Like a good philosopher, you figure out a brilliant idea and then immediately critique the hell out of it
Though I enjoyed that musing,
this one is probably my favorite
Thank you
@Wyote, it means a lot. Not many people engage with my aphorisms, they tend to find them too abstract. I stick to them because it really is my dream to create a system built around the concept of the open essence (I have made diagrams, written dictionary entries, many things to try to get closer to it) but sometimes it can be lonely, so your words are really, sincerely appreciated.
Since you mentioned the section called "The Jest Kills the Laugh", I thought I would briefly mention how I got that idea, because the jest, and the jester in particular, play quite an important role in my framework. The insight is indeed that a jest always really ends not in laughter, but in the absence of it, once the laugh is over. I connected this insight to an experience I had in 2011 when, as the good geek that I was back then, I played the game
Skyrim. But so that you understand the parallel, let me just briefly develop this idea of the jester first.
The jester (in my writing, that is) is what we are when we play a role, when we 'lie' to ourselves to feel better in the moment; but it’s also a little more than that. It’s us seeing ourselves playing a role, and with it, the fleeting recognition that we
choose to play it. So when we see the jester, we actually (paradoxically) see the fragment of freedom in ourselves. We would much rather just see him as a prankster, because it’s easier. But in this permanent state of being joky, ironic even, there is a lot of sadness, I find, because it suggests that the self has been made to adapt to its environment to such an extent that the ‘costume’ has almost completely espoused the form of the body. The jester, in a way, is asking for help. But we won’t let him in, because he is the mirror in which we will see all the lies that we have been telling ourselves in order to shirk responsibility and feel better on the surface.
In
Skyrim, one of the villains you have to fight is the boss of a group of Assassins called Cicero, a jester. Since you initially get to join the Assassins, you interact with him a bit before you get to fight him. That character always annoyed me in the extreme. I kept thinking that I wished he just accepted and openly embraced that he killed people and ordered others to kill people, instead of always acting like a never serious, joky character. And yet, when I got to kill him, I felt disturbed to a strangely great extent. I was looking forward to erasing his identity, but then I got almost upset by the fact that I killed him before he ever had the chance to find that identity for himself. During the fight he plays dumb, makes weird noises, jumps around, sings, he acts like a creepy buffoon, basically. But every time I hit him, every time I saw him fall to his knees and gasp for breath and look helpless, his humanity shone in plain sight. And I thought: the only way Cicero can be himself is if I hurt him. I found this realisation deeply disturbing and worth exploring in thought.
If we then wanted to tie this idea back to the open essence, we could say that the jester is a human being like Cicero who refuses to conceive himself as an open essence, because such a thing necessarily involves embracing chance and uncertainty, and these things induce anxiety (the 'dizziness of freedom'). Constantly joking can be seen as a way to avoid that anxiety by 'closing' oneself to possibility, by refusing to be serious about what one
could actually do.
End of the monologue
