Best Quote from Mailer

Best quote so far from Oswald’s Tale, by Norman Mailer, doesn’t seem, at least on the surface, to have anything to do with Oswald:


The essence of magic is to exist in a state of consciousness where past and future seem interchangeable. Classical Hebrew, for example, has only two tenses: There is the present, and then there is another tense which barely distinguishes between past and future. To indicate a past action, it is enough to say, “I went”; yet, to speak of the future, one need only add the word “and” as in, “and I went,” and it becomes equal to “I will go.” A primitive sense of existence is suggested – one that would transgress our modern separation between the real and the imaginary. In such an ancient grammar, yesterday’s events are not seen as facts which have already occurred so much as intimations of the future, that is, omens received from a dream. In that primitive world, the events of yesterday mix in one’s memory with the portents of last night’s dream. To say, therefore, that you have done something which you have not yet done becomes the first and essential step in shaping the future. Out of omens come events. It is as if the future cannot exist without an a priori delineation of it. God conceives of the world, then makes it. The cabalistic sense is that in His act of conceiving the world, God has already made it. (The rest is details!)

(page 569)

This appeals immensely to me. Let me see if I can figure out exactly why.

I think it has something to do with that extremely intimate yet completely foreign nugget of experience called the Now. I’m going to capitalize it to emphasize it as a state of being, or I should write, Being. The Now. Intellectually, I know that there is no such thing as a past or a future. Or at least I can read it on a piece of paper and understand the thought behind it. Or, rather, I can understand the sentence as written, but I have a more difficult time fully comprehending the underlying fact that there may not be a past or a future.

See, I even had to insert that conditional word “may” in that last sentence.

While Mailer is not talking about the Now and the non-existence of past and future, he’s strolling and whistling about in the same neighborhood. I think that what he’s talking about is mysticism, pure and undistilled. After all, is not the Self-described name of God, I AM WHO AM? In other words, “I am pure existence.” “I am the present moment.” “I am the Now.”

He mentions that the past and the future are interchangeable (in magic – but I’m thinking more of mysticism, which I think is what he’s thinking of, too). That is because the past and the future are rooted in the present. What is the past? Our subjective memories, individual and collective. What is the future? The projection of our thoughts (hopes, fears, expectations, etc) that may or may not come to existence, be it seconds or years from Now. Simplistic definitions, but accurate, I believe. Therefore, the past and the future do not exist, at least in the same form as the Now exists.

God is pure Now. He says so Himself. This, I think, is the reason for His omnipotence. (I think.) For if nothing is impossible to you in the Now, including the ability to change the past and mold unchangeably the future, you are all-powerful.

Mystics (or magicians) somehow have the ability, or are granted the grace, the gift, of “participating” in this pure Now. Consciously, subconsciously, or unconsciously, they are then allowed to influence the past or the future, even if only to “read” either.

That’s what I think this paragraph is about. In the context of Oswald, it’s about his uncanny ability, or fate, to show up at the vortex of every government agency and every fringe group, international as well as domestic, that had the means and the desire to do away with an American president. Even if you read only a little bit about this strange young man’s life, you can’t help but notice it. Somehow, Oswald was “plugged” into something greater than himself. I don’t think Mailer’s serious about this. More like he’s just shrugging his shoulders as if to say, what the hell else can be the explanation?

As a side note, I have always been interested in languages. When you read philosophy you see a lot of how languages influence reality and vice versa. There are a whole bunch of theories. Unfortunately, philosophers generally are completely inept using language to explain their ideas, especially their ideas about language. I have yet to read something clear and concise about the relationship of language to reality, but intuitively I feel there’s something very heavy there. I know nothing of Classical Hebrew, but if what Mailer writes is true, is that not the coolest thing you’ve ever heard?