An "anarchist" does not believe, as some
wrongly have put it, in social chaos. He believes in
a state of society wherein there is no frozen power
structure, where all persons may make significant
initiatory choices in regard to matters affecting
their own lives. In such a society coercion is at a
minimum & lethal violence practically
non-existent. Certainly, there will still be
situations where coercion may have to be exercised to
prevent something worse, but, as Ammon Hennacy has
demonstrated in life, even maniacs with knives may be
sometimes pacified without violent coercion. A
"pacifist" believes that better methods
than violence may almost always be found to solve
social difficulties & resolve differences between
individuals & groups. While not all anarchists
are pacifists even now, & many pacifists are not
anarchists, I think all agree in regarding the
individual person as being infinitely precious &
as being capable of cooperating with others for the
good of all. Let us add to these attitudes that of
the Taoist, Zen Buddhist, or Kegon Buddhist, wherein
the elementary actions of the world itself & of
"all sentient beings" are regarded as being
on a level with those of human beings in the narrower
sense. One comes to situation wherein "even
plants have rights" (one doesn't chop down a
tree unless there's a damn good reason to). How
better to embody such ideas in microcosm than to
create works where both other human beings &
their environments & the world "in
general" (as represented by such objectively
hazardous means as random digits) are all able to act
within the general framework set of "rules"
given by the poet, "the maker of plots or
fables," as Aristotle insists-the poet is
pre-eminently the maker of the plot, the
framework-not necessarily of everything that takes
place within that framework! The poet creates a
situation wherein he invites other persons & the
world in general to be co-creators with him! He does
not wish to be a dictator but a loyal co-initiator of
action within the free society of equals which he
hopes his work will help to bring about.
That such works themselves may lead to new
discoveries about the nature of the world & of
man I have no doubt. I have learned, for instance,
that it is often very difficult to tell, in many
cases, what is "chance" & what is
"cause." There are kinds of inner &
hidden causation that are very difficult to
distinguish, on the one hand, from "chance"
or "coincidence," & on the other, from
"synchronicity": "meaningful acausal
interconnection." Also, absolutely unique
situations may arise during performances of such
works, & the experiences of those participating
in them (whether as performers, audience or both)
cannot help but be of new aesthetic (experiential)
meanings. That is, not only do the works embody &
express certain metaphysical, ethical, &
political meanings, but they also bring into being
new aesthetic meanings.
from A Controversy of Poets
Reprinted with the permission of Mr. Mac Low
"Because it's there."
Attributed to Sir Edmund Hillary
