The Stygian Wholesto

Somewhere between the 14th century and present day stagnation, the word ‘mystify’ has moved from a faith based definition to a definition focused on deceit, lies, and conspiracy. Mystification has been deemed as a method of control which explains away what is already obvious. Or, more precisely, as John Berger posits “Mystification is the process of explaining away what might be otherwise evident.” The Stygian Wholesto wishes to remystify logical discourse, literature, and any oral traditions still existing. Remystification, in other words, is an attempt to remystify texts in order reject methodological approaches of meaning, and instead, re-elevate texts to a universal level of ambiguity that extends beyond reader-response. Texts should be inaccessible, in other words, to all. Here is the reason. The reader wishes she could reject the vast area of typical knowledge and dive into the off trodden path of subjectivity and multiplicities of crisscrossing criticism and beliefs in order to gain a sovereign vista. Sounds great, oh boy, let’s go! However, one will soon realize they found only in the end the most beaten path—a literary stabbing in the back, and a sell out notion to the promise of refutations against social attitudes. If this worked we would know who Hamlet was. The methods have failed us, and should be abandoned. We return to the scope of movement without ethics and eventuality. We grab a book and read without fostered various perspectives only revealing false truths like the way a fire chases away shadows in the woods. We should resist the notion of implied readers and context-dominated associations with shifted manifestations of rhetorical communal criteria. The book is a book; the book is not a book. The Stygian Wholesto denudes applicability and views art as unequivocal. Books are crash landings of spacecraft, as alien to us as our own culture, as mystified as confessional inquiry and reliance on institutions or ideological scrutinized analyses of discursive production. The most successful book would have its covers glued, and transparent nouns. Of course, that is radical, but the point is that we should render less meaning towards social or historical systems. Personal views pointing to moral spaces should also be admonished. One should pick up “Notes from the Underground” and say, “this book may be about rules that rendered codes of behavior on the existential arch, but it really only suggest that emotional proclivities only amplify themselves in bitter situations, or situations I cannot fathom because this is only artifice at an artificial spot in the nothingness of the universe.”