

week 2.
In speech, the body comes into contact with the mind. More than that, the body, through speech, articulates the mind. It shapes it.
April 12
In speech, the body comes into contact with the mind. More than that, the body, through speech, articulates the mind. It shapes it. But it is only in writing that the mind finally becomes body. It is only in writing that I come face-to-face with my mind. My mind as a body that is not my own. A stranger?
———
Kasha: What is it about religion, art, and philosophy that so thrills me?
Teretz: They allow me to feel touched. Encountered. Real. In short, to feel alive.
Kasha: And what is it to feel alive?
Teretz: To feel bodied. To be Unthought. Un-understood. Unimagined. To be here, not over there. To be now, and never then. To feel this, and nothing but.
Heaven is a place where the ice of existence melts into a stream of warm-water. Heaven is a place where nothing is as it is.
The dichotomy between mind and body is mistaken. It should rather be reconstituted as a dichotomy between language and sense. To attempt to live without language is to attempt to live like an animal. Or a child. It is, therefore, an attempt to live without sin. To live, finally, both happily and peacefully. But hasn’t Nietzsche already shown us that return, regret, rejection will never take us where we wish to go? Hasn’t he convinced us all that there is only one direction: forward?
Well, consider the inverse. To attempt to live without sense is to attempt to live like an angel, or better, an idea (i.e. like god, the Idea par excellence). It is an attempt to achieve independence and freedom. And hasn’t Hegel taught us enough to know that freedom without actuality is nothing but death?
But how can we live as neither animals nor gods? As neither free nor holy? How, that is, are we to live as broken, grieving, loving men? Where can we go to find some hope?
For one, we can begin with our language and our sense. We can begin right here, at the very end.
———
Today was ordinary = folding laundry, washing dishes, a stroll in the park, coffee to go.
———
The Body in Society, by Alexandra Howson
A framework in which selves are construed as “parts” in a theatrical performance. We act out the roles we feel are best, the roles which work. We share and conceal information (through gestures and language) which befits our role. Consider what happens when a person who is “unreadable” joins a small group. The other “actors” are forced (often uncomfortably) to reevaluate their own role in light of this ambiguity. Improvisation is forced upon them by this unreadable body.
Link between medicine and body image: the development of the medical profession (over the last two hundred years) has allowed doctors to study an enormous quantity of human bodies (for perhaps the first time in history). This in turn has produced a dizzying array of statistics around what a “normal body” is or should be. Consider the innocent questions “isn’t she tall for her age?” From a very early age, we receive constant reminders from medical authorities (during several visits per year) reminding us of our position relative to the normal (read: healthy) body.
The modern person laughs at the ancient Egyptians who believed that their pharaoh didn’t need the bathroom. And yet, if the president were to fart during the state of the union, it would shock the world. Just like the ancients, we desperately seek leaders who are more-than-bodies, who have risen beyond mere flesh. Leaders who, at least in the minds of their followers, have shed their bodies and become gods.
My Body
My body is fun
My body is work
My body is soft
My body hurts
My body is art
My body is an animal
My body is a human
My body is a mystery
My body is warm
My body is mine
———
How does one “think” the body? Or, how does one “body” thoughts? Phrased still differently, what does the body of thought consist of?
Well, for starters, a thought has an appearance. It appears. It becomes known. It is felt. But what is it felt as? Just as what it is. What it is as body.
I smell a smell. I taste a taste. I see a sight. I think a thought.
But thoughts do not pertain to bodies.
Oh, but they do. Bodies of thought.
I think the thought: “I love you”. What does that appear as? How is it shaped? How does it feel?
I think the thought: “a pile of purple plums.” What does that appear as? Is it the same as “I love you”? In what ways does it differ? Not in meaning, but in body.
Thoughts give birth to their own children. I once had a thought so scary that I could hardly bare to think at all.
Once again: How does one think the body?
I will answer with a question: how does one body the body? Answer that, and you’ll have the solution to both questions.
Three steps to embodiment: (1) Perception (2) Communion (3) Expression
How does one embody a thought? By becoming it.
How does one perceive a thought? By feeling it.
“Sad”
I embody the thought. I become all that “sad” wishes to be.
I feel the thought. I notice all the ways that the thought “sad” feels like. I feel it with my mind. I feel it with my mouth. I feel it with my ears. And my eyes and my nose. I feel it with my fingers and my tongue and my tears.
I don’t have to reach outside myself, to take what other people have. I can reach inside myself, and receive what I already have.
There is a lot of talk of redefining beauty standards. But why the need to feel beautiful in the first place? I’m content with being ugly.
I have nothing to write. Because I have nothing to think.
The first thing I did with all of the information I learned about the body is to forget it.
We grow up hearing about things like marriage and love. We’re shocked, when we grow older, to discover that they're not just stories. We're shocked to discover that they’re actually real. Real people engaged in real marriages held together with real love. Reality is far more shocking than fiction.
—————
Two essays on large bodies: Hunger by Roxane Gay and The Whale by Daren Aronofsky. Today, I just so happened to read the first and watch the second. What a coincidence.
Both characters ate themselves to misery, both in response to a trauma. Roxane was gang raped. Charlie’s boyfriend first starved himself and then jumped off a bridge. Both blamed themselves for the tragedy, the loss. Both claim to be worthless, with Charlie telling his estranged daughter: I couldn’t imagine anyone would ever want someone like me in their life.
Both characters strove to make themselves, bite by bite, pound by pound, disgusting. And by so doing, barricade themself against those who might love them.
But in both cases, this proves impossible. The only person they truly can’t bear, the only person they truly despise, is the one they can never escape.
The only difference between the two? Charlie insists that “people are amazing” while Roxane reminds us that “the world is cruel”.
Who’s correct?
———
My body holds me in my past.
In other words, my body holds me in my self.
There is no sense of happiness to be found
Outside of the body.
Transcendence through the body.
Transcendence on the body.
Transcendence with the body.
Transcendence in the body.
Transcendence = descendance.
Through my body, I have a past.
Through my body, I am a descendent.
Through my body, I descend (from above)
Through my body, I ascend (from below).