|
There's a sort of loop that this conversation is falling into, which I think relates to the cyclical nature of defining art.
There is an existential paradox caused by our reliance on language. On one hand, our whole existence is defined by words. On the other, words are symbolic, metaphorical, and at least one step removed from whatever is being discussed.
I understand ARTelevision's desire to reach an existential place where he transcends words. I think, at least at this point of my life, that I have been attempting to use words to transcend existence. Does this mean that I'm living in a dream-world? No, but I love the metaphor, and generally I realize just how metaphorical everything is that I do and write. I am aware of the metaphor, and yet it still has meaning to me. By using the words to transcend existence, I end up having a deeper understanding of existence on a base level.
In this sense, I am a poet. I vascillate between being as distant from the metaphors as possible and being consumed by them. Typically, I am somewhere in between, but (to use a metaphor) I like the rise and fall of where it takes me.
__________________
Innominate.
|