BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


In the Beginning was the Word?

 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
19:03 / 30.01.06
Fell, thanks for those posts - really intriguing...

I find myself at odds to break stale use of language and terminology.

usually through wordplay and puns.

want to learn magic? start with spell-ing.

--not jack
 
 
Digital Hermes
22:05 / 30.01.06
A couple of things. Mostly, I'm agreeing with you, but there are a couple of places I diverge, mostly on semantics. The phrase is often bandied about that these god-forms, or magical wisdom/gnosis, are 'beyond words,' or 'beyond language,' or are 'in a place without words.' I'd like to clarify my own viewpoint here. I don't think that just because we don't have the words for them, or the proper ones, that these entities and states of being are language-less. Rather, I'm of the beleif (at least so far) that these may actually be made up of meta-information, like Jung-Cambell's meta-myths. Meta-ideas, or the supercontext. Ideas that are beyond our concious, day-to-day, ability to perceive.

Now, does that invalidate what you were saying, Fell, or does it run concurrent with it?
 
 
Fell
20:17 / 02.02.06
I hope it runs with what I am saying, as the experiences I've had with most intelligences I could consider "alien" or "occult" would have been in altered states. Not just entheogens, but cocaine, marijuana, meditation, visualisation exercises, or coming out of or entering sleep. Or night terrors, in particular.

I think the experience can be terrifying because for them to be able to make any sort of communication with the person, the person must be in an altered state. This could diverge into a conversation about EEGs and consciousness, but let's not here. The one thing to point out is that ideas and the interaction with data is different at different brainwaves, so if one spends most of their time in and around the waking 14–17 Hz (12–13 Hz while relaxed, watching tv and what not, however), then these would be the states we're most accustomed to. Being drawn through some sort of entrainment of vibration to co-exist with an intelligence in a state below or above these common brainwaves would be frightening for most.

It's not that language can't wrap around the contexts of these entities, but English will certainly have problems. And a meta-language is necessary, perhaps such as Austin Osman Spare's "Alphabet of Desire" and sigila.

On this, I wanted to post this quote from this research material I am going through for an article I am currently writing, concerning Japanese spirituality in design practise:

Contrary to Kuki’s attempt to seek a “strict meaning” of iki, iki is a relative, flexible value but not an absolute, exclusive value.

Iki is an etymologically flexible word. If not futile, it would be very difficult to give precise definition of iki, it being a colorful concept. When a Japanese word is written with different ideograms, the same single (phonetically identical) word can carry dozens of different nuances, sometimes quite different meaning. When a Japanese word is written with phonograms, either hiragana or katakana, the word leaves the possibility of interpretation opened. Takeuchi lists fourteen examples of different ideograms appeared in Edo literature and popular songs, each one of them having different nuances, used for this single word, iki. Kuki himself lists four different connotations of iki. If iki is written with phonograms, as Kuki did for the title of his book, the precise meaning of the word become almost indeterminable. Manifestations of iki oscillate depending on the context. For example, Kuki recognized iki in stripes, especially vertical rather than horizontal ones. However, as Kuki admits himself, horizontal stripes can be iki when the sensation and emotion is insensible to vertical stripes.


That a word can exist and be so prevalent in Japanese culture, yet be so open to interpretation and use. That is more along the lines of how a language would maybe work when with these intelligences. These same qualities are found also in the use of symbols and glyphs when working with evocations and invocations.

English words are too rigid, and thus we find our thinking perhaps structured similarly.

ps — The italic font on Barbelith by default is really difficult to read. Someone should make the default typeface something else specifically designed for proper www legibility.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
20:48 / 02.02.06
(You too eh? Italic fonts are a pain to read in large blocks, but I agree that this one is particularly hard on the eyes. Most of us get round it by using bold for quotations. Could bring it up in the Policy, I suppose.)
 
 
Fell
03:26 / 03.02.06
(I changed the quote to bold for legibility. And on an peculiar note, not jack, Digital Hermes, and myself each represent one of the major three major cities of Western Canada. I guess the interest in this must be isolated to us Canucks, hehe?)
 
 
Digital Hermes
16:57 / 03.02.06
Just to provoke the debate a little further:

I do agree that English does seem fairly rigid, particularly when the grammer nazis come out to play. (On the other side, as devil's advocate, one can work within grammer, and still have flexible meaning.) Maybe this comes from a Victorian sense of properness of word and language, of a codification of every possible word. That said, even the Oxford English Dictionary now has Homer's "d'oh!" in their lists, because it has become so prevalent. Same with 'blogging,' I think.

I think that curmudgeonly nature of the english language is begging to fall away, like the dross it is. Led by poetry, and that prose which has a similar lyrical feel, we can give english some more flex then it previously had. William Gibson coined words that are now in common usage, by slamming two words together. Not unlike James Joyce, in both Ulysses and Finnegans Wake, which is written in english, but sprawls far further than it often does.

Lastly, english is one of the most abstract languages around, being one of the most youthful in it's creation. That abstract nature means that it is technically possible for a word to meaning anything at all. There's a play by Tom Stoppard on those lines, in which a bunch of people who use English words, but not in the definitions we use, rehearse Hamlet. Slowly, you figure out what each person is saying as they refer to the world around them. Basically, they show that words can be loosened from their defenitions, and I would argue that English is particularly loose, when you look at it in a new direction.

Along with that is English's ability to absorb terms from other sources. We all know what Sephiroth are, and I don't feel as though I've switched to Hebrew and back again when I use the term.

That said, I beleive all of my supercontext malarky is to imply that god-forms are beyond any real human language, and that human-conceived languages, even one with as many tools as English, are only a stepladder into realms of meta-ideas and meta-language, where the Gods live and speak.
 
 
Fell
18:34 / 03.02.06
Yeah I like that last bit, as I've pondered that into detail. Language is good in that it allows us to build a structure upon which we can grow concepts and ideas, ponder them, store them for later and share them with others. This allows us to build that language ladder so that we can crawl high enough to poke our heads into the clouds and reinterpret new ideas.

That is something language is necessary for, the growth of ideas. As long as one is willing to drop the pre-existing notions of one vernacular for another or scrap a concept in favour of a new experience, language is the step-ladder of conceptual evolution.

The gods are interesting as, with my experience with "them," they exist in a realm where the senses meet — our five become one suprasense — and communication is dealth with via emotional contexts and peculiar symbols composed of these unified energies that we only interpret through our individual senses in Malkuth. It's a very cool experience, and hard to define.

But once both individuals have had the experience of it, then the word is relatively unimportant as communication can continue in English and both know the context. The hard part is trying to explain the abstractions of such to those that have not had the experience yet, which is where language falls flat. It's inability to to convey experience and wisdom. Tacit knowledge is the realm of the sole individual to garner, by which conversations can soar to new levels.
 
 
Digital Hermes
20:22 / 03.02.06
(As an aside regarding the power of language, I often find the mystical texts I respond to to be well-written, as well as the mystical poets. {Yeats, Blake, Cohen} Likewise with barbeloid posters - I will pay much more attention to those who post articulately and ability. In that sense, and perhaps in most other forms of communication, langauge well-used has a power to affect others...)
 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
  
Add Your Reply