Showing posts with label difference. Show all posts
Showing posts with label difference. Show all posts

Friday, August 17, 2012

Give back the problem its exclamation mark!

When exactly did the word "problem" get a negative meaning? Let's return back to the very dear etymology dictionary.

problem
late 14c., "a difficult question proposed for solution," from O.Fr. problème (14c.), from L. problema, from Gk. problema "a problem, a question," lit. "thing put forward," from proballein "propose," from pro "forward" (see pro-) + ballein "to throw" (see ballistics). Meaning "a difficulty" is mid-15c. Problem child first recorded 1920.

So, it was "pro" "putting forward",  in other words, "in favor of" doing something that has an effect. Well, I would call that "existence", standing forth in a certain way. Standing forth is always in a certain way anyway. A way that is changing other ways, allowing other certain ways to do certain things and standing in the way of other certain things, obstructing or even destroying their way of being.

For example, if you think that I am talking gibberish, you won't be allowing "my way" to exist in your world and do things to you. You will just surf on to another web page and continue on surfing until you find something that passes through the pours of your mind's skin, making a difference for (on) you, "interesting" you. Off you go...

And the others who still stay on this page and continue reading probably have the same vague feeling that I have now: there is something important about this question of problem and existence and the negative meaning "problem" has in the everyday life, something that makes a difference in our existence, but what?

To my surprise, I often come across as a negative person when I talk to others. I've been thinking about what could be the thing I do to make people understand me as oppositional all the time since all I actually want to do is to have a nice conversation, stimulating and interesting enough to make me want to keep going, to feel as if something else is happening. Of course it is impossible to be objective when one tries to understand how one comes across to others but I think, in my situation, the negativity they feel is more about how they understand questions than it is about the negativity itself. People feel that questions (provocative ones, the ones that pushes you outside your limits) are signs of not-accepting, not-agreeing, not-liking, and all the "not"s. When all I do is to point out that there is another thing and another and another... waiting to be considered in any subject, they feel that I oppose them by not staying in the comfort zone of their own making. Well, maybe it is just my "problem" but I feel that there would be nothing to talk about if everybody just agrees and feels comfortable within one line of thought, without even going till the end point of that line which almost always consists of a jump to another line, and goes on to the next and so on... The "problem" is not taking the problem seriously enough to follow through. The "problem" is not wanting to deal with the problem(s).

Actually my intent was to try to explore the quality of problems when I began writing, but now I see that before passing to the question of the quality of problems, we have to first pass through the will to problems, the will to follow their lines which are always intersecting with, crossing across other lines and creating "shining points" from where they open themselves up to other lines. The more "shining points" the better the quality of the problem.

And not everything is a problem. For example, if you want to change your job because it pays less than you need and all you consider about your job is the benefits, there is not much to talk about on this line. What your "problem" is here, is not an actual problem. It is merely an obstruction, a difficulty waiting to be solved by acting on it. But it will become a real problem once you start to question what you do as a job and how that effects you, changes you. You will still be unhappy about the job but instead of thinking that there is a solution (and in many cases there are solutions with which the "problem" itself disappears and everybody lives happily ever after), you will be on a constant search, problematising the very subject of how you live your life, how you spend your time while you are going through all the actual changes...  The way you put yourself forward is the problem which doesn't -fortunately!- have a solution.

My "problem" is my very own questioning but more with exclamation marks than neutral question marks. It is me following the lines while putting myself forward in a certain way that only I am capable of. It is me making a difference, being difference as I jump to that line instead of this willing to go on an almost infinite journey.

The problem should be understood as a verb. Problematising that is... Your problematising is your very own exclamation mark, the meaning of your problem which happens to be you leaving an affective trace in the world.




Saturday, August 21, 2010

Living in an international commune - Part ! (not a typo, it is an exclamation mark)

Inbetween languages there is again language itself. As if it refers to itself and by doing so making itself understandable. Very simplistic way of understanding this would be repetition which is different in every movement of repeating. Experiencing this fact knowing what it is, is just wonderful.

On the other hand, sharing things, in other words living in a commune is tricky. I can say that having an international quality ease things for a commune a little bit. Everybody is curious about the other so they let each other be in order to observe the other and having a sense of the other's ways of doing things. That's why this could be called a "community of individuals" if we are willing to let go the strict sense of being an individual. Because here there is a very vague shape of being individual. It is the culture you represent, the place where you came from what counts as the reason of curiosity in the first place. But I am not willing to surrender the beauty of being let free just because the reason of it affirms representation.

And it is not always the case either. I'd rather think that personal differences are recognized in a very short while. You can always see two Italians who don't like each other and rather hanging out with other nationalities. It would be logically correct to say that they are giving each other space to be free by being away of each other. But they still say hi when they see each other also. This wouldn't be happening in Italy, because they would not be obligated to live in the same environment. International student complex in which they will be living at least 5 months forces them to live in peace recognizing their differences.

Nevertheless it is a community which forces itself on individuals with its architecture. But this architecture is one of proliferation. It enables recognizing differences. Curiosity of the other becomes an expression of the architecture, through the architecture. Curiosity expresses itself much more easily.

Or all of this may be too much loaded with optimisim...

(I think it is not over yet)