Andy Toth wrote (13.11.2001/18:27) :
> > Greeks dance when they are grieving to get their suffering out.
>
> why isn't it sublimated into something else? i don't understand that
> specific mechanic. for how can the suffering be absolved if the dance is
> self-referencing (to suffering).
I don't know the particular dance you're referring to, but in other
instances I know, I think that you "sublimate" the suffering by
evoking/dancing (the reality causing) the suffering IN A PARTICULAR
WAY. This "way", it is the dancing itself, it is that which is not the
suffering itself.
In SOME instances, this translates, as you suggest, in evoking
something ELSE than (the reality causing) the suffering. But it
doesn't need to be that way, and isn't all the time.
It's enough to invent a particular way to dance your suffering (see in
fact the suffering as the background music), that allows you to make
something out of it, and possibly to turn your experience into
something positive. Instead of being squashed by it, you regain
control and live it in a positive way.
In still other terms, you have a choice, when you operate the
"artistic transmutation of suffering" :-), between overtly keeping the
suffering on the forestage, or not. It's just a question of
organisation. You can create by tranposing and substituting something
else ; or you can create by inventing a way to dance the given
experience.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:19 MDT