My point about these communities revolves more around how we come to be a part of them because of the circumstances in our lives that bring them to our attention in the first place. Had this or that not happened or had we not met this or that person we might never have become aware of the group at all. The complexity and the uncertainty of it all. I was once a devout Christian, then a Unitarian, then a political radical, then an existentialist. What began to dawn on me however is that being part of a group was really the most important consideration. It provided me with a “meaning of life” that allowed me to ground myself in something far more substantial than my own insignificant existence in the vastness of “all there is”. Now that this is gone I’m left with stumbling about as best I can to make sense of things. But the consolation is that in not being a part of a group that makes distinctions between the right way and the wrong way to do things, I have many more options from which to choose.
Well, if you ever become a part of one that is more to your liking let me know what you took away from it. That’s the part that always intrigues me. There is what you think and feel. Then you become a part of a community where others think and feel the same. And you have to dig down deeper into why you think and feel what you do in terms of being a part of the community itself. And then the part where something comes up in which there are different, sometimes conflicting reactions. Always wanting to be a part of the whole but recognizing the challenges that are sometimes posed in integrating “I” and “we”.
Or, sure, maybe, I’m really thinking more of my own experiences over the years. Only when I get to know you better will I perhaps come closer to a “middle ground”.
Yes, sooner or later what you believe is going to be tested “for all practical purposes” in your interactions with others. Some things will click, others won’t. Same with some people. All we can really do is to be willing to live and learn. And then of course the part where sheer luck – what some call serendipity – comes in.
Have you ever encouraged others you know who are blind from birth to explore this community with you? That way you would have another mind able to interact in the community and enabling you to discuss your own shared experiences from the same starting point.
By the way, I just finishing watching The Miracle Worker for the zillionth time. The 1962 original. I was wondering if you had ever had a relationship with someone who was deaf from birth. I’m trying to imagine what conversations between someone who was totally deaf and someone who is totally blind would be like. Each having to make their way in a world where most can both hear and see but having to so in this case from a different starting point.
Thanks. That was really well described. I understand the need for ritual in our lives. And it transcends particular communities to basically include all of us. It seems to be a part of how the brain evolved to make sense of the world. By engaging in rituals we do the same things in the same way for the same reasons. And it is precisely in doing this that it gives the behaviors weight. And it is from this that we able to anchor ourselves to a necessary reality. With me though I find myself thinking about it in this way and the more I do the less I can participate in them myself. The part I find very hard to explain to others.
And another back to you: youtu.be/8NrHkf7rB34
My favorite by Steeleye Span
In fact, I’m beginning to suspect that even though the novel is called Blindness, the fact that all the main characters [except one] are blind seems to be of less importance than the manner in which they become blind. And the fact that blindness actually becomes contagious. Like a viral pandemic. And then the manner in which it is necessary to quarantine them. The pages are riddled with capital letter words like Government and Authority. It seems more an attempt to explore a community cut off from the rest of society and forced to create their own world. A kind of Lord of the Flies only all the people are blind.
Though this may turn out to be wrong.
As for blackness and darkness, that is still really difficult for me to understand.
Here is something from the BBC: bbc.com/news/blogs-ouch-31487662
It begins…
"It’s often assumed that blind people experience complete darkness, but in my experience this is far from the truth.
“I appreciate this is going to sound odd coming from a blind person but when people ask me what I miss most about not being able to see, my answer is always ‘darkness’”
And then…
"Though I’ve had the cord cut between my eyes and my brain, it seems that the world has not turned black. All metaphors, similes, analogies, and literary flourishes about blindness and darkness should henceforth cease to be used because I’m saying it’s far from dark. It is, in fact, quite the opposite.
"So what replaces 3D technicolour vision once it’s gone? The answer - at least in my case - is light. Lots of it. Bright, colourful, ever-changing, often terribly distracting, light.
"How do I even begin to describe it? Let me have a go. Right now I’ve got a dark brown background, with a turquoise luminescence front and centre. Actually it’s just changed to green… now it’s bright blue with flecks of yellow, and there’s some orange threatening to break through and cover the whole lot.
“The rest of my field of vision is taken up by squashed geometric shapes, squiggles and clouds I couldn’t hope to describe - and not before they all change again anyway. Give it an hour, and it’ll all be different.”
Is this anything like your own experience?
To me it all seems counter-intuitive. Blackness is what I would expect but, of course, I have no experience with being blind and I don’t understand the technical, biological, chemical, neurological etc., interactions between the brain and the eyes.
Also, the author does not appear to have been blind from birth.