The Amorphous Male
Pithecanthropus Erectus

Kofi Fosu Forson

Boxer would be best definitive of the male. The gentleman further and professionally reprises the role as pugilist knowing of its science and rule.

Circumstances bring the macho fisted, less-gloved in the streets of Mexico to fight, form an opinion on who governs within a moment of ill-dispute. For it is not the man made definitive as “street” based on his walks of life.

Torture as in emotional turmoil need not be rendered in a gang-fight, drug bust or rape. The primordial mind is capable of surrendering to an escapade found in serial killers, dictatorship and government.

Who are we that bring to life foetus born to lead a challenge best deserved of a conqueror knowingly life itself is more than gift; it’s miraculous. Where are those who merge this complicated effort not to merely survive but ascend beyond proportions set aside for those who dare? In defeat and victory we summon this challenge.

Wherefore do we sport in deciding who is king or merely man? Does manhood suppose physical and emotional strength? What becomes of a person who has no monetary gain? Is he less the victim and more the conscientiously free?

There are suppositions in life. One must deliver unto oneself the ordained manifesto. To what principles does one ascribe? When does politics refrain from art and do they form a consequence with science and music to implicate genius. Is that then a means of disillusionment or a clever way of describing Goethe?

Art is never the scientific method. It’s the very way of meditating on nothingness. But with every query is the history behind the undertaking. To suppose a pen and paper, brush with paint is to kill by sword, death at war. We are not children at play. Such is the hindrance in today’s society where to pupil requires a gun. Credibility is gained by senseless death. Isn’t the precarious delivery of an artistic expression an excuse not to murder?

When then is art a premeditated means of expression and earns its merit as an occupation? Were we not all children once ready at play crayons in hand debating on colors, shape and form? Was this a path towards destiny or does innocence beget curiosity?

Experience warrants the character of every male. The hunter in nature knows a precise hand and eye coordination. The painter at heart is open to the world. Depending on temperament he finds a vision. The writer marks with punctuality thoughts and equations.

How then do we suppose the resolve with which an abstract expressionist manages the thought process from the minimalist divide of an avant-garde filmmaker? Does an accomplished jazz improvisation bear similarities to the redundancy of a rock and roll song?

These require theoretical interpretations coming to terms with the notion and understanding behind the creative process. Assuming the standards and artistic movement relevant in each medium we can magnify in peculiarities and uniqueness, the musician from the photographer, the dancer from the choreographer.

Art then becomes construct, a decided business with which we mark conclusions drawn from our pithecanthropical existence neared evolution through time, emerging as creative beasts, pronounceable as architects of misfortune from which we establish language, vernacular, enabling communication, semiology, translating signifiers through advertisement, cinema, art culture and the continuous motion emerging as dignified, an entity onto all others where we prolong by will alone the innate ability to conference.