an understanding of time. When we cast the light of our attention around the room we are illuminating space with that light, but we might also consider that, in some respects, we are also illuminating time.

When we walk in the dark carrying a torch to help us find our way, the light of the torch illuminates the path directly ahead; we can see the path, and the lower branches of the trees that overshadow it. We can see the bend in the path coming up. But the light of our torch is limited and can only penetrate the darkness a few yards ahead of our feet. We can see the way the path will support our next few steps, but beyond that it grows indistinct. We assume the path continues in a reasonably straight line beyond the haze limits of our illuminated sight, but we cannot be sure. There may be a fork in the road ahead, or the path may end suddenly, or the darkness may conceal an infinity of emptiness and potentiality. Maybe we are not moving forward at all. Maybe the darkness up ahead is actually moving towards us. Maybe our torch is not picking out selective details from the background of the night, but what we are witnessing is the constant congealing of the darkness into the solidity of the path and the lower branches of the trees. Maybe the bright light of our torch is not illuminating the world before us but in actuality we are witnessing the dark light of the past fuse into the singularity of the present.

Posted in Attention, Light, Metaphor, Seeing | No Comments »

Seeing Double

August 20th, 2007 Fred McVittie

The concept of ‘dualism’ involves an experience of being in which the world is separated into two parts or materials. These are variously designated as ’self and other’, ‘body and soul’, ‘body and mind’ and ’subject and object’. The normal experience of the act of seeing gives strong reinforcement to such dualism because of its structure. From a naïve standpoint, vision seems to involve the operation of two major component parts: the seer and the seen, together with conditional components which support the act, most notably the space which lies between seer and seen and across which seeing operates, and the light which must be present if seeing is to happen at all. The self-evident obviousness of such a structure, combined with the aid to this kind of thinking that some scientific support for its validity provides, inevitably forces one to conclude that the location of ’self’ within this system is with the ’seer’ and that everything else that is ’seen’ is ‘other’: that ‘mind’ only exists at the location in space occupied by this seer and the rest is inert matter, including the ‘body’ one sees when one looks down or indeed the body of another person. Here is the subject, there is the object. Vision, as described here, is the objectifying sense par excellence, and remembering that up to 40% of brain activity is comprised of the visual processing of information it is not surprising that, as Paul Bloom puts it, we are ‘natural born dualists’. Since so much of our brain activity is taken up with visual processing, a fact observable by noting how much of our cognition and language relies on visual metaphors, we have an inbuilt tendency to constantly reproduce the conditions under which dualism thrives.

Any move toward achieving non-duality must inevitably confront this difficulty or find ways to minimise its effects. Clearly one way is to develop a set of techniques which privilege non-visual ways of being in the world and which do not have this this tendency to spatialise and objectify. However, many traditions do attempt to offer ways of finding non-duality which rely on the concept of ’seeing’, or which make extensive use of visual and spatial metaphors despite the inherent difficulties. Such methods work because of a number of strategies which have been found which circumvent the duality-producing tendency of vision.

One way this has been achieved is through the building up of an identification or association not with the ’seer’ in the structure of vision but with some aspect of the conditions in which seeing operates, usually light or space. We intuitively associate ourselves with the position of seer, feeling our self as existing at the place where the looking is taking place or coming from. This intuition can be broken down however, allowing us to change the location of such identification, at least partially. In fact we routinely modify the location of our identification, extending it to cover our family, team, country, or species, swelling with pride when ‘we’ have taken our first step, scored a goal, turned green and pleasant as an English springtime, or evolved an opposable thumb. Alternatively we may shrink our identification to include only our head, our brain, our consciousness, placing the I deep inside and casting everything else out into the over-there-ness of objective space. We also habitually and non-mystically move ourselves away from ourselves whenever we see someone in pain; we wince in empathy, placing part of ourselves momentarily in their shoes and neuronally mirroring their being. It is a comparatively small step from these everyday resizings and relocations of the self to an identification with the non-self components of vision mentioned above. When we feel ourselves to be, not the subject or object in the visual equation, but the space in which these entities appear, we are adopting the space as ourselves and feeling the singularity and non-duality which comes with that territory. This is particularly potent if we have an understanding of space not as the emptiness which lies between the stuff of the world but as a continuous substrate which permeates every-thing and (so physicists would attest) at the deepest level comprises everything. Similarly, the development of a close association with light, the other great condition for the functioning of vision, can also allow one to avoid objectifying dualism which still utilising the power of visuality.

Some practices, particularly activity-based ones, find a non-local location for self in an identification with the affordance connection between ‘here’ and ‘there’, between this thing here called ‘I’ and that thing there called ‘it’ (or ‘you’). An affordance connection draws on that faculty of our minds which synchronises our perceptions with the actions required of the object of those perceptions. So, for example, when we see a chair we do not simply see a collection of wooden geometrical shapes assembled in a particular way, we ’see’ the sitting opportunities offered by this object. Similarly, when we see a tool with a handle we ’see’ its graspability. According to Gibson, this recognition of affordance is not some rational act carried out by the conscious mind once visual perception has taken place, rather it is completely embedded within the perceptual act, preceding such analysis as geometry or the recognition of a particular material. When we see something, the first thing we see it how we should interact with it, and this seeing is an unconscious, embodied, felt sense. The other more formal aspects of objects relating to their shape, size, colour, etc follow this primary active perceptual response, and it is these secondary perceptions which most clearly separate seer from seen, subject from object, self from other. A form of ’seeing’ or ‘being’ which foregrounds these primary affordance relations between perceiver and perceived may reduce the dualism which normal seeing tends to promote. So Herriman, writing about Zen and Archery, can claim that non-duality is achieved when the archer ceases to exist as an individual separated from the bow, arrow, and target, and begins to exist as the action which coheres these disparate elements into a unity. This singularity is a result of an identification by the archer not with his self as distinct from the activity, but with the affordance structure which makes these elements one.

Posted in Affordance, Dualism, Enlightenment, Light, Non-duality, Space | No Comments »

The Feeling of Light

September 16th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Although enlightenment cannot be reduced to the feelings associated with it, feelings which might include awe, a sense of connectedness, a dissolution of the ego etc, such feelings can be considered as pointers, indications that we are on the right road. Provided one stays aware that these feelings can be a distraction, and that the path to enlightenment continues beyond them, one should welcome them as encouraging landmarks.

Although it is sometimes thought that these sensations are unique, emerging only from spiritual practice and having nothing in common with the more routine feelings experienced in everyday life, this is not the case. It is better to consider the sensation of enlightenment as an amplification of the sensations associated with other experiences and cognitive activities. In particular, it can be regarded that there is a set of experiences which constitute an increasing intensity of feelings culminating in this sense of enlightened ‘unity of being’. A provisional list of these sensations would include: perception, ‘noticing’, recognition, pattern recognition, problem solving, ‘realisation’ and the feeling of ‘getting’ a joke or solving a riddle, the generation of a theory, and the various reaches of artistic creativity. It will be noted that this list, which is not meant to be exhaustive, includes states of mind which are completely unremarkable, and which we would not usually draw our attention. In including perception, it also includes processes of mind which we are unavailable to conscious scrutiny but which perhaps underpin or give content to that consciousness.

These processes have a number of features in common, and which determine them as conceptually connected (remembering that such conceptualisation inevitably involves the use of metaphor). Two shared features are particularly significant for our purposes: these are that all of them involve the bringing together of disparate elements into a unity, and the second is that this unity is conceived of as existing in a single, brightly-lit space. As we will see, these two features are necessarily connected but it may be useful to consider them independently.

Unity
The first feature they share is that of Unification. All of these concepts depend upon the bringing together of disparate elements into a larger unified whole, a singularity or gestalt which is apprehended in its entirety. The difference between the concepts is the extent to which this unification takes place.

enlightenment
creativity
theory (and mythologisation)
realisation
recognition
noticing
perception

The higher up the list one goes, the greater the degree of singularity one is attributing to experience, with the ultimate goal of enlightenment as one in which one experiences the universe, including oneself as a single undivided whole. At that level everything is brought together and there is no distinction between self and other, mind and body, conscious and unconscious; all is seamlessly unified into the singularity of One. Starting at the bottom however this bringing together of individual elements is much more routine. Perception involves the compilation of sense data, the information about the world provided by the senses, into manageable and meaningful phenomena. When we look at a tree for example, we do not observe the individual elements that make up the tree: the branches, bark, leaves, the sound of the wind rustling those leaves etc, and then consciously assemble this data into a unified whole. Rather, it is the whole tree which presents itself to consciousness, the assembly having taken place in the interstices of the brain using the normal processes of perception. This compilation of sensory impressions into complex gestalts is entirely automatic and non-conscious. In fact it is only by an effort of conscious will that we are able to prevent ourselves from performing this routine act of creative construction. If we wish to see the elements which make up the tree, or make up whatever other gestalt is presenting itself, then we have to consciously shift our attention to those elements. (Actually, it may be inaccurate to say that this perception is ‘presented’ to consciousness as if consciousness is a kind of empty stage waiting for the performance of the world. It might be more accurate to see such a ‘performance’ as constituting consciousness.)

It might be a subject of interest why the routine unification of sense-data seems to operate at particular scales. When we look out into the world why do our non-conscious unifying processes stop at the place they do? Why, when we look at a tree do we see a tree first rather than the leaves or the forest? It seems likely that, since cognition derives from the adaptive processes of evolution, then the unifying processes of perception would tend to converge on scales which best served that end. When one is looking for somewhere to hide from a predator there is clearly an adaptive advantage to be gained from seeing tree rather than leaves or forest. Or to bring the example indoors, why, when we look at a chair do we initially and effortlessly see a chair rather than a composite of rectangular shapes or a general piece of furniture? For that matter, why do we not see fragmented patterns of light and shade or particles of matter. Normal waking awareness is partly a process in which the disparate sense data of the world is brought together by non-conscious operations into appropriately-sized gestalts, this ‘appropriateness’ being determined by the affordances offered by these gestalts.

(It should be noted that the scale at which this unconscious unification happens is not only a product of evolutionary determinism but is also partly determined by cultural circumstances; different circumstances suggest different affordances from the environment. So, for example, whilst I might take a trip to the coast and see the ocean, a surfer might look in the same direction and see the wave.)

Perception of the kind I am indicating here is entirely unconscious and requires no effort of will and need produce no sense of awareness. To experience the unification of the sense data of the world at this level would be totally unremarkable. This is the kind of perception we have when we are ‘doing something else’. When we drive down the motorway singing along to the radio, or daydream while we walk the dog in the park, this unifying of perception is what stops us crashing into the armco or stepping off the path, or bumping our head on the low-lying branches of the trees.

On a neurological level, this process is referred to as ‘perceptual binding’ and involves the synchronised firing of networks of neurons. These networks code for different sense data: vertical lines, particular colours, edges, certain shapes etc. and the synchronisation unifies these individual data items into a coherent mental ‘image’ such that we do not see these data elements but only the results of their synchronisation, a chair for example.

Posted in Binding, Cognition, Consciousness, Enlightenment, Feeling, Light | No Comments »

Threshold of the dark room (exercise)

September 24th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Stand at the threshold of a door which leads into a garden, a street, or into any open space, ideally on a day which is bright and sunny. Turn so your back is to the outside world and you are facing into the room. Position yourself so that you can just make out the door frame at the very edge of your peripheral vision, then move forward very slightly so that the door frame disappears and is replaced by the frame of your own eye-sockets. Stand perfectly still. You are looking out from a space which is infinitely vast, and filled with light.
Try to really ’see’ the bright whiteness of it all around,extending in all directions above, below, left, right. Imagine the lightness and the whiteness extending backwards to infinity behind you.

Posted in Exercises, Light, Space | No Comments »

This Side of the Light

October 2nd, 2007 Fred McVittie

The space in front of us is (usually) saturated with light and is the place of vision. It is also where we meet the gaze of others and triangulate the objects of the world in this shared vision of objectivity. Furthermore, it is also the place we feel we are moving forward into, as well as the time we are moving into. As Polanyi suggests, the space in front of us is the location of the ‘to’ within the binary of the ‘from-to’ that characterises perception. In looking permanently forward into the light we leave our selves behind in the dark. The intentionality of vision, the dominant sense, proceeds from where we are to where we will be, and we, that is our selves, are left behind in this onrush. The appearance of the brightly-lit world of objects in front of us is at the cost of the disappearance of the body.

This disappearance of the body, or more accurately of the sensate or exstatic body, is not total however. When we look down we see our own bodies falling away beneath us, we routinely see our hands projecting into the visible space before us. There is a sense then in which parts of our bodies precede other parts into the illuminated future. Our extremities are at the vanguard of this forward march, reaching and stepping constantly out of the dazzling dark of the recent past. Our arms and hands seem to be following the from-to line of intentionality to stretch toward the objects of the world, and in stretching, become objects themselves. Our touch is that of Midas in reverse and everything we touch objectifies us. Looking down, our feet and legs extend to touch the object of the Earth, the pedestal on which we stand and the future into which we perpetually fall. Again, we may feel intentionality streaming Earthwards catching and objectifying those legs and feet in the hard light that is always in front of our eyes.

And what about these eyes? They are the last to go, if indeed they ever go at all. We may detect the shadows of eye-sockets or nose, the rapid grey blur of a cheek at the boundary of our vision, maybe the frame of our glasses if we wear them. These are liminal, partly formed objects of uncertain status that we are, perhaps, not fully qualified to quantify objectively. Do these glasses suit me? Should I pluck my eyebrows? Do these coloured contact lenses (that I cannot see) match my jacket (that I can)?

The source of the intentional gaze that grazes these uncertain framing entities is absent. It has disappeared from objective surveillance by its being located behind the apparent transparent lens. Wherever we are, it is on this side of the light and a moment behind a present into which we are always appearing.

Posted in Embodiment, Light, Perception, Polanyi, Michael, Self, Time | No Comments »

Brightly Lit Space: Behind the Eyes (exercise)

October 14th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Fix your eyes on a point directly in front of where you are sitting. Without moving your point of focus, try to shift your attention and awareness to one or other side of your visual field. You will be able to detect movement and you will sense what is there but you will not be able to determine details or colour. Gradually move your awareness backward, away from the centre of your gaze, to the full extent of your peripheral vision. You may be aware of a darkness, or you may feel the existence of a point beyond which your awareness meets resistance, this is because we associate awareness with physical seeing, and since the movement of the eye is limited to the frame of the eye socket this association tends to carry over and affect how we use attentional awareness, even though the same physical limits do not apply. Try to continue the backward motion of the point of awareness into this darkness or beyond this imaginary limit. Move your visual awareness right back so that you are attending to the area behind your eyes. At this point, notice that you are no longer attending to a space that is in darkness, but a space that appears to be brightly lit, a light behind the eyes. If you give close attention to this space you may find that the light behind the eyes begins to take on form and colour, and as if waking from a dream, you may find you are looking at the world again. The room you are in is back, illuminated and radiant.

Posted in Enlightenment, Exercises, Light, Perception, Space | No Comments »

Eyes Touching in the Light

October 30th, 2007 Fred McVittie

When we were a baby of only a few hours old, before any light of consciousness has been lit in that little box of bone, when our mother smiled at us, we smiled back at our mothers. Before we had any idea of what a smile means, or what a mother is, or what seeing is, or what a mouth is, before any of that and before any of anything, we smiled back. How did we achieve this miracle? Certainly not by any rational intention on our part. What we are told happens, and we have no reason to discount this explanation, is that some of the light bouncing around the delivery room reflected off the lips of the woman who had recently given birth. This light flew across the room at an incomprehensible speed and entered the eye of the baby, our selves, where it impacted on sensitive cells at the back of the eye. These impacts were then converted into electrochemical signals that travelled up the optic nerve to our baby brain where they exploded in a storm of frenetic activity. Some of this activity took place within special neurons in our tiny, barely-formed brains which somehow translated this maelstrom into instructions to the muscles of our baby face, particularly our mouth, and as if by magic, we smiled back. This neuronal mirroring, as it is called, caused us to reflect with our bodies what we had seen with our eyes, not by ‘copying’ what Mummy did, for such a sophisticated concept would have been way beyond us, but by the simple and direct touching of our eyes and minds across space and in light.

Posted in Consciousness, Light, Mirror neurons, Neuroscience | No Comments »

Desert, Dazzling Light (kitchen)

November 22nd, 2007 Fred McVittie

When I relax and look at the world I have the strange feeling that it is not inert, passively accepting my gaze and allowing itself to be simply captured by my eyes, but rather that it is alive and active. Between typing these sentences I am looking around a kitchen and the whole room, including the appliances, the furniture, the windows, the cups on the draining board, even the space itself, seems vibrant and strangely alert. I have no sense that the room has ‘consciousness’ or ‘agency’ and there is none of the feeling of a predictive psychology that accompanies the presence of another human being (or animal), I do not feel that the room is ‘thinking’. The feeling is more like the experience one has in the presence of a corpse, or a dead animal, but without the morbidity of that encounter. Here is the palpable presence of undirected, sourceless, intentionality. I feel it all around me right up to the surface of my skin and touching my eyes, balancing and continuing the personal sense of the presence of my own mind at this side of those eyes.

Posted in Death, Light, Liveness, Sense, Space | No Comments »

Darkness at Noon - Objectivity and Undeniability

November 23rd, 2007 Fred McVittie

A common metaphor for the acquisition of knowledge is that of ’seeing’. When we want to refer to such gaining of knowledge we might explicitly say ‘I see’, meaning that we have such an understanding. As noted elsewhere, this visual metaphor for knowing also confers object-like status on the knowledge itself and we intuitively begin to treat it as if it were some kind of object that can be ‘grasped’, ‘acquired’, and ‘transferred’, or might be ‘hard’, ‘robust’, or less positively ’slippery’.

The visual metaphor for knowing also has a number of significant entailments which figure within the structure of the metaphor but which may be less obvious. Firstly there is the requirement that these ‘objects’ of knowledge exist in some kind of conceptual ’space’, usually external to the body (obviously, or we would not be able to ’see’ them), and secondly that this space be illuminated. This latter point is evidenced in our references to being ‘in the dark’; we use this and similar phrases when we want to indicate that we know that certain facts (knowledge objects) are ‘out there’ but we cannot see them.

Some types of knowing are conceptualised without the use of the visual metaphor, and in these cases some other sensory mode is usually referred to. So for example, when we want to indicate that we understand what a person is saying but do not want to simply agree with their viewpoint (sic) we might say ‘I hear what you’re saying’. By using an auditory rather than a visual metaphor we have acknowledged the existence of the facts the other person is claiming sight of but have not awarded those facts the full objective status that would be implied by saying that we also ’saw’ what they meant. We are acknowledging the existence of their words, but holding back on accepting the truth claims that those words make. To this extent we might say that (metaphorical) seeing is believing, whilst (metaphorical) hearing has something of the status of rumour; a good indication of what the other person thinks they know, but no guarantee of authority.

Other metaphorical senses used as labels for knowing have similar partial status; ‘felt’ knowledge is usual personal and tacit, and the defining feature of that form of knowing we call ‘taste’ is that it is not ‘out there’ in interpersonal space at all but is inside the body, inside the mouth. Strangely, these up close and personal (or even internal, interoceptive) forms of knowing, whilst they may not have the interpersonal and social authority of ’seen’ facts often have a feeling of personal authority which exceeds the objective. Whilst we may rationally understand that ‘feelings aren’t facts’ as the AA mantra goes, at the same time there is an undeniability of this type of felt knowledge which is often lacking in the objective. Many of us will have had the sense that, whilst all the (objective) facts about a certain phenomenon say one thing, our guts say something else, and that ‘gut feeling’ has a authoritative quality which is hard to overcome.

Obviously these acts of knowing that draw on non-visual metaphors have different, and usually lower social status than the objective knowledge of the seen. In any official context, or in any claim for the authority mentioned above, it is visual, ‘objective’ knowledge which holds sway. For this reason it is not surprising that when we wish to imply that our ideas should be treated as authoritative we tend to use visual metaphors to frame those ideas. Any politician who argued that his opponents ideas were invalid because they were ‘not to his taste’ would get short shrift from those who argued that the truth of such ideas ‘could easily be seen’.

Occasionally the visual metaphor is used to articulate a belief about the status of knowledge which is not easily shared, or which has ambiguous status, and this is most clearly revealed in the language around enlightenment and spiritual experiences. Typically, a person experiencing some kind of epiphany or divine revelation would claim that this experience constitutes the gaining of knowledge or insight, usually a particularly significant or transformative insight which seems to have something to say about the external world. To this extent it requires an objective explanation. Also, such experiences tend to have a quality of undeniability about them; it is rare for a person having such an experience to doubt the reality of it, in the way one might doubt the reality of a contestable fact. To this extent such experiences also demand an explanatory form which indicates the felt certainty of that knowledge. For these reasons, any desire to communicate this experience and share the knowledge thus gained would require that this communication use sensory metaphors which convey the most authority, which as already noted tend to be visual metaphors with all the entailments of space and light that go along with them. (This paragraph has already mobilised some of these metaphors as exemplified in words like ‘enlightenment’ and ‘insight’). They would also require the use of metaphors which convey the ‘felt’ sense of the experience, with all of the self-evident undeniability of the closely-held belief, (again the idea of a belief being ‘closely held’ indicates the mobilisation of an appropriate metaphor, and the unavoidability of using such metaphors in writing and thinking about these concepts). The requirements of a form of expression and conceptualisation appropriate to these experiences inevitably lead to paradox; one must find a way of thinking and speaking which simultaneously evokes the metaphorically exterior space in which objects of knowledge gain their interpersonal authority, a space which is illuminated and translucent, but one must also suggest the darkness and contact of the internal space which give an undeniably sense of phenomenological truth. This necessary paradox may help to explain why some authors, when trying to articulate the enlightenment state (or cognate conditions) use apparently oxymoronic terms such as ‘the dazzling dark’, or possibly in the case of alien abduction, a strange set of (probably confabulated) experiences in which similar symptoms to enlightenment are featured, the light emitted by the aliens or the ships has been described as ‘white, but dark white’.

Posted in Belief, Darkness, Feeling, Grasp, Hearing, Knowledge, Light, Metaphor, Objectivity, Seeing, Sense, Space, Taste | No Comments »

The Dying of the Light: Hello Darkness

December 11th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Development in human medicine may one day delay the onset of senile dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and the routine deterioration of memory and reasoning that accompanies old age. (Recent studies have linked these effects with loss of integrity in the white matter of the brain (1).) We may eventually see a time in which aging of the brain is halted and as one gets older there is no loss of mental function, one stays as sharp and alert as a 20 year old, right up to the point when one dies from some somatic breakdown or other. Is this really a good thing? I am not at all sure I want to go out like that, at the absolute height of my cognitive powers, fully wide-awake and fully aware that, if only my body would keep going, then my brain would continue to carry me forward. I suspect that such ‘improvement’ would only add to the fear of death and the impossibility of imagining it. There would be no gradual decline, no fading away, no seeping of consciousness into the fabric of the world, no emptying of the self until the body is a hollow shell. Instead the ghost would be perfectly trapped within the machine, watching the decay of its vessel with increasing frustration and anxiety. There would be no ‘dying of the light’ to rage against, only the solid black wall of terminal embodiment to which we would hurtle, wide-eyed and with our path toward it brightly lit with anachronistic mind.

Let me dissolve into the gathering dusk piece by piece. Take this part of mind, then this, then this. Let me gently forget my friends and family, my home, the books I’ve read and the television I’ve watched, my wife, my past, my name. Return these things from wherever they came, out there beyond the extent of skin and bone. Take my freedom, my independence, my dignity, my continence, my responsiveness, my mobility, my rights as a human being, my sense of self, and stick them where the light of my sun no longer shines. Here is the dark, and here is the whisperer in darkness.

Andrews-Hanna J.R., Snyder A.Z, Vincent J.L., Lustig C, Head D, Fox M.D., Raichle M.E., and R.L. Buckner. “Evidence for large-scale network disruption in advanced aging.” In Preparation. Reported in Scientific American, December 5th, 2007.

Posted in Brain, Cognition, Consciousness, Darkness, Death, Embodiment, Life, Light | No Comments »

Light as a Metaphor

December 14th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Although light is intangible and uncontainable it nevertheless has a rich significance in the world of thought. This is possibly because the perception of light is a key component of the visual sense, which is the dominant mode in human sensory awareness, with up to 50% of the processing power of the brain being given over to vision. Light underpins out ability to see and therefore, despite its ephemeral nature, is central to our conceptualisation. The important position of light as a concept is revealed in the metaphorical uses it fulfills, and significant connections are evidenced between the different phenomena to which the metaphor of light is applied.

Light metaphors tend to be applied to the various abstract phenomena broadly understood as ‘knowledge’, and particularly, the acquistion of said knowledge. This is exhibited most clearly (sic) when we say that we ’see’ what a person means when we want to indicate that the knowledge that the person is pointing us to is objectively available to us also. We also refer to the gaining of knowledge as ‘illumination’ or ‘enlightenment’ and support the metaphor with reference to ‘light bulb’ moments, ideas ‘dawning’ on us, ‘flashes’ of inspiration, etc.

The source of the light metaphor is, as noted, the role of actual visible light within visual perception. Even though light itself cannot be easily seen, it is necessary for seeing to take place; when we look at a tree we do not see the light filling the space between the tree and our eyes, we ’simply’ see the tree. However, since the absence of light is also the absence of sight, this natural concurrence gives light something of the status of an embodiable phenomenon. We feel that it is a concrete, sensorially available entity, even though in actuality, when distinguished from the objects which it illuminates, it is exposed as a deeply abstract concept beyond the horizon of direct experience.

Posted in Enlightenment, Illumination, Light, Metaphor, Perception, Space | No Comments »

The Dark and Light of Dying

December 16th, 2007 Fred McVittie

Two images dominate our understanding of the death experience. In the first of these we imagine death as an embrace of the darkness. We find this in poetic metaphors of ‘the dying of the light’ against which we should rage, in visual representations of death as associated with blackness, impenetrability, and night, and in images of ‘fading’ consciousness, squeezing out of sparks, and the dimming of brilliance in senility. Conversely, there is the apparently paradoxical metaphor which associates death with entering illumination, a moving toward the light and a merging with the glory of that light.

Posted in Darkness, Death, Enlightenment, Illumination, Life, Light, Metaphor | No Comments »

Light and Space

January 17th, 2008 Fred McVittie

The key role that light plays in our metaphorical conceptualisation of knowing is linked to other elements or entailments of the overall schema KNOWING IS SEEING. Seeing is dependent upon the medium of light for its functioning, and closely related to this is the space which the light occupies and which allows for both the separation and the containment of the object of vision. In order to see something that thing must exist in a brightly lit shared space with ourselves, it must be separated from us within a prescribed distance, and it must not be obscured or occluded by other things. Only when all these conditions are met can the act of seeing take place. The relationship between the components of this schema, light and space, is such that they are inextricably linked; we cannot divorce the space from its illumination. A space which is totally dark, in visual terms ends at the surface of our eyeballs. A visually extended space, on the other hand, is defined by the extent to which it is flooded with light. The conscionable space ends at the limits of the light, and while we might suspect the space continuing into the shadows there is a distinctly different ontology to such a space; it is ambiguous, impenetrable, filled with the absence of lightness.

The conceptual metaphor KNOWING IS SEEING which derives from the phenomenology of sight similarly echoes this tangled relation between light and space. To know something is to recognise its existence out there in the illuminated space beyond our eyes, and we invoke the metaphor whenever we say ‘I see’ when we really mean ‘I know’. Also, the limits and entailments of the metaphor transfer to our conceptualisation of what knowing is. If the object of our knowing is too close to our self the elision of the spatial separation also banishes the light and we can no longer claim to have this kind of visual knowledge. An object held against the heart ceases to be visible, and similarly with objects of knowing, when we are too personally involved the object ceases to have the objectivity which light and distance conferred upon it. It is barely an object at all and seems to be part of our selves, part of our subjectivity.

Alternatively, if the object is too metaphorically distant from us we may have great difficulty seeing it at all. We may sense that it is partly hidden in shadow and it may even inherit an eldritch strangeness from the darkness toward which it leans. At such a remove the object of knowing becomes part of occult knowledge, secretive, hidden and the property of the gnostic.

Posted in Darkness, Knowledge, Light, Metaphor, Proximity, Space | No Comments »

Here is Knowing.

January 18th, 2008 Fred McVittie

You are standing at the centre of a space and at the centre of a pool of light. The light is all around you and may even be inside of you. You may even be the source of that light. Because of the light and the space you are able to ’see’ objects which are within that pool of light, although they cannot be too far away. Beyond a certain distance they grow indistinct, shadowy, and vague. At some remove, within a certain proscribed range, these objects are clearly visible, not only to yourself, but also to others who are near you in this illuminated space.

Should this object pose any kind of threat, because of the distance and the space between yourself and this object of sight you are in no immediate danger. The sight of it may suggest a threat in the future or may be a precursor for some other kind of reaction but this sight alone cannot harm you. No-one ever died from just looking at something. Similarly, the object cannot profit you just by its being simply visible. At that distance you cannot eat it, drink it, have sex with it, shelter under it, wrap yourself in it to keep warm, or use it as tool of any kind. It’s existence may be interesting or informative but it can not be life-preserving. There is therefore no urgency about the object; no life or death decision rests on its precise identification or the appropriateness of its naming. The object is perennially ‘over there’ in the communal space beyond the touch of a hand and the press of skin.

This is not a static space however. Objects can move and we ourselves can also move and as we do so the proximity we might have to objects changes. And with those changes in relative location come other changes in relationship, in salience, and in sensory availability. As we approach the object it moves from being removed to being within our grasp, and we might make use of this availability and place our hands around the object. Here it is man-handled and its affordances are measured against our grip, a larger object may give its weight to our hands and arms and be difficult to embrace and even harder to move. It is now up close and personal, and we would be advised to pay closer and more personal attention to its properties and its motives. It may fall and crush us; it may poison us on contact; we may be eaten alive or pushed over the edge of a cliff. This is the distance at which accidents happen and that which we can touch is not something we can be blase about. If we can touch it then it may touch us, possibly in ways which are unwelcome and life-threatening. Alternatively it may respond to the touch of our outstretched fingers with the softness of a lover’s cheek, thrilling us to the core and drawing us closer. It may, at this distance, release perfume at our touch; the tang of orange and the heavy scent of musk, and again we would be foolish to ignore these tender pleadings. Instead of being dangerous there is the promise of rapture. Whether attractive or repulsive, the source of pain or delight, at the range of touch these objects become significant in a way which is ours and ours alone. No onlooker is offered these promises and threats; there is no sharing of this proximal and intimate space and only by standing on these shoes, at this exact spot in the centre of space and light, and only by being this close to the object can this exact experience be obtained. The salience of the moment is mine and mine alone.

Inside the orbit of our arms the object is not only within our grasp but also beyond our last defence. Any opportunity we may have had to ward of this entity is gone; the blow of an enemy, the unwanted sexual advances of an undesirable fellow human, the slings and arrows of fortune both outrageous and exhilarating, and impact with the body is certain. The space between the object and ourselves is now completely elided and there is only the darkness of direct contact. It is here, at the level of the skin, that all of the drama of human being takes place. Any entity which cannot protect its boundaries from invasion and intrusion is dead in the water. Any being which resists merging with the objects of nourishment and reproduction is similarly stultified. All life is here, and this surface, this superficial envelope should be a major focus of attention and care. What touches, what goes in, what comes out, is a matter of life and death and is not the subject of inconsequential, interpersonal, rarified, distanced debate. In fact there can be no debate; no matter where you stand and however well lit you are you cannot feel these blows and penetrations. They are mine and only mine.

Some of this contact, this pressing, is strong and shakes my balance, moving me away and relocating the centre of myself, my space, my light. Other contacts are more to the point and puncture the skin with surgical precision. Still others both consume and are consumed, passing behind the boundary and making contact with inner spaces and inner sense. Once inside I can feel these objects, if I can feel them at all, only with my gut and the with my heart. They may have a taste which is salty or sweet, and they may weigh heavily inside me. These entities have become entirely secret and no other person can truly know of their existence at all. Even I myself may lose touch with them in the space inside. They are not clearly bounded and seem to merge with the internals of my own body so that I no longer can be sure where I end and they begin. In fact I may start to wonder if I am in total no more than a collection of interior objects, forgotten and assimilated, like the fruit I ate last month which is now transformed into skin cells, but which nevertheless feels like my skin, and the milk I drank as a child long ago became bone and is now far away in the shells of sea creatures; my bones, my self. Internal space, dazzlingly dark

Posted in Grasp, Light, Proximity, Space | No Comments »

Height and Light

March 30th, 2008 Fred McVittie

The common metaphorical association of light with knowledge (in all its forms) seems to show a consistent relationship with the spatial metaphor of knowledge which relates the extent of knowing with height. This consistent pairing of these two metaphors may originate in an embodied experience which routinely links these two concrete experiences.

The light metaphor has been well covered within Arthur Zajonc’s ‘Catching the Light: the entwined history of light and mind’, in which he shows that the historical and cross-cultural application of this metaphor is impressively widespread. As a specific metaphor for the cognitive process of knowing this metaphor has common application within terms such as illumination, enlightenment, flash of insight, and seeing the light. It also features within graphical representations of knowledge acquisition such as lighbulbs, flames, and candles. It should be noted that the sense of knowing signified by light metaphors need not necessarily be the objective knowledge of empiricism; it is very common for light to feature within spiritual and religious epistemologies, and whilst these may not constitute knowledge in the academic sense, they do tend to be experienced as such, albeit Gnostic rather than positivistic.

The use of the vertical dimension as a measure of knowing similarly shows extensive usage across times and cultures, and again this application is not only to the knowledge of science and rationalism, but also to other forms of knowing including the spiritual and religious. Isaac Newton is cited as saying that, if he could see further than other men, it was because he ‘stood on the shoulders of giants’. The elevated position offered by this historical piggy-backing is used to signify greater knowledge (ultimately drawing upon a metaphor linking knowing with seeing), a metaphor widely exploited within ‘hierarchies’ of knowledge, in which higher vertical placement on the hierarchy is seen as suggesting greater knowledge. This verticality is also referred to within terms such as ‘higher power’ or ‘higher self’, in which the power or self which is placed in this higher position is one with superior (sic) access to knowledge and truth.

These two metaphors are both consistent in their application and can be confirmed in their consistency by noting that in both cases the opposite of height and light metaphorically implies the opposite of greater knowledge. There is also a strong consistency between these two metaphors; a source or repository of knowledge which is considered ‘high’ is usually also considered ‘in the light’, whilst one that is considered ‘low’ tends also to be thought of as ‘in the dark’.

It seems extremely likely that the origins of these metaphors, and the reason for their co-presence and coherence, is in the embodied experience of being the types of animal we are with the types of senses we have. To have greater access to information through the occupation of a more elevated position, the top of a tree for example, must be an experience we and our ancestors have had for millions of years, to the extent that such a correspondence must be hard-wired into the fabric of our cognition. Similarly, the fact that the major source of illumination available to us, the Sun, is above us must have structured our consciousness since the earliest dawning of that faculty. There is therefore an overwhelming correlation between height and light which can be verified simply by allowing one’s eyes to rise from the ground to the sky and experience the increase in illumination this rising brings to mind.

The hard-wired nature of this assumed location of light as being ‘up’ is witnessed by the various optical illusions which rely on this phenomenon for their effect. The image below, which appears to show alternative rows of ‘bumps’ and ‘dents’, relies on the unconscious assumption that light comes from above.

bumps.jpg

Posted in Illusion, Light, Perception, Up | No Comments »

Sublimation

April 9th, 2008 Fred McVittie

In chemistry, a substance is said to undergo the process of sublimation if, on heating, it changes state from a solid to a gas without passing through an intermediate state of liquidity. Observing sublimation in action is a relatively rare experience, confined primarily to chemistry students or, historically, to alchemists, and a prototypical experimental demonstration might proceed as follows:

A small amount of a solid substance is placed in the bottom of a test tube and the test tube is then held over the flame of a bunsen burner. For a few moments nothing happens, then a thin vapour may be seen issuing from the substance (or maybe not). This vapour may be seen to rise up the tube and, when it reaches the cooler regions at the top, deposits itself as a solid on the glass sides of the tube (1). With some substances there is not even the telltale trace of vapour to mark the passage of the substance through the intermediate space; it may appear to simply diminish in presence at one location and accumulate in another, higher place. This is the literal, ‘embodied’ sense in which the term ’sublimation’ can be experienced, and as noted is not an experience that many will have had. Nevertheless, this process of sublimation has extensive use as a metaphor and the structure of this metaphor links it to the wider imaginary landscape within which knowledge makes sense (and the senses make knowledge). The relationship between this particular metaphor to the wider imagination, and indeed why such an apparently arcane experience is appropriate in this case, can be revealed by an analysis of the various uses of the term outside of its specific scientific or alchemical context (2).

The term ’sublimation’ appears in Freudian psychoanalysis, and is most usually applied to the practices of artists. He writes that “Among the instinctual forces which are put to this [civilizing] use the sexual impulses play an important part; in this process they are sublimated.” (Freud, S. 1966. 27). This “process” “consists in the sexual trend abandoning its aim of obtaining a sexual component or a reproductive pleasure and taking on another which is related genetically to the abandoned one but is itself no longer sexual and must be described as social. We call this process ‘sublimation’, in accordance with the general estimate that places social aims higher than the sexual ones, which are at bottom self-interested.” (Freud, S. 1966. 429)

Note the use in this passage of terms indicating differences in elevation, and the unstated values associated with different ‘levels’. The originating substance of sublimation is placed ‘at bottom’ and is narrowly concerned with the self and the sexual body. The products of sublimation however are given the wider and more lofty perspective of the social. The metaphorical schema underpinning this image, in addition to its narrative of alchemical transformation, also makes use of the UP IS GOOD association discussed elsewhere. The view from the top of the test tube or alembic vessel takes in the houses and gardens of one’s neighbours.

The particular goodness of this sublime position, particularly when it becomes the precipitator of art, is, for Freud, not unclouded with potential problems. For Freud the libidinous and thanatoid drives of the ego, constantly under the whip of id and superego, ideally found release in the delights of sex and the void of death. But for those of us who are wedded to either celibacy or self-preservation these drives must send their energy elsewhere and the destination of choice for artists, writers, and other creative inadequates, is to exhaust them upward in the vaporous evanscences of art, the social function of which, for Freud, is questionable. He describes the artist as “…originally a man who turns away from reality because he cannot come to terms with the renunciation of instinctual satisfaction which it at first demands, and who allows his erotic and ambitious wishes full play in the life of phantasy.” (Freud, S. 1911. 24). This is an image of creativity in the arts as the steam above the factory; energy lost to the environment as uncontainable and useless gas. This unruly, and possibly even toxic, waste is deposited as solid accumulations on our gallery walls and the shelves of our libraries without even passing through the hydraulically practical liquid stage of useful procreation or of turning the wheel of life into the mulch of death. As is evident from the tone of these sentences, to Freud (as to Plato before him (3)) the product of arts practice was a deviation from the intended use of these drives. It is interesting to note that Freud, in keeping with the necessity of maintaining consistency in the utilisation of his image schema, (although he may not have thought of it in those terms) described the alternative to sublimation as ‘repression’. The workings of the steam-driven psyche act upon the unwanted desires such that instead of being evacuated to the air they are pushed underground. The verticality of the psychic dimension is retained, along with a notional position of the self, in the form of the ego, at ground zero. Repressed material enters the confines of the dark, whereas the sublime expands upward into the light.

This characterisation of sublimation as the cause of, at best, harmless vapourware, is obviously not one that tends to be shared by artists and those in the art industry more generally. For the cognescenti, the alchemical transformation that marks the change from the solid and indeed stolid experiences of this fallen world into the elevated condition of high art is little short of miraculous. This process, including the airy gap across which the substance disappears and reappears, bears the marks of the magickal, reminiscent of an earlier, more theological age. As Peter Harrison reminds us “Some of the practitioners of alchemy also wished to claim much more for their chemical experiments that that they merely signified Divine activities or theological doctrines. Thomas Tymme, the English translator of Calvin’s commentary on Genesis, believed that God had actually used alchemical processes to create the world, bringing it forth from an elemental chaos ‘by his Halchemicall Extraction, Separation, Sublimation, and Coniunction’”. (Tymme, 1605 in Harrison, 2001). As the base material of God writ small, the paint diminishes from the palette and recongeals in angelic form on the canvas; inconsequential ink evaporates from the pen and rises unseen to trace the shape of sounds across the page. The dull and profane solidity of matter passes invisibly upward to become a second solid, a bright and sacred work of art permanently glimmering in the empyrean of the cultural imagination. This is the alternative take on sublimity favoured, and most clearly exemplified, in the work of the Romantic poets; Wordsworth for example, uses the term ’sublime’ or its derivations twenty times in his ‘Prelude’, each usage referring to some kind of elevated state which, it seems fair to say, he never articulates well, which is probably the point, since almost by definition the Romantic sublime is forever an inarticulable idea beyond expression in the charnel-house language of fallen flesh.

For Edmund Burke, whose Enquiry into the Origins of our Ideas on the Sublime and Beautiful (1757) and for Kant in his Critique of Aesthetic Judgment (1790), the sublime finds its place within the glossary of formal aesthetics, and this place illuminates the intuitions of the Romantic poets and those painters of the period who similarly aspired to this transcendent position. Interestingly, the sublime of Burke is aspirationally more lofty even than the social overview suggested by Freud. He distinguishes the sublime in art from that which is merely ‘beautiful’. The judgment of beauty, he claims, “has its origin in our social feelings, particularly in our feelings toward the other sex, and in our hope for a consolation through love and desire.” http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-570785/sublime

The production of the sublime, on the other hand, may require the mobilisation of cthonic forces which one would be hard-pressed to consider social;

“Whatever is fitted in any sort to excite the ideas of pain, and danger, that is to say, whatever is in any sort terrible, or is conversant about terrible objects, or operates in a manner analogous to terror, is a source of the sublime; that is, it is productive of the strongest emotion which the mind is capable of feeling.” (Burke, E. 1757/1998. 50)

What is more, the view from the ground, when looking up into the eyes of this sublime horror is similarly enlarged. To feel oneself the object of that terrible subject is not the detached aestheticism one feels in the presence of beauty. The height of beauty is merely that of the pedestal, whereas sublimity touches the void, and the only appropriate response, as Burke notes is one of astonishment.

“Astonishment, as I have said, is the effect of the sublime in its highest degree; the inferior effects are admiration, reverence and respect.” (ibid. 53)

It is irresistable at this point to note in passing that one, ideosyncratic etymology of the term sublime traces it to the latin super limas, which means ‘above the slime or mud of this world’. (Beattie, J. in Monk, H. 1935. 129), although Monk does comment that Beattie’s contribution is “chiefly memorable” for its “etymological aberrations.”

To return to the ground on which we began, this term ’sublimation’ has its technical origins in the laboratory and marks this odd and counter-intuitive transformation in which the intermediate stage is invisible. Instead of seeing physical change one sees upward motion, disappearance and reappearance. This chemical act is not the first use of the term however, and if we are to get to grips with the meaningfulness of the concept in its full embodiment we may need to go further back. Without wishing to evoke etymology as explanation, it is worth noting that the origins of the word ’sublime’ lie in the Latin ’sub lintel’, indicating a metaphor to do with thresholds, entrances and exits, passage across, through, or under a significant boundary. To ’sublime’, in what may seem an overly literal sense of the phrase, would mean to pass from one location to another, very different type of location; leaving the cell in which one has been confined, stepping out of the darkness into the light. The identification of the metaphor in which STATES are understood as LOCATIONS has been well explored (Lakoff & Turner. 1989. 3) and this use of the concept of the physical threshold, a transition zone in which there is no perceptible and identifiable space in which change can be observed, merely the demarcation of a line of difference, is evidently an entailment of that overall metaphor.

It seems to be a consistent theme in much writing, unfortunately beyond the scope of this piece, that part of the human condition is to be a dweller on the threshold, without definition other than as a liminal interface between the inside and the outside, the fallen and the risen, the sublimated and the repressed, the day and the night. As Samuel Beckett put it:

“Perhaps that’s what I feel, an outside and an inside and me in the middle, perhaps that’s what I am, the thing that divides the world in two, on the one side the outside, on the other the inside, that can be as thin as foil, I’m neither one side nor the other, I’m in the middle, I’m the partition, I’ve two surfaces and no thickness, perhaps that’s what I feel, myself vibrating, I’m the tympanum, on the one hand the mind, on the other the world, I don’t belong to either.” (Beckett, S. 170. 34)

(1) Almost all gasses, if frozen, will pass from solid to gas without passing through a liquid phase if the atmospheric pressure is kept very low. There are some substances however which are solid at room termperature and that undergo sublimation at atmospheric pressure. These include include phthalic anhydride (1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid anhydride), which is widely used for making paint resins. Another is terephthalic acid (1,4-benzenedicarboxylic acid), which is used form making polyester. The most common substance is probably napthalene, which is the active ingredient in mothballs. Some substances, iodine for example, appear to undergo sublimation but this is actually a different process involving an oxidation and reduction reaction.

(2) Thomas Timme, in his epistolary to Duchesne’s 1605 ‘Practise of chymicall and hermeticall physicke’, wrote, “Then shall yee see the sublimated substances clinging to the sides of the glasses”

(3) In Plato’s ideal and noble Republic, poetry and the arts were to be banned, partly because of their status as imitations (and therefore further distancing man from the light of ideal forms), but also because they cause excessive and unnatural emotions and appetites to be aroused, that is, to ‘rise up’. (Republic X.595b-608b).

References

Beckett, S. (1970). The Unnamable. New York, Grove Press.

Beattie, James. (1783) Dissertations Moral and Critical. London, 1783). Quoted in Samuel H. Monk, 1935.

Edmund., B. (1998). A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Freud, S. (1966). The Complete Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis. . New York, Norton.

Freud, S. (1989). Formulations Regarding The Two Principles in Mental Functioning. The Freud Reader. P. Gay. New York, Norton: 301-306.

Harrison, P. (2001). The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Lakoff, G. and M. Turner (1989). More than cool reason : a field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago, Ill. ; London, University of Chicago Press.

Monk, S. H. (1935). The Sublime. A study of critical theories in XVIII century England. New York, MLA.

Posted in Light, Matter, Space, Substance, Up | No Comments »