Temporary Stillness: A Close Reading of "Pebbles of Poetry"
One such creation was documented by Wago Ryoichi, a poet writing in the wake of the Fukushima disaster after the Great East Japan Earthquake struck. He initially wrote on Twitter, posting fragmented statements documenting the human experience in the days after the disaster. In reading his work, later compiled as ‘Pebbles of Poetry’, we can understand the new perspectives needed to examine intraobjective interactions and ontological thinking, particularly as omniobjects emerge.
The most striking representation of this transition is a repetition over several days about the radioactivity, both literally and metaphorically falling over the area. Wago repeats:
“Radiation is falling. It is a quiet night.”
“Radiation is falling. It is a quiet, quiet night.”
“In the rain of radiation, I am all alone.”
“…But even if I rushed outside, the radiation would still be raining down.”
“Outside, the radioactivity rains down.”
This repetition stresses the anxiety of the individual in the scale of the omniobject. Wago creates this metaphor of rain to objectify this new omniobject and its ability to saturate other objects. Whilst this metaphor doubles to represent the grief and claustrophobia of being surrounded by the radioactivity, the scale of the interaction becomes divided. There is the larger scale, where the radioactivity is so massively dispersed that it becomes impossible to escape. There is also the miniscule scale, where the radiation interacts with the DNA in billions of cells to destroy them. Both of these are inescapable, as the permeation of the omniobject makes radiation both abundant and particulate. As the omniobject is ultra-viscous, the entanglement with it can never be undone, only more deeply felt. Wago writes:
“They say radioactivity isn’t enough to immediately cause abnormalities in our health. If we turn the word ‘immediately’ around, does it become ‘eventually’? I am worried about my family’s health.”
The high permeability of radiation allows it to penetrate the individual, and the intraobjective interaction causes the change within the individual beyond what can be controlled by human consciousness. That is, whilst the person is unaware they are being changed, the interaction occurring between the object of DNA and the omniobject is producing new effects. Further, the consideration towards family shows that this interaction is omnipresent; the intraobject interaction is occurring on a larger scale between an omniobject and a hyperobject, rather than with a single person.
This experience for Wago then displays a new question of ontological being: that is, a questioning of the ‘meaning’ behind the disaster. Object-oriented ontology describes a flat ontological plane, where objects are equally important whether they are human or not. The nuclear disaster and the psychological effects of entanglement force this new perspective upon Wago:
“My ways of looking at and thinking about things have changed.”
“The meaning of all things is probably determined after the fact. If so, then what is the meaning of that period ‘after the fact’? Is there any meaning at all?”
This search for meaning is instigated by the disaster, whereby the author becomes the bystander towards hyperobjective interactions. This change in personal meaning occurs as the individual perspective is destroyed in favour of the objective relationship. The original form of relationism defined by the Anthropocene – the nature of the world is determined by the situation and interpretation of the viewer – is destroyed. This “meaning of things” being “determined after the fact” is descriptive of the former perspective. As Wago says:
“What meaning could there be in harming us to this extent?”
The dissolution of the object-subject structure in the face of the omniobject deconstructs that internal ‘meaning’. Wago writes:
“What could this earthquake be trying to teach us? If it’s not trying to teach us anything, then what can we possibly have left to believe?”
“With the spiritual power of a universe that pulls away from meaning, the world continues to support the extremes of birth and destruction, and thus continues to exist.”
The idea of an anthropomorphised earthquake designed to deliver moral meaning is a fallacy created by the faith the individual has in their own perspective. As Wago becomes more entangled with the omniobject, it begins to form the basis of ontological thought. That is, as the “universe pulls away from meaning”, it becomes clear that the existence of the Earth is not based in the situation of the viewer. As the omniobject permeates, its existence and interaction with other objects is done not because of an intention to act, but because it has been acted upon. The omniobject and its interaction with hyperobjects is sustained because of a physical, rather than metaphysical existence. In the same way, Wago recognises this new dynamic, as the anthropocentric perspective begins to fade.
Wago’s work is so compelling to read in the study of omniobjects because of the dynamic between intra-action with eco-diegesis. As his perspective unfolds, he becomes part of the landscape he is describing. Further, this perspective becomes weighted amongst his environment, as he reflects his perspective upon the world around him. He writes:
“I cleaned up the broken plates. As I put them in a box one by one, I felt miserable. For myself, for the kitchen, for the world.”
His projection of his own feelings upon the world around him is a lingering manifestation of his anthropocentric ideology, but his expansion of his awareness into the world around him defines the shift in ontological thought to an object-oriented methodology. As the intraobjective interactions take place, he recognises the transitional nature of interactions:
“There is no night without a dawn.”