About

You need to fullfill projects. In your life you may have only a few, all in all. You may make out of a single one, a destiny.

It’s actually what happens with a literary life project called “I’m Jerusalem”, born during a journey down to Jerusalem in 1992. It is something like giving a principle to your life in order not to get lost, perhaps, and in any case it allowed the construction of something new, almost irreal: the insertion of a hypothesis inside of reality, as if reality was doubled by another reality appearing such because the one talking about it may be pretending for a while it were really true. It’s sometimes really difficult to believe something is true, more so if it isn’t, and as German say: lies have short legs.

(Reality has it’s own parameters. It has names, places, situations. To understand these in such ways that they seem to be governed by a principle you are almost imposing on it, makes arise another reality inside of a reality whose reading criteria are perhaps almost vanished.)

In order to reach my goal, an imaginary conquest of Jerusalem by sea, by earth and by sea, millions of Pakistani horseback would help to, I had to play on severe ambiguity, but not only. I could say it was just a spiritual goal but had to pretend on top, it may be understood as a territorial claim and, in order for it to be more exciting, imagine I must have whole sorts of obscure agents on my back running behind me as mislead by a wrong interpretation.

To make it possible I had to know very well in principle who may be hunting me and actually I very carefully studied for years through derivation (what may an obscure agent look like if you have just an unprecise impression of the general organization of a state as basis?) the character and nature of such individuals. Only knowing them, appearing as shadows determining the perception of reality and eventually even reality itself,  the story would look credible and that is what it was all about.

In 1992 I had said to Conchi I would write it in English and that implied many supplementary efforts. In 2003 I managed to get to Jerusalem for a third time and could say that the material for the text was factually given.

I just had to find the how and when to write it and this implied to get back to English and a very specific English. I thus started testing language using WordPress and this not only because my computer had suffered of an almost deadly illness and was waiting for me at the hospital. In fact, publishing (meaning by it that texts could be read publicly) allowed getting a clear and quick idea on what people could be interested in and thus almost indicated a general tone that may be attractive for at least a few.

Many texts saw the light this way. (Dostoyevskij published his main novels in daily newspapers and covered with his overwhelming presence such an unusual attempt.)

It’s true that in the meantime I had forgotten what the main idea had been, and although that was parts of the plan, I had to deal with what was arising from a whole amount of different perspectives that included the possibility of giving a principle to different texts even a posteriori.

I had written at the very beguining of my exercises “Manual of a soldier”, a strange way of fixing a language in psychopathetic environments in a text that should determine the underlying structure. Structurally it fixes already a few characters and mainly obscure ones in symbolic frames and jumping from one thing to the other with many questions in between, actually, does not say anything at all. (I have to admit that my greatest effort to define the characters of my work to come had lead to a fixing of those in drawings and I had to confront myself in 2003 to the somewhat surprising evidence that some of them seemed to have a real counterpart although it was impossible to know how and if ever they may be related to my prolific imagination.) In any case it was not something that would bother me excessively – although it made questions arise – and I continued happily to work on my characters.

One of them was a lieutnant general, characterized as ‘woman’, as supposed to symbolize the ‘attitude’, the ‘way of thinking’, that is ‘the inner disposition’ of an army that has its own information agency. I didn’t know what a lieutnant general is, but actually put it as medium ranged in a possible general scale. (The impression of possible reality was supposed to be given, among other, by the fact that was taken into consideration the obvious holes in knowledge of a determined person, who not necessarily has to know how an army is built up. Strangely I had remarked that too accurate information as provided in some works does underline the impression of ‘creation or imagination’ as actually nobody in a common context may have in his immediate awareness such an amount of accurate information.)

“Firework in Amaretto” arose as idea one day I discovered accidentally a lieutnant general belongs to the Etat Major and that, I guessed, sitting back for once in my life, the possibility there be more than one even in a mixed army was probably more than rare. Hm. Must be happy the possible one, I thought, who may take it personally, if she ever gets in knwoledge of it.

Instead of making a step backwards, thing that is sometimes wise, I decided to make of it the background story allowing to gather all my texts or almost, under a same roof. Precisely because it made appear an extremely interesting psychological question linked to a legal situation, questions which usually fascinate my mind.

If (let us say) someone gets furious because he/she thinks something you’ve said or done is a personal aggression and accuses you of whatever as some kind of revenge, you don’t stand there in front of justice with the possibility of defending yourself in justice: arguments, explanations, facts, definitions. You know that it is personal, finally, and you know that whatever you say or do will be deliberately misunderstood anyhow.

What do you do? It becomes a fine psychological question. You need to gain time and you need to see how you may find a way out. To distract the ‘enemy’ who as incongruently as an SS officer in a concentration camp, is keeping a prison (but imaginary lieutnant generals may do whatever), is possible only by feeding him/her with all sorts of literature, thing that is possible because the high tech prison in question allows the use of computers inside.

Leaning somehow on Potocki’s “Die Handschrift von Saragossa” where a story is told into which another story is embedded and so on, and further more on the principle of “1001 nights”, the situation allows the ordering of different texts with the purpose of distracting the ‘enemy’s’ attention while a sophisticated plan to escape is built up.

Do I escape at the end? The plot is made up in such ways that it can be read from the beguining to the end or from the end towards the beguining, including such two different stories where the second does finally refuse the fact anyone has ever been closed into a prison by pretending a fantastic story has been made up that is misleading the world as published in internet. The second story will make appear the lieutnant general anyhow, allowing the insertion of an element having appeared on the way, which is the localization of a ‘one’ who seemed to fit the features of the character as drawn already in 2001.

If finally the ‘one’ exists (of whatever rank), is the whole then true or not? There will be no answer given to that, but there is one given to the main questioning: there is perhaps always a way out of the most desparing situations.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: