Immortality
We can only arrive
at a clear conception of immortality
in a stable, unchanging universe.
In a universe where a divine sanction
ensures the continuity of the cosmic order (Kepler’s universe),
immortality is akin to a natural property
of the human microcosm.
It is merely the logical extension
of the continuity of an order.
The universe could not change since all
is ordained by a higher decree.
By contrast, as soon as that order begins to break up,
as soon as that transcendence is lost, the cosmic order,
like the human order,
emancipated from God and all finality,
becomes shifting and unstable;
it falls prey to entropy,
to the final dissipation of energy and death.
The happy consciousness of eternity and immortality
is ended…
[but] the end does not forget us.
The Illusion of the End, by Jean Baudrillard, trans. by Chris Turner, chapt. Immortality page 91
We saw this coming. Nevertheless I confess my shock at the few moments of video, images that I happened to witness on the late evening news. The inauguration of the 47th President of the United States commences four years of suffering for many that by chance are obstacle to this upheaval, a paroxysm to impose “greatness” by cleansing society of thousands who harvested our tomatoes, picked our fruit, roofed our houses, etc..
This quest for “immortality,” for an American version of ‘Tausendjähriges Reich’, a Third Reich, is the subtext of the Trump coronation, with the roughly 200 executive orders signed, some in public view. A belief in ‘immortality of the soul’ is a key dimension for many supporters of the new regime. The will to impose by forceful social purification an uncontaminated, enduring society is a clue positive to the loss of transcendence, to instability, to entropy.
Whatever the future holds, “the end does not forget us”.
2 thoughts on “Immortality”
As always, I’m at a bit of a loss to fully comprehend Mr. Baudrillard’s meaning, but I can guess at aspects of the intent. The phrase that stood out to me were the final words, ” . . . the end does not forget us.” Does this mean that we not be given a pass with regard to mortality, that the end of our existence will not be overlooked and we will succumb?
Because if that is not the meaning, I would offer an alternative phrase: “The end will not FORGIVE us.” Those immersed in religious piety espouse the calling of the myth of Christ to wash away [forgive] the inherent acquisition of the knowledge of good and evil. That somehow we are born with this sin that can only be expunged by genuflecting to a make believe god. But for me, the end of life, regardless of belief, will not offer any of us forgiveness for there is nothing to forgive. We are born, we live our lives, and then we cease to exist except in the synapse of those who knew us. That’s it. Simple and strait-forward.
Nor am I able to comprehend a great deal of what Baudrillard is writing. I do grasp however a central point: an emphasis on faith in the-right-things occurs at at time when a given interpretation of affairs has been brought into question. To make the point bluntly: one who emphasizes verbally what a “real American’ holds true, shows his/her propagation of doubt, in his ginned-up dissimilation of a vanished concept… How about a showing of hands for real Americans in the room? Those who raise their hands are lying… If I could I’d show them the door!
That said Baudrillard’s words written in 1993 are available for good use given the circumstances of our time. Your suggestion that our American, (at least the 48.9% supporting Trump) confusion, the vertigo with respect to an ending is equivalent to an end to our American experiment which holds “no forgiveness for us,” religious piety notwithstanding — is an interpretation that I would support. There is no “washing away” of our responsibility to do the right thing, by a deity or by anyone else.
Each of us and societies too, live and die by their deeds.