WE ARE CANNIBALS

The Ark Interview

In 2017 Ark Review of Ark Books in Copenhagen sat down with Mycelium. The interview took place ahead of their public performance, ‘Witches Circle’, which happened in connection to solstice. The purpose of the interview was finding out how this fungus can move us to organize in radically different ways, beyond individualism and the ego.

What is Mycelium?

Mycelium is a root network of mushrooms. It consists of spores, which form a communicative web with neither spider nor commander. Displaying sensibility and the ability to interpret environmental circumstances, it seeks to expand: eventually forming a disc. It then cannibalizes its own center as to distribute excess energy. In further attempts to expand, it forms a circle of mushrooms above ground. The fairy rings of folklore: a meeting place for witches, a place for sacred activities: ritual, symposia, sabbath. Communion, transgression. Mycelium itself is sexless, however, the coven is abundant. Its spores cannot be considered closed individual beings, they are explorers, seekers, cannon fodder. Copulating, communicating. However, mycelium doesn’t form a singular organism, it is legion. Mycelium is an open-ended and indeterminate dynamic structure, where the totality exceeds the number of beings. Birds in motion: black sun.

What is so perverse about Mycelium?

Traditionally the pervert is someone who diverts her eyes from the truth. That is: God. The Eye in the sky, the metaphysical sun. Perversion corrupts being. According to Freud the pervert confuses truth and what is false. Perversion becomes a diagnosis of humanity, but a sickness nonetheless. Today, perversion is accepted as private fantasies, which are legitimized via informed consent and is overall a part of our self-exploration and self-realization. In that respect, perversion is stripped of its subversive potential. Thus, traditionally, the pervert is someone who actively averts her gaze from the singular truth and its institutions, the constituted homogenic order and bourgeois morality, which are based on ressentiment. The “object” of perversion (when taken to its subversive limit and not just your private “legitimized” fantasies) is always that which disrupts the homogenic order.

The homogenic order is the world that we have taken into possession and made orderly. It’s the world we have rationalized, machined, organized. According to Nietzsche, it is a possessed world, taken into possession by rationality through fictions and conceptual constructions; it is the world of work, utility and production. Mycelium disrupts the homogenic order, by its mere opposition to it. Mycelium does not have a center of truth entailed in it, nor does it have a center of self, nor does it abide by a generalized economy of benefit to one at the cost of another, but disrupts and undoes itself continuously, in order to become (an)other, while never in itself identical. It embarrasses the established order. Today’s truths are those of self-realization, egoism, capitalism, neoliberalism, utilitarianism, rising nationalism and necessity. Such logoi produce their own witches [and] naked life. The perverted won’t accept these power-manifestations. The perverted averts her gaze to glance other truths and raises her fist. Seeks subversion and revolt.

Why write collectively? What limitation do you escape once you leave the individual identity of an author behind?

We should begin with some notions on what the ego and what an individual is. According to Schopenhauer our individuality is constituted by the double experience, that we are both will and representation. This double experience is what ties the subject precisely to us. The world is representation, through and through. We perceive everything as representation, as an object to our subject, including our own body. However, what separates our body from every other form of representation is that we also have an intimate experience of our body, which isn’t (and cannot be) exhausted by the representation. A so-called inner experience (to use Bataille’s phrase) or non-knowledge. The inner experience of the body (and thus the world) is qualitas occulta, which is something different from the world as representations. The world as representation is a world of divisions, distance and limits. Limits we draw. The inner world is limitless. Thus our individuality is constituted by this double mode of existence. Our paradoxical way of being. We exist, we exit, we step out. Out of the limitless. Into a world of objects, purpose, utility, duties, morality. Thus, our individuality is not indivisible. It bears within the participation in everything. The individual is by definition an opening, wounded. Both distance and embrace. Both limited and limitless.

Immortal mortals, mortal immortals, living the other’s death, dying the other’s life. (Heraclitus)

This paradox also reveals the openness in every other object individuated by us. An inner world not transparent to the castrated eye. Everything is wounded, a passage, a threshold. We engage in the limitless via eroticism, ecstasy, joy, love, music, art, dance, laughter. The Sabbath celebrates exactly this. However, fear, custom, laziness, habit, angst, motivates us to grab hold of the constituted world, the homogenic order. To hold on to ourselves.

Now, as already noted, this double knowledge is what ties the subject to us, which constitutes our individuality. The subject, however, is nothing. Not a representation. Not a part of the limitless. It is but a point of reference. A figment of our imagination. A fiction. A diffuse and ever-shifting vanishing point. Thus, to celebrate the ego, the subject, is to celebrate nothingness. Nihilism! It is an integral part of capitalism, neoliberalism, egoism and also many forms of individualism, since it celebrates the self-realization and uniqueness of the closed individual. But you are not unique. Your uniqueness is nothingness. An individualism that doesn’t embrace community is borderline nihilism, and a communism that doesn’t embrace the wounded individual is totalitarianism and/or fascism. This is beautifully summed up in the erotic prose of Henry Miller:

We must die as egos and be born again in the swarm, not separate and self-hypnotized, but individual and related. (Miller)

Or as Alain Daniélou writes in his essay The Shaivite Revival from the Third to the Tenth Centuries C.E.:

The conception of monotheism, along with its aggressiveness and the audacity with which such a simplistic doctrine could be presented as progress, impressed the philosophers, who sought to adapt it, interpret it, and incorporate it. It was a phenomenon like Marxism, which clandestinely penetrated all religious thought, no one daring to point out the countertruths and the unrealistic nature of its assumptions. […] The prestige of the metaphysical absurdity that monotheism represented for traditional doctrine was to affect philosophical thought in India down to our times. The Western world was hardly interested in anything but philosophies infected by this germ. In vain, the Tantras continued to proclaim “ekashabdatmika maya: the number “one” is the soul of error.” For the Samkhya, the number “one” is collective, referring to a group or fragment, and does not exist as an absolute, since nothing exists except in relation to something else. (Daniélou)

So, to answer your question. We seek to undermine the ego, the idea of a privileged vantage point, even though it, like God, hides in the grammar, and we seek to embrace the open-ended, wounded and naked individual in the swarm, in community. So in a sense we are undermining the very subject/object structure of language.

God is dead
The author is dead
I am dead
The swarm rises like a black sun

[or maybe it should rather be: God is death, The author is death, I am death.]

We would rather write enchantments, cast spells, make incantations, but in order to do so, we must also do some theoretical and philosophical footwork. Some awareness is needed. We seek to promote this awareness, so that we and others and we as others can manifest these sacred places.

Therefore, we seek to create collectively, to think collectively, to resist the temptations of ego-formation. We do this by writing together. Make collages. Make room for associations (as in Mycelium #2).

Obviously to get lost in the swarm is potential madness. Divine madness. Dangerous madness. Evil madness?

What is the relationship between perversion and evil?

Historically speaking the pervert is evil. Lacking truth. Lacking being. Lacking god. Evil is a metaphysical concept unlike bad or unhealthy. Horrendous deeds often seem to seek legitimization in notions of justice, the good or necessity. As Hannah Arendt noticed, there is a certain kind of banality of evil. We do dreadful things when we think we are in the right. It was both necessary and good to burn witches, since they were evil. So it seems that often evil is a judgement made from the perspective of self-righteousness, of good. Most horrendous deeds are indeed justified from perspectives of utility and purpose. The black witch at our door right now, gives us purpose, (national) identity and moral highground. So viewed from the outside the coven must be considered evil, however, within the dance, the joyous violent frenzy of the Sabbath, we are beyond good and evil.

Morality must draw its power and appeal from the sovereign aspects of life, the value of life beyond utility, therefore it must be determined by a lack of the selfsame sovereignty. Sovereignty emanates and morality feeds off this source. Sovereignty, however, transgresses judgement and is beyond good and evil. It shows no concern for anything else but the rapture or sometimes the tranquillity of being, where all is given in the instant, the trembling of being, the hesitation to disappear, sunlight upon the forest’s edge. Intense communication implies a complicity in evil. From a moral point of view, which gazes towards the future, judgement and action, sovereignty is at least complicit in evil, negating and embarrassing the call for purpose and project, while also, almost as an act of defiance and joyous taunt, making it apparent that morality must draw its power from the luminous emanating sovereign source of love.

What is done out of love always takes place beyond good and evil – Nietzsche

This time your performance will focus on witches and the exclusion/burning of them, what perspective does Mycelium add to this concept/reality that other critics do not?

Obviously, the tradition [Sankt Hans – the symbolic burning of witches in Denmark every summer solstice] to celebrate the genocide of thousands of men and women is absurd, as many critics point out. With regards to cleanliness, we should stop this atrocious practice. However, we are not clean. We grow from the soil. Rather, we would like to burn with the witches signaling through the flames. Let the sod fall like black snow on our pale white faces.

If there is still one hellish, truly accursed thing in our time, it is our artistic dallying with forms, instead of being like victims burnt at the stake, signaling through the flames. –Artaud.

We do not embrace the witch to promote self-realization, individualistic empowerment, you-go-girl-ism. We are in a sense too privileged. The real witches of today are burning in the Mediterranean. Naked life. Legitimate pray. We are burning witches every day. The inquisition=our moral highground.

Could you talk about the politics of your practice? Is there a politics of fungi or a politics of witchcraft? Should we engage in a politics of evil? If so, how?

What makes the mycelium a political endeavor or collective is that it seeks to establish a collective outside the established or dominant orders through the symbolism of that which has historically been rejected as evil or dangerous, such as the witch and witchcraft. We see that position as having political as well as aesthetic potential. It stands as an outsider, an alternative order, that through its distance from the dominant and established, provides another-way-of-knowing the world, and how we might organize it. This other, that which is considered evil, therefore also contains a critical potential. The critique is not brought about with the ambition of seeking acceptance or inclusion; rather, it constantly is in the process of seeking the outsiderness or occulta excluded, of moving away from acceptance. Acceptance in a way becomes the death of a witch, symbolically at least.

A politics of fungi or mycelia should mimic the open ended dynamic and communicative structure of mycelium; form dynamic communities that resists the temptation to become a centralized organization. The mycelium is “a heterogenous army of hyphal troops, variously equipped for different roles and in varying degrees of communication with one another. Without a commander, other than the dictates of their environmental circumstances, these troops organize themselves into a beautifully open-ended or indeterminate dynamic structure that can continually respond to changing demands”. Since it is open-ended and dynamic, it must disregard appeal to the politics of necessity, history and utility, and formulate political poetics. If it stiffens, it dies. To uphold these grimaces of death is decadence. And they must therefore be transformed, eaten, delivered. A politics of mycelia must embrace this dynamic hunger. This includes a politics of cannibalism. The mycelium cannibalizes its own center in order to be able to manifest the fairy/witches rings. These manifestations are sacred realms, thresholds, passages from one place to another. The transgression of limits into the intimate swarm of the limitless.

Through loss man can regain the free movement of the universe, he can dance and swirl in the full rapture of those great swarms of stars. But he must, in the violent expenditure of self, perceive that he breathes in the power of death. – Bataille

As the dancers are cannibals
As the generous are cannibals
As the lovers are cannibals
We are cannibals

Creative and political lessons to be drawn from the mycelium:

  1. Form a heterogenous communicative open-ended structure.
  2. Cannibalize your center – eat your ego.
  3. Distribute excess energy to wherever the spores seek to expand.
  4. Manifest a sacred circle, love.

Problemet om den sidste gris

Grise er sociale væsner, der er lette at håndtere i flok, men som har tendens til at gå i panik, når de bliver alene.

I kødindustrien bliver de gennet i flok, men aflivet enkeltvis, hvilket efterlader den sidste slagtegris i en helt fortvivlet tilstand, der ofte resulterer i ekstremt selvskadende adfærd, med store blå mærker og brækkede lemmer til følge.

Dette forringer kvaliteten af produktet og dermed værdien for opdrætteren.

https://artmatter.dk/journal/graad-skrig-projektrummene

Politiken var “Til messe i Mayhem – med Thales, Sade og Beyoncé”

“Et atmosfærisk, droneagtigt lydlandskab og et bagtæppe med skiftende illustrationer akkompagnerer oplæsningen, der langsomt tager form. En person træder ud af halvcirklen og bevæger sig hen til mikrofonen: »Bliver pladsen for trang, må det skyde frem«, lyder det, og det er både en biologisk observation og en samtidsdiagnose, finder jeg hurtigt ud af.”

Læs Politikens omtale her:

Til Messe i Mayhem

 

Floret on Mycelium #1

“Jeg tror også det er derfor sproget gennemgående er ført i manifestets agiterende toneleje i Mycelium. Som en markering af alvor, af samfundsnedbrydelse, af (seksual)politisk konflikt. Der er ikke blot tale om den sidste, nye perverse trend. Der er tale om en politisk nødvendighed som finder sit perverse udspringspunkt i røvhullet: “I enden nedbrydes og sammenblandes alt. Udslettelsen af enhver forskel, at trænge ned i væren, antager en ekskremental karakter”. Røvhullet er altså det perverses sted fordi røvhullet er det sted der nivellerer alle forskelle og udskider en besudlet, tabuiseret masse. Men samtidig er det vigtigt at dette sted forbliver usikkert. Den besudlede masse må ikke helliggøres, røvhullet må så at sige aldrig blive Gud, for så falmer stedet i endnu en assimilativ overtagelse.[…] Den perverse er altså den der fører overtrædelsen til den yderste konsekvens. Derfor er røvhullet også nært forbundet med en kærlighed til “alle de udstødte”. “Kan man tænke sig noget mere anstødeligt, en større hån imod den herskende anstændighed, end fattige, bådflygtninge, sindssyge, tabere, ludere, stofmisbrugere, samfundets udstødte affald?”.

Den logik der gør sig gældende i Mycelium er derfor også en revolutionær logik, en logik der ikke acceptere gradvise tilpasninger og indordninger, men derimod taler for en totalomvæltning af de normative strukturer. Det er selvfølgelig ekskluderende overfor nomaten, men det er måske den allerede ekskluderes eneste tilbageværende rettighed? Selv at kunne vælge sine kampfæller: “Den perverse finder glæde i denne spottende hån”.”

Læs mere:

http://floret.se/kussen-og-roven/

“I also believe this is why the language throughout Mycelium is carried in the manifesto’s agitating register. As a marker of seriousness, of social disintegration, of (sexual-)political conflict. This is not merely a matter of the latest new perverse trend. It is a political necessity that finds its perverse point of origin in the asshole: ‘At the end, everything is broken down and mixed together. The annihilation of every difference, the penetration into being, assumes an excremental character.’ The asshole is thus the site of the perverse because the asshole is the place that levels all differences and excretes a defiled, tabooed mass. But at the same time it is crucial that this site remain unstable. The defiled mass must not be sanctified; the asshole must, so to speak, never become God, for then the site fades into yet another assimilative appropriation. […] The pervert, then, is the one who carries transgression to its utmost consequence. This is why the asshole is also closely connected to a love of ‘all the outcasts.’ ‘Can one imagine anything more offensive, a greater mockery of prevailing decency, than the poor, boat refugees, the mentally ill, losers, whores, drug addicts—the expelled waste of society?’

The logic at work in Mycelium is therefore also a revolutionary logic—a logic that does not accept gradual adaptations and accommodations, but instead argues for a total overturning of normative structures. This is, of course, exclusionary toward the nomad, but perhaps this is the only right that remains to the already excluded? To be able to choose one’s own comrades-in-arms: ‘The pervert finds pleasure in this mocking derision.’”

Yet Another Effort, Deviants, If You Would Become Free

By Mycelium

The pathology of perversion

Modern society is perverse, not in spite of its puritanism or as if from a backlash provoked by its hypocrisy; it is in actual fact, and directly, perverse.
(Michel Foucault: Will to knowledge)

Perversion is  a penetrating aspect of modern society – to the extent that the concept itself has been perverted, since debauchery has become legitimized as a personal right to self-realization. The fact that debauchery is considered a right contradicts the very source of debauchery, the well from which the jouissance of perversion is nurtured, thus constricting it and rendering the subversive potential of perversion harmless. The permitted and private excess doesn’t really challenge the established order, which, as we all know, is the order of the ruling classes, who on their part can capitalize on the individual deviant’s characteristics. The question thus remains: Is our society sufficiently perverse?

Perversion is originally tied to the active turning away from truth itself; a corruption and distortion of man. In the 13th century, where we first encounter the concept, this implies a refusal of god, since man’s nature is inseparable from a god-fearing determination. Anyone who was an enemy of the established and current truth, anyone who infused with lust for knowledge, engaged in the alchemic quest for ennobling the spirit or gave in to passions that could not be reconciled with an ascetic worship of god, any heretic, heathen, eroticist or witch was, by the very nature of things, a pervert. By the end of the 18th century, perversion is specifically used to denote deviant erotic behavior which would differ from a common conception of heterosexual, procreative behavior. That is: sodomy. Freud later concluded that every man is perverted, and that the perversion is rooted in the infantile sexual development. Where perversion was once something to be condemned and punished, it became something to uncover, diagnose and treat. Thus, perversion was still in opposition to the real and thus a diversion from a new version of the truth. However, condemnation was to a large degree still tied to perversion, and, in an attempt to correct this, John Money introduced the so-called neutral concept paraphilia. Politically motivated by a wish to embrace sexual diversity and the individual right to self-realization, more and more have condoned this legitimizing notion. From a purely conceptual point of view, the notion is all right. Paraphilia: a deviant, contrary, beyond (para) tendentious love (philia). From an impure conceptual point of view, it lacks the transgressive aspect we find in the concept of perversion.

It is in the original notion of perversion, the pathological, condemned and accursed notion, that we recognize a progressive and subversive potential. According to the original notion, the pervert is a man who actively turns away from god, transgresses any nature-given determination and  finds pleasure in a behavior which does not have utility and functionality as its object. In other words, the pervert aims at the dissolution of the constituted structures and dynamics. Such dissolution is the immanent core in any form of eroticism if it is taken to the limit. Perversion thus contains a deeper existential and philosophical quality in its abyss, which challenges god, nature, the established order and the structure of society. And the question is, when we seek to introduce perversion in the sphere of legitimacy, whether we are not then losing track of and perverting the very understanding of our own abysses, existential depth, perversion itself and the odd jouissance one find in the bond between  horror and joyous ecstasy. Must we castrate our minds and our eyes in order to adapt our passions to the optics of legitimacy? If the task following God’s death is to reevaluate all values and turn existence inside out, who then is sick?

 

The excremental universe

For the power of destroying matter is not granted to man: the most he can do is to vary its forms. And since every form is equal in the eyes of nature nothing is lost in changing them. Change continues her power and maintains her kinetic energy . . . Ah! what does it matter to her ever-creating womb if today matter is flesh and tomorrow worms!
(Sade: Justine)

Nowhere else is the destructive character of perversion more obvious than in the works of Marquis de Sade who again and again stresses how the social, moral and divine order must be undermined, not necessarily to attain the total destruction but rather to equalize any difference, thereby creating a chaos from which the pervert can arise and create the world anew. We are presented to numerous orgies where any difference is being undermined, mocked and decomposed at a material as well as a symbolic level. Some protagonists of his are fantasizing about being Etna; this mouth of hell, that melting pot, which can recreate, mix and reject anything. Etna, into which the philosopher Empedocles threw himself, so as to return to the elements and arise as a God. Yet, a God acenting from such a crater might be sacred but is in no way the heavenly God, who by his first act of creation separates light and darkness, then sea and earth, the species and mankind, and who through and through builds on principles of distinction, division and differentiation. The pervert seeks the undifferentiated, the limitless, where the goal is the destruction of the differentiation between sexes and generations(Janine Chasseguet-Smirgel: Creativity and perversion). Sade is demonstration this again and again, making his protagonists mock the ruling institutions and conventional norms. He discloses a perverted logic that legitimizes debauchery by taking a point of departure in the character of nature, religion and the conventions, thus turning them against themselves. Not that legitimacy is needed. Rather, he does this in order to again to mock and undermine the constituted structures.

Bodies are combined across gender, status and age in every conceivable and inconceivable way. Everyone penetrates and is penetrated, flogged, defieled and so on, and should one run out of holes to fill, the knife will do the trick. In the end everything is decomposed and mixed. The annihilation of any difference, the descend into being, assumes an excremental character. The terrestrial globe is covered with volcanoes which serve as its anus (Bataille: Solar Anus). Enormous melting pots that devour and even-out, so as in time to throw up its waste and defile the outside world. It is the universe of the sullifying blasphemer where everything that separates, all that is taboo, forbidden or sacred is devoured by the digestive tract, an enormous grinding machine disintegrating the molecules of the mass thus obtained in order to reduce it to excrement (Janine Chasseguet-Smirgel: Creativity and perversion). The pervert makes the sacrament excrement, mocks the law and belittles fate. The all too human God who ascended from the depths of a volcano is the creator Maldoror sang about who sits on his throne of excrement and gold, high above the earth and, to Jung’s great horror, defecates all over the world (Jung: memories dreams reflections & Lautréamont: Songs of Maldoror). This is why Artaud can state: where it smells of shit it smells of being (Artaud: To Have Done With the Judgement of god).

By recognizing the excremental character of being, the abyss of this existence, the pervert adds the peculiar joy -horror’s pact with the thrilling ecstasy – that can follow upon gazing into the abyss . The aim of the perverse activity is not transcendence, the transcendent, the gift of mercy, but rather transgression as over-stepping that annihilates any difference between genders, bodies, experiences etc. The outermost aim of the pervert is the limitless, the cessation of distinctions and separation, but paradoxically, in order to be able to find enjoyment in this, the pervert must recognize ‘him-’ or ‘herself’ at a distance from the desired object. The point of departure of the perverted debauchery is, in other words, the awful paradoxicality of existence, which is not denied but rather serves as nourishment to the exalted transgression. It is important to underline that when we talk about the pervert, the pervert is one who takes perversion to its extreme and not just someone who cherishes particular and personal enjoyments but otherwise complies with cultural conventions. Viewed from the perspective of normality, the pervert is sick, but this notion of health rests on amnesia concerning the excremental character of the world; the world that continually oscillates between birth and chaos, creation and destruction (Nietzsche: Will to Power §1050), whose excrement is its nourishment (Nietzsche: Will to Power §1066). The totality of the pervert’s perspective does not exclude that which cannot be digested and transformed; the useless, the excremental, the daimonic, but finds pleasure in ‘hers’ or ‘his’ illness, in the fever of matter that has been aroused to sensitivityaroused to pleasure of the organic, the rotting-living  matter itself, the fetid flesh, and has become perceptible to the arousing one.

With pleasure, the pervert mocks, taunts and exhibits the very notion of health. Accursed and crucified to the earth by the healthy being of resentment, the perverted being of jouissance exclaims in contempt: I killed my father, I ate human flesh, and I quiver with joy. As Caligula, the pervert wants to drown the sky in the sea, to infuse ugliness with beauty, to wing a laugh from pain (Camus: Caligula).

 

The parodic cosmos

Those lacking imagination take refuge in reality
(Goddard: Goodbye to Language)

There are various eyes. Even the Sphinx has eyes: and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth.
(Nietzsche: Will to Power §540)

It is clear that the world is purely parodic
(Bataille: Solar Anus)

The pervert is confusing the falsehoods for truths, according to psychoanalysis. The conventional norm considers the pervert immature and self-deceptive, and according to religious dogmatism, the pervert has turned away from God. However, something entirely different seems to be the case. The pervert has abolished truth and replaced its singular form with a diversity of perspectives. Rather than pledging allegiance to one singular truth that denies all that cannot stand in the service of the one truth, all that is insufferable and useless, the pervert mocks the flimsy conceptual cathedrals in which the truth-lover seeks refuge. The “truth” and the established order thus show their parodic character, the boundaries are blurred and everything may soon morph into a new and different thing: an eye, an egg, a sun, a bull’s testicel. This does not mean that the pervert agrees with the constructivists or the nihilists who exclaim “Everything is allowed”, not even the absurdist remark “Everything is possible”(Lev Shestov: All Things are Possible). After the death of God and the collapse of the great narrative, the pervert maintains the only truth that remains – an experimental, mocking, and parodic truth: everything is perverse. Furthermore, the pervert claims that those who do not acknowledge that they carry within themselves their own contradiction and abyss live half lives. Schopenhauer taught us that the world is our imagination, an open eye that sees and divides the world according to the conditions of the imagination – in object and subject, in time and space – and as a result, matter flows in a never ending unfinished stream. Also, the world is entirely will, nature as it is in itself, Immanuel Kant’s das Ding an sich, Marquis de Sade’s boiling pot, the mouth of Etna, whose hidden character the pervert has determined as excremental. That is, the world is blind will, excrement and endless overflowing. Matter flows like the tears of suffering from the inflamed wound that the open eye inflicted on the world. But rather than despairing in awe of this existential condition, the pervert strikes a tearful laughter and finds a joyous jouissance in the futility, mutability and boundlessness of everything.

 

Ontology of the ass

That night he dreamed that he had to expel the universe out of his anus
(K. Abraham: The Narcissistic Evaluation of Excretory Processes in Dreams and Neurosis)

When you will have made him a body without organs,
then you will have delivered him from all his automatic reactions
and restored him to his true freedom.

They you will teach him again to dance wrong side out
as in the frenzy of dance halls
and this wrong side out will be his real place.
(Artaud: To Have Done With the Judgement of god)

If the progressive potential of the pervert is to be redeemed so the pervert can call herself free, it is not enough to dwell on destructive aspects of perversion. Should flowers not be able to sprout in the compost of being? When all differences are equalized, when everything is reduced to the excremental essence of being in the belly of the volcano; the pervert has set herself free from any convention, moral obligation, truth, god and the compulsion of culture and can thus recreate herself out of this undifferentiated mass. Since the sexes have been abolished and devoured, the ass can now take the place of the sex. The ass is the neutral and common gender of the newly created body that unites everyone, and with its mere presence, the ass mocks and parodies the utility, the purpose of procreation, the mouth and the word.

It marks a new ontological paradigm, where the ass is the melting pot that can transform everything and produce what Artaud called “the body without organs”; this true freedom, that makes it possible to sew yourself back together into a whole without the god who assimilates you and produces you, as if you produced yourself … out of nothingness and against Him; beautiful as a Chance meeting on a dissecting table of a sewing machine and an umbrella (Lautréamont: Songs of Maldoror). In other words, the pervert’s potential consists of opposing the prevailing order, breaking it down, such as to re-create herself out of this chaos. To thrust the universe out of its anus in enormous explosions, Big Bang, gigantic prolapsing stars, which turn the inside out of being and send interstellar gas clouds out in the very galaxy to condense and merge into new solar systems, galaxies and worlds. In the end is the word. It means nothing. And one must still have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star (Nietzsche: Thus Spoke Zarathustra).

 

Perversion and revolution

The pervert will thus throw herself into the volcano and repel and eject to become a creator herself. When this potential is taken to its limit, the pervert will become subversive and a revolutionary. And what is more perverted than the love for the rejected  with its mockery and parody of the prevailing order, the petty-bourgeois complacency and self-sufficiency – a mockery that is in the mere presence of the rejected. Can you think of anything more offensive, a greater scorn against the ruling decency, than poor people, boat refugees, insane people, losers, whores, drug addicts, the outcasts of society?

The pervert finds delight in this mocking scorn, finds the revelation and embarrassment of the exposed decency ridiculous and exclaims: Arise, you damned, ostracized, deferred, expelled from this earth. Become an undifferentiated mass and spill all over the laced, self-righteous social order. Like Nietzsche just before he went mad, we will embrace a horse, and like Caligula, we will appoint it a consul. It will lead to our advancement.

And when we lie wounded, after the revolution has betrayed itself, I will lick your wounds. Not because they are orchids or roses, but because they are an opening in your body where all that is life and death flows like the tears of matter from the wound that the open eye inflicted on existence. Rather than devouring your flower, I will permeate in the soil, open my mouth and allow you to set root in it, so that you can grow, germinate and sprout above the surface from my open mouth buried beneath you (Eugenie Piegnot: Posthume writings).

And was I to be buried face down, you would have to find another opening in which to set root.

 

Continue reading “Yet Another Effort, Deviants, If You Would Become Free”