Monday 17 October 2022

Fang Meets Scale by Owen Townend

 


At this stage ouroboros is practically a diamond-backed living tyre. The eternal snake is tireless in its rotation, rolling down the black road of existence.

            Surely somewhere down the dusty trail, Ouroboros would have spotted a more delectable snack than its scaly tail. Imagine if it had changed course and shape for a mouse. Of course this would have to be metaphorical too, an analogous mouse that pokes its head in on all that has ever been and ever will be, in search of some crumbs. Karma crumbs, probably.

            Ouroboros would spot the little chancer, extend its fangs and lash out with some existential venom. That poor mouse might be in the throws of perpetual agony, at least until the eternal snake decides to swallow the hapless interloper. Who knows what the digestion would be like, never-ending and bilious with angst?

             And what then? Would Ouroboros be able to revert to its primary instinct of rounding off infinity? Surely it would be past all that, lost to a more primal urge to devour and survive. Even immortal concepts have that drive to fill their belly.

            No. I’m not convinced Ouroboros would return to chasing its tail. What would be the meaning of it? Ouroboros would just be a snake, albeit one of the most famous. Then again, such drastic action would prove an embarrassment to the philosophers. An unanticipated failure in a tried and tested thought experiment. In that case, nothing lasts forever. There is no pattern.

            Mind you, I have no proof that Ouroboros has done any such thing. The snake has set its mind to the task of circles and that’s no meagre undertaking. Life has to keep going.

            Only once fang meets scale can we truly talk about something new.

2 comments:

  1. Well, you're right, that's about the scale of it all, Owen. We could go on arguing the toss about it, ad infinitum, but it's an amusing little tale, with a nice bit of philosophy thrown in. Thanks, Vivien

    ReplyDelete
  2. Far too deeply thought for my poor level of theological thinking!

    ReplyDelete