(photo courtesy of risk.net)
Every movement that starts promisingly or powerfully always
ends in some form of ignominy or final absolution that heralds its decline.
Well if not ignominy or absolution then a form of static manifestation or the
pinnacle of decadence which is a sight for sore eyes as the extravagance is
something to behold. But why? Why do we always reach this stage in our lives
when we are called out for not adhering to the lofty standards of our
forefathers who paved the way?
The answer is quite simple: we are not meant to reclaim the
essence of what made us great. We embody it every day as we go along and we add
new ways that will deviate from the original but will be tied to it in some way
just as other original manifestations are created in its place or stand side by
side with it. We would never be where we were if not for the original
exposition or detailed examination of a particular subject. This original material is inevitably improved
upon but never superseded. This expansion moves into the realm of quantity where
some elements added to the original are redundant and are vulgar expressions or
manifestations. With quantity comes extravagance and extravagance is merely
just one way of squeezing as much as can be squeezed from the quality of the
original material. It is only when this happens that it is claimed that we
can’t aspire to the high standards of the past when in fact the high standard
is only reached when we embody all the advancements that came with additions to
the original. The original is never complete and to reach a mature stage it
must be enhanced in a quantitative form until it ripens and then rots. The
dogmatic way becomes almost tedious. When the original element is being formed
it requires extensive examination and implementation to guarantee success in
some form or the other in the social sphere. It cannot be dogmatic because it
has to be tested by whatever reality it encounters and create its own space in
that reality. Once it creates its own space it justifies its place as a part of
the whole or by becoming one of its many parts. It is almost natural how the
original element assumes its place. When the quantitative elements expand the
original they do not necessarily make it grander but only refine it or make it even more pronounced.
The high standard of the original was not necessarily as
high as previously thought because of the fact that various elements are added
to it for enhancement. The real problem is that the original element is exalted
beyond a certain reasonable measure and so it actually reaches its peak under
the present and not the past. It is only
in the present that the extravagance of the original material becomes unbearable
or reflective of decline. The pinnacle of decadence is one term for it because
the original material becomes entrenched or even oppressive. When the original
was being formed it was actually an inspiring element and gave people hope to
follow and to add to it. It is when you can no longer add to what made that
original element great, in terms of quality, does it become a great burden to
live up to. It can no longer inspire others because any further addition is
merely a sign of extravagance. You can never reclaim the original element
because it is already there but only in a more extravagant form. Getting back
to basics won’t achieve anything because it would mean that you’re actually
past the original element and are merely being nostalgic. If you go back to
basics you will go back in a dogmatic form because the original inspiring
element would have disappeared. People will start looking for another inspiring
element that gathers momentum with each addition in the form of support. No
matter what you try with the original element that was once dominant it can no
longer be reclaimed or its lofty standards will never be reached. Even if you
tried 100 years later you would find that the direction that you take can never
correspond with the original inspiring element that emerged in a different time
and under different circumstances.
People should not be worried about not measuring up to
certain standards established in the past. Once it becomes dogmatic it merely
becomes one way of doing things. That one way was originally very inspiring
when it just came out and over the years all the fancy additions made it soar to
the stars however that one way was still just one way. There are other ways,
some yet to be discovered. The original element will still be influential in
terms of dogma but can’t inspire like the next original element. People must
also understand that the highest standard is always set in the present, after
all the refinements to the original have
been made. Decline can only be measured
by the other original elements that comprise the whole or the other ways to get
things done or to fit in to the whole.
When the original element was inspiring people there were many additions
in the form of support but once it failed to inspire and became dogmatic, people gravitated to other original elements that would emerge. There
is always unequal exchange in such a scenario. The former inspiring element
just could no longer inspire and decline comes when it falls from its high
perch because just at that moment when it falls it would have been at its most
dominant. You can’t fall from a low perch you fall from a high one and that’s
common sense. You keep squeezing what
you can out of the original element but eventually it will tire and when it
does tire that was when it would have been reigning supreme. Maybe there were
some subtractions but those subtractions would have done their part or they
would have moved on to another inspiring element. The extravagance hides the fact that although
the essence of the original element was very
inspiring it was still only one way of doing things and there are other inspiring
ways.
So I am not worried about failing to live up to the so
called high standards of the past. They were not so high to begin with.
No comments:
Post a Comment