Paul Ricoeur wrote that “symbol gives rise to the thought.” This particular statement is referencing Ricoeur’s discussion on the symbolism of evil. But these days, my mind has been taking this aphorism in another direction.
First, there is a simple question of what symbol is? Do we even think about symbols that come out of our daily acts? Let us use the example of participating in the Mass. Every act, hand movement and utterance of the priest carries with it a symbol or representation, which should (at the least) give us something to think about, and hopefully help us attain wisdom. It is from the symbolic act that we receive the meaning. This carries us through the sorrows and joys of the terrestrial world. The meaning renders even great suffering purposeful and not merely accidental.
Secondly, are we aware that our existence is unsustainable if we completely lose touch with the world of symbols? Today’s culture is certainly suffering from an affliction. Jean Bethke Elshtain calls this “techno-agnosticism,” and what an appropriate phrase! Of course, technology is supposed to give us certain freedoms and make our lives easier. But substituting technological communication with an actual community is simply unacceptable.
Such acts of “techno-agnosticism” make me sad. I can see the loneliness and numbness in people and I wonder what it really means to be spiritually dead. It is the worst kind of death. Despite the experiences that life has brought me (war in Bosnia, refugee life, etc.), I have never experienced such hollowness. Not even during the war have I felt a detachment from reality; thankfully, I still had the ability to see and hear the boredom and anatomy of war as my being reacted in repugnance at the never-ending attacks on human dignity. And now I ask: are we deaf to the voice of God that whispers to us?
Although I try to be aware of symbols in life, it is proving to be a difficult task for me to actually encounter them. This has been a quite difficult undertaking in my experience of art. Most art, these days, is problematic and it has a two-fold issue: art is seen synonymous with politics and/or psycho-analytic therapy. We have moved further into the realm of pure self-involvement. The egocentrism and pride is keeping us from seeing symbols, and therefore creating art that ought to transcend its author.
So, now what? Pointing out the problem is one thing but finding a solution is quite another. I do not presume to have a way out. I can only offer what I have learned so far and even that knowledge has rough edges waiting to be smoothed. But I am inspired by the words by Bernard Lonergan who wrote that it is the condition of a biased mind, which prevents us from creating dynamically. This means being aware of one Truth and proceeding with the clarity and tranquility of the mind. Losing the sight of the symbolic in our lives may seem like a small cause to be worried about, but become blind to the symbol and you have just lost the blueprint on how a civilization is built. I would hope that what we are experiencing now is not a complete loss but rather a misplacement of those important blueprints.
How do we open our eyes? Some would say that we ought to “be true to ourselves.” I always found that statement to be trite and cliché but I also wondered what it really meant. Then I read Fr. Neuhaus’ words. He wrote that to be true to yourself really means being true to the person that you are called to be. Suddenly, it all made perfect sense to me. This was the antithesis to the statement that “man is the measure of all things.” Surrender to God releases us from self-inflicted captivity. It invites us to see both the sacred and the profane in art and life. Suddenly, we don’t have to be the captives of illusions but rather be part of the reality that breathes forth life.
No comments:
Post a Comment