mills

My name is Mills Baker; I write about love, culture, art, religion, mental illness, philosophy, memory, politics and the rather random.

My Photo Blog
Flickr / Videos
Facebook / Twitter
Email / Archive


Your search for becker returned 6 posts.
“Kierkegaard had no easy idea of what ‘health’ is. But he knew what it was not: it was not normal adjustment –anything but that, as he has taken excruciating analytical pains to show us. To be a ‘normal cultural man’ is, for Kierkegaard, to be sick –whether one knows it or not: ‘There is such a thing as fictitious health.’ Nietzsche later put the same thought: ‘Are there perhaps…neuroses of health?’”

Earnest Becker, in one of my favorite books. The answer to Nietzsche’s question is clear: yes, there are neuroses of health. The acquisitive and organizational urge run amok that defines consumerism, for example; or the preoccupation with a plastic aesthetic over the corporeal, with its attendant concealment of pores, sweat, hair, anything organic and unruly; or the obsession with cheeriness that makes self-esteem, a low sort of self-satisfaction, into a virtue without which one might as well be naked.

There are as many neuroses of health as there are neuroses of illness. What we must use, then, to define real mental illness, as opposed to simply characteristics that are socially undesirable, is this question: does the quality or behavior interfere with the individual’s ability to freely self-determine, to create himself as he wishes?

Searching Oneself

Melanyouth, in reference to the self-exploratory work of Anselm Kiefer, asks if I am interested in “discussing the mechanism by which one searches one’s soul for the truth of his person(ality).” I appreciate the request, so here is my overlong response:

The mechanism of introspection is an imperfect one. Perhaps due to nature of emergence, it seems almost to be a property of our universe that upon close enough examination all phenomena break down, degenerate into clouds of probability and vanishing particulate elements, neurotic tics and untraceable quarks. We cannot know that which we look at too closely, and we are closer to nothing than to ourselves.

Varus, 1976.

There are further problems of reflexivity, expressed variously. The semiotician says that triadic language cannot triangulate meaning when the symbol is the seeing self. The mystic asks if the eye can see itself, if the knife can cut itself. The analyst notes that reflection tends to produce less insight than projection. We construct our rationalizations, and that often we don’t reflect on who we are but on incidents from our lives or things we want, both of which are immaterial.

Margarethe, 1981.

That we search ourselves poorly and reach prideful, self-justifying conclusions, however, is merely something to note, not an excuse to live automatically. The impetus for self-examination is simple: unhappiness exists solely within the self, not in the world, and as we can attempt to control the self through awareness of its dynamics we have the capacity to try and be happy and good. You cannot control the world, but you can observe and corral the self.

Alaric’s Tomb, 1975.

The “truth of one’s soul” or self is precisely what one wishes never to learn, of course. Earnest Becker made the claim that one’s personality is indeed an entire mechanism which exists purely to mask and deny what one truly is. Kiefer’s pondered whether he was a fascist:

[He] explained that the photographs were a way of asking himself the question ‘Am I a Fascist?’ Anyone, he argued, might recognise themselves as authoritarian, competitive, with a sense of superiority – including himself.

Whatever Kiefer’s conclusions, mine are unavoidable: we are all fascists; we could all watch our neighbors lined up and executed, were the right parts of our minds tapped by circumstance and manipulation. Those of us most certain of our goodness are the ones easiest to enlist: we are the one’s who know about the world and know what is right and wrong and are given to think oppositionally. The anger I see in writing about politics always amazes me for this reason: the intoxication of moral certainty, the euphoria of indignation, the bliss of describing how evil others are!

Parsifal I, II and III, 1973

Still: the real self remains a mystery. I am twenty-eight years old and have no real sense of who I am. I wonder what pitiful emotional narratives I enact with the innocent people in my life; I search for which of my feelings are genuine and which reflect fears and insecurities -not even sure that such a division can be made. Am I manipulated or manipulating? Ruthless or compassionate? It is hard to know.

But this is the task of life: to try and clear the self-pitying, self-aggrandizing overgrowth of the rampant mind and honestly observe who one is, how one has falsified one’s identity with tastes and habits and causes, what relation exists between one’s actions and one’s fears, and to the best of one’s ability to liberate oneself from one’s self. However inadequate language is to describe it, I think we all know how it feels: it feels like growing up.

“Admit the void; accept loss forever. Not to admit the void is the trouble with those schizophrenics who treat words as real things. Schizophrenic literalism equates symbol and original object so as to retain the original object, to avoid object-loss. Freedom in the use of symbolism comes from the capacity to experience loss. Wisdom is mourning, blessed are they that mourn.”
Norman O. Brown, whose words are accompanied with a striking crop of Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel on Frederick Woodruff’s Wandering Weltanschauung. Brown’s ideas are well-represented in Ernest Becker’s work, which in itself confers authority on him.
“Anxiety is the result of the perception of the truth about one’s condition. The idea is ludicrous, if not monstrous. It means to know that one is food for the worms. This is the terror: to have emerged from nothing, to have a name, consciousness of self, deep inner feelings, an excruciating inner yearning for life and self-expression - and with all this yet to die.”

Ernest Becker, quoted by Mise en Abyme. Becker is my favorite psychologist-philosopher by far; The Denial of Death is probably the most important non-fiction I’ve read. There are too many excellent notes on psychology going around right now.

I recently read a rather more poetic way of reminding us of looming death, a Sir Thomas Browne sentence that supplied William Styron with a title: “It cannot be long before we lie down in darkness and have our light in ashes.”

The longer I reflect on those words, the more chilling they seem. And of course, they’re true.

“A large proportion of life involves our refusing to put our ear to the mundane heart chamber, lest we die from hearing ‘the roar which lies on the other side of silence.’”

Nietzsche

“Nietzsche said that if a human being put his ear to the heart chamber of the world and heard the roar of existence, the ‘innumerable shouts of pleasure and woe,’ he would surely break into pieces.  But a newspaper, pumping its inky current of despair, might serve as well…” ~ James Wood, from Holiday in Hellmouth: God may be dead, but the question of why he permits suffering lives on, New York Magazine.
Thank you, Sir.  I was glad to come across Wood’s article, in light of my recent ponderings on acts of God and unsustainable empathy. I’ve been thinking about this with respect to the coverage of the Myanmar cyclone, the China earthquake, embassy and suicide bombings, the Tokyo stabbings and other tragedies that have received recent widespread circulation. Will the incessant influx of bad news will soon break all the survivors into pieces?
I was talking to someone about this the other day, and they mentioned World War I. The death toll for that Great War was inconceivably higher than it is for the current war in Iraq, yet the media outlets varied significantly.  How did the survivors cope?  Is the answer to be determinedly ignorant?

(via bunnynico)

Ernest Becker once referred to the necessary “partializing” of our perception and consciousness that occurs as we leave early childhood: we strangle our innate awe and limitless imagination, which is spontaneous and uncontrollable, because otherwise we could never navigate the world.

There is a critical partialization of empathy, as well: if you stop and reflect on the sum of suffering in the world, and on suffering’s intransigence, empathetic collapse and despair is all but inevitable. From that broken position, not only can you not live, but you can’t even help. The partializing of empathy, which takes the form of “not thinking about” the horrors of the world, is often criticized as narcissism in the West, as indifference; but there are anthropological limits to our empathy. This world is too large; the scale of horror is too great.

What a beautiful quote.