the narrative of bodies

[adrienmundi]

I'm having problems with narrative and meaning. I'm very cross with the available narratives of bodies, and the meanings assigned them. But that's a social thing, this narration and meaning making based on minor differences here and there... at least I think it is; it's hard to say, living as deeply under the influence of memetic colonization as I, as we, do.

But if it is, then the reality of bodies can be a very different thing. Or can it? If the narrative around meaning assignment is a cultural construct, then it should be possible for an individual to change the relationship to that individual's body, and if that's possible, it should be possible for me to do so. Right?

Assuming it is, though, doesn't solve the problems when a body outside the narrative, a body developed and inhabited outside the dominant narrative, encounters that loosely fixed set of meanings and assignments. Assuming a degree of individual comfort, of inhabitance, can be achieved individually, what does that mean in relation to social interaction/encounters? Does individuation come, or potentially come, at the cost of alienation?

This seems extra problematic for me as I work to disentangle self from group identity, traits from group identifiers, because that work seems to hold liberatory promise, but is it only privately liberatory, and if so, what does that mean in relation to degrees of public domains?

Comments

[adrienmundi]

Ironically, despite the group thinking of conventionalism, the myth of hyperindividualism still seems dominant.

[ineffabelle]

they actually work together... the myth allows people to not see the conventionalism for what it is... just like the myth of the free market allows people to not see that the economy is as rigidly controlled as Germany's was in the 30s.