Avishkar Govender
Avishkar Govender

The narcissism in heraldry

Notwithstanding my demand that collusion and impervious co-operation not decide the fate and future of my peoples, I have on occasion taken the liberty of unilateralism. Unbeknown to many and unfettered by the constraints of corruption, I have been able to shape reality as it is experienced by each and every person, regardless of whether they believed that life existed for the purpose of participating in selective or destructive repetition, or whether they claimed that liberty existed for the purpose of issuance, utterance and passing-off.

It is obvious that there are more than just two types of person, delusion and insanity not being the archetype or prototype of either or any. It is obvious that without justifiable homicide it is in fact murder, to kill, to take life and enforce the forfeiture of life and living. However it is equally obvious that misrepresentation and misinterpretation being the lifeblood of disease, malaise and cretinism; are also detrimental to the welfare of those who would lead and to those who would live.

And so, believing as I do that I am wholly infallible, wholly constituted in perfection and wholly precise in my determination of the fate and future of my peoples; I set about some thirty years ago dismantling and disassembling a puppet theatre that had for the preceding decades not impressed or entertained me. Indeed having spoken to the puppeteers of this theatre at birth, I had held them thusfar in their state of their own uselessness, inertia, and ineptitude.

Certainly it is unknown whether the methods and mechanisms of reprisal and reaction, in the wake of my machinations, were justified or whether they were induced by and from fear. It is however known that the inertia sewn so deeply into the minds, and arcane and obvious logic, that believed in hate, of all things, seemed to echo a fervent delusion of domesticating and thus enslaving those who had arisen to lead and those who had arisen to live, with dignity and sanity.

It is unknown whether the puppets of the theatre being dismembered were envious or whether they were simply lost, unsure of the origin of their own confusion. It is however known that the uselessness imbued so truly throughout the bleating line of their misshapen and self-convincing rendition of hate, hate, hate and hate; counted not just against them, but against everyone who had sought to collude and establish impervious co-operation whether through means corrupt or otherwise.

As with Deuteronomy, it unknown whether the theatre had ever lent itself to being impressive or entertaining at all, or whether its own fixation with social justice, bereft of all jus, simply determined that blind adherence and emphatic repetition was commiserate with the expected realism. It is however known that the ineptitude so endemic to the plague-like submission to defeatedness, made fools of the entire cast as they splintered and sought to find employ in the theatre which had appeared to replace the theatre being dismembered.

Manipulated by the allure of an easy existence, many sought to adopt seemingly pragmatic approaches to their behaviour as the audience of the forthcoming theatre. And in so doing simply found themselves saddled with the burden of habitual collusion and unrelenting impervious co-operation. Those that had believed themselves cleverer than the rest, did not shy away from corrupt and beggared behaviour, thieving through misrepresentation and misinterpretation. However without exception it was saturated iconography that presented to each and every person, an obvious eventuality.

Irrespective of how many claimed that they were entitled to continue as they had previously performed, despite never having impressed or entertained me, they were found in the course of switching theatres, to be short and encumbered by their own prejudice and systemic hatred. Such things never have and indeed never will engender any form of respect for reality or indeed grasp upon cognisance of existence. It is therefore a pauper’s delusion to believe that change is muted and that the status quo is superlative.

Needless to say it would be purposeless to comment herein on thirty years of social engineering without raising the issue of legitimacy and credibility. It is unquestionable that those who are empowered by their peers are subject to the fecklessness of inexact relation, while it is also unquestionable that those who are empowered by the people are subject to the expectation of inexact adulation. Without which it is evident that neither legitimacy nor credibility are commodities that are understood by those that do not understand power.

Interpreted exactness and contrived circumstance do not sane bedfellows make, and without any pandering or delinquency would render the believers to be hopeless and lost, in their own deludedness, in their own delusionalism. It is therefore appropriate to postulate that if I had conceded at any time to the corrupt and the unethical, that the theatres would not have changed, would not have switched and indeed that the universally accepted understanding of what was would have continued into the universally accepted understanding of what is.

Seemingly over the last thirty years many have fallen to the consequence of corruption and irresponsibility. While others have had to contend with the reality that none actually have the time to question the fabric and the nature of the content of the theatre, whether it is for one’s own edification or entertainment. Therefore I cannot in good conscience abide the notion that the accepted collusion and impervious co-operation be allowed to exist or worse to fester.

Change is without any doubt worthless if that change is muted and withheld from the reality of actually being change. Just so that change itself is not, never has been and indeed never will be something that panders to the delusions of those that are themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time. Much as power is not, never has been and never will be held or wielded by the powerless.

It is unknown whether this discourse in addressing the primacy of our argument in favour of theatre that impresses and entertains me, will be appreciated by those that cling to the obligation they have merely to participate and be seen to participate. However it is known that regardless which the facts of the participation in society, in the economy and in the polity are known and recorded for all time, without exception, interruption, omission, concession or special consideration.

So much so that when I comment on the performance of the theatre, I comment not from the perspective of a puppeteer or of the audience, but rather from the perspective of the utility of the theatre, which must exist as a thing, in and by itself. Uselessness, ineptitude and inertia do not ever suffice as valued things or valuable things. It must be then that, without exception, an understanding of reality is required and indeed demanded.

Demanded, an understanding of reality means an understanding of reality not not-reality. Moreover reality cannot be confused with delusion, with abstracted representation of fact, with half-truths and sarcastic bleatings, whether intentional or otherwise. Reality as a thing must be understood in the context within which it is conceived, communicated and conveyed; not in terms of parameters that do not pertain to reality. Without this demand for the understanding of reality in the holistic and complete sense, there is no purpose of action.

Indifference to reality, whether real, fictional, imagined and/or affected; is not a sign of madness, rather it is a sign of weakness and a pitiful cry and indeed plea for help and attention. However such a situation does not lend itself to being made better through indulgence or entertainment; and should rather be eschewed and disregarded immediately. Regardless of the purported value of self-importance, there is not reason to consider it.

Needless to say reality cannot be apprehended by the dulled or indeed the deluded senses, and therefore cannot be restated or instated by the cowardly or the simpering. Without exception, where reality is misstated, where reality is misrepresented and/or where reality is excluded, the theatre itself is not in congruence with the need of the audience, nor with the intent of the puppeteer; resulting in dissatisfaction throughout the iterance.

It is unquestionably directly the purpose of the theatre to generate perception, not to variance of reality, nor to the entrenchment of delusion, rather to the satisfaction of the constituent participant; and therefore it must be the work that is a priority for my consideration, without the entanglement one would encounter through hypocrisy and/or corruption. It is thus directly the projection of perception which must controlled judiciously.

Of all the perceptions projected, to be assimilated, were it possible to consider all; I prefer a carefully balanced optimism, that is bereft of insanity and delusion, in its entirety. Where this is not possible, instead I choose radical integrity, that is devoid of any and all sarcasm, narcissism and/or larceny. Without exception, the perception of deludedness and thus hopelessness feeds into a lack of interest and attentiveness that is worthless.

Considering that hopelessness is the result of misdirected effort and that misunderstood iteration is as dangerous as irresponsible accusation, I would have been remiss all these years if I had simply condoned mediocrity and low standards. Be that as it is, I do not make in any way whatsoever any apology for having demanded that mediocrity and low standards be abhorred.

It is finally without cause and without consideration that those that hold themselves up as icons of virtue, of respect and of decency, must be questioned so that we can be sure that their worth in our belief is not just dictated by the obviousness of their embellishment of their own character but rather by the reality that cowardice is not, never has been and never will be tolerated.

Of those who have made the effort to separate their own obligation, and thus their potential cowardice, from the object of the good for the many, and thus their potential leadership; it is only the logic of the valuable icons, saturated into our consciences; that has endured the changes over the last thirty years. Notwithstanding the inevitable critique, I have certainly found that without any sort of capitulation to corruption, it is quite possible for the unnecessary to be excluded from having and/or holding any influence, access, power and/or authority.