{liberatormagazine.com exclusive feature}
I've spent the last year, or so, considering the symbiotic relationship between freedom and bond-age and to a certain extent, freedom and love. It all started with Achali’s question/statement in the comments of the "On Wenches and B-Sides" post:
"I'm curious about the destination of your train of thought -- your take from your experiences and lessons in love's joys, complexities, oppressions and possessions. In what ways do these broad, strong thoughts bounce off of you -- in the tales and experiences that are familiar to you (personal, communal, etc)? For example, I wonder, in what ways -- as David Foster Wallace might have had some insight on -- might intellectual overexposure, or "hyper-internalization", of oppression and possession narratives and trajectories cause us to check out (if, of course, we don't first end up wholly buying into them somehow)? Wallace's meditations on the need for rebels in an American society, increasingly "networked" but non-communal, enslaved to self-consciousness-amplified-by-technology, and that "rebels take risks", are even more interesting in that light, making paramount the need for anchors (ironically, whom oftentimes are unpure and unsanitized -- bsides and bsides for days if we have time to listen -- yet beautifully human) you can trust without question."
It climaxed and “got real,” so to speak, sometime around December, when a friend jarringly opened what would become a recurring conversation, with a challenge that echoes in my head:
“I don’t know about you and this … freedom thing …”
I would begin to locate my response in an exploration of some of the philosophical themes in the movie, "Under the Tuscan Sun." My friend (another one) asked me to watch and then discuss with him my thoughts on each of the characters and we ended up looking into one in particular -- a secondary character who was presented as this free-thinking lady who "lived in the moment," and moved about as she pleased, etc. I thought that a schism appeared in the trajectories of this lady and the main character's when the lady crossed the threshold into a kind of existentialist realm. In her case, she was able to articulate her surroundings and conditions and desires and the philosophical "meaning of life" very well. And this is often the case. But at the point one crosses into existentialist thought, we concluded, even inadvertently, is when they divorce values, feelings, desires and ways of functioning from the actual function of living things. They are searching for and looking to supplant the instinct with ideas, ideals, ideologies. Through various ways, the other main character never let go of that ability to cultivate these things within nature, being mindful of how different cultural and spiritual "enzymes" and "substrates" can connect and manifest. It made me think about the precise ways these theories were manifesting in my life … and the extent to which the distance between my theory and praxis had widened, if only for lack of practice, and value-aligned experience. It was high time for me to distill the meta-analysis on this ... freedom thing.
One summer, in a boat in the middle of a lake just outside Minneapolis, I took a nap under the sun and lost all sense of time and place amidst the meditative utterances of my sister-friend ...
“I know God made this … I know God made this … I know God made this...”
This, meaning all that we were surrounded by in those moments -- the elements, the flesh. It was freedom, indeed. We were floating … we were anchored, but we were free. And within that, analogously, free to pull up the anchor and sail on when the time is right, or conditions are no longer optimal (choice). It became my point of reference.
Realistically speaking, despite the curiosity that many have for a Thoreau-like solitudinal experience -– one devoid of commitments and anchorage -- I have been taught, shown and have experienced that there are certain things that will always ground us in life and keep us "anchored": our family, our passions, our responsibilities, our respective communities, etc. And I enjoy interaction and the process of intimacy-building with these things. I think, too, it's in that process of growing with these "anchors" that removes (or perhaps tempers is the better word) the occasional feelings of obligation, because there would be an organic connection that would make us want to tend to it and help it grow -- especially if we can locate our sense of purpose, and sense of self within them. "Work," then, becomes a matter of perception.
In real life, the next step is finding a way to be understood by others, or at least by one other; ideally a community of others; and from there you cultivate compatibility, through time, through patience, through repetition. With freedom as the operating premise, and as the fuel to our interactions … then you'll get not only the very best of one’s self, but you'll get the most of a deeply rooted self. There's choice, free will, connection, anchor-age, bond-age, reciprocity and freedom flowing all through that. But the symbiotic nature of this dynamic suggests subjectivity or at least a contingency factor, or a conditional one. Which leads me to wonder, must freedom always be negotiated? Is "Man born free," as Rousseau would say (and goes on to say, "but everywhere is in chains")? Or must we always be granted our freedom? Maybe through understanding; through love; through reciprocity; through revolution; through emancipation; through force ...?
Consider Huey Newton’s notion of Revolutionary Suicide …
This is perhaps why Lauryn Hill asks in her song "Conformed to Love": "What is freedom but a fleeting notion?" I would take that to imply that perhaps we can never really truly understand or experience freedom without some sort of "anchorage" with which to base this freedom against/on ... to adhere to ... to conform to ...
Freedom must be rooted -- and there is boundless freedom in a true anchor/anchorage; and too, a truly functional anchor will help sustain one’s sense of freedom infinitely.
On another layer of freedom, my friend (another one -- unpure, unsanitized, who I could trust without question) once wrote me: “the freedom comes in choosing what you will pursue, work on, commit to … what truths you will explore and seek to master with your unique gifts and experiences. From there you accept mastery is a process … but then you will have the choice again (more freedom) to learn from them and gain wisdom, which in turns aids your further mastery. Our choice to endure that is what I think tests our worthiness of achieving mastery. Or we can choose not to and not attain mastery hopefully seeking another path with what we’ve learned from trying and rejecting another. Like water, my friend.”
And that, my friend, is the destination.
2 comments:
Truly respect your notions of anchors @Kamille.
"Freedom must be rooted -- and there is boundless freedom in a true anchor/anchorage; and too, a truly functional anchor will help sustain one’s sense of freedom infinitely." I was just talking about foundations (anchors) two days ago in depth and then I find myself stumbling upon this article. madness. Really, what are these "true anchors" you speak of? Essentially they are well built foundations, unable to be destroyed. Even fire cannot destroy a well built foundation. I'm always reminded of the ancient structures of the world, especially the Egyptian pyramids when I think of anchorage and foundation manifesting at it's highest excellence. The pyramids have stood strong, tall and constant for the longest amount of time amongst all of the earthly structures. The architects of such monumental structures, our African antecedents, knew all of the hard work lay in the anchor of the tomb/temple/structure, the underground foundation. A patient and humble friend very recently exclaimed to me, "don't nobody want to put in work at the foundational level anymore!" I was taken aback at his frustration. To paraphrase, he went on to describe how folks will stand around and laugh at you for your tireless faithful labor simply because no spectacular structure yet exists within sight when the foundation is still being built. It looks like the road to nowhere for quite sometime. Excellent foundations require patience. Excellent foundations require sweat. Excellent foundations require precision and calculation and certainly going back and revising errors. I always visualize the builders laying one massive stone at a time. The patience required could drive any man to abandon such a feat. There are 2.3 million blocks in the largest pyramid, each weighing btwn 2 to 80 tons. woof. And yet once the foundation is finished, the hierarchy of the structural elements begin to rise. Classified and organized one above the other, they began to manifest as symbols of significance and importance, layered and anchored and strong. That is the point in which one's critics (who blindly laughed and considered 'foundational work' to be a foolish way to spend one's time) begin to see the meaning of it all. Foundations, anchors, they give life freedom. A well built foundation, just like a true anchor, will never betray all that has risen out of it. My mother always says to me in times of chaos, "Nothing good comes easily". Love tests faith and faith tests love. A woman or man without a strong foundation in faith cannot build a lineage. And faith is the foundation of love. No matter how 'conscious' one appears to be, if they can't understand foundations and anchors, they'll float away, blow away, crumble and turn back into the dusty earth without ever leaving a trace for future builders to learn from. Nothing good comes easily.
^^^ Amen, Amen and Amen.
The good Black Yoda once said, "to a writer, it's all epilogue."
When you reveal, there are always things that inadvertently get left unsaid. It's difficult to provide all of the shading ... at least I find it difficult to put words to many of my thoughts, senses and emotions. I find words oftentimes to be inadequate. So there's so much value in the ensuing afterthoughts and ricochets ... the post-script ... the interpretations ... you know?
I read that Elie Wiesel has said that, "Most people think that shadows follow, precede or surround beings or objects. The truth is that they also surround words, ideas, desires, impulses, and memories."
I'd like to think the same thing of anchors ... my mind tends to dwell on the shadows, the unseen, the kinds of things you need faith for, as you mention. And also like you said, these foundations and anchors and reinforcements often dwell below the surface. That was next on my train of thought -- We're >*< here.
That you were able to essentially "hold me down" and anchor this notion with your thoughts and provide even more breadth and context, speaks volumes to the potential of this space and dynamic. In a real way.
///Foundations, anchors, they give life freedom. A well built foundation, just
like a true anchor, will never betray all that has risen out of it.
///
Agreed!
Word to everything you said. Word to Mum, too. I can imagine that having those words to hold you down both in times of chaos and calm has rooted you in ways seen and unseen.
Post a Comment