Skip to content

anonyme.

Did anonymity exist before the written word? Did text make possible a voice with no name? I am at once both in love with and repulsed by the universal and irresponsible potential of this. There was a time when what was said could only be said directly, or by virtue of the lubrication of a certain personal trust. Today I take for granted the possibility of countless anonymous venues, thanks first to writing and then, now, to recording and duplication. Today origin is no longer obvious.

Duplication. I can duplicate a text; I can use this same process for duplicity. Must authorship always be taken on faith? I fear yes, and I am delighted.

9 Comments Post a comment
  1. No, I don’t think the text created the possibity of anonymous voices. But it certainly made it easier, and removed the necessity for schizophrenia, spirit possession and the like.

    April 19, 2010
  2. Dave: Yes, I see, though, then, why not say it just allowed for a more culturally acceptable schizophrenia, spirit possession, etc?

    April 19, 2010
  3. Yah. Being anonymous allows us to assume different personalities which our culture, with its belief in a unitary, indivisible identity, otherwise doesn’t permit.

    April 19, 2010
  4. Dave: Yes, and yes, and I think every one of my fractured identities has missed you tremendously. It’s good to be back.

    April 19, 2010
  5. DiamondLil #

    Siona, I often marvel at how much I fell in love with anonymity through Gaia.

    My pseudonym allowed me to be the person I always felt I was inside but that no one else seemed to see, that in fact I didn’t even see. And when that identity first began to be breached, when people first began to know me as Tracy, I was unutterably sad for a while to be Tracy again. Then I realized that everyone on Gaia saw DiamondLil and Tracy as the same person, allowing me to see it too.

    Schizophrenia indeed! But a healing schizophrenia. Apparently I was always the person I wanted to be!

    April 19, 2010
  6. Sharyn #

    I am who I am, whether anonymous or not. Those who know me well, know me not. I am anonymous only to others, not myself. It’s great to see a new beginning here. I have missed writing and learning about others thoughts!

    April 19, 2010
  7. but to touch somebody you would otherwise never have known, as you have me, possibly maybe makes your loss of anonymity worthwhile.

    April 19, 2010
  8. Tracy: And for me Gaia was the opposite of anonymity! For me there was an oddly uncomfortable and inescapable display, where even being silent felt too revealing. Thank you, though, for the gift of that bridge, and the lesson, and how lovely that Diamond was a part of your name–or one of your brightest faucets.

    Sharyn: That is a beautiful way of putting it. I sometimes feel the opposite: that I am named to others and inward, at heart and to myself, ultimately anonymous, but perhaps that is just the inverse of what you observed.

    Bill: I’ve missed you, and yes.

    April 23, 2010
  9. Anonymous rat #

    I love your question. Or whose question is it? Are these my words, my answers? Certainly not mine alone.

    My textbooks say anonymity existed long before written text. I tend to see anonymity less related to words than to possession and property; ultimately maybe the distinction of you and me, or I and not I.

    May 6, 2010

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