Hello.
In celebration of keeping this project alive we are hoisting a review. Like a gentle hike through the woods, this past half year was easy in some cases; yet challenging in other respects. The road has twisted and turned unexpectedly. From here look back. To pick and tweeze at this tapestry—woven over such a lengthy field—will help let us grasp what comes next. A new set of ferns? Outgrowths? Let’s enter the weeds to see what exactly lies in wait.
Our theme has expanded over the course of this dredge: from direct research to short histories (personal, general and particular). What follows will be a short synopsis of each article chronologically.
1) Nonlinearity and the Sociological Frame—best surmised here,
Let’s consider it like this: if history were to be enframed in a particular era(or even a particular social vector), would it perpetually and progressively expand the effects of that “era” to infinity? The research is pointing to no.
We take here a great example of ostensives within a non-generative anthropological discipline.
2) Short Merrell Wolff Notes—Notes on the differences between mystical emergence of knowledge. Rather than set up an intermediary way to grasp “the understanding”, Wolff defines what is intimate about identity and thus knowledge.
3) Suicide Prevention—A summary and analysis of institutional suicide analysis. Surrounding: One, the nature of suicide is linked to an inability to participate in commands from the center. Two, such is inextricably linked to self-harm. Three, the variant of self-harm is related to how “ostensible” it is; i.e., the less cloaked the ritual is, the more likely it will be chosen.
4) Eric Gans—A short biography on generative anthropology’s history and its analysis. Fundamentally, the analysis boils towards the recognition of the paradox of language. Given the assumption is as minimal as is necessary, it must have been as an event. What follows forth is the dialogue of GA. The history itself is surrounded by book writing, article weaving, conferences and a small but dedicated group of “generative anthropologists”.
5) Language and Identity—A decent length love letter toward mystical revelation. Based notably on Wolff’s distinction of the “pole of consciousness”; I show an anecdotal example in my own life. This time we are focusing on co-habitation with the Divine and its relation to metaphysics.
6) Housing in America—Using Katz’ terminology of idioms and upclining we accomplish a few things. We show some historical precedents of human indwelling to political imperatives. This is a tour through larger historical currents of pastoral reigns to the World Wars.
7) Early American Politics I—We deconstruct modern party ideologies by backtracking towards two early parties: Federalists and Democratic Republicans. I note and focus on Jeffersonianism as one of the major fault lines in party representations in America.
8) Early American Politics II—Displaying the interplay of “imperative gaps”, we dive into agriculturalism turned environmentalism. Through the lens of local v. federalized authority this shows the imperative gap increases with bureaucratized legislature. Or, the dividing of common ground to separate partisans. This gap is the lessening of the actual ability of peoples to participate in the center, and more importantly to receive commands hence from.
9) Think Tanks—Inarguably one of the most dense pieces written here, the main theme is agency. The agency of people is tied, ineluctably, with the ability to use language. We show how modern think tank theory can benefit from further agential theory, and thus linguistic theory.
10) Lugal—A short piece on Big Men. We discuss proto-Indo-European theory and Sumerian linguistics. Ultimately weaving together with modern examples; ranging from nativism to isolationism.
These tendencies within history are amplified through particular “stories”. I’m telling a story every time I type on this blog, really. We must always start with some kind of history, really a type of ritual, in order to order ourselves. Once that has begun—the ordering of people and not just a singular person—there is always an asymmetry inherent. Someone will always have more than you, or just thereby existing have a power of language (of authority) that isn’t your own. Yet, all the same, they speak with the same power that we all imagine we have when we speak for ourselves.
The goal of academic analysis, in particular linguistic theory, is to draw attention from perceived disorder to harmony. Furthermore the nature of our “selves”. We are always seeking not just to re-institute ordering amongst this fiefdom but to bring out the best in each other. While it may not always be that way, the intention is the same. If we simply were to parrot platitudes—perhaps akin to a gross neo-fascism or environmentalism—it would now be as useful as eating the same cracker for every meal. It might be possible; but a colorful, plentiful diet certainly would be preferred. After all what would life be if it all were a gray monochrome? Or that is to say, we all monks or authoritarians?
We’ve covered some of my own mystical tracks. Discussed the relationship of new ostensives (the establishment of dwellings) on political economy. Perused discussions on necessary federalization—through imperatives within political ecosystems. Even formalized motivations for linguistics (to become the basis of explicit theories in political analysis). I can only hope what we’ve laid out has been helpful to you lot. It is meaningless otherwise.
We’ll be taking a short break for this month, in order to have some fun. I’ll be detailing the more practical side of linguistic theory, and how it can work for organization and decision making principles. Ultimately, the hand rests upon you, but tried and true methodologies don’t hurt…
Happy Friday the 13th and good luck!
In the dark you shall dance, dance, dance… only real…only the tomb…
*synth line