Wednesday, November 17, 2010

I SEE PENIS: BEAM OF LIGHT




When I think of a beam of light I normally think of God, ET, maybe if I'm pressed, Madonna.  I rarely think: penis.  Dick=Ray makes sense though . . . "The penetrating light" etc.  Its the way in which God/ET/Madonna impregnate us with the power of their presence, which is all good sex can ever really hope to accomplish: the temporal collision of two or more present bodies (and sometimes maybe a baby, but that's another story).

Light (which gives us sight) is also about "strangeness".  Light provides a sensory interface that allows us to engage the sociality of otherness. . . Sex takes this "otherness" and magnifies it to the extreme: I WANT this "other body", I WANT to be inside this "other body", I WANT this "other body" to be inside me, but the merger never happens-- the cessation of desire never occurs.  Desire is present, broken, unaccomplished and unfulfilled.  Even with reproduction, fucking fails to produce a complete merger of two disparate and alienated halves, but rather creates a completely new "other", separate and distinct from the two "halves" which temporarily combined to create it.  Three people are alienated from each other rather than two.

Kate Bush gets it.  A blog reader passed along this video of "The Dreaming" after my Wuthering Heights post.   The laser beam makes an appearance about 3/4 the way through the video. . . Are they jacking the laser?  Wank the light fantastic?  . . . Gives a whole new meaning to "Charge of the Light Brigade" (also an INCREDIBLE film if you haven't seen it). 

2 comments:

  1. Well, Kate does sing about the "pull of the bush," so the song and video are rife with potential for genital puns!

    Plus, the song deals with the colonisation of Australia, so the metaphor of a penetrating "light" (with all the sexual connotations intact) makes sense in that context, anyway. (The "civilising" forces of imperialism as a rape of the land and its indigenous population, etc.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. So true. . . thanks for the added context Marc.

    ReplyDelete