Est. 2012 · Specimen No. 1.1

The Museum of Vestigial Desire

GallerySanctuary

Certain ideas need to be allowed to persist, even if there is no evidence of their having any value. The reasons for doing this might not be immediately apparent but they need not be known for this allowance to be given. Ideas need to be allowed to continue on the basis of what they need. If they do not ask for attention, do not ask for money, do not ask for practitioners and do not ask for validation, what is the harm in letting them do what they need to do? Sanctuaries are structures that give such inert desires that do not require much a nestling space. A nestling space only means that a space to develop from a spark to a fire is available. Resources for adding fuel to the fire exist.

But what are the criteria of such an offer of nestling space? The criteria is purely instinctive. When we feel that a desire has yet not become enveloped in a puddle of cynicism, we include it in the sanctuary. Cynicism does not allow a desire to achieve its ends. The desire gets stuck in limbo, not being able to reset and not being able to go ahead and pursue its ends either. This sanctuary does not have only a personal implication for us. It has a wider implication even if you do not care about us or the Museum. We are not saying that culture is infectious so we indirectly and invariably have some influence on the way things will shape up. But we are stating that till the total annihilation of all the sanctuaries that offer nestling spaces is completed, there is no victory for either side. Sanctuaries are detested and their role in fermenting opposition is not easily tolerated.

But this depends on what the nestling space offered is able to trigger. Provided the nestling space is actually able to seed a drastic set of alternatives, it will really end up meaning something. The truth is that there are far fewer resources available for causes that are taking a bet on the future that might never be realised. There is a simple one-to-one correlation between investable futures and liveable realities. If an idea does not have the desperate desire to become investable, then it is an empty symbolic gesture and cannot be taken seriously. Not being take seriously means that there we retain no power and remain a benign entity on the landscape.

Alienation tags: clinginess

If you can't connect, don't bother. If you feel out of place, you are. If you feel alienated, enjoy it.

The alien is the coolest creature on the block. Try to understand why. Aliens can do anything, no social conventions need to be followed. Alienation is part of the infrastructure. Look around you, can you think of any reason to not feel alienated? The design of the system demands you to feel alienated.

So if you can't ever feel at home, feel like you belong, why even try? Embrace alienation. Do bizarre, be bizarre. The alien and the schizoid are similar. If you believe the hardware/software duality about humans (many of us don't), you could say one is a software, and one is a hardware solution. Feeling effervescent, I will go ahead and say that we should petition the United Nations to demand universal alienation. And in kindergarten, we should teach children how to treasure, acknowledge their alienation. There will be no concept of an outsider, no angst in teenage when children suddenly realize that the world is not made of candy. For the well-adjusted minority, maybe the medicos can make a vaccine? A virus? But maybe we should let them feel alienated from the alienated?

It will be refreshing to see writers come up with some new material. They can just trash their first three chapters safely, "We know all about that. Yes, the guy was a mis-fit, weall are." Clinginess will be safely avoided, people who would like to cling-on to their socially cohesive ways will safely be sent away. There will be no more place for them.

You think I am joking? We never joke. We take the long-view, weigh-in the commentary. And objectively suggest the most potential.

Breakage

Breakage is the only moment the object is fully visible. We do not see the chair when we sit on it. The sitting replaces the chair; the chair recedes into being a device whose purpose is to not be noticed, and if the chair is well-made, the chair succeeds. Well-made means unseen. A good chair is a chair that has disappeared into the act of sitting so completely that only the sitter remains.

The break interrupts the disappearance. For a moment the chair is on the floor and the sitter is on the floor, and the sitter sees the chair for the first time — not as a means, not as a function, but as a thing with joints and grains and histories of stress. The chair has a particular dowel that has failed. The failure was always going to happen at that dowel. The grain of the leg ran in a direction that compromised the joint for years. The sitter is looking at an entity with a personality, and had never known.

This is what breakage does. It is the object's first appearance.

We tend to describe breakage as loss. Loss of function, loss of investment, loss of continuity in the room where the break occurred. All of these are accurate. They are also shallow. They treat the break as a subtraction from what was there, which is to say, they treat function as the whole of what was there. But there was always more. The chair was a material thing before it was a functional thing. The break did not remove the material thing; the break revealed it. What was subtracted was the illusion that function exhausted the object. What was added was the object itself.

The child who breaks a thing is closer to this truth than the adult who repairs it. A child faced with a broken toy does not first ask how it can be mended. A child first turns the broken pieces over in their hands and looks at the interiors exposed by the break. What was inside? A child knows that breakage is an opening. An adult has learned to skip the opening and proceed to the repair because the adult is responsible for the continuity of the household, the continuity of the room, the continuity of use. The child's interval is the correct response to breakage and the adult's interval is a management of the room. This is one of the early losses of a childhood — the loss of the interval in which the break was allowed to be seen.

There is an argument that some objects are made only to break — porcelain that is thrown at weddings, bottles smashed against ships, the specific glass used in fireworks. These are not breakage in the sense this entry means. These objects were designed to disappear into their breaking, and the breaking itself is the function. The material was never permitted to have a life of its own. The ritual breaking is a small tragedy that the ritual papers over with meaning.

True breakage is the breakage the object did not intend. The chair that collapsed. The cup that slipped. The axle that snapped on the road. These are the breaks that reveal, because these are the breaks that were not in the object's contract with its maker or its user. The contract was for continuous function. The break violates the contract. In the violation, the object appears.

We have become a civilisation that tries to avoid this appearance. We buy objects that cannot be opened, cannot be inspected, cannot be repaired if they break — objects so completely absorbed into their function that when they fail, there is no moment of visibility; they simply stop and are thrown away. The appliance that cannot be fixed is the appliance that was never allowed to appear. The phone whose battery is glued to the case is a phone that has contracted with its owner never to become visible as an object. We call this progress. It is a refusal of the sanctuary's only moment of access to the thing.

An object that broke once and was mended retains a history of its first appearance. It remembers when it was seen. It will, if the repair holds, continue to carry the trace of that seeing into the rest of its working life. The sanctuary keeps such objects because they are honest about what they are. They have declared themselves. The ones that never broke have not declared themselves, and there is nothing to be done about them until they do. Often the unbroken ones are the loneliest objects in the sanctuary, though they would never know it, since they have not yet been seen by anyone, including themselves.

And so breakage takes its place in this sanctuary. An event that has been described as an ending and is in fact a beginning. The opening of the object. The first moment the user saw what they had been using. A loss that was also an introduction.