I once heard a writer speak about how she felt as if when she typed words on her computer, the sensitivity with which she typed it in some ways transferred to the word itself.
This remark set off a series of beautiful insights in my mind.
Does the intention and energy with which a word was written change the objective form of the word?
No.
Does it alter the experience of the reader in and of itself?
Probably not.
But how does it effect the process of the writer?
Perhaps typing with more sensitivity lends itself to a more nuanced engagement with the ideas being written, and in so doing leads the writer to subsequently follow a different train of thought and feeling for the remainder of the sentence.
Would this not then effectively alter the initial word, whose existence serves a different function now in relation to the new words following it – retroactively changing the word – given the different nuances of meaning highlighted by its relation to the subsequent words – even if the objective form did not change?
I feel that this dynamic demonstrates a profound dynamic at the root of our understanding of the world.
Is this a logical framework of manifestation – wherein the intention with which an objective act is done eventually leads to a change in behavior?
Is this not an optimistic political insight?
Is this not a beautiful description of the interplay between subjective and objective realities?
The objectivity of the form – although untouched in and of itself – occupies a different space in the objective value of the sentence, and is done through an initially undetectable change in subjectivity which leads to a subsequent creation of a new trajectory of objective facts.