lynn
ModPo student
Posts: 6
|
Post by lynn on Jan 12, 2023 2:02:59 GMT -5
I agree that there are some people who relish uncertainty. I've seen people dominate via the exercise of it. Uncertainty can be a ploy used in offices world-wide, where people in positions of power deliberately create uncertainty, so that everyone around them rushes around fixing problems they have created, while they exercise power and climb the corporate ladder. Many a talented person has been crushed by the use of such power dynamics. Uncertainty can't be so simply defined as 'loving it or hating it'. It has a moral quality to it. I think that it's possible to describe those who pushed QAnon themes as loving uncertainty and Trump as being its CEO. The implication here at ModPo is that those who relish 'uncertainty' are somehow better, more creative, inspired, able to do the work most valued, that of poetry etc than those who find 'certainty' important. If you like uncertainty, you are a plodder, uninspired, somehow challenged. I think that there are serious problems with such thinking. I suspect that those of you who relish 'uncertainty' suddenly lost your job, or your home, or your entire family - as is currently happening in Ukraine - might find that relishing 'uncertainty' is not as appealing a psychological category. Lear on the heath - having lost it all - gone from king to pauper, that's uncertainty - and there's no relishing it, and he goes mad - as Shakespeare makes clear. Uncertainty and madness are seriously correlated. Philosophy involves thinking - the ability to think, evaluate, push arguments along - that's all I'm doing here. This is not about causing offence, or getting people offside - but about challenging issues that require challenge. Hello Laura! The uncertainty seems to have hit you in a very personal way. I participated in the zoom and your reaction surprises me. There are several definitions to the word "uncertain". The fifth definition in the Merriam Webster is "not reliable" or untrustworthy. I think that no one here on ModPo would relish a situation in which a child cannot trust their family members or an employee who feels uncertain in their job position because their employers or superiors are not trustworthy and manipulative. On the other hand the outcome of a scientific experiment is "not known beyond doubt" (1st definition) and not constant (2nd definition) or subject to variables. The same could be said of our reactions to a particular poet and their work. Your referring to QAnon and Trump as loving uncertainty surprises me! From my experience they are people who are absolutely certain of their beliefs. ModPo presents us with often challenging material, it's up to us how we react to it. In the discussion forums we can find all kinds of people and all kinds of reactions. It provides a space for everyone to express themselves. I think it's harsh to say ModPo has positive or negative judgements about the different people who participate. I'm not an academic and often feel that my comments are very different from others, and that's ok. Joan Retallack is not easy but if I'm here for the ride I want to find a way to appreciate what she's offering me. If that means NOT getting it, NOT being certain I'm going to try. Anyone else is free to find it opaque, obscure or uncomfortable. And I have to admit that in my life experience many important people and life situations that I was absolutely certain of turned out not to be certain at all. As a result I do have some distrust for certainty.
|
|
|
Post by Laura De Bernardi on Jan 12, 2023 4:40:56 GMT -5
Hi, lynn, I appreciate your response, thank you. I think it's important to discuss the meaning of words like 'certain' and 'uncertain' and how they can be used or not. Essentially, I agree with you. The word 'uncertain' has various meanings, and I think it's important to tease that out, as you did. I was doing no differently, although in a more provocative way.
I don't think it's useful or helpful to describe people as either relishing or not relishing uncertainty. I was challenging that. I think that in some situations, people can relish it and in others not. I don't see the problem with saying so. I think that blanket statements describing what people at ModPo are like are a problem. I've been said to be "on the side of the oppressors" here at ModPo because I was critical of various aspects of modernism and post-modernism. I offer that up in this context, because it's important to clarify that people judge each other all the time - it's human nature to do so - and to think that it doesn't happen at ModPo is misguided.
In general, the moment a human being is defined as being a member of a category, there are implications to that. I was suggesting what those implications might be. I think all human beings are much larger than any category. I'm currently reading a rhymed translation of Pushkin's verse novel Eugenie Onegin. I think it's wonderful. I love the certainty of the rhyming action. I love participating in the translator's ingenuity and extraordinary playfulness with language. It's a genuine pleasure. What does that make me here at ModPo? Am I now in the 'certainty' camp? I adore Wallace Stevens and Bob Kaufman. What camp does that put me in?
Trump: I did not say that he was not "absolutely certain of (his) beliefs." I am sorry if you read me that way. It's not what I meant at all. What I said was that people can use the tactics of uncertainty to achieve and maintain power. I was talking about the dynamics of power and not belief systems. One can be utterly certain of one's beliefs and use the tactics of uncertainty/surprise, etc to further your own ends. That is what I said. I was suggesting that the word itself points to both postive and negative outcomes in many fields of human endeavour, whether in politics, child rearing, etc.
Finally, uncertainty in and of itself, doesn't necessarily mean that the outcomes are 'good.' I have a problem with how the word is being used in a poetic context. The same argument can be levelled at Ezra Pound's famous invocation: "make it new." Just because it's new doesn't make it better. What makes experimental poetry 'better'? What is the criteria for judgement? I think that also could do with some teasing out, with some discussion, at ModPo.
|
|
|
Post by Laura De Bernardi on Jan 12, 2023 5:22:18 GMT -5
Denny, I think it's important to be clear. I was not referring to people who are attracted to conspiracy theories. I was referring to people who "push" them, that is, people who are leading the charge, not those who follow. I suspect that initally the so-called 'Q drops' were haphazard statements which, over time, took on a life of their own as some clever, opportunistic people began to mine them for meaning.
It's the people who got on the Q gravy train - the people who began to 'translate' what the various 'drops' might mean - who enjoyed using tactics of uncertainty to dominate, make money, etc. I wasn't referring to the psychology of the Q phenomen but to its unfolding dynamic. As I said in my response to lynn below, it is possible to be certain of one's beliefs and to use the tactic of uncertainty to dominate others. I was using the word in a variety of ways in the hope of opening up debate about the nature of the word itself.
Describing people who are attracted to Q, and how it is metamorphosing, as 'afraid of uncertainty' - I have questions around that kind of language. I suspect that what's happening is more complex. People who are attracted to Q and its new manifestations are afraid of the certainty of the elites. That's another way of looking at it. In a very real sense, they don't trust the politic, economic and academic elites, which they blame for wreaking havoc in their lives. That's why the language that's becoming normalised in the USA now amongst these groupings is "awake not woke".
They are just as certain in their awakeness, as are others in their wokeness. Both camps, it seems to me, are very certain of where they stand. And that's one of the huge problems when it comes to discussing these issues. Holding the middle group - trying to understand what's going on - that's not easy at all now. Personally, I don't know who is certain/uncertain, or who is or isn't afraid of uncertainty.
Finally, one last point about how I use language. I often use phrases like 'it's possible to argue'. I do my best to use open-ended language in order to open up conversation. To be 'taken to task' Denny, because I am making suggestions about possibilities, implications, and exploring outcomes, makes me feel like a child who must be taught a lesson. Perhaps you could 'take me to task' less? The last time I looked, it seems to me that we're about the same age, and of relatively similar and reasonable intelligence. I think that's a far better place to begin again from, don't you?
|
|
adef
ModPo student
Posts: 20
|
Post by adef on Jan 12, 2023 11:31:07 GMT -5
On forms of uncertainty.
Reading the responses above I am struck by how differently people seem to understand uncertainty and how this in turn alters how we understand Retallack. This is my view and I look forward to hearing yours:
1) where there is relevant information on which to base a decision, uncertainty relates to the way to act. I would call this indecision.
2) where there is too much relevant information ie the situation is complicated or complex, uncertainty relates to how one processes the information. It becomes a thinking issue. We are undecided but can reach a decision.
3) where there is conflicting information none of which clearly leads to a conclusion then uncertainty is resolved by judgement. No decision is either right or wrong but can be a personal choice based on the relevant context.
4) where there are conflicting opinions some of which are not truthful (I count Qanon as lying in this territory) then uncertainty is an individual's psychological response to the prevailing orthodoxy or social pressure. Retallack refers to this as formulaic 'suites of words' requiring writing as a 'radical reformulation.
5) the kind of uncertainty that I think interests Retallack is where none of the above conditions apply: the uncertainty lies external to anyone;we do not even know that we are uncertain. It is not that we are uncertain but that the complex context in which we live is uncertain if only we could apprehend it. This requires her form of artistic imagination. It is brave.
|
|
adef
ModPo student
Posts: 20
|
Post by adef on Jan 12, 2023 11:57:08 GMT -5
I suspect that those of you who relish 'uncertainty' suddenly lost your job, or your home, or your entire family - as is currently happening in Ukraine - might find that relishing 'uncertainty' is not as appealing a psychological category. Laura, this is a very timely example and I have been wondering how Retallak might respond to it. Few poets write from the front line. Could this be because they are in fact certain: they have to stay alive. Apart from weather forecasting, war is about as complex and chaotic a circumstance as I can understand. What would a 'radical reformulation' as Retallack asks for look like? How do we even begin to talk about it? Is war the ultimate failure of imagination? Retallack says that conversation - especially with her alter 'slef'- is her way of thinking. In many ways the Ukraine - Russia conflict is a war of alter egos. At the moment so many stories are being generated with no common basis of truth even though the warring factions can understand each others' language. Are they therefore warring over conflicting forms of imagination (freedom against totalitarianism)? What is the poethical moral stance in these circumstances? Is this what happens when imagination is removed from 'Not a Cage'?
|
|
|
Post by marciacamino on Jan 12, 2023 12:10:54 GMT -5
Yesterday's zoom session was just so enriching and inspiring. I loved Lydia's analogy of a 'difficult joke', and I remember that in my initial years in Mod Po, I would feel that way about so many poems. Stacy talked about understanding how Retallack reassures us that incomprehensibility is ok. And also, Al pointed out how there are two kinds of people in this world - one kind who cannot stand uncertainty and the other type who welcome it. I was of the first kind. Not only did I feel wretched with the complexities of life, but I also felt wretched with the complexity of relationships. And I find that reading these poems in this collaborative space has made me more attentive to everything around me and more accepting of people and situations. I now feel that these difficult poems can also be pleasurable. Close reading like this seems to open up all the closed and clogged neural pathways in one's brain. Close reading like this seems to open up all the closed and clogged neural pathways in one's brain. AGREED! If close reading can open up the clogged neural pathways in one's brain, let's see what it can do with respiratory systems! (says cold suffer, currently).
|
|
|
Post by marciacamino on Jan 12, 2023 12:25:28 GMT -5
Will B, I like much of what you say. Non-understanding makes me feel awkward, but I now expect that of poetry. Who on the first read-through of any poem gets it completely? JR knows this and invites it. I particularly like that you call your early read-through(s) a meditative practice. I, do, too. I just keep going in my uncomfortability, trying to rest easy with it. Meaning might or might not come later.
To your point about Stein, I found that I had to read her aloud the first/second/third time through her pieces in ModPo and found them delightful. Had I not taken her words to the air zone, so to speak, left them in my eye/brain zone, I, too, might have given up on her.
|
|
|
Post by ellaadkins on Jan 12, 2023 18:00:44 GMT -5
Been reflecting on the wondrous group of thoughtful humans that was the Zoom session the other night.
What has particularly been sitting with me is the idea/necessity of the collective. Retallack urges and is quite insistent at nudging us towards leaning in to the unknown and embrace the ambiguous and the murky, which I find so inspiring and liberating.
In particular, this idea of collective knowledge making and community really resonates with the period of life I'm moving through (not to get to personal), where I am moving into my late 20's and feeling the mad scramble to 'make something' of myself, whatever the heck that means. This pressure to KNOW as MUCH as possibly can in the shortest amount of time possible, which can be attributed to the capitalistic, and corporate value systems that infiltrate our everyday, has been weighing on me lately: do I know enough? Have I figured out enough? Am I wise and learned enough to call myself a teacher and creator?
These pressures I have placed on myself are simultaneously arbitrary, negative and unrealistic as well as yearning, curious and growth oriented. However, Retallack, to me, offers some sort of solution to this desire to know, and the 'yearning mind'. She encourages a exploratory and non-possessive kind of knowing. Leaning into the unknown and the ambiguous, isn't about giving up a pursuit of knowledge, or just passively fading into the abyss of the uncompartmentalized and non-concrete. It is about bringing forth a curiosity and willingness to learn that isn't concerned with hierarchy, or competition, or the possession of knowledge. Her ethics are democratic and invite a collective knowledge making to occur. In Retallacks poethics of presentness and embracing confusion, we are not required to know EVERYTHING since that is impossible, but rather bringing forth our own funds of wisdom. What I will further suggest is that, as we saw in the Zoom the other day, as well as in this whole ModPo community, that knowing, unknowing, and leaning into that which is unknown or not fully compartmented, ISN'T AN ISOLATED ACT. It is vital that we adventure on through the brambles of entangled knowledge and its mysterious knots together, not to dominate it, but to experience realism as Retallack's argues it is to be: sticky, messy and sometimes, for the best, unexplained.
|
|
lidia
ModPo student
Posts: 24
|
Post by lidia on Jan 12, 2023 20:15:41 GMT -5
The implication here at ModPo is that those who relish 'uncertainty' are somehow better, more creative, inspired, able to do the work most valued, that of poetry etc than those who find 'certainty' important. If you like uncertainty, you are a plodder, uninspired, somehow challenged. I think that there are serious problems with such thinking. I suspect that those of you who relish 'uncertainty' suddenly lost your job, or your home, or your entire family - as is currently happening in Ukraine - might find that relishing 'uncertainty' is not as appealing a psychological category. Just to add a few thoughts to this Laura, I kind of view 'uncertainty' as a a question of 'how' complexities are represented - of aesthetic choices which have ethical consequences. It is a question that many of the poets and artists in Al's book about confronting the war and remaking the modern, deal with. How as a poet, does one deal with/represent war? If experiences are first-hand there is trauma and then, intergenerational trauma. What implications does this have for your art if you are Ukrainian? For your poetry? If you are an artist affected by the war at a distance (perhaps living in another country) you might see the seeds of intergenerational trauma sown in the present, you might see Ukraine's past impacting in its present or see a multiplicity of perspectives, or colliding representations ranging from photographic, social media, news, cultural propaganda to philosophical-political analysis. So many layers. How to navigate all this? To write in the 'I' if you are living at a distance may not be appropriate. We are bombarded by a disjunctive collage of information daily which might make some forms more appropriate as windows into the conflict. At the heart of it, it seems to me that being in a state of uncertainty and replicating uncertainty in your art (in its form) is an authentic position for many artists. eg. Elision where pain cannot find words might be more effective than the certainty of words that diminish the hurt. Smudges rather than clear lines might be all you can make.
|
|
|
Post by vijaya on Jan 12, 2023 21:32:07 GMT -5
Yesterday's zoom session was just so enriching and inspiring. I loved Lydia's analogy of a 'difficult joke', and I remember that in my initial years in Mod Po, I would feel that way about so many poems. Stacy talked about understanding how Retallack reassures us that incomprehensibility is ok. And also, Al pointed out how there are two kinds of people in this world - one kind who cannot stand uncertainty and the other type who welcome it. I was of the first kind. Not only did I feel wretched with the complexities of life, but I also felt wretched with the complexity of relationships. And I find that reading these poems in this collaborative space has made me more attentive to everything around me and more accepting of people and situations. I now feel that these difficult poems can also be pleasurable. Close reading like this seems to open up all the closed and clogged neural pathways in one's brain. Close reading like this seems to open up all the closed and clogged neural pathways in one's brain. AGREED! If close reading can open up the clogged neural pathways in one's brain, let's see what it can do with respiratory systems! (says cold suffer, currently). I do hope the collective energy boosts your immune system and the cold goes away! In the meantime, drink a lot of fluids !!!
|
|
|
Post by vijaya on Jan 12, 2023 21:52:45 GMT -5
On forms of uncertainty. Reading the responses above I am struck by how differently people seem to understand uncertainty and how this in turn alters how we understand Retallack. This is my view and I look forward to hearing yours: 1) where there is relevant information on which to base a decision, uncertainty relates to the way to act. I would call this indecision. 2) where there is too much relevant information ie the situation is complicated or complex, uncertainty relates to how one processes the information. It becomes a thinking issue. We are undecided but can reach a decision. 3) where there is conflicting information none of which clearly leads to a conclusion then uncertainty is resolved by judgement. No decision is either right or wrong but can be a personal choice based on the relevant context. 4) where there are conflicting opinions some of which are not truthful (I count Qanon as lying in this territory) then uncertainty is an individual's psychological response to the prevailing orthodoxy or social pressure. Retallack refers to this as formulaic 'suites of words' requiring writing as a 'radical reformulation. 5) the kind of uncertainty that I think interests Retallack is where none of the above conditions apply: the uncertainty lies external to anyone;we do not even know that we are uncertain. It is not that we are uncertain but that the complex context in which we live is uncertain if only we could apprehend it. This requires her form of artistic imagination. It is brave. I like the way you have systematically analyzed the different types of uncertainty. I agree that Joan Retallack refers to a broader context outside of individual subjectivity. But to understand the broader context we have to necessarily revert to our own understanding of uncertainty. We all faced that kind of uncertainty with the pandemic. Similarly, even in our individual experiences we do encounter periods of uncertainty and that is what we bring to our reading of the kind of poetry she is talking about. I also take it as a way out of the binaries which are dividing people into inimical groups. Just my thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Laura De Bernardi on Jan 12, 2023 23:36:30 GMT -5
adef, I appreciate your thoughtfulness, and have enjoyed considering your questions, thank you! Some poets write from the front line (eg WWI English poets) but I agree, most people are fixated on surviving.
I don't see war as involving a failure of imagination or of alter egos or of freedom vs totalitarianism, perhaps because I tend to use to a different kind of language and consider war in material terms. Somebody else has got what I want and feel that I need in order to survive - that kind of reasoning.
Why would America want to defend Taiwan against China? Because Taiwan currently produces the most sophisticated chips on the planet - due to how globalisation played out - and while there are American companies determined to introduce such a manufacturing base in the USA, a timeframe of over a decade is required to get similar facilities up and running. These are incredibly sophisticated, pristine, dust free environmments. They are not quick, simple builds. Why would China want to control Taiwan? For the same reason, to protect and enlarge its sphere of influence, which the USA has done brilliantly for so many decades now.
In terms of human history, globalisation happened incredibly quickly, with its incredibly complex supply lines, and 'just in time' production models, all of which have proved remarkably efficient in times of political stability, to the point that 'we' in the West have led what you might call charmed lives. And while it seemed economically intelligent and sensible at one point to base the manufacturing of chips in Taiwan, the geo-political consequences of globalisation are now making themselves felt as American influence wanes, and others jostle for a share of power using all means available - diplomacy, trade agreements, and, finally, war.
When it comes to these issues, I value the opinion of Prof John Mearsheimer, University of Chicago. He makes the most sense to me. Without going into his arguments - unnecessary in this context of poetry - I experience myself as enjoying certainties that have most human beings throughout human history could barely imagine. Short of nuclear war being declared overnight, I am reasonably certain of waking up tomorrow morning, of reading the newspaper over a good cup of coffee, followed by an incredibly nutritious lunch - all the right kinds of vegetables and fruits...and so on and so forth. I am living in the luxurious lap of certainty, and while so many here want some other kind of experience, I'm sitting here thinking about certainty, and the extraordinary marvel that it is, and what it is that constructs the marvellous certainties that I enjoy, unparalled, as I say, in human history.
I tend to see the comfortable lifestyle that I lead - typing on a marvellous laptop - with the incredible nature of digital technology allowing me to write to you about poetry, when I'm thousands of miles away (in Australia) - as resulting from living inside the American sphere of influence that it has fought for and protected so vigorously. All of its harshness, to others, I am the happy beneficiary of, for the simple reason that I was born here, and not in South America, a peasant on the wrong side of politics in Columbia say, or in Africa - where climate change, drought, poverty, political instability - might mean that, at this very moment, I might be in despair, contemplating fleeing to Europe in a leaky boat, or even starving to death, rather than expecting to hit, "Post Quick Reply".
|
|
|
Post by Laura De Bernardi on Jan 13, 2023 1:15:19 GMT -5
lidia, I loved reading your post - you are so sensitive to war's horrendous impacts - its destructive complexities - how swords maiming or bombs falling can reverberate for decades if not centuries - and how war itself maims our bodies, our minds, and our ability to creatively interrogate our world. That's its nature, sadly, and in saying so, I'm considering the blight of WW2, and how it, still, in my own family casts its shadow on my life. I'm thinking now of a French WWI book of haiku, composed in the trenches in 1916, which has just been newly translated into English, probably because the spectre of war once again haunts us here in the comfortable (for some) West. "One Hundred Visions of War", Julien Vocance, 1916, trans Alfred Nicol, pub Nov 2022: Two rows of trenches, Two lines of barbed-wire fences: Civilization. An aesthetic choice has been made - form and content in dissonant and uncomfortable relationship - war's ugly, stirring, challenging complexities, represented - ethical implications manifesting. What I'm unsure about is how important issues discussed here, of certainty/uncertainty, are to the making of such choices. I can see that you feel strongly about it, and that there are forms of writing and language which exhibit 'certainties which diminishes the hurt' rather than gives voice to it. I'm wondering what an example of that might be. My guess is that I'd simply label such attempts as 'bad' poetry, which misses its mark. But, I don't say that glibly, or idly. I am interested, or I wouldn't go to such lengths here, to try and understand the issues. I'm wondering what you think of Rokhl Korn, Jewish/Yiddish poet, (1898-1982): yiddishkayt.org/other-side-of-the-poem That poem struck me when I first read it - its power immediate - and I am moved and feel teary every time. I suppose what I'm getting at, perhaps rather lamely, is that people find their way to an expression of honest emotion, with the route to expression as torturous as the experience itself is. There is nothing simple, easy, or certain in the experience, and there can be nothing simple, easy or certain in its expression. I don't feel I need the language of wagers or a neologism such as poethics, to come to that conclusion, and to embrace and honour artists who seek to make the journey, from experience to expression.
|
|
|
Post by Denny on Jan 13, 2023 1:29:13 GMT -5
Denny, I think it's important to be clear. I was not referring to people who are attracted to conspiracy theories. I was referring to people who "push" them, that is, people who are leading the charge, not those who follow. I suspect that initally the so-called 'Q drops' were haphazard statements which, over time, took on a life of their own as some clever, opportunistic people began to mine them for meaning. It's the people who got on the Q gravy train - the people who began to 'translate' what the various 'drops' might mean - who enjoyed using tactics of uncertainty to dominate, make money, etc. I wasn't referring to the psychology of the Q phenomen but to its unfolding dynamic. As I said in my response to lynn below, it is possible to be certain of one's beliefs and to use the tactic of uncertainty to dominate others. I was using the word in a variety of ways in the hope of opening up debate about the nature of the word itself. Describing people who are attracted to Q, and how it is metamorphosing, as 'afraid of uncertainty' - I have questions around that kind of language. I suspect that what's happening is more complex. People who are attracted to Q and its new manifestations are afraid of the certainty of the elites. That's another way of looking at it. In a very real sense, they don't trust the politic, economic and academic elites, which they blame for wreaking havoc in their lives. That's why the language that's becoming normalised in the USA now amongst these groupings is "awake not woke". They are just as certain in their awakeness, as are others in their wokeness. Both camps, it seems to me, are very certain of where they stand. And that's one of the huge problems when it comes to discussing these issues. Holding the middle group - trying to understand what's going on - that's not easy at all now. Personally, I don't know who is certain/uncertain, or who is or isn't afraid of uncertainty. Finally, one last point about how I use language. I often use phrases like 'it's possible to argue'. I do my best to use open-ended language in order to open up conversation. To be 'taken to task' Denny, because I am making suggestions about possibilities, implications, and exploring outcomes, makes me feel like a child who must be taught a lesson. Perhaps you could 'take me to task' less? The last time I looked, it seems to me that we're about the same age, and of relatively similar and reasonable intelligence. I think that's a far better place to begin again from, don't you?
|
|
|
Post by Denny on Jan 13, 2023 1:32:10 GMT -5
Laura my choice of phrase ‘to take you to task’ was a poor choice of phrase that didn’t accurately reflect my intention. What I had wanted to do was to highlight and register my complete disagreement with your using QAnon as somehow analogous to anything Retallack discusses or mentions. This in particular because it was the second post on which you had brought up QAnon. In another you had suggested that QAnon could be described as ‘playful’ and I had heartily disagreed with that assessment but had not replied. So this time I felt doubly compelled to speak my mind quickly, and I am not quick witted. And additionally I read into your post correctly or not a tone that really rankled me. I did also conflate those who ‘pushed’ with those who bought into QAnon, and that shows just how flawed my reading ability often can be. I really don’t know what the deranged minds that push QAnon are thinking, but I still don’t believe QAnon has anything to do with anything Retallack writes about in the poethical wager. And in fact in the excerpt from the wager posted I don’t believe there is even any mention of the terms certainty or uncertainty. There is a lot of talk about complexity and simplification and realism but nothing of certainty and uncertainty. I don’t even know where that originated. Maybe on the recording? I was there but don’t recall and have not re listened to it.
That said, there’s nothing novel about embracing or lauding the fact of uncertainty. Keats talks about it in his famous letter about negative capability in the context of Shakespeare and also mentions Lear whom you brought up. Doubt and uncertainty are a part of the landscape of our complex reality. Even math is subject to uncertainty. Bertrand Russell wrote in the twenties that he had sought along with his colleague Alfred North Whitehead before WW1 to answer the seemingly simple question of whether math was true. And Russell wrote that although as a result they came up with something called Principia Mathematica they were unable to answer his original question of whether math was true. I think the reason why became clear a few years after Russell wrote that recollection when Kurt Gödel came out with his incompleteness theorem which appears to have rendered Russell’s question unanswerable. And Heisenberg even developed an uncertainty principle to describe atomic behavior. These advances in math & physics don’t mean that anything goes. They are specific and difficult to wrap one’s head around and certain in their depiction of types of uncertainty. I’m not competent to discuss them in detail but believe they form another component of the modernist landscape of the twentieth century.
|
|