THE SWEET APOCALYPSE
(An Essay About Dying Current Civilization)
By Ivancho Jotata, known also as Ochnavi Atatoj, Ivan Bugarow, Jotabash Giaurgi, Nostradamus Buladamus, and other cloning names
: This is a paper about the decline of our civilization, in what we don't believe en masse because it is not felt as dying, it smells
good, yet it is a decline, obviously for those who give a thought to it. So that I will explain why this is so, in what it chiefly expresses itself, and what would have been good to do, if we don't like much this idea. But this time, maybe for change, or because you, people, as a rule, don't like especially structured things, they look boring for most of you, I will not structure the material, it will be just a narration, dreams, play of the imagination, such things.
[ The idea
for illustration is in placing of one picture in a frame under the title
and the author, which has to be square and probably 450 x 450 pixels (because I
use usually 525 x 725 for the cover and then multiply by 3, when necessary).
The picture is better to be painted in colours and looks as follows: on the
left part and above is shown hanging fly paper with some things on it,
supposedly caught flies, but on the right of it is placed (part of) a
magnifying glass, and is seen that these things are, in fact, human beings; it
has to be shown one person nearly whole and parts of some others, the sex is
not important (i.e. there are men, women, and children). The idea is that the
consumer society just catches us and we are stuck in it. This is all, and the
same picture is used for the variants in all languages. ]
I have come to the idea for this paper turning in my head the word apocalypse (or -sus), where apo
- is a prefix in old Greek said to mean back /-ward, but I think that the idea here is rather in some movement ahead due to some digging, picking, delving, like with a pickaxe, of making a step forward. This has to be so because dopo
in Italian is after, and only po
in Latin, as shortened from podex
, is something near to the ground, what is to the same idea if we imagine that we have walked on … our fours, and then have sat on our derriere
-bottom (and so on, I will try not to indulge in pretty long etymological explanations). In some cyclical process there has not to be big difference whether we move in one direction or in the opposite, and it can also be meant that pulling ourselves back we see better the object, or that we return back in the time to some primeval chaos, but I have in mind this picking and making of step because of the old Arabic hap /ap
as a morsel, i.e. we have tried to bite a piece from this kalo
thing. Yet the important is not the prefix but the root and I have dug about kalo
-root maybe before a quarter of a century, and have come to the conclusion that this mean both
, good, or bad things, it depends. Depends on what? Ah, on the look that we cast at the metamorphosis of the things, because the decaying is a bad thing, but it is also good, it is unavoidable, necessary.
These are dialectical reflections, which people do not do nowadays but have to -- if you ask me, that's it. So the reasons for this meaning are, for one thing, Bulgarian word 'kal'
meaning mud, or Russian the same 'kal'
but meaning there sh#t (guano in Latin), if I may allow myself to use such words; and for another thing there are many words with this root as something good, like: kaleidoscope, Greek kalimera
as good day, their muse Calliope, the callanetics, Turkish and Bulgarian kalay
as the metal tin, and others. But one can cite also only the Hindu goddess Kali, which is a goddess, yet on the under-terrestrial world. And with all these long explanations I want to tell you that the apocalypse is moving to the mud or sh#t, or the decay, or that we want to bite in it. To some similar ideas one can come digging around Arabic kef /kief /kaif
as big pleasure, where is Russian 'kefir' as kind of sour milk, but also Sanskrit kaphas
as slime or sediment (or then Persian kaf /kafa
as a foam or froth). Id est, we like the dirty things, we know that they are dirty, but we often like them all the same.
And the apocalypse, or at least the first steps towards it, look more or less good, we have so many things that we just wonder what to throw out to the garbage first, but this is not pretty clever. This is not much clever because it is one thing to make natural kal
-mud, and quite another thing to produce things that do not turn to mud or sh#t. I usually like to make here difference between: ecologically clean dirtiness
, and ecologically dirty cleanliness
! In the same way may be made difference between necessary decaying or wrong decaying (of the society in general). Here the problems are not only in qualitative aspect, but also in quantitative, in the measure or proportion, and as far as no god, existing or not, tells us what is right and what not, it becomes necessary for such clever guy like me -- what is seen at least by the fact that I am not
valued in my barbarian country (or rather am valued about 3 bus tickets daily, as I have already explained in other materials), because in such countries are valued and liked, by the official instances, as well also by the masses, people who have as less brains as possible (in order to be easily bamboozled by our democratic authorities) -- to indulge in popular explanations of obvious things.
But let me dwell for a while about the garbage. As I was young,