Reinterpreting the Darkness

In Latin the word for black is niger. “Nigger” is also a pejorative term used to degrade people with a “black” skin tone. The word black is also associated with evil. The Latin for white however; is candidus. It derives from the white togas worn by highly respected senators. It also carries a positive meaning. Juxtaposed to the evil meaning of black, white is often associated with good. Even to describe people with non-white skin as black therefore seems to carry with it a degrading meaning. I am not saying that all white people are racist(I myself am a Mic-Mac-Limey-Crout), but I think that our interchangeable use of the words black and white to describe skin tone as well as our conceptions of evil and good is telling of a fundamental danger in the development of human language. It is little wonder that fear and loathing towards non-white people has been so prevalent throughout western history. I would like to clarify that I do not believe that racism is a white problem alone, but my argument is concerned with the effects of language of thought; this is not a discussion about racism.

I will not here get into a nature/nurture debate because the result is always a compromise. I must assume however; that thoughts are imbibed by children as they encode meaning using symbolic systems known as languages. Thought does not entirely precede language. Bias and discrimination are learned, they are not inherent. This is nowhere more blatantly shown than in the early aversion to the dark by children. What? This seems to be a contradiction! It may appear to be, however; it may seem natural to say that children are afraid of the dark and therefore the dark is necessarily evil. I propose that while black/dark is frightening it is not necessarily correct to associate that fear with negativity. I propose an alternate meaning to the word black. Instead of thinking of black as the physical embodiment of evil think of what white looks like in relation to black. Is black not much more full than white? Does it not have more depth and mystery? In a completely illuminated room nothing is hidden. That is why it is not scary to sit in a well-lit room. To sit in the dark however; is frightening because there is an element of the unknown. If a light could illuminate the entire universe would it not make it so that one could see through everything and therefore see nothing? Is white not the absence of everything? Whiteness therefore becomes the embodiment of oblivion, not black. In blackness, in the dark, there is matter, there is form, there is substance, there is life. We cannot see or understand it, but it is something nonetheless.

This is why I believe that ignorance, ignoramus, is better than knowledge. To reside in your total lack of knowledge is to truly embrace reality, but that does not mean that you are embracing a depressing and “black” reality, a reality fit for suicidal nihilists. It is when you reside in a world which is entirely illuminated by your false sense of knowledge that you are truly residing in oblivion. To know something is truly a futile and depressing thing. Think now how devoid of substance the white person is compared to the “evil black person”. It is the white person who is a hole in reality, a white hole, a void. It is fitting how western culture, dominated by white people, has itself mimicked the skin tone of its lost makers. Our culture has reached oblivion with a form, the outline of distinction surrounding the white body. Perhaps my use of Oprah as an example of “Oblivion’s Torso” was wrong? I retract my statement about Oprah, Martha Stewart is the embodiment of oblivion, but then again, in all seriousness, maybe it is I…