MEAN
AND SHADOW
1. The theory of 'means' and 'shadows', which I
first explored in my previous text, Bringing the Judgement, has to do
with the relationship between a predominating not-self and a subordinate
not-self which is paradoxically complementary to it from a contrary standpoint,
be that standpoint sensual or sensible, noumenal or
phenomenal.
2. To begin with, it helps to establish the
distinction between the objective axes of space-time and volume-mass, both of
which are female, and the subjective axes of mass-volume and time-space, both
of which are male.
3. Hence the plane of space is divisible between
the objectivity of spatial space and the subjectivity of spaced space, while
the plane of time is divisible between the subjectivity of sequential time and
the objectivity of repetitive time, space-time accordingly falling diagonally
from spatial space to repetitive time, time-space, by contrast, rising diagonally from sequential time to spaced space.
4. Likewise the plane of volume is divisible
between the objectivity of volumetric volume and the subjectivity of voluminous
volume, while the plane of mass is divisible between the subjectivity of
massive mass and the objectivity of massed mass, volume-mass accordingly
falling diagonally from volumetric volume to massed mass, mass-volume, by
contrast, rising diagonally from massive mass to voluminous volume.
5. Thus the axes of space and time, which are noumenal and hence
upper class, afford us a distinction between the female objectivity of
space-time and the male subjectivity of time-space, while the axes of volume
and mass, which are phenomenal and hence lower class, afford us a distinction
between the female objectivity of volume-mass and the male subjectivity of
mass-volume.
6. Scholars of my work - if there are any - will
recall at this point that whereas the objective is rooted in a vacuum and tends
either to diverge in sensuality or converge in sensibility on a straight-line
basis, the subjective, by contrast, is centred in a plenum and tends to diverge
in sensuality or converge in sensibility on a curved-line basis.
7. Hence the femaleness of objectivity and, by
implication, both space-time and volume-mass, but the maleness of subjectivity
and, by implication, both mass-volume and time-space.
8. Just as one cannot be both noumenal and phenomenal, upper class and lower class, at
the same time, so one cannot be of space-time and volume-mass or,
alternatively, of mass-volume and time-space to an identical degree, since the
one tends to preclude the other and both, moreover, are subject to a gender
specific integrity, so that he who is of time-space tends not to have that much
to do with space-time and vice versa, while he who is of mass-volume tends not
to have that much to do with volume-mass, although neither can be completely
ruled out.
9. Since these four axes are inseparable from a
given element, be it fire in relation to space-time, air in relation to
time-space, water in relation to volume-mass, or vegetation (earth) in relation
to mass-volume, they operate with regard to the various orders of not-self and
selflessness, will and spirit, both on and across the gender divide, from the
female elements of fire and water, which are objective, to the male elements of
vegetation and air, which are subjective.
10. Hence space-time can be organically translated
into a distinction between the eyes and the heart, while time-space affords one
a like distinction between the ears and the lungs, the former in each case
sensual and the latter sensible.
11. Likewise volume-mass can be organically
translated into a distinction between the tongue and the womb, while
mass-volume affords one a like distinction between the penis and the brain, the
former in each case sensual and the latter sensible.
12. Hence quite apart from the gender specific
axes of space-time and time-space, corresponding to eyes-heart and ears-lungs,
the plane of space is divisible between the objectivity of the eyes and the
subjectivity of the lungs, while the plane of time is divisible between the
subjectivity of the ears and the objectivity of the heart.
13. Hence quite apart from the gender specific
axes of volume-mass and mass-volume, corresponding to tongue-womb and
penis-brain, the plane of volume is divisible between the objectivity of the
tongue and the subjectivity of the brain, while the plane of mass is divisible
between the subjectivity of the penis and the objectivity of the womb.
14. Now as I have argued in the past, so I shall
continue to argue that a hegemonic upper-class, or noumenal,
position, be it sensual or sensible, tends to encourage a contrary lower-class,
or phenomenal, position, whereas a hegemonic lower-class, or phenomenal,
position, be it sensual or sensible, tends to encourage a contrary upper-class,
or noumenal, position.
15. Within the male gender options, which the
reader will recall are subjective and elementally divisible between vegetation
and air, the phenomenality of a hegemonic penis will
tend to co-exist with the noumenality of subordinate
lungs, the former sensual and the latter sensible, while, conversely, the noumenality of hegemonic lungs will tend to co-exist with
the phenomenality of a subordinate penis, the former
sensible and the latter sensual.
16. Likewise the phenomenality
of a hegemonic brain will tend to co-exist with the noumenality
of subordinate ears, the former sensible and the latter sensual, while,
conversely, the noumenality of hegemonic ears will
tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of a
subordinate brain, the former sensual and the latter sensible.
17. Within the female gender options by contrast,
which the reader will recall are objective and elementally divisible between
fire and water, the phenomenality of a hegemonic
tongue will tend to co-exist with the noumenality of
a subordinate heart, the former sensual and the latter sensible, while,
conversely, the noumenality of a hegemonic heart will
tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of a
subordinate tongue, the former sensible and the latter sensual.
18. Likewise the phenomenality
of a hegemonic womb will tend to co-exist with the noumenality
of subordinate eyes, the former sensible and the latter sensual, while,
conversely, the noumenality of hegemonic eyes will
tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of a
subordinate womb, the former sensual and the latter sensible.
19. Thus, on the male side of life, either the
penis or the lungs will be hegemonic in the one case, and either the brain or
the ears in the other case, with the subordinate complement always standing as
a 'shadow' to the prevailing 'mean', be it sensual or sensible, vegetative or
airy, noumenal or phenomenal, which is to say, upper
class in time-space or lower class in mass-volume.
20. Thus, on the female side of life, either the
tongue or the heart will be hegemonic in the one case, and either the womb or
the eyes in the other case, with the subordinate complement always standing as
a 'shadow' to the prevailing 'mean', be it sensual or sensible, fiery or
watery, noumenal or phenomenal, which is to say,
upper class in space-time or lower class in volume-mass.