What is that?: Horrorific Ontology
The statement “What is that?” indexes the horror of the weird (or the weirdness of horror) in at least 7 dimensions.
/1/ – ‘What’ is the epistemological dimension of horror or the very questioning of the identity of the creature or thing before the thinking entity subject to horror. Whatness assumes possibly belonging to a taxonomy in that ‘what’ already assumes an ontology, an isness.
/2/ – ‘Is’ is the dimension of ontology proper interrogating the being of the thing and even the very bounds of the thing’s thingness or identifiability once an epistemological schema has been thoroughly employed.
/3/ – ‘That’ speaks to the spatio-temporal location of the thing that is questionably known/unknown, or solid/gelatinous and so forth.
/4/ – ‘What is’ marks an indistinction of thinking and being, not their ontological distinction, but the ontic fuzziness resulting from the mad stacking of countless epochs. In other words, unknowability (epistemological limitation) can result from temporal or spatial distance (too old, too new, too close, too far), an underdeveloped schema of knowledge (unclassifiables, unobservables, dark matter, and so on and so forth) resulting from malformed tools or instruments, or the weirdness of grounding/ungrounding activities themselves troubling the very operation of binding, separating and so forth. Or the problems of discernment could be called proximity, the second blindness, and the third forces and mixtures.
/5/ – Proximites, as both temporal and spatial, is exemplified by the demonic. Possession is the strongest example. ‘What is that?’ in the case of proximal horror is a question of orientation and infection. This is the ‘what is that’ going to do.
/6/ - ’What is that?’ is an appeal to being amidst becoming. This is what separates weird horror (or cosmic horror, or supernormal horror) from slashers. Slasher’s are about ‘who are you?’ as it moves in the circuit of trauma. These being the horror of personality films or horror of blindness.
/7/ – For mixes and forces the natural/supernatural are obscured. Mixes and forces are the play of interiors and exteriors displaying the potency of the radical outside and the depth of internality.’ What is that’ acquires in its most purified form in the supernormal.
Filed under: nature, ontology | 7 Comments
Tags: horror, lovecraft, radical outside