H. Noo

How we confuse freedom (Spontaneity & Rationality)

As Europeans spared from unemployment, how often a day do we find ourselves doing that which we want to do? How often a day are the things we do not chosen by ourselves, spontaneously, freely? In the “chosen” path of rational modernity: all the time; because rational freedom is not spontaneous freedom.

Habituated beings choose “freely” to do what is in their habit. Rational habituation means being determined by a reading of the environment that seeks to appropriate it for the self. The need of the rational self is effective survival, effective pleasure, generally, the effective achievement of desire. On the other hand, being spontaneously free is a conduct stemming from the unintentional and ruleless exhaling of the self. Our respiration may have many explanations, all of them do justify, none of them defines its purpose.

The explicit ideal of European consciousness is spontaneous freedom (the fulfilment of soul tendencies), but it is implemented as rational freedom (the obedience to reasonable calculations). Both we call freedom, but they only coincide on aspects non-essential. This confusion shows in our addiction to all those things that place us in a present regardless of the future.

Standard
H. Noo

Culture as No Resort

The possibility of plurality as a virtue or ideal has been freighted into so-called culture, into art, and remains there now exclusively, while the big, 8-hour long, practise of existence is substantially devoted to conformity. The individual introduction of otherness into this practise: theoretically it is possible, practically one lacks the strength to disattach oneself (from consciously despised habitualities, from the self-evidence of a seemingly uniquely-true form of living, from the sensibleness of rational behaviour, from efficiency as a populatory duty).

The problem is not so much the marketisation of art – provocativity and critique will remain, because they sell. The problem lies in their effectlessness.

The primacy of acceptance for plurality in culture is effectless because now, culture is leisure. The culture is not the economy. It is the servant of resort. And as much as the resort does a good deed, so it devalues itself to be an instrument of conformity. The suggestion therefore is that the art, the so-called culture, has to deinstrumentalise itself by no longer positing itself as a resort, by thematising incessantly that which is not wanted to be heard, seen, or felt inside of it.

Standard