Disclaimer: I was inspired to write this piece after reading Bruce Lee's Tao of Jeet Kune Do. It would be safe to consider this a meditation on his life and work.
The basics of expression
To express. How can one define this? We often hear this used in the context of artists, or those in an emotional diatribe. Merriam-Webster defines this as:
express (verb): to convey (a thought or feeling) in words or by gestures and conduct
It is also defined as:
express (verb): squeeze out (liquid or air)
You may be thinking: if one were to express themselves it would be primarily the former, not the latter definition that matters. I take the stance that both are actually related. Let's now dig into the etymology of the word, which you all know I love to do since my first encounter with Nietzche's difference between bad and evil. The etymology of express is:
late 14c., "represent in visual arts; put into words," from Old French espresser, expresser "press, squeeze out; speak one's mind" (Modern French exprimer), Medieval Latin expressare, frequentative of Latin exprimere "represent, describe, portray, imitate, translate," literally "to press out" (source also of Italian espresso); the sense evolution here perhaps is via an intermediary sense such as "clay, etc., that under pressure takes the form of an image," from ex- "out" (see ex-) + pressare "to press, push," from Latin premere "to press, hold fast, cover, crowd, compress"; or to strike.
The etymology of "expression" is unique and important in that it draws upon some unique points. Those being that:
- one can do so with visual arts or by putting into words
- one squeezes out (like the latter of the two definitions we addressed; centering of breath you will see is an important point we draw upon)
- they "represent, describe, portray, imitate, translate" which implies that one is acting out something already existent, not implying any creation in the process
- not only does it press, but it presses out (hence the "ex" as the prefix)
- that one takes the form of an image through pressure
Let's tackle what I think it means to live your life through beautiful, genuine self-expression if the implications of its etymology are to imitate. Through imitating we gain familiarity and free up mental space. Your heart beats regularly. Your lungs breathe regularly. It's safe to assume that your body and mind process repetitive processes to keep ourselves alive and healthy. The system is reliant upon those repetitions and yet those repetitions are done through the autonomic system without any conscious intervention. If you had to think about breathing and beating your heart consciously, surely you'd die. So we evolved to have that run in the background, on its own, in sync (more on that later).
Our somatic system allows us to control things voluntarily; its where most of our headspace is at. If our headspace were occupied by the tasks of both the autonomic and somatic systems, well, we wouldn't have progressed as much as we have as human beings because there would be no mental capacity for thoughts beyond that which keeps us alive. We do the same with computer memory via RAM and ROM. We have a hard drive that may store 250GB of long-term memory/storage and 4GB of RAM for the more immediate requirements.
So we can agree, having certain functions run on auto-pilot affords more flexibility in new, creative endeavors. And that is why by imitating through expression, we are really trying to normalize those movements & thoughts so they can be intuited and absorbed into our very nature, affording us the bandwidth to truly create. It's a pre-requisite to creation.
We need to express through imitation in order to express through creation.
Expressing oneself through synchrony
If one is to express by imitating, then one understands how nature uses networks to synchronize; inherently. Fireflies do this by having a leading node in their network initiate a flash of light, which in effect is followed by another node, etc. The speed in which this is done is so fast that it seems as thought they are doing so as one.
We've all seen flocks of birds maneuvering the sky in unison at high speeds. They are also following the same synchronous orders which fireflies use. Even oscillators in any context follow the same synchrony, implying that we can maintain uniformity through synchrony and synchrony through imitation (imitating the parent node).
Synchrony
As you can see in the diagram above, with synchrony, even in a metastable state, there is the opportunity to reach equilibrium. This would more closely correlate with the world we live in: a complex adaptive system. Where chaos is the norm, relying on the ability of nodes to synchronize among themselves brings a sense or order to the equation. One can say these nodes are expressing themselves to their telos-driven state: order. Are we the same? I'm not certain as I don't believe in predetermination, however in a multiverse where theoretical physics dictates what is actually possible, I'm convinced one's expression of free will coupled with the synchrony they intuitively follow coalesce into something genuine and beautiful.
If you want to understand a real life example of how oscillations and synchrony produce a calming effect, look at the paths that water takes in waves. See the image below for clarification; water molecules take a path of circles that overlap other circular paths other water molecules take, oscillating in a forward motion. They are in sync by nature, a physical expression of the Earth's impact on the moon's gravitational pull.
Breaking waves
Expressing oneself as an agent of change
"A man confined in thought and scope will not be able to speak freely. Therefore. if he wants to seek for truth, he should not be confined by the dead forms." - Bruce Lee
If one is to adapt to change, then they must be a dynamic change agent. So if I adapt to only a few styles, those styles have a numerical value to their count -- could we agree to that? I know it seems rigid to say that the culmination of a certain subset of moves I have can be adhered to jiu jitsu, and the other combination of moves (which will overlap) adheres to boxing, but for example's sake let's just give each style a count of one. Whether you are a constructionist or a deconstructionist, you are tapping into a pool or either finite or infinite styles. This will have an impact on how fast and effectively we can adapt to the change. Let's look at these in visual format.
Sketch by Ahmad Saffi
In the diagram I drew above, I explore whether there are an infinite number of styles-to-be-discovered or if there is a finite number of styles that a person is to uncover. I side with the rosier picture of there being an infinite number of styles; we simply cannot know all the styles that are out there; so why stick to the dead forms as Bruce Lee mentions?
I'm convinced Man will never know all the styles that are out there. Even the summation of all Men will not be able to obtain all the combination of styles since they are recursive and reproductive in nature. And so, man learns, never attains, and is mostly in harmony in this perpetual attempt at trying to attain it.
We change, environments change, nothing is static. If we believe this, then as soon as we settle on an idea we think is true and permanent, it becomes stale and outdated. I've always held the belief that the Universe is really Life realizing Itself. Every corner, every quark and super string, they all have an inherent nature that vibrates and changes. All these things are potential states and through potential states we can make them actual states by expressing our Will towards it. We use change as a medium as well as a state (or continual lack thereof).
So by combining the will and the acceptance of change as inevitable, we express ourselves in every second of our life. To live is to express and to express is to live. So one should not just express but express with purpose, mindfulness, and focus.
Transcending imitation to produce authenticity
Now that we are in agreement as to why imitation is important as a foundation, let's explore at what point the gates of authenticity open.
Simplicity of expression rather than complexity of form. - Bruce Lee
One can become and one can "be". If you're confused, this is stemming from Nietzsche yet again. When we become we are trying to express ourselves in an unnatural manner. When we merely "be" its a more mystic way of allowing expression to take a natural form. It's simple yet difficult (as opposed to complex but easy). It is difficult for us to reach this state because we are never fully present to express ourselves. We may be course-correcting by fixating on the past or we may have our heads in the clouds too often to ever be cognizant of the perpetual present.
To express oneself well, we must imitate a flower, or water, or any other natural being that merely "is".
Why contradiction leads to authentic creation
Everything and nothing. Light and darkness. Alpha and Omega. Rigidity and flexibility. Seriousness and play.
As I continue to dive deeper into Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do, I'm reminded of his advice to "be like water." When water is ice, it has form; when it thaws to become water, it has no form. In having no form, it can adhere to all forms... and in this lies the beautiful contradiction with which creation occurs.
If we are to express ourselves, we must understand that the creative element is inherent within our very selves. It's coded in our DNA, it's present in the evolution we take part in, and it's necessary for any transformation we make: objective or subjective. This is also expressed through binary code, where a "1" and a "0" is a representation of a representation of a representation ad infinitum-ish until we abstract away at its eventual expression. With those 1's and 0's you can abstract the sentence "three brown dogs". That abstraction is the expression of "three", abstracted on "brown", abstracted on "dogs". We can infinitely abstract but eventually it produces our intended expression.
Inherent within that is, in the words of Hamlet: "to Be or not to Be... that is the [expression]." One either is or is not. In any fraction of a second with which we exist (think of a film reel), something expresses itself one way, then another, then another. So to the point we were making earlier, expression is never a steady state but a dynamic, ever-changing way of "Be"-ing.
Is it contradictory? Kinda.
Expression through the breath
There's no easy way to say this: we all breathe wrong. Well, most of us. You'll find people in certain circumstances practicing the correct breathing technique:
- your doctor having you take deep breaths with his stethoscope
- a Lamaze class encouraging the opening of your diaphragm
- a yoga class that emphasizes a deep exhale when in downward dog
- benching in its proper form with an exhale upon pushing
- napping
Frankly, we don't do this in our day-to-day breathing. So much for relying on our autonomic system to run its course! I was inspired to practice breathing the right way when I heard of the insane meditation and breathing exercises Rickson Gracie, a member of the infamous Gracie jiu jitsu family, would participate in. He would partake in ancient Kundalini breathing practices; simply watching it and you'd think there's an alien inside his stomach desperately trying to claw its way out. His breathing techniques involved fully compressing the diaphragm to the point where he could manipulate the movement of his stomach. Check out the video below to see what I'm talking about.
Earlier we quoted Webster-Merriam defining express as "squeeze out (liquid or air)" and I was referencing this as a very literal expression of that. By controlling our breathing, we control ourselves. We control our nerves and we allow ourselves to remain loose. When we are tense as a default state, we expend unnecessary energy by flexing and focusing on muscles that simply don't need to be used. This is inefficient and not a good control of the self. What's unique about this is that it is also a manner of expressing the non-physical self. It's not the physical body we are controlling (though we are using our lungs and our diaphragm), but we are expressing the space within.
To take a spiritual tone, we can quote the Bible (as well as comparable verses in the Torah and the Qur'an) that says:
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
If you're led by a dogmatic spiritual light, then this passage should only strengthen your conviction that we, as a being, are merely the breath we contain. So to express the breath, we express ourselves.
One thing we can agree on is that expression is always an on-going, dynamic process. It's never stale and always constant; never the same. Regardless of the apparatus we decide to express ourselves in, make it genuine and authentic!