+ Looking at our language—and damn we are already in the trap with ‘looking’, seeing as believing, using the words of our oppressors. But begging,, beginning the question at this intersection. We are a looking people when-once we become literate. Before writing we could assume it to be more natural to say “hearing our language” when we wanted to explore its nooks and crannies. 101 stuff, really, but we are exploring this at ground level, where
the grass meats the ground.
We have come to a thinking of words, the fodder for knowledge, the measure of knowing, explaining, we think of words and then of some kind of language as the epitome of our human face. And it is our surface, our edge, an ability to form, give form. And sometimes we use the language of language, of words and seeing words and yes still hearing words. and sometimes still words on a page, we say they speak. Speak to us. And sometimes we say such things that are not words speak to us, it is an easy list: colors, landscapes, moods… whole sets of things without voices. My suggestion is that instead of considering a usage of ‘speaking’ as related to a kind of anthropomorphic centrism, that we instead see—(dammit, that see, that sticky perception)-we come to interpret this way of relating our own way of engagement , speaking-as-something-having-to-do-with-words-and-or-language, as one expression of something we as yet do not understand, have language for, what we cannot yet see.
It is just a suggestion, but these words grow from its ground. Plants have edges too. And we meet those edges with our own. It takes more than a camera to investigate where these edges meet. It is we who remain in the dark without consciousness. left to interpret what we can with our limited resources. But we try
we try ever so hard.