Begrepp Square (working title).
Begrepp square is a dialogue between visual artist Per Hüttner and medical researcher Elias Arnér. The two collaborated in 1992 to create “Begrepp – En Samling” an exhibition, a publication and a series of lectures discussing the role of science and art in society and how the two are interlinked.
Almost 20 years later, when both enjoy successful careers in their respective fields, with a new project raising similar questions. The project takes both a narrative and visual approach:
1. 1. Each of the two contributors pose four questions that in its turn are answered by both of them generating 16 short texts on eight subjects. (Elias, should they rather be a dialogue?)
2. Both contributors will collect images and texts and images that together constitute a research material, this will in its turn be used by the designers to create a visual collage that runs throughout the book.
Graphic design: Åbäke?
Schedule: published in 2010 for the KI anniversary?
Exhibition?:
Funding:
- KI 200 års jubileum.
- Konst i arbetsplatsen KUR?
- Kulturrådet
- Svenska författarfonden.
Per Hüttner’s eight questions.
1. 1. In 1992 we made the collaborative project “Begrepp – En Samling”. How has your relationship to art and science changed over the time that has passed?
1. 2. How does sex and violence affect your everyday activities in life and work?
1. 3. What is the role of cooking and food in your life?
1. 4. What does change mean?
1. 5. How does presentation, representation and ideas about realism and objectivity feed into your life and work?
1. 6. Is happiness a relevant term? If so what does it mean and can one person’s life be happier than another’s?
1. 7. Can we deliberately change our lives or are we pre-programmed robots that are run by our DNA or other genetic material?
1. 8. Is there such thing as freedom? If so can we be free in art and science?
Från: Per Hüttner <pah(at)swipnet.se>
Ämne: coolt...
Datum: 27 november 2007 00.33.08 CET
Till: Elias Arnér <Elias.Arner(at)ki.se>
hej elias,
spännande att se att våra frågor är så lika. Jag är sugen på att svara på alla dina frågor utom 3-5 som jag tycker är lite torra.
jag har några frågor angående hur vi skall gå vidare:
1. hur skall vi välja frågorna?
- skall vi resonera? skall jag välja bland dina och du bland mina? skall vi välja våra egna och sedan rsonera?
2. hur skall vi gå vidare med att skriva texten?
- skall vi svara helt separat? (känns ganska tråkigt)
- skall vi ha en dialog runt dem?
3. en lösning på fråga 1 och 2 är att du skriver en kort kommentar till de frågor (bland mina) som intresserar dig (och jag gör samma sak med dina) och sedan utvecklar vi detta till en gemnsam text.
P.
Hej Prallis,
Ja, det var verkligen tråkigt att vi inte kunde komma - så kul att du säger att det blev lyckat! Du får berätta mer sen.
Jag läste din projektbeskrivning av Begrepp square och det är utmärkt! Skulle verkligen vara roligt om vi kunde göra det här. Jag har inte läst andra sidan när jag skriver dessa åtta frågor (har alltså ingen aning om hur du formulerade dina frågor), men här kommer mina förslag:
- Is there really a distinct border between life and death?
- Mankind certainly has more knowledge today than 2000 years ago - but are we any wiser?
- What defines art?
- What defines science?
- What is neither art nor science?
- What is the most trivial experience anyone can have - and why is it that trivial?
- What is the purpose of it all?
- Do we all, really, have the same thoughts all of us, or are we, really, that different?
Nu ska jag trycka på "Sänd"-knappen, sedan läser jag dina frågor. Ska bli spännande! Avvaktar därefter nästa mail från dig, innan jag hör av mig igen. Nu måndag/tisdag är jag borta på internat, men jag bör ha möjlighet till mail.
Kramar,
Elias
Från: Per Hüttner <pah(at)swipnet.se>
Ämne: Re: coolt...
Datum: 30 november 2007 23.06.05 CET
Till: Elias Arnér <Elias.Arner(at)ki.se>
Svara till: pah(at)swipnet.se Hüttner <pah(at)swipnet.se>
hej elias,
vi skriver som du ager svar pa alla 16 fragor. langt eller kort.
deadline maste nog bli nyar. jag har mycket i december och vi har inge bradska.
kan du/vill du soka lite pengar sa kan du besoka www.langmanska.se.
eller sa vantar vi. jag har redan en ansokan som jag inte redovisat sa undvik mitt namn.
besos de madrid!
P
--
P e r H ü t t n e r
143 Boulevard de Magenta
75010 Paris
France
t: +33 (0)1 5319 9451
m: +33 (0)6 9931 5322
e: pah(at)swipnet.se
Crafoordsväg 14, 1 tr
113 24 Stockholm
Sweden
m: +46(0)70 728 00 18
http://www.perhuttner.com/
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:58:49 +0100
Elias Arnér wrote:
> Hej Prallis!
>
> Som sagt - kul att vi tänkte så pass lika! (vaddå
>"torra" frågor nr 3-5... ;-)) )
>
> Jag funderade också på hur vi skulle kunna gå vidare,
>ungefär i samma banor som du tänkt. Vad tror du om denna
>variant:
>
> - vi skriver, var och en, våra egna spontana
>reflektioner på samtliga frågor (d.v.s. både våra egna
>och den andres frågor), vilket får bli så långt eller
>kort som vi själva känner för och orkar med. Ska vi ha
> en deadline - två veckor? före jul? före nyår?
>
> - när vi meddelat varandra att vi är färdiga, så sätter
>vi ihop texterna i ett och samma sammanhang och ser om
>vi får någon intressant diskussion ut ur det. En variant
>är att ställa upp våra texter i två spalter under samma
>fråga (t.ex. din reflektion på en fråga i
>vänsterspalten, medan min reflektion på samma fråga löper
> parallellt i högerspalten).
>
> - vi skulle i en andra "cykel" av diskussion kunna
>kommentera delar av varandras reflektioner på de olika
>frågorna (de delar som vi tyckte behövde kommenteras)
>
> Kan detta bli något av allmänintresse?
>
> /E.
Från: Per Hüttner <pah(at)swipnet.se>
Ämne: Re: tråkiga nyheter...
Datum: 17 december 2007 23.26.20 CET
Till: Elias Arnér <Elias.Arner(at)ki.se>
hej elias,
jag blir verkligen ledsen att höra detta.
ge henne en stor kram från mig och jag skickar henne och hela familjen alla goda helande tankar!
jag säger inget till någon...
kram/P
Hej Prallis,
Tack för ditt mail. Det stämmer att mamma ligger på sjukhus och jag berättade att du hört av dig. Hon hälsar så mycket till dig! Tyvärr är det verkligen tråkiga nyheter - hon fick diagnosen akut leukemi i förra veckan och har idag fått påbörja behandling med cellgifter. Hon är ännu vid gott mod, men självklart tar detta på både kraft och humör. Hon ber dig att inte berätta för andra om diagnosen, eftersom det lätt händer att många börjar höra av sig och det lätt blir onödigt jobbigt.
Vi får höras snart igen - jag ser också fram emot att få tid att skriva svar på våra frågor!
Många kramar,
Elias
17 dec 2007 kl. 16.50 skrev Per Hüttner:
hej elias,
jag hörde att lenke ligger på sjukhus. jag hoppas att det inte är allvarligt.
hälsa henne så hemskt mycket. jag tänker på er allihop.
stor kram/P
--
________________________________________________
P e r H ü t t n e r
143 Boulevard de Magenta
75010 Paris
France
t: +33 (0)1 5319 9451
m: +33 (0)6 9931 5322
e: pah(at)swipnet.se
Crafoordsväg 14, 1 tr
113 24 Stockholm
Sweden
m: +46(0)70 728 00 18
http://www.perhuttner.com/
_______________________________________________
Från: Per Hüttner <pah(at)swipnet.se>
Ämne: preface...
Datum: 4 februari 2008 21.09.57 CET
Till: Elias Arnér <Elias.Arner(at)ki.se>
Hej Elias,
Jag hoppas att allt är bra med dig och familjen. Hur går det fär Lenke? Jag oroa mig mycket för henne och hennes hälsa. Du måste ge henne en riktigt stor kram.
Jag har funderat en hel del runt vårt projekt och jag tror att vi är på rätt väg. Men jag har skrivit en kort text där jag försöker förtydliga lite vad jag tycker är viktigt. läs och säg vad du tycker!
jag har även träffat våra designers. de är mycket sugna på projektet och den boken som vi gjort tillsammans är fantastisk! så vi har i alla fall toppen designers!!!!
kram/P
Dear Elias,
I am going through our questions and I realise how strange my mind is. Those of your questions that I did not particularly find interesting in the beginning, are the ones that I like the most now. I also realise that some of my questions were far more a provocation, than real questions and that they somehow miss out on the poetry and the essence of what you and I both try to do in our different and yet similar ways with art and science.
Dear Prallis,
Well - the wonderful aspect of being human, is to be able to think, contemplate, and develop our mind within our own life-time. Rather remarkably so, I must say. Our mind (biologically) is so flexible and dynamic - it just needs the right stimulation and our own inherent interest to think and contemplate, as a stimulus for development. I believe that discussions and dialogues are the basis of human development as a whole. It is through the process of thinking and of discussing, that we may find new aspects of life, new thoughts, and new ideas that subsequently can be put to use in our material world. Look back - what wonderful development (and also sometimes horrific development) has mankind not gone through in the last couple of years, decennia, centennia, millenia... But, it has always (at least the last couple of thousands of years) been the same brain (biologically, that is) - thereby illustrating the remarkable capacity to think and develop mentally that we have, us humans.
But what is far more important, is that I can feel in my bones exactly how we should approach this project. I know what we need to accomplish. But I am less sure that I am able to formulate it. I know at the bottom of my soul that we have something extremely important to contribute with, something that we need to share between us and also to share with the people that surround us on in our lives. We can do something which is far bigger than the sum of our (p)arts.
I believe that what we can do and what we can provide - to ourselves and to the benefit of others - is the power of dialogue. By having our shared interest in looking at aspects of creativity, of being, of substance, we can contribute to the development of ideas. That - development of ideas - is the very basis of mankind, as I see it. The powerful and interesting "twist" to our current discussion, yours and mine, is the fact that we have such different frameworks of reference. Art and biochemistry, performances in galleries or lectures in lecture halls. Or are we that different, really? Do we not just try to reach the essence of life, using two different vessels on our two journeys? Or do we perhaps sit in the very same vessel, just on different chairs? Or, do we actually sit on the same chair, next to each other? I would like to think that we do.
So, rather than answering any of the questions, I move on to formulating something that could be a preface. I want to think a little bit about what the essence of this project and publication ought to be. I do not want to run away from the core questions while I chasing some detail.
True - that is why I liked to react to these writing of yours. But, I will also try to start anwsering the questions as well. I send my first draft of answers as an attachment to this e-mail.
The fact that we made Begrepp - En Samling some 16 years ago offers the very key to the sequel. It is all about time and how time and age change who we are and what we do and more than anything - how we do it.
Sure - that gives us a natural outer framework for this project. But, really, the core of this discussion is clearly the essence of our questions and answers, or reflections during the process. What frightens me though, are two risks: i) perhaps our discussion becomes too cumbersome or "boring" to follow, so that nobody (not even ourselves) will follow it? Then it would not fill any purpose. And, ii) maybe we can not formulate our inner thoughts well enough - maybe we'll never reach those answers and insights that we so eagerly search for....
Because, we still do the same things that we did back then. We do it for the same reasons, but we do it differently and we expect to get other rewards from our respective practice. This is one of the two main questions that I want to address in this project. But, my question is not really about quantifying the differences between then and now. Because this is totally coincidental and define you as an individual and me as a person - we are not important. We need to address something that is far bigger than you and I in this project.
Right, this comes back to what I already wrote, above. It is the idea, the development of ideas and novel insights, that is the goal for discussions and dialogues. That is always true, but perhaps more outspokingly true within this project. I hope our discussions, when read and followed, can lead to insights that had not been there, had we not had this project running. If so, then we've truly accomplished what we have aimed for!
The question that I am raising is more about the very fabric of time and change. How we are bound to do things differently because of age, experience and maturity. How time and age changes us in the fabric of what we are as human beings. We can embrace and understand reality in a very different way as we grow older. Like everything in life, there are pros and cons in these changes. In certain ways, we are stronger and more confident and more formulated. In other ways, we are far less malleable and mobile than we were before. But the real question is to what degrees the changes that we go though in life are pre-programmed and to what degree we are able to shape the changes that occur in life. To what degree are we able to change our lives and things around us?
That is a very interesting question and concept. In fact, rather natural to discuss in terms of biological evolution and Darwinism. Since all individual creatures, or species if you so wish - but better here to talk of individuals - are a bit different, have a bit different experiences and talents (learnt as well as inherited), this sets the stage for development. The fact that we react somewhat differently to the same situation, to the same discussion or setting, gives the possibility for finding the best solution in each case (but it also gives rise to failures in each and every instance, by the less successful organisms or individuals at a given moment, which is the downside of development or evolution). So, I firmly believe that we react differently to the situations in which we act. BUT - having said that - I also think that there is a given and eternal "truth", or best possible solution, in each given moment. With our differences in background, interest and talents, we have different chances of finding that truth in each instance, but the absolute truth is there, somewhere. There are no alternative solutions that are all as good as the other. There may be many different solutions that are just as much wrong as compared to the true solution, but there is only one real truth. That truth, must clearly encompass all our different experiences, talents and aspects of life - and all of those aspects that we still do not know of - but it is there, somewhere. Our struggles in life, our discussions, our development and evolution, is all about coming nearer to that truth. Becoming wiser, closer to reality and the essence of being. And - I must say in this setting - that truth is not any religion or deity, I believe. It is simply the natural essence of existence. Our different activities as humans - be it as artist, writer, scientist, physician, priest or clerk - are just different paths filling our lives while we, inevitably, come closer and closer to that essence of being. Whether we are aware of this or not, that is the case, I believe.
My second question is connected to the driving force behind what we do - you with your research and I with my art. In the end we do what we do to fill our lives with meaning, just as we do it in order to bring something positive and good to the world. It is not a small thing for a human being to contribute to one's community. But to answer how we can contribute to a society is not an easy question. Anyone who has worked for a charity and for a good cause knows that this is indeed a very tough and complicated task. It is hard, not only because it is difficult to do good. But also because unless we also do it for ourselves, the act of doing good will be an empty one. To do good, can never be a self-negating process. It has to encompass the joy of doing and creating. Generosity has to be provided for very selfish reasons.
Yes, you are right. We do what we do, because we feel good about it. And we are good at doing it. And we enjoy it (hopefully). And we have not found other paths in life that have attracted us more than the paths we have actually chosen. If we would have, then we should have changed our lives already. Yes, there are circumstances and there are more or less of opportunities arising in our lives (and sometimes we can not help our reaction to them). But still, in the longer perspective, it is how we react to life as it presents itself, that determines what we do. So we can never blame anyone else than ourselves for what we do. What is our driving force? I think it is a combination of our inherited talents (and lack of other talents), our interests and our feeling of doing what is the best we can do under the circumstances. But what determines what is the best thing to do? I believe, again, that we have some endogenous compass that somehow feels the direction of that essence of being. The truth of existence. What we do in our lives, is to walk the path most suitable for us - as individuals - in order to come closer to that absolute truth. Most of us walk that path without realizing, that this is what we do.
There are important parallels between what we do. We need to let this project and this book focus on us reflecting on why it is that we do what we do. We need to think about what it is that bring us back to the working place every morning and why we do it with such joy. What are the things that compel us to go on, when so many of our friends and colleagues give up? I think it is also in this common space that the project will become important for other people and it is also here that we will find the joy in realising it.
--
I think that already this discussion and dialogue - in this e-mail - has started to touch upon those questions. I agree with you - those over-riding questions are of major interest. Why do we do what we do? If you agree with me - that there is an absolute truth - what would that truth be, then? Perhaps, trying to answer are questions and continuing our discussion, will lead us closer to the answers on those questions, closer to the essence of being. After all, without discussing these issues, how would we then get any wiser?
Do you know what? I started this e-mail by saying that I should also give my reflections on the specific questions that we raised. But I have changed my mind. This discussion, as we've now had it, was much too important in itself. However, let us return to the questions soon. To the essence of being -the truth of life and existence.
Dear Elias,
Maybe you are right. Maybe there is an absolute and all encompassing truth out there. I am sure that it can be like a beacon guiding men and women to enrich their lives and at the same time that of other humans - whether it be through art, philosophy, science or by simply doing good deeds. I know you well enough to know that you are unyielding, positive and restless in your search for answers and I can see that this outlook on life suits you.
But let us not ignore the fact that you and I share our views in certain aspects of life and yet we are diametrically opposites in others. It is both these similarities and differences that make our dialogue worthwhile. So, what I look for in my life and art is something ever so slightly different than you do. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, I am looking for truths that function in a given time and context and which can change quickly. As a matter of fact, what I am researching for the moment in my work is the malleability of reality. I am looking at instances where our realities can change in a moment even if nothing has changed that can be measured or conceived. I will give you an example.
A man kisses his wife as they sit down at a waiting area in an airport. People are milling past by the hundreds and all of sudden the man sitting next to the wife gets up and another takes his place. The event is as trivial as it can get. It takes place millions of times a day in public waiting areas around the globe. But in this instance, the person sitting down next to the woman is the man that she has been sleeping with for almost a year - a fact that almost lead the married man to divorce. In the eyes of everyone, but the three human beings implied in the drama, nothing has changed. But for them, the whole experience of reality is totally and irreversibly changed.
To put it differently, I am engaged with the inner reality of human beings and especially how certain events that are specific to each of us can make us switch reality in an instant. It is the rabbit hole in Kansas and Alice falling through the mirror, the little boy who finds that his wardrobe is a portal to a world full of knights, dragons and beautiful princesses and hundreds of similar stories.
I am sure that the event in the airport is compatible with a universal truth. It does not seem farfetched. But at the same time, I am unsure whether it makes sense to discuss it in this context. What is important in life and in this world, is that each single human being on the planet fills his or her everyday reality with meaning. I believe we do so by finding a struggle that makes sense to each individual. Your struggle is to put pieces to the puzzle that add up to a universal truth. Mine, is to provoke my audience and people around me into making their everyday lives deeper and more meaningful. To find the magic and beauty in the details that surrounds us and through that have a slightly different gaze on their reality and future.
I think this is also where our conversation becomes important for other people. It is by investigating the parallels and differences in what we do. Because ultimately we both try to understand the world that surrounds us and through that procure as much joy as it is humanly possible. Or I can rephrase that more cynically and say that we work as much as we can and stay busy in order for our minds not to be flooded by melancholia or spleen. Personally, I think that both formulations are equally true, but I choose to subscribe to the former. Because by doing so, I give more joy to myself and through that also to the people that surround me. I could explain this as being an argument where we either see the glass as being half-full or half-empty. But, in my experience the majority of the inhabitants of this planet spend their lives worrying about problems that "could" occur or complaining about the fact that they are victims of events that are long past. What life has taught me, is that when a problem arises one looks at the situation and tries to find the best possible solution.
Here, I arrive at another aspect where art and science converge. Because to find the best solution, one is forced to sometimes go outside what one has done before and what people take for granted. But how does one think a thought that has not been thought before? If we look at it rationally that is impossible. You say that is by dialoguing. But really because two people spar each other intellectually, does not explain how truly new ideas can materialise. You as a scientist will say that it is simply by studying the universe. Well yes, but as you have already explained our universe changes far slower than humanity and yet new philosophies, arts and technologies develops all the time - and all these are conceptual and mental breakthroughs. So, there is a gap between our experience and rationality. Some inventions are simply based on a misunderstanding that allows us to think differently. But in my work with my students, I see that it is also a question of training. They are often stuck in a pattern of thinking that is traditional and they cannot move on because of this. But by opening their minds to the irrational and unexpected, they learn to be more creative and innovative. I see that society proclaims that it supports new and inventive ways of thinking. But ever since we were children we have been told to be good. We are taught how to think inside the box and to please our teachers and elders. When we are quiet and make up our rooms we are given new toys. But it is in chaos that new thoughts develop.
At the same time, we live in a meritology where new inventions and thoughts are premiered. All the great men and women of history broke with the social and intellectual mould and came up with something that went against the accepted norms and rules. It is true that we cannot have a world solely inhabited by Einsteins, Copernicuses, Kleins and Goyas. But I think there is an inherent schizophrenia in our society, where the main force is to keep everything the way it has always been. There is a deep-rooted fear for the unknown and what you and I have always shared is the opposite - a true and incurable curiosity for the unknown and challenging.
In keeping with this spirit, I am researching to what degree rationality is an arbitrary system that primarily works to give us reassurance and at the same time leads us away from a world which is truer - but also far less predictable and safe. But by clinging onto rationality as the only form to describe reality, we also miss out on other forms of communicating. Poetry for instance, is another form to describe reality. To take an example, when Tarkowsky introduces the Zone in the beginning of Stalker, he stipulates that the world inside the fences operates differently than what we are used to. Virtually everything looks the normal inside the Zone, but the Stalker, the Scientist and the Writer act according to another logic. It is a miniscule shift in reality, but his allows the filmmaker to create an extremely forceful and poetic story (that also discusses the limits of art and science).
This is why I reply to your questions with stories rather than with an academic discourse. I find it is limiting and in the context of what I want to do, it is also a blunter tool to address the issues at hand. Because to my knowledge there are no scientific or academic tools to define what you feel when you make love to the person that you love. Just like there is no rational way to explain how we can know when something important happens to a person that we know well even when he or she is on the other side of the globe.
I try to look for ways to open our minds to the world instead of shutting out possible ways. All though systems are by default jealous. They do not like others to exist. Norms enforce this jealousy by any means necessary. Rationality sits on creativity and smothers its every expression. But rather than accepting this, I fight back for the things that I believe in. You know that I have always found my own way and I am sure that that is one of the many things that you and I share. We will both continue to do so until I die.
Från: Elias Arnér <Elias.Arner(at)ki.se>
Ämne: Re: preface...
Datum: 15 april 2008 02.59.18 CEST
Till: Per Hüttner <pah(at)swipnet.se>
Hej Prallis!
Jag sitter nu på flyget tillbaka från Vancouver (där jag varit på ett helgmöte för tidskriftsredaktörer) och tänkte att - äntligen - ska jag börja med reflektioner på våra frågor. Dels kommenterar jag dina reflektioner nedan (direkt i mailet), dels försöker jag ta mig an frågorna i sig. Så att projektet går vidare....
I övrigt rullar allting på för fullt. Vi beslutade till slut (efter väldigt mycket tankearbete) att inte flytta till USA (den här gången). Vi stannar alltså i Stockholm och fortsätter mer eller mindre i tidigare banor.
Med mamma är det förvånansvärt bra. Hon svarade på cellgifterna och har nu goda blodvärden utan detekterbar kvarvarande leukemi. Det innebär förstås inte att allt är garanterat bra, men det är så bra det kan vara vad gäller behandlingssvar. Skulle inte förvåna mig om hon så småningom blir 100 år (och mer därtill).
Hoppas allt bra med dig!
Låt oss hålla kontakten - mer eller mindre sporadiskt, som vi alltid gör. Jag ser fram emot vad du tycker om det jag skrivit som svar på ditt!
Varma kramar,
Elias
4 feb 2008 kl. 21.09 skrev Per Hüttner:
Hej Elias,
Jag hoppas att allt är bra med dig och familjen. Hur går det fär Lenke? Jag oroa mig mycket för henne och hennes hälsa. Du måste ge henne en riktigt stor kram.
Jag har funderat en hel del runt vårt projekt och jag tror att vi är på rätt väg. Men jag har skrivit en kort text där jag försöker förtydliga lite vad jag tycker är viktigt. läs och säg vad du tycker!
jag har även träffat våra designers. de är mycket sugna på projektet och den boken som vi gjort tillsammans är fantastisk! så vi har i alla fall toppen designers!!!!
kram/P
Dear Elias,
I am going through our questions and I realise how strange my mind is. Those of your questions that I did not particularly find interesting in the beginning, are the ones that I like the most now. I also realise that some of my questions were far more a provocation, than real questions and that they somehow miss out on the poetry and the essence of what you and I both try to do in our different and yet similar ways with art and science.
Dear Prallis,
Well - the wonderful aspect of being human, is to be able to think, contemplate, and develop our mind within our own life-time. Rather remarkably so, I must say. Our mind (biologically) is so flexible and dynamic - it just needs the right stimulation and our own inherent interest to think and contemplate, as a stimulus for development. I believe that discussions and dialogues are the basis of human development at a whole. It is through the process of thinking and of discussing, that we may find new aspects of life, new thoughts, and new ideas that subsequently can be put to use in our material world. Look back - what wonderful development (and also sometimes horrific development) has mankind not gone through in the last couple of years, decennia, centennia, millenia... But, it has always (at least the last couple of thousands of years) been the same brain (biologically, that is) - thereby illustrating the remarkable capacity to think and develop mentally that we have, us humans.
But what is far more important, is that I can feel in my bones exactly how we should approach this project. I know what we need to accomplish. But I am less sure that I am able to formulate it. I know at the bottom of my soul that we have something extremely important to contribute with, something that we need to share between us and also to share with the people that surround us on in our lives. We can do something which is far bigger than the sum of our (p)arts.
I believe that what we can do and what we can provide - to ourselves and to the benefit of others - is the power of dialogue. By having our shared interest in looking at aspects of creativity, of being, of substance, we can contribute to the development of ideas. That - development of ideas - is the very basis of mankind, as I see it. The powerful and intersting "twist" to our current discussion, yours and mine, is the fact that we have such different frameworks of reference. Art and biochemistry, performances in galleries or lectures in lecture halls. Or are we that different, really? Do we not just try to reach the essence of life, using two different vessels on our two journeys? Or do we perhaps sit in the very same vessel, just on different chairs? Or, do we actually sit on the same chair, next to each other? I would like to think that we do.
So, rather than answering any of the questions, I move on to formulating something that could be a preface. I want to think a little bit about what the essence of this project and publication ought to be. I do not want to run away from the core questions while I chasing some detail.
True - that is why I liked to react to these writing of yours. But, I will also try to start anwsering the questions as well. I send my first draft of answers as an attachment to this e-mail.
The fact that we made Begrepp - En Samling some 16 years ago offers the very key to the sequel. It is all about time and how time and age change who we are and what we do and more than anything - how we do it.
Sure - that gives us a natural outer framework for this project. But, really, the core of this discusssion is clearly the essence of our questions and answers, or reflections during the process. What frightens me though, are two risks: i) perhaps our discussion becomes too cumbersome or "boring" to follow, so that nobody (not even ourselves) will follow it? Then it would not fill any purpose. And, ii) maybe we can not formulate our inner thoughts well enough - maybe we'll never reach those answers and insights that we so eagerly search for....
Because, we still do the same things that we did back then. We do it for the same reasons, but we do it differently and we expect to get other rewards from our respective practice. This is one of the two main questions that I want to address in this project. But, my question is not really about quantifying the differences between then and now. Because this is totally coincidental and define you as an individual and me as a person - we are not important. We need to address something that is far bigger than you and I in this project.
Right, this comes back to what I already wrote, above. It is the idea, the development of ideas and novel insights, that is the goal for discussions and dialogues. That is always true, but perhaps more outspokingly true within this project. I hope our discussions, when read and followed, can lead to insights that had not been there, had we not had this project running. If so, then we've truly accomplished what we have aimed for!
The question that I am raising is more about the very fabric of time and change. How we are bound to do things differently because of age, experience and maturity. How time and age changes us in the fabric of what we are as human beings. We can embrace and understand reality in a very different way as we grow older. Like everything in life, there are pros and cons in these changes. In certain ways, we are stronger and more confident and more formulated. In other ways, we are far less malleable and mobile than we were before. But the real question is to what degrees the changes that we go though in life are pre-programmed and to what degree we are able to shape the changes that occur in life. To what degree are we able to change our lives and things around us?
That is a very interesting question and concept. In fact, rather natural to discuss in terms of biological evolution and Darwinism. Since all individual creatures, or species if you so wish - but better here to talk of individuals - are a bit different, have a bit different experiences and talents (learnt as well as inherited), this sets the stage for development. The fact that we react somewhat differently to the same situation, to the same discussion or setting, gives the possibility for finding the best solution in each case (but it also gives rise to failures in each and every instance, by the less successful organisms or individuals at a given moment, which is the downside of development or evolution). So, I firmly believe that we react differently to the situations in which we act. BUT - having said that - I also think that there is a given and eternal "truth", or best possible solution, in each given moment. With our differences in background, interest and talents, we have different chances of finding that truth in each instance, but the absolute truth is there, somewhere. There are no alternative solutions that are all as good as the other. There may be many different solutions that are just as much wrong as compared to the true solution, but there is only one real truth. That truth, must clearly encompass all our different experiences, talents and aspects of life - and all of those aspects that we still do not know of - but it is there, somewhere. Our struggles in life, our discussions, our development and evolution, is all about coming nearer to that truth. Becoming wiser, closer to reality and the essence of being. And - I must say in this setting - that truth is not any religion or deity, I believe. It is simply the natural essence of existence. Our different activities as humans - be it as artist, writer, scientist, physician, priest or clerk - are just different paths filling our lives while we, unevitably, come closer and closer to that essence of being. Wether we are aware of this or not, that is the case, I beleive.
My second question is connected to the driving force behind what we do. You with your research and I with my art. In the end we do what we do to fill our lives with meaning, just as we do it in order to bring something positive and good to the world. It is not a small thing for a human being to contribute to one's community. But to answer how we can contribute to a society is not an easy question. Anyone who has worked for a charity and for a good cause knows that this is indeed a very tough and complicated task. It is hard, not only because it is difficult to do good. But also because unless we also do it for ourselves, the act of doing good will be an empty one. To do good, can never be a self-negating process. It has to encompass the joy of doing and creating. Generosity has to be provided for very selfish reasons.
Yes, you are right. We do what we do, because we feel good about it. And we are good at doing it. And we enjoy it (hopefully). And we have not found other paths in life that have attracted us more than the paths we have actually choosen. If we would have, then we should have changed our lives already. Yes, there are circumstances and there are more or less of opportunities arising in our lives (and sometimes we can not help our reaction to them). But still, in the longer perspective, it is how we react to life as it presents itself, that determines what we do. So we can never blame anyone else than ourselves for what we do. What is our driving force? I think it is a combination of our inherited talents (and lack of other talents), our interests and our feeling of doing what is the best we can do under the circumstances. But what determines what is the best thing to do? I believe, again, that we have some endogenous compass that somehow feels the direction of that essence of being. The truth of existence. What we do in our lives, is to walk the path most suitable for us - as individuals - in order to come closer to that absolute truth. Most of us walk that path without realizing, that this is what we do.
There are important parallels between what we do. We need to let this project and this book focus on us reflecting on why it is that we do what we do. We need to think about what it is that bring us back to the working place every morning and why we do it with such joy. What are the things that compel us to go on, when so many of our friends and colleagues give up? I think it is also in this common space that the project will become important for other people and it is also here that we will find the joy in realising it.
--
I think that already this discussion and dialogue - in this e-mail - has started to touch upon those questions. I agree with you - those over-riding questions are of major interest. Why do we do what we do? If you agree with me - that there is an absolute truth - what would that truth be, then? Perhaps, trying to answer are questions and continuing our discussion, will lead us closer to the anwers on those questions, closer to the essence of being. After all, without discussing these issues, how would we then get any wiser?
Do you know what? I started this e-mail by saying that I should also give my reflections on the specific questions that we raised. But I have changed my mind. This discussion, as we've now had it, was much too important in itself. However, let us return to the questions soon. To the essence of being. The truth of life and existence.
________________________________________________
P e r H ü t t n e r
143 Boulevard de Magenta
75010 Paris
France
t: +33 (0)1 5319 9451
m: +33 (0)6 9931 5322
e: pah(at)swipnet.se
Crafoordsväg 14, 1 tr
113 24 Stockholm
Sweden
m: +46(0)70 728 00 18
http://www.perhuttner.com/
_______________________________________________
Dear Prallis,
I think that the potential differences between me and you that we are currently discussing, in terms of our different goals or our different views of life, are actually determined by a simple matter of scale. And of course focus of our professions. In fact, I believe most (all?) things are. Let me illustrate with a table, just giving a few examples of potential differences in scale and fields of focus for a few different professions:
Profession
Scale (object of interest)
Focus/goal of profession
Astronomer
From the initial condition of Big Bang to thousands of light years (Universe)
Understanding the concepts, evolution and structure of the Universe in physical terms
Novelist
From limited dm-scale (the physical book) to the imaginary scale (the psychological impact of a novel in behold of the reader)
Exploring the human mind, relations and existence through reasoning and story-telling
Artist
From the scale of the object of the art itself, to the imaginary scale (the impact in the mind of the observer)
Exploring the human mind, relations and existence through the complexity and impact of art
Hairdresser
Scale of a hairdresser studio, and that of different hair-cuts
Exploring, trimming and making different hairstyles
Biochemist
From molecules (usually from Ångström scale to µm scale) to the impact on organisms
Exploring and understanding the chemistry in life of organisms
Physician
Usually from the scale of the biochemists to the meter scale (patients), unless epidemiology, having a scale up to the size of the globe
Understanding the function of human beings and treating human disease
Soccer player
From several-meter scale (on the soccer field) to world-wide impact (TV-audience and global betting firms)
Perfecting the game of soccer
Psychiatrist
Imaginary scale of the mind
Understanding the human mind and treating psychiatric disease
Chef
Up to several-meter scale (from cooking ingredients to the scale of a kitchen and restaurant)
Perfecting culinary experiences
…
…
…
Now, the interesting question is: are these different scales and professions not merely addressing different aspects of the same existing world? Of course they are!
We all exist in the same Universe, as studied by the Astronomer, and we are all moved in one way or the other by that novel we just read. We probably wish to have a certain hairstyle when visiting the Hairdresser, who clearly deals with a hair governed by processes as described and studied by the Biochemist. We all contract diseases at some time needing the attention of the Physician, and we may all hear of the latest soccer game result (perhaps we also watched it). All this we are doing, using our minds – that complex phenomenon studied by the Psychiatrist – and we all certainly enjoy a delicious meal as prepared by that excellent Chef.
So, what is the “truth” to anyone of us? What is the goal of our professions? What is right and what is wrong, if anything? I firmly believe that the answer, in each individual case, will be governed by our scale and focus, as illustrated in the table above. Moreover, I also believe that – yes – there exists some basic truth that is true for all of us, no matter what scale we are using. Naturally, that is I as a scientist stating this. I believe that the Universe is one single Universe that holds the same principal machinery for all of us (even if that machinery involves splitting the Universe into multiple Universes at each event of a choice – then that mechanism holds true for all of us). I believe that the processes of our atoms interacting with each other are the same for all of us, and I believe that the inner mechanisms of life, of mind, of matter are the same for all of us. The differences lay in differences of scale, and of complexity. The apparent contrasts in life depend upon interrelationships between persons, individuals or matter, that may be different from one time to the other, giving rise to complex patterns exceedingly hard to comprehend or understand. But the underlying mechanisms, and thereby the truth, is the same for us all.
Let me end these paragraphs with a short recollection of a conversation I had a couple of weeks ago: At a dinner, I came into a discussion about the biochemistry of the mind, and I said (as I firmly believe) that the mind, really, is not anything else than an array of exceedingly complex biochemical reactions. There is nothing in the mind, which is “beyond” biochemistry. Some people at that dinner reacted very aggressively to this statement. They said “But that is terrible! Then we have no free will!” I simply answered that, “Well, we may have the illusion of having a free will. We can certainly make choices – or at least we have the sense of making choices.” I then also replied with a simple question: “So, if there would be something else that constitutes a ‘free will’ – what kind of mechanisms would govern what choices that free will was making, and how would it be ‘free’ if it then indeed decided the choices that we make?” I thought that nobody could answer that question in any satisfactory way. It also surprisingly felt like they had never contemplated on these issues, which indeed surprised me quite a lot.
So – whether we have a free will or not – how should we act in life and what choices should we make? I think that being humans, we should aim for being humane. We should aim for minimizing suffering and increase happiness. It does not matter if those feelings are merely biochemical processes and nothing more (how could they be?) – we all know what suffering is and how devastating suffering may be to a person, and we all know that we feel good of happiness. Basing our actions on that knowledge, it becomes rather easy to formulate practices that overall aim at minimizing suffering and increasing happiness. That is, I believe, the underlying principle of mankind, which eventually resulted in the different flavours of religions and of civil law that we have today around the globe. The different aspects of different religions and different systems of law, as found in different cultures and countries, are simply the differences in historical settings and cultures affecting the processes leading to some kind of consensus, or at least some strongest principle at a certain place and time of human culture. But, underlying all of this, we all obey to the same general principles of truth and systems of existence. As individuals, we approach those principles, that truth, those processes, by focusing on different aspects of life and using different scales. You, as an artist. I, as a biochemist.
Dear Elias,
I find your reasoning about scale fascinating, it really kick-started my imagination. I understand that your chart is just an outline and a catalyst for thoughts of different kinds, rather than something complete and finished. But, I would still like to add a few things to your list. The first is relatively simple: Number plays into scale. To exemplify this, we can think about what the difference is between a City Planner in a small Croatian town with a few thousand inhabitants (with many old people and the young leaving) and his colleague who works in Ho Chi Min City or Beijing where hundreds of thousands of new homes need to be created every year for people who move from the countryside.
We can also look at how time affects scale and discuss linear, cyclical and emotional time. This allows us to come back to where this dialogue first started. That each member of humanity that changes according to a pattern, so that we do things when we are 40 that we would never dream of doing when we are 20. We tend to be greatly idealist and visionary when we are young and our concerns change as we move through life and they become more pragmatic and focused on the family and loved ones.
But time and number is relatively easy. Because what really strikes me, is that you stay in Newtonian physics in your reflection on scale. What we are compelled to do, is to reflect on what happens to scale in the 5th, 10th or nth dimension? Here the brain is forced to stretch itself towards its own limitations and in the end this is the point that joins us in our efforts. We share the will to challenge ourselves and the people around us to the limit. Exactly which form this will take in the exhibition remains to be seen. But it is something that we need to develop together. I need to to think more about how to develop this.
You also write about free will which always inspires me greatly. It is a fundamental and recurring question in my artistic practice. I agree with certain things that you say and disagree with other. But rather than engaging in a traditional dialectic, I would like to raise a few issues related to free will that I am curious to hear what you as a scientist think about.
I am sure that you meet researchers, thinkers and scientists who have made breakthroughs that you can return to time and time again and you always get just as excited and inspired by. The ability to generously motivate other people through one's own actions, creations and conceptual breakthroughs is a wonderful human gift. But that cannot be quantified. How many inches more inspiring is the work of Galileo than that of Shakespeare or how many minutes longer can you be motivated by Heizenberger's and Bohr's contribution to mankind than that of Duchamp or Deleuze? These kinds of comparisons are just as pointless as trying to convince your neighbour that you love your children more than he does.
All the same, it is safe to say that there are certain people, thoughts and concepts that remain hugely inspiring and they remain exiting year after year - while others fade. This is also where I see my role as artist and human being taking shape. I want to enjoy life and develop myself as a living entity and through that process inspire other people. It is dialogue and exchange. The more I can inspire people around me, the more motivated I feel myself. Whether this is an outcome of fate, a biological process or divine fate I really do not care. I know that I have worked very hard to get to where I am today. I have made many controversial and unexpected choices, but I have made my choices. I have been on very long detours. I have been very lost, but I have always found my way back to the visionary self that I have inside of me and that I know is at the centre of who I am.
So, here we arrive at a fundamental question. Because according to tradition the scientist is seen as someone who only studies nature and comes closer to a description of nature that is less of an approximation than the scientist before him had achieved. Einstein's theories describe nature in a wider sense than Newton had done before. But, do you think that inspiration can be defined by science? Maybe it is only a biochemical process in our brain and body that can be replicated with a pill? I don't think so.
And it gets more complicated. Because all the great men and woman of history have had a vision of the world that they formulate based on something that remains virtually impossible to define - a hunch, a premonition or just a sense of intuition. We all know that Einstein did not get the Nobel prize for the theory of relativity, because it was too controversial. It took many years before it could be proven and thus accepted. So, where do these visions of the world come from? (and is that important to define?)
I really do not think that there are any answers to these questions. But it is important to think about it and let them be mantras in our practices. We do both look for new ways of approaching the world and our specific fields in specific. So, let's just dwell on where new ideas come from. Because I find it sad and rather tragic wit people who say that everything has already been done and there is nothing new under the sun. But that is their problem and not ours.
- Is there really a distinct border between life and death?
They were laying nude in bed. The big, blond girl had her right arm behind the dark, small young woman's head who dug her left index finger into her lover's belly button. She twitched and lovingly brushes the finger away. The dark girl roles over on her back, pulls up the blanket and looks straight into the monochrome white ceiling. The blond girl continues one of the many conversations that the two are juggling at the same time,
"Yeah right, if you were my grand dad in a previous existence. You might as well have been my dog, right?"
The dark girl answers by rolling over and hitting her lover lovingly on the cheek,
"I am serious, maybe we have been approaching each other over the decades that have passed. You died a good 65 years ago and since then you were reborn as a mosquito, a dog, a horse, a flower and then you came back in your form."
"So, how come you have been a human being all along?"
"I never said that. When you were a horse I might have been a flee on your back."
"I am sure you bit me."
The dark girl gnawed on her lover's arm,
"Ouch, that hurt."
"I am sorry."
They kissed to make up. The blond girl tries to seduce her partner into making love again, but she lovingly stops her and says, "I am sure that I was some sort of asexual amoeba in my previous existence."
"Why, because you are a lesbian?"
"I really do not see myself as that. More as someone who is not defined by sexual boundaries."
The blonde girl stiffens as if the words were a personal critique of her being.
"Don't worry. It has nothing to do with my love for you. The way I feel for you is grounded and solid."
The words make her relax and she picks up her train of thought, "So, where does this journey of yours as a series of sexless flees and amoebas lead you?"
"Well, it seems like it has brought me to you which is a very nice experience. But I can also feel that we have met before. Mysteriously enough, you keep conjuring up this distorted image of my granddad in my head. So, I thought that that could be the connection. But I am not sure and I really do not care."
"It is true that it is strange that we only know each other for a week and yet I feel like you have always been there, as if I have always know you."
"Exactly."
"Yeah, but that could also be some sort of genetic memory of love and affection that has nothing to do with you and me. But simply how our scents, hormones and bodies vibrate in a special way."
- What defines science?
He woke up. He had slept deep, but the pain between his legs had given him a sense of unrest in his deep rest. His wife could feel him stirring deep in her dreams and she groaned slightly and reached out an arm to hold him. He folded back her arm and kissed her gently on the head. She made another sound of disagreement, turned around and curled up seemingly in protest, but continued to sleep.
He looked at the clock at the tall church-tower across the street. It blinked 05:15 flirtatiously and he sat down at the surveillance table with a bottle of sparkling water and a glass that he had gotten in the kitchen. A gentle spring breeze from the lake kissed his brow from the open window in the hallway, bringing with it the smell of blooming Jasmines that his wife kept on the windowsill. He could see the lights of the fishing boats in the distance and he felt a tinge of annoyance as he glanced at his two interconnected scanning grids and viewing obelisk that had rather deepened his problems than helped to resolve them.
He needed to think. No, he mentally slapped himself to correct that misguided reflection. He needed to act. But this time he needed to act differently and far more reflected than he had done so far. But first, it was yet again time to evaluate the situation, to backtrack, to figure out what had happened and how he had ended up in the position he was in. He needed to do something drastic about the condition that kept haunting him. He was a brilliant researcher equipped with a knife-sharp mind. His rationality was going to bring back the equilibrium in his life.
The basic problem was the phases that his wife kept going through. She had gone through them ever since they had gotten married. The first time it had happened he had been overjoyed. But after a while, he started to sense a wee bit of annoyance peeking through the door of his mind and it deteriorated to the point where sometimes it almost killed him.
The most difficult part of it all was that her phases were completely unpredictable. They could last two days or three weeks and they could come six weeks apart or just a few days after the previous had ended. They could be more or less violent and intensive.
He had very reluctantly talked to his wife about her way of being. She had replied with shame in her voice that she had no way of controlling her body. Once she was in one of her phases, it was as if demons took control of her and she could not do anything to hold herself back. They had discussed it at length and in the end he got even more worried by their talk. He asked himself, what happened when he was away on a conference and she got this violent urge? She had assured him that there were ways that she could satisfy herself and she assured him by explaining that there were films and literature to help her. She had after all lived 22 years alone before they got married and managed relatively well on her own. Her calming words had upset him even more. Whenever he went on a working trip, he was haunted by horrible visions of his wife satisfying her desires in the most monstrous of ways. This took place both in his dreams and when he was awake. Rationally he trusted her and he had all the reasons to. But at the same time his emotions would drive him wild with unfounded jealousy.
They had gone to a doctor to ask if there were any medications that could help them. But the doctor had only laughed and said that "they should be happy to be young and vigorous" and not given them any advice in either direction. He had insisted that the situation was only a sign that they were both healthy.
But he did not like the world to be unpredictable and capricious. To him the world was governed by rules that could be established and the future could be predicted if only the data was collected in the right way. To prove his point he always said proudly, that he and his wife had found each other through a hormone-matching scheme that had been developed to simplify match-making and apart from the small glitch with her phases it had proven extremely successful. They loved each other deeply and their life together was rich despite the fact that they had few interests in common.
Ever since he was a child he had always found a logical and rational solution to every little problem in life. This time, like before, when all other solutions had failed, he had approached the dilemma with rigour. He had set up an elaborate scanning and surveillance system to overlook how his wife's reproductive system changed when she was in and out of her phases.
Every morning and every evening, he had placed her on a table and mastered the scanning device to measure every crevice and hormone level of her internal organs. He compiled an impressive amount of data and he knew so much about his wife and her whirlwind insides that it was enough to base a major survey on it. In the beginning he had felt reassured about the numbers and their development. He kept evaluating them and they seemed to make wonderful sense.
But as time progressed the data started its own mutiny. He had seen this before. The subjects responded to being under scrutiny and like a spirit had taken hold of them, they performed all kinds of unforeseen magic. But this time it was different. Because the data itself escalated his desires and him and his wife often made love twice after each scanning session. This meant that he showed up late at work and would often leave early to measure his beloved's insides and make love to her repeatedly.
He then proceeded to see what impact their lovemaking had on her topography and hormone charts. This of course sparked the desire in him and their evenings were spent measuring and copulating without end. They slowly both started to neglect their work, physical appearance and social life. The rationality that was intended to save them had allowed his wife to be in one of her phases for over three months and he showed no signs of tiring either.
Recently he had to leave for an important work meeting in a far-away location. The idea of not giving up the research became an obsession and he considered cancelling his trip. His wife implored him to stay, but in the end his best friend and colleague had assured him that his job would be in danger unless he went.
But what should they do with the research? He could not imagine to have a weeks void in the beautiful string of numbers. He talked to a great numbers of women gynocologists who all refused to do the job. In the end he managed to find a young medical student who was willing take over his role as scrutinizer of his wife's insides. Throughout his short trip he masturbated while looking at the numbers from his research, as if they were a new form of pornography. His waking hours were full of horrible images of the young student, whom he had found very attractive, seducing his wife and taking over his place and research.
His wife reassured him that everything was fine at home, even though she missed him in a way she thought not possible before. She said that the numbers that the student compiled would prove that she stayed faithful to him. But he felt that a quiet storm was building p in him. He felt that he had no way of trusting his wife unless he had the numbers from her inside to prove it.
When he finally came home his wife threw herself at him with a big smile and she showered him with kisses. But he was cold and he immediately got started to evaluate the data that the student had compiled. He found quite a number of oddities that he had never come across before. So rather than making love to her he asked his wife what she had done 17:13 on Saturday and or 06:03 on Sunday morning.
He stayed up all night scrutinizing every number and hormone level, while his wife went to sleep hoping that everything would be OK in the morning. When she woke up, she realised that her husband had not slept at all. They performed another scan, but what he saw filled him with disgust rather than excitement. He was under he impression that the young student had done something evil and irreversible to her insides. He ignored his wife in the most violent and nasty way, while he would masturbate looking at the old numbers and hormone levels.
This went on for two weeks and finally his wife got so frustrated with the situation that using sheer will power she managed to produce virtually identical numbers to that which had proceeded his work trip. This together with an onslaught of kind words and seductive measures she managed to rope him into making love to her and to re-establishing the life that they had shared prior to his trip.
Dear Prallis,
I enjoyed very much reading your reflections on inspiration and intuition. You asked where those visions of the world, that we can suddenly acquire, could come from. You also asked if it was important at all to define the process of inspiration and intuition. “But, do you think that inspiration can be defined by science? Maybe it is only a biochemical process in our brain and body that can be replicated with a pill? I don't think so.”, you said. Guess what I think – I think it might very well be that solely biochemical processes could define intuition and inspiration (but replicating this safely with a pill might, however, prove to be difficult). Of course I cannot know for sure, but I would not be surprised if sole biochemistry would be the true answer to the processes of our mind and, also – here I know I am at large with many non-biochemists – I would not find that being controversial at all, but instead rather natural and less controversial than any other models of the mind. I would also think that looking upon human beings as pure biochemistry, would not lessen the need for high moral, good ethics, and keeping the conceptual meaning (the sense) of free will – on the contrary. Looking upon ourselves as pure packages of biochemical processes make it even more important that we act in the best possible manner to the best of our capacities. Let me try to convey my line of reasoning:
1. - The basic question that we ask in this discussion, is whether there exists something, some dimension, that is completely divided from the material world, not involving atoms, molecules, electromagnetic fields or any other of the laws of Nature as we know them. Yet this dimension would nonetheless affect our actions and thoughts, and who we are. This something would then encompass what sometimes is called the “spiritual world”, “God”, “mind”, “free will”, “intuition”, “the dark side”, “angels”, “ghosts”, or any other term that conveys an idea of existing entities that are completely divided from the material world.
2. - The difficulties I have with a concept of a non-material dimension of being, as defined above, are many and severe. First, however, I must clarify that I would be the first person to state that I am absolutely certain that we do not know or understand everything of the world around us (we would never be able to do that), we do not know the true forces of Nature, the processes of the mind, the dimensions that exist in the Universe and in ourselves. On the contrary, I think we have learned nothing but a minute fraction of all there is to learn (which is a fact, I think one could say, underlying the wish for us to explore the world further – you as an artist and I as a biochemist). So, when I state that I do not believe in a spiritual dimension, God or free will as separated from the material world, it is not because we have not yet seen “evidence” for those entities or because we can not explain what they are based upon. No, I object to those ideas solely due to the evident contradiction in thought that lies underneath those concepts.
3. - Let me try to illustrate my thoughts as this: Let us imagine a scene of a family of three – husband, wife and child – living isolated on an island for twenty years, doing fine, who suddenly realized that on the island also lived the brother of the wife (whom she did not knew existed as he had been born a year before herself and then separated from her), there was another woman on the island that was actually the true mother of that family’s child, and the husband was sterile leaving it uncertain who was the true father of the child. Would that scenario affect the state of that family? Of course it would! But – here comes the interesting part – would that knowledge retroactively affect how the family had been living those twenty years before the new facts came into play? Of course not. Still, the genetics of that child and the inherent relations of the family members would still have been the same throughout those years, with or without the revelation of who they really were. In my mind, the same holds true for those who we think that we are, as human beings, and for the concept of the “spiritual world”, “God” or “Free will”. I believe those concepts are solely reflections of some (in many ways unknown) integral parts of ourselves, that would however still be possible to explain by sole biochemical processes, if only we knew how.
4. - I shall try to illustrate further my lines of thought, by reasoning. Let us say that some unknown “spiritual” dimension exists that we have not discovered yet but which affects our modes of being, or thinking. However, in that case, just because we have not discovered it, if it exists it already now affects our processes of being (thinking, intuition, wanting something) and perhaps the world around us, in manners that we are not aware of (the weather, animal behaviour, feelings of telepathy, ghosts – what do I know). But then, my dear friend, that dimension would still not be separated from our material world. Instead it is clearly an integral part of it, albeit yet unknown to us. It would solely reflect another parameter, affecting the biochemistry of our minds. Still we would just be the result of biochemical processes interacting with each other, with the rest of the world, and, with that new dimension that we just discovered. Everything that, in any manner whatsoever, affects existing entities, must be considered as parts of a whole and as solely one more parameter affecting the biochemical processes occurring in us as organisms. It is very, very, difficult for me to understand a concept of a separate spiritual world that is not part of us, yet affecting our actions and our thinking. To me, that is not possible.
5. - So, then, what do I think is the nature of intuition or inspiration? I believe that it is rather simple. I think that when we try to be rational, thinking hard about a solution of a problem, we may well arrive at a very clever such. However, that solution will seldom (never?) reflect a true innovative step covering new grounds. The simple explanation for why that would be the case, is that when we are rational, we base our thoughts upon the facts already known to us. Therefore we cannot arrive at thoughts involving completely novel concepts only through rational thinking, since the basis for such concepts could not be taken into the calculation as they – per definition because they were novel – could not be part of the factual basis for the reasoning. This is where intuition and inspiration comes in. Those processes reflect thoughts that we let ourselves have – consciously or unconsciously – without being burdened by convention and known facts, but rather “inspired” by fantasy and trying to break conventional ideas. When we allow ourselves to such free-floating-thinking and we subsequently “listen” to the answers that appear to us, thereafter analyzing them with our rational thinking and put them into action in the context of the known, that is when we’ve arrived at creativity. Again, I do not think that anything else than biochemistry and biochemical processes in our minds was involved. I do not need “non-natural”, “spiritual”, “divine” processes separated from myself and my being, in order to have intuition and inspiration.
6. - Last, let me come back to the need of good ethics and good deeds, as this is important. Some people have a tendency to say that “if we are just matter and biochemical processes, then it does not matter what we do or how we act, since we are just atoms and molecules responding to the natural laws”. Well, yes and no. I do believe that we are just atoms and molecules, but we are also so exceedingly complex that we have an illusion of “self”, of “free will” and of “choice”. The interesting aspect here is that what we do, is affected by everything else that we interact with. That includes writing and reading these very sentences. When have a discussion as this very dialogue in writing, or when we enjoy art, or music, when sit in a room, when we watch TV, when we walk on a stroll, when we interact with other people, we are always affected by all the impulses we get from the world around us. And we process those impulses - consciously or unconsciously – in our mind (rationally and through our intuition, the “gut feeling”) and all those impulses affect our actions. Most importantly, our biochemical processes may also inflict the sensation of suffering, of pain, or sorrow. As human beings, we wish to avoid or lessen those negative sensations – in ourselves and in others – and we wish to increase well-being, happiness and good life, while decreasing illness (mental or physical), death and sorrow. That is our evolutionary pressure to the benefit of mankind. That is also the evolutionary reason for our sense of good moral, good ethics and choice based upon free will. We need to obey those sensations if we are to continue as a species. And while we are doing so, we also try to understand more and more of the world, we expand our knowledge of the aspects and flavours of being, and we do that through many different methods, including art, including science, including dialogue.
Elias,
We see the world according to your description of scale. My interest, really lies on the human scale. While your, scientific look stretches across a far broader spectrum, from molecules to the motion and implications of heavenly bodies. I am interested in this, but purely from the perspective of how this knowledge affects the lives that we lead and how that can help us to open our minds and enrich the experience in the everyday. A discussion about cutting edge theories in contemporary mathematics or physics can inspire me. But, it does so in a very different way, than it was intended and I embrace the liberty of appropriating knowledge and being inspired by it with the explicit awareness that I probably don't stay very true to the original doctrine.
Today, we pride ourselves with knowing more than anything. (You address this in one of your questions.) But at the same time over the last twenty years, our society has closed itself to the possibility of new thoughts. It has become more conservative and reactionary. It has done so with all the best of intentions, but the effect is still detrimental. New dogmas are created in the name of political correctness while trouble solving is mistaken for creativity, the documentary is seen as fiction and being visionary means cutting costs and expenditure. This conservatism has been made possible because the lives that we lead are materialistically richer than ever before. But I also believe that many people's lives are spiritually poorer than ever before. I will return to this later, but I want to underline that spirituality in this sense has nothing to do with religion, but suggests human values that cannot be quantified in money or physical health. It would be defined as quality of life minus the measurable aspects.
Now, humanity has a long history of throwing out the baby with the bath water. I am currently re-reading Mikhail Bakhtin's "Rabelais and His World" where he describes how the whole system of knowledge inherent in the medieval carnival has virtually been lost if it wasn't for the work of Rabelais. The whole philosophy of humour and the subversive and creative potential therein has been overlooked for centuries.
The point that I am trying to make, is that this project and our collaboration must break new ground. We must look into what art and science has to offer to each other and not simply regurgitate knowledge that has already been accepted for a long time, or discussions that take place on a too abstract level.
We have to be visionary about what we do and the central question remains. What can bringing together your knowledge, enthusiasm and visions in science with mine in art give to the world? How are we, together able to create something that we would never be able to give and that makes sense for the world and our audience? I agree, that we need moral and ethic discussions. But doing good deeds means nothing. The only people I have met that do truly evil deeds are the once that are convinced they good, simply because it gives them the moral and ethical right to do so.
I described earlier how our reality can change in an instant, by telling a story about a married couple in an airport who run into the husbands ex. mistress. You describe a situation where a family is living on an island. I agree and I disagree with you. The events that take place during the 20 years will not change, but the individual's view on events do.
A very close friend of mine, got a phone call eight years ago from her cousin. Saying, "I cannot hold it back any more. I am not your cousin, I am your brother." What he explained to my friend was that the person that she had always thought was her mother, was in fact her aunt. The woman she had always called "auntie", was in fact her mother.
I can explain, why the lies were told and why my friend ended up in the situation she did. But it is of no importance in this context. It suffices to say that everyone acted according to what they thought was right in the context. The acted according to their ethics and did what they believed to be good deeds. The point that I am making, is that each of the five persons' (my freind, her "two" fathers and mothers) genetic make-up and past remained identical. But their outlook on life and the past and every human being in their world was forever changed by the phone call from the cousin become brother.
It is Alice going through the mirror or falling into a rabbit hole to meet another world. But if this is due to biochemical change in their respective brains or due to an interventionist god, is beside the point. If it is moral or immoral what my friend's parents have done is equally unimportant. What matters is our lives and how we deal with them. Life is about conflict. Life is about survival. But there is nothing bad in that, it is what makes life beautiful.
Yesterday, I was in Amsterdam and during the meeting, one person was talking about friends who had lived in Sarajevo during the war. Never had they been so scared, poor and lead materialistically deprived lives. Yet this person explained that they had also been very happy and that they were often nostalgic about this golden time in their lives . Immediately, an English artist said that her Grandmother always said that life during the war was the happiest that she had lived.
Now, we both know what your mother lived during the war. The three of us, together with your family made a journey to Auschwitz in 1994, to help her make a sculpture and a publication to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the liberation of the camps. So, I am not saying that we should start a global war to make everybody on the planet happy. I am simply pointing out that life is hugely complex and ethics and doing good deeds is very hard to define and the most important thing to keep in mind, is that what is a good deed today, can become the opposite tomorrow.
Some people get great pleasure from being humiliated and even beaten under special, controlled circumstances and maybe it is during the biggest struggles and hardships that we are truly happy. Simply, because we serve a purpose in life and do not have time to think about the triviality of our existence. But, each individual is also different and has certain genetical qualities. Someone who makes a very good accountant, might be a lousy chef. Or a great mathematician, might be a very bad physiotherapist etc.
The prime mover of life, art and science is change. If we are able to contribute to important changes, we also become a threat to the world around us. But in order to achieve this goal, we also need to take risks. We have to be bold and daring and believe in our visions. I am convinced that rationality, political correctness, the logical (if only temporary) has lead us into a blind alley. That is why I talk about mathematics and the tenth dimension, because in one sense it is utterly rational, but in another it is far more spaced out than your average new age guru in southern California.
So, what can we do to create something which is truly inspiring and inventive? Is it enough to juxtapose paradigms? When I got very inspired by your scale discussion I made some drawings. They all have a little caption. Rather than showing you the drawings, I will simply write down the captions, to see if you get inspired by them:
- an arrogant photon being bullied by 5 celestial bodies who feel insecure.
- the magic dragon of tax legislation.
- to grow 10th dimensional bacteria in vitro
- in the 7th dimension DNA will bloom.
- an even more irrational panopticon.
- a tank with bad self-confidence.
- democracy and desire having amorphic sex in the 7th dimension.
- a sports car driving through my digestive tract.
- Gay porn seen by a cobra in the 8th dimension.w
Från: Per Hüttner <pah(at)swipnet.se>
Ämne: Re: liten förändring....
Datum: 27 juli 2008 15.23.43 CEST
Till: Elias Arnér <Elias.Arner(at)ki.se>
hej elias,
är i london i dag. har många bra möten och allt går bra. men det är svårt att får tiden att räcka till...
jag vill fortsätta att svara på frågorna och jag tycker att det vore kul om du kunde göra det samma. jag tycker dialogen går in i en intressant fas och ju mer vi skriver, desto mer intressant material finns det att ta från. vi måste banta ner det så småningom. men vi skriver på, så ser vi var vi hamnar
fortsätt du med att njuta av italien! hälsa alla där nere!
kram/P
Kära Prallis,
Nu (i Peveragno, medan resten av huset sover) läste jag din text. Spännande resonemang om intuition och inspiration! Jag kunde förstås inte låta bli att fortsätta dialogen, istället för att försöka svar på våra tidigare frågor en och en. Läs i bilagan.
Jag fick en idé: vad tror du om att vår dialog blir källan till svaren på våra frågor, medan vi låter frågorna som sådana stå obesvarade? Det var en tanke jag fick, eftersom jag tycker vår dialog börjar bli mer och mer heltäckande. Kunde också vara spännande att ha kvar frågorna obesvarade, som stimulans till eget tänkande hos åskådaren/publiken/läsaren. Eller ska vi be dem om svaren, som du var inne på? Eller så tar vi trots allt frågorna en och en för att besvara dem, som vi sagt. Vi får väl se. En sak är säker - processen vi är inne i är mycket spännande och jag är säker på att det i slutändan blir en tänkvärd utställning och katalog (och seminarieserie? och film? och....?)
Varmaste hälsningar,
Elias
P.S. Mamma var så glad över senaste mötet ni hade - kul!
Från: Per Hüttner <pah(at)swipnet.se>
Ämne: evolutionsstopp
Datum: 28 oktober 2008 18.25.14 CET
Till: Elias Arnér <Elias.Arner(at)ki.se>
hej elias,
jag hoppas att allt är bra med dig.
en text till till boken är klar. den är väldigt lång och det kanske är den som blir upprinnelsen till min nästa roman. vi får se.
jag är väldigt nöjd med texten, även om den är väldigt lång...
**
jag försöker komma på alternativa saker som skulle kunna ha skett i evolutionen. men de är alltid negativa. dvs.
-hur skulle världen set ut om valarna stannat kvar på land?
- hur skulle världen sett ut om dinosaurierna inte dött ut?
-hur skulevärlden sett ut om vi kommit på en kur mot virus istället för bakterier?
den enda positiva grejen som jag kan komma på är:
- hur skulle världen sett ut om vi kunde flyga, springa fortare etc...
om du har lite galna idéer om alternativa evolutionära påfund så är jag mycket glad!
**
slutligen, vad sägs om lunch på KI torsdagen 13 november? funkar det för dig?
kram och hälsa familjen!
P
--
What Defines Art?
A bunch of keys were rattling in my brain. It was as if a void had opened in the centre of my head and with every slight movement of my body the sharp metal objects moved in the soft, fatty whiteness inside my skull. Every time I shifted the position of my body, the objects shuffled they made the noise of a ping-pong ball hitting a hard surface of cheap Formica.
I was surrounded by very lightly dressed women who were clad in costumes made of artificial feathers in every size, shape and colour that were attached to plastic, fake leather and covered by artificial beads that looked extremely cheap. Everything was day-glo coloured, shiny and blinking and loud. The girls’ faces were made up brightly with lots of glitter and they all wore smiles that seemed to be surgically implanted. They danced merrily and shouted loudly and kept bumping into me, which made the keys rattle and gave me more pain and the ping-pong noise increase in volume. The girls' glittery make-up, the sun - everything hurt my eyes and I dug after my sunglasses in the pockets of my toga outfit. But after a long and unsuccessful search, I realised that I was already wearing them. I was sweating profusely. I was not sure if it was my sweat or all the other bodies surrounding me, but the smell of human existence was mushrooming into an unbearable stench in my nostrils. The dancing bodies that had been a smorgasbord of appealing and sexually arousing beauty had quickly become an unbearable mound of revolting and sweltering meat that seemed to decompose in the sun. Not a single angel could even be imagined in this sea of dancing flesh.
It was time to get out of this crazy carnival. I needed to sit down in a calm, cool, place and allow the storm in my brain to subsume. The keys kept rattling in my head and the sound of cheap, Chinese 1980's table-tennis equipment was reaching deafening volumes. I everyone tried to obstruct me. I was engaged in an immense wrestling match where more and more people dressed in costumes joined by the second. They all came for the sheer pleasure of fighting me and inflicting pain to my body. Sharp elbows were thrust in my back and belly, boots and stiletto heels trod on my sandaled feet, fingers poked my eyes and the space between my ribs. Someone fell over me. I lost control and my elaborate papier-mâché hat fell off as I crashed to the tarmac and I was quickly squashed by stampeding and dancing feet. I lived one moment's calm and was able to raise my back and felt oddly light and free without the heavy and ornamented headdress. But the joy was short-lived. Someone kicked me in my lower legs and I fell again. This time I lost my sunglasses. I tried to find them crawling on all fours. People kept trampling on my hands, I had to face the facts. The eyewear was irretrievably lost.
I realised that if I stayed on all fours that I could evade the crowd. I crawled like an energetic baby or a giant insect between the dancing bodies. The stench was still there, but the heat was less imposing and the noise more bearable. Within minutes I had managed to evade the bustling crowd. I was so content with my new way of moving that it took me a while before I realised that I could walk upright. When I got up I did so very quickly since I realised that I looked a complete idiot crawling on the Pavement. As I got up, the rattling and ping-ponging in my head reached even more deafening volumes. I saw stars and the pain ground into my bones and my teeth were invaded by an electric pain. I though that I was going to faint.
When the dizziness had subsumed I saw the place that was the answer to all my prayers, a safe-haven and the kind of watering hole that I had been looking for without knowing it before I laid eyes on it. I went directly into the small establishment whose name, “The Sixth Dimension Bar” was painted in indescribable letters on a small and blinking sign above the door. Once I was inside, it was even better than I could have imagined. It was a cool and quiet café with dimmed lights and I appeared to be entirely alone. I went to the bar and ordered three cokes and drunk two of them in rapid succession and sat down in the dark and enjoyed the calm and my cool drink. I was by myself and away from the intrusive daylight, music and shouting in the streets. It was bliss.
I was happy beyond imagination to have escaped the mad carnival. But at the same time a sad sense of emptiness was humming in my soul. I felt terribly lonely. It wasn’t as if I wanted to be with anyone. But more a profound feeling that existence in its very centre was lonely and sad. I wanted a guardian angel more than a friend or lover.
But the moment that my eyes got used to the dark, I realised that I was far from alone. A whole army of snakelike aliens were sleeping everywhere. They were sitting, crouching, leaning and lying in every corner. I even got up to make sure that I was not sitting on one of them. I was too comfortable and lazy to become scared or upset. I do not know how long I had been sitting there when one of the aliens got up. It had three potbellies and it was unclear if it was pregnant with triplets or whether all its body fat or liquid was contained in these three lumps like a strange reptile three-humped camel. He seemed to be looking at me with dead expressionless eyes. But it was impossible to tell.
"Are you OK?" I ventured.
It shook its head as if it had got water caught in its ear and then it spoke calmly with a hoarse voice.
"I guess so," it cleared its voice and went on. "Yeah, it is a strange old world," it paused and reflected. "How did I end up here in this oversimplified dimension, so far from home? There has to be a very good reason for it and I am pretty sure that it will be unveiled relatively soon. It always does."
I couldn't help but to laugh. There was something comical about its words and the situation. But it was not a mean laugh. The alien laughed with me and the keys immediately stopped rattling and the void in my head closed up. I felt a hundred times better.
"I am not quite sure, what you are supposed to be dressed up like,” the alien said. “But if you are a Roman or an ancient Greek, you are also pretty far from home, both in time and space, right?"
"Well, I am afraid that that is the human condition. Even if you stay in your own house or flat your entire life, you will still be far away from home."
The alien scratched its rubbery head, "I am not quite sure that I understand, but then again, I just woke up. Could you elaborate?"
"Well, you see we humans..." I stopped to smile and it seemed meet my smile, even if its expression was utterly unmoved. "We humans are addicted to being reassured by other people. We are obsessed with finding comfort in our lives. Most of us are terrified by the idea of change. So, we have created rationality, nationality and the idea of home and family to make us feel comfortable and reassured. But in the end, we are utterly alone. In front of big decisions and death we are each an island. Likewise, we will never find our home. We might feel at home in the arms of the one we love, when we read a story to our children and when we return from a long journey. But the children will grow up. We will move out of our house and it will become the home of someone else. Everything we have, even our bodies are just lent to us for a short while."
The alien stared at me with an empty gaze. "Did I come on too strong?" I ventured.
"No, not at all. I am just thinking."
"Oh."
“Are you an artist?”
“Yes, how did you know?”
“And you think that art is to surf this state of loneliness and of ‘not being at home’?”
“I guess you could say that.”
The alien went quiet and scratched its soft nose and then it went on.
“How can you be so sure that you are alone? And anyway, isn’t that a very limiting and uncreative outlook on life that stops you from realizing your potential?”
“Not really, that is the way life is and there isn’t much we can do about it.”
“But that would make you one of the people who does not embrace change that you just described.”
“Far from it. I change all the time.”
It was quiet for a while and then it went on, "I suspect that you are one of those humans who turn everything into knowledge. You create your doctrine and then you repeat it and hope that others will look up to you, cheer you on. You feel powerful and you think that other peoples’ admiration is an expression of love. You criticise other people for building a home, creating a system of rationality. But in fact, you do exactly the same with your knowledge. You build a wall around you with what you know. You remain a blind stranger to the world and people around you."
I really didn't know what to say. I heard my voice getting feeble. "I guess that that isn't a good thing?”
The alien leaned forward and laughed one of its rubbery and muffled laughs. "I really do not know if it is good or bad. Knowledge obviously protects you from something that you fear profoundly. But I think that it will be very hard for you to actually live something if you have this film of dead intellectualism between you and the world."
"Oh, I see," I felt like I had shrivelled up and died in second. I had started out vigorously and felt crushed and did not know what to say.
The alien patted me on the back with its plasticky paw.
"Hey cheer up, you are a man who embraces change, you are intelligent and quick witted. You will sort that out before I can even go to the bar," he got up. "Can I buy you a drink?"
"Sure, a Coke would be great!"
"Sounds like a great idea, do you want two?"
"You read my mind. I would love two, but in that case I will to go and empty my bladder."
I went to the toilet. Standing at the urinal I was thinking about what the it had said. It was true that I really very rarely felt inspired or energized by conversations. I was only going through the motions, repeating a few sets of formulaic truths. Time had come to stimulate myself and through that the world around me. I needed to energize my intuition and my inspiration to come up with fantastic and wonderful ideas. I flushed and went back to the table where two full bottles were awaiting me. The alien had already finished his two drinks that by the look of the residue in the glasses must have been some sort of egg toddy. I offered one of mine, but it just shook its head.
"You are right. What I say isn't very inspiring and there is no joy in what I said. I really do not think or listen. I only repeat what I already know. I copy and what is worse, I copy myself."
"Well, me being critical of you isn’t very creative either. And I am sorry if I came on like that, but it really bores me with people who proclaim their own ideas in a lecturing kind of way where there is no exchange or dialogue. I am happy that you take what I say well and that you see it as something that allows you to get inspired. I guess that somehow I felt that there is a bigger man hidden and ready to be born inside you."
"Being critical, can also be inspiring. Few things can be more stimulating than a revolutionary overturn of a regime or social conventions that have become stale and outgrown. There is immense energy in events like those."
It did not reply, but seemed to take off its plastic hands and scratch something underneath them and put its alien hands back on as if they were gloves. But it was too dark for me to be sure.
"I couldn't agree more. Destruction gives people wings. Just like disasters get everyone going and bring out their best sides."
“What do you mean?”
“Many people are happy when they are faced with a crises of great magnitude.”
"So what you are saying is that there are not enough disasters and wars for people to show their good sides and not enough conflict for people to be happy?"
"No, that is not what I say”, it seemed to be smiling a crooked smile, but it was hard for me to be sure. “It is not the disaster in itself that gives meaning to peoples’ lives. But many people feel very happy in a crises situation, because they feel useful, alive and engaged. They feel important because they are joined in a common cause and they feel joy because they play an important role in life. It is not by chance that waging war has always brought people together and that this strategy has been used by politicians since the dawn of times and in all the cultures that I am familiar with.”
“So, what are we going to do to make ourselves happy unless we stay constantly at war?”
“Well, a lot of fights are fought for righteous causes and not necessarily for the sake of greed. So, each of us have to find the right battle to fight.” It became silent and paused and then it went on. “Some fight for political equality, other for social causes and helping the people who have little or nothing in life. What do you fight for?”
The aliens’ words hit me right in gut like a punch.
“Well, I try to get my life in order and to improve my own work.”
“Do you find pleasure in this struggle?”
“Well, it is hard to formulate like that. My work is getting better and better and I am slowly developing what the purpose of it all is.”
“Hardly a very generous attitude.”
“Well, maybe I need to help myself before I can help others?”
“Or maybe it is by inspiring others that you can help yourself? Maybe it is simply by finding the joy in the struggle that you are engaged in that is needed?”
I was dumbstruck. There was absolutely nothing conflictual in what he said and yet I had chosen a bullet in my gut to hearing the words that he uttered. I looked down on my sandals and tried to make out my own toes in the dark. It was not an easy task and I had to focus all my attention on the difficult task of seeing them below the abyss that opened under the table. My toenails were all black and I remembered that an enthusiastic or coked-up girl had painted them at a party that I had crashed at an indefinable point during the carnival madness. She was cute. I was reflecting on why I hadn’t tried to seduce her when the Alien spoke again.
“Maybe I am being too tough on you. But you really seem confused and lost. It seems like you take everything like a personal critique and you look at everything as if it is negative and take everything very seriously. There is another parallel reality which hosts the opposite of that you know.”
I got more and more interested in my toenails the more he spoke until it got to the point where I was bent double and staring at a tiny strange fold on one of my toes.
“But then again,” the Alien’s voice had become soft and accommodating, “fighting a battle is only a tiny detail. What is truly important in life is to find magic in the mundane and everyday. But that is far more difficult.”
“I don’t quite follow.” His calm voice and the fact that he wasn’t insisting allowed me to be able to magically escape the hypnotic obsession with my own mesmerizing toenails.
“The great things in life are found in the details and the great things is of very little importance.”
“Are you from planet Zen?”
The Alien laughed heartily and held its tail in its left hand and used it to scratch its ear, “I deserved that!”
“No, I am serious,” I smiled a crooked smile.
“OK, what I am trying to say is that when your wife is objectively ugly. Maybe she is fat and has rotten teeth and you can still find amazing beauty in these shortcomings and how she walks, brushes her hair from her face, then you have come close to something important.”
“Hmm, I am starting to like your world view. Your idea of heaven is leading our lives in ceaseless war, surrounded by fat women with bad teeth. Why not throw in a little bit of disease, allergies and malnutrition while you are at it?”
“Wow,” it laughed its hollow and rubbery laugh again. “I think that I have done a bad job at selling my philosophy to you.”
“Seriously,” I calmed myself and regained my serious tone. “I really appreciate what you say and I am actually quite convinced by your reasoning. But there are far more magical aspects of everyday existence than love for ugly women.”
“Well, I guess you are right. It was only an example and I think it is a very strong argument. Because it also shuns the hegemony of vision.”
“Now, you are the one being critical and conventional. Anyway, what do you know about beauty? I assume that your reptile mate has very little sex appeal to me.”
We both laughed and I slapped it on its shoulder. When I touched it I got the feeling that its flesh had a gelatinous quality, as if its entire body was made of slime and only its rubbery skin held it together. My soul froze. Maybe it was a true alien after all. I stopped laughing and felt fear gushing up in my insides. I really wanted to turn on the light to look at the true faces and bodies of these strange alien bodies that lay sleeping in the empty bar. I did not know what to do or say and felt incredibly uncomfortable.
It could sense my worry.
“I have travelled a lot in my days,” its voice was cool and reassuring. “When I first started out discovering our universe and how differently people live, I assumed that it would allow me to understand what was around me. I expected that existence would somehow be unveiled and that I would be surrounded by certainty and wisdom. But what I have found is, that life gets increasingly strange and that the only comfort that I get in life is to embrace this strangeness and unpredictablilty.”
It paused and I really did not know how to reply. An invasive silence sneaked up on us, but the alien’s voice remained calm and composed.
“Someone has said that life is a journey to prepare us for death. I have been thinking that maybe life is escalating in strangeness until it reaches a point of ultimate strangeness and that is what constitutes death.”
“I find that very poetic,” I said, “Death is the epitome of strangeness, a paragon of peculiarity.”
“Yes, it is reassuring to let go of any idea of understanding or comprehension. It allows you to live.”
“But death is far away from the everyday. It is the opposite of the mundane.”
“It depends on how you look at it. If you see death as an event and not a journey, then you are right. If death is simply the opposite of life, then it becomes very scary and oppressive. But if death is gradual, something that is always there and life is the opposite of the mundane, then the journey becomes all the more important and rich. Life is a surprise gift full of mystery.”
“So your fat woman with her rotting teeth is a part of this process of dying?”
“Yes, everything is a part of an intricate and poetic net of strangeness and the more you allow yourself to get lost, the more joy you get from it. It is here that you find greatness in the tiny details and where you can overlook all great decisions. It is here that you can see death everywhere as a beautiful and seductive twin sister or brother to every person, object and everything else that you encounter in life.”
I went and bought us two more cokes each. It seemed that he didn’t want another toddy. We drank them in silence. I have no idea how long we sat there, but it was a warm and comfortable silence that allowed me to feel both happy and content. My confidence and happiness seemed to grow and with that I started smiling to the world. I had the feeling that my brain was slowly but surely filled with energy and greatly vitalized. Visionary and imaginative thoughts bloomed in my inner.
All of sudden my alien friend got up. He whistled strangely and all the other sleeping bodies got up. They rubbed the sleep from their eyes and the ones who had them fiddled with their three potbellies and got ready to leave. My friend gave me a pat on the shoulder. “You are a good man. Never forget that. It was very nice talking to you.”
I wanted to get up and shake its hand, but it somehow made it very clear that I shouldn’t.
“I see lot’s of new futures now,” I said.
“Do you also see new pasts?”
“I guess so,” I was taken aback by his question.
“I want to ask you how I should realize those futures?”
“Wow, that is a biggy,” he laughed a surprised laugh. “That is for you to figure out. Just don’t let yourself down, OK?”
“OK.”
“I have to go.”
“Safe trip.”
“Likewise.”
I have no idea how long I sat there in the dark letting the cool air wash over my body. It was a brief moment and an eternity at the same time. Maybe I even slept an instant. When I came to my senses, I could see the barkeeper drying off all the tables and wooden chairs and benches that had been occupied by the aliens. When he was finished he disappeared into the kitchen and by the smell of it he was making himself an omelette. I got up and went into the street. The sun was setting but apart from that nothing had changed. The parades of people were still dancing and people were drinking, dancing and enjoying themselves in a state of un-hierarchical folly. When I looked closer I could see reptile like creatures following the merry people in the carnival. They appeared to be guardian angels for virtually every dancer and drinker in the crowd. The number of living entities in the street had in an instant doubled. I could see the reptile angels and their individual three potbellies swinging leisurely to the beat of the music and the dance of the person they were guarding.
With the knowledge that solitude is in fact a physical impossibility, it became obvious that the time had come for me to give up partying and to deal with other issues in life. I danced ever so brightly and looked at my sandals and headed home. I could hear the sound of three potbellies behind me and a well-know voice in my head reassured me, “that is the way my friend, keep going.”
Från: Per Hüttner <pah(at)swipnet.se>
Ämne: evolutionsframgång
Datum: 2 november 2008 01.52.52 CET
Till: Elias Arnér <Elias.Arner(at)ki.se>
hej elias,
jag hoppas att allt är bra med dig och familjen.
ytterligare en text till till boken är klar. den är också lång.
men det stora steget framåt består i att jag äntligen löst den konceptuella knuten i vårt projekt och det hänger ihop med frågorna som jag ställde i förra mailet.
**
kolla min lilla text där jag förklarar utgångspunkten för projektet. och om du har tid så kan du läsa texterna till boken. men gör det när du kan läsa i lugn och ro och njuta av det du läser. nu skall jag knyta mig.
**
funkar lunch på KI torsdagen 13 november?
kram och hälsa familjen!
P
6th dimension evolution
Darwin’s ideas about evolution are fascinating and also central to our understanding of the world around us. It is very interesting to see how he sees friction, violence and conflict as the motor of development. The two-folded selection process that he describes I find particularly interesting: On the one hand, there is the slow and painful development of species. The process of going from prokaryotes to man (and beyond because what is the next evolutionary step after man?) is slow and methodical. The natural selection moves at a snail’s pace and it is methodological and rational(?).
But chance also plays a big role and acts in a far more violent way. An alpha-male with wonderful genes might accidentally slip into a ravine killing himself. A meteorite might have hit earth and killed all the dinosaurs. It is the relationship between the two and particularly the irrationality of chance that interests me.
The 6th dimension is a mathematical reality and at the same time an (imaginary) space where all possible pasts and futures are available and where temporality works in a different way. It is present, but all times and all possible futures and pasts are present at the same time.
What I am suggesting is (this is a metaphor and not an installation) that the visitor is in a circular room surrounded by identical doors. He enters one and finds himself in a time and timeline that is different from ours (e.g. where intelligent creatures can fly or where a third sex has been introduced). You go back into the circular room choose another door and enter into our timeline, but maybe before life had started on this planet. He can then walk in and out of these doors at will. All possible history (in theory at least) is present at once. The “doors” could obviously be an interactive media function where one click’s oneself through different worlds.
But I think that we can find a far more interesting way of presenting the whole project. We achieve that by being really specific. By taking the starting point in Napoleon’s boot or Cesar’s last breath or something like that. (sorry for the poor examples)
I do not know what form the work should take. In order to decide on that we need to discuss what evolutionary steps that can be interesting to think about. I need your expertise as a scientist and freethinker!
What is important to me in this project is that by changing the parameters for the reality we know we also allows us to look at the reality that surrounds us in a different ways. Because no matter how abstract and dreamlike a reality we create, it always has to convey a kind of wisdom that enriches the reality that surrounds us.