Early this morning, I found myself there, on Twitter, in between the tweets about Bahrain atrocities and Internet related legal cases, musing on the subject of desire.
Oh hello, what’s this? I caught my attention as it were.
The mind runs parallel currents simultaneously. It’s only when something new or unfamiliar pops up that focus is drawn tight.
Even a gilded cage is still a cage. Some can’t keep their eyes off the shine. Others only see the bars. Some see what’s beyond that.
Unfulfilled desire is one of the most agonizingly pleasurable experiences. Something few really want to renounce.So rather than try to renounce it I’m going to obsess on it all day. Perhaps it will burn out.
Why not enact it? Circumstances…time, distance, opportunity. Some desires are best not reified. They cease as desires and become material interactions. Desire being an ideal action, performed alone. Alienated. Filled with possibility.
You may find that having is not so pleasing a thing as wanting. This is not logical, but it is often true.
~Spock (Star Trek episode–Amok Time)
Sometimes gratification is within deferring gratification. Sometimes not.
The state of the meta-desire. Renunciation predetermined. Desiring desire for it’s own features, for the experience, to refine the sensation. How can one understand desire unless it has been thoroughly palpated? An exercise in emotional foreplay
This has nothing to do with love. Unless the desire is for love. Then it’s tragedy.
There will be more to this epistle….
This is where it seems some tantric interpretations stray. Particularly the New Agey sorts.
It’s not about the object of desire but the subject enacting, but not fulfilling, desire. To fulfill is to kill desire, as in murder.
And all men kill the thing they love,
By all let this be heard,
Some do it with a bitter look,
Some with a flattering word,
The coward does it with a kiss,
The brave man with a sword!
~Oscar Wilde–The Ballad Of Reading Gaol
Then it must arise again with a new object or a new rendition of the apparently same object. The sequential renditions of the apparently same object renew due to the factor of time and circumstance. All desire requires consumption of the object in some form in order for it to be quenched. This may be related to addiction. The subtle renunciation by way of non-fulfillment allows transparency of desire. Then examination.
Thus gross desire, such as that which drives greed, is sifted and refined to the necessary and a near (Deleuzeian) actual. The actual being that which is without potential. Hence constructions of the ideal are removed. The thing itself.
The actual is unknowable. Ineffable. Ontologically impossible. Beyond the bars which are frameworks of conscious knowledge. The intermediation of human perception renders it thus.
We remain in the gilded cage of perpetual desire.