Tuesday 30 July 2013

Repost

Nietzsche was my “psychoanalyst”, at least in the first instance. The limitations of Nietzsche are that he does not deal with the question of patriarchy. Like many a contemporary male, he sees no particular problem with this in terms of causing mental health issues. He is prone to essentialise gender.Marechera was my second, much deeper and more self-aware “psychoanalyst”. He deals with issues both of race and gender. One understands through him how society is constructed so that both race and gender constrain as well as determine psychological development. Marechera comes from my culture, which is also more primitive than that of European of contemporary Western culture. My problems were sourced in this culture, not in Western culture, which meant that Western therapists had not the background that would have enabled them to get to the bottom of any of my concerns. As a result, there was meaningless talking around the issue — or, if pressed concerning the urgency of finally addressing my issues, the therapists would become extremely abusive.  Marechera, Bataille and Nietzsche, in the reverse order, taught me about a different way of being, which I call shamanism. 
  1. Shamanism is a mode that mixes the recognition of extreme trauma with a mode of speaking that is extremely ironic. It’s not to everybody’s taste and is indeed confusing, since most people believe that genuine injustices ought to be taken seriously and with the greatest sense of moral deliberation. 
  2. Shamans are, however, “wrecked out of their wounds”, which means that they've reached such a base level of extreme skepticism about morality, and its capacity to do any good, that they can only treat the world ironically, henceforth.

No comments:

Cultural barriers to objectivity