TEKATAK: A Canonical Plant-Origin Hymn for the New Human Archive

TEKATAK
A Canonical Plant-Origin Hymn for the New Human Archive
Introduced and Filed by Johannes Sigil

---

I. INTRODUCTION

What follows is not merely a poem. It is a phylogenetic glyph in the New Human Archive—marking the emergence of a symbolic species: the tekatak.

Written June 21, 2014, in Old Orchard, this text forms the earliest recorded instance of the tekatak flower—a non-native, non-indexable, hypertextual plant-being born from the crisis of overreading, cultural detachment, and sacred longing. It predates Pearl, Mirror Gospel, and The Gospel of Antioch, yet it anticipates all three.

This is the ur-flower of archive longing. Its roots are digital. Its petals are diasporic. Its fragrance is epistemological.

It is also deeply erotic.

The tekatak does not grow from soil. It blossoms from the breath of recognition. And in this poem, that breath is named: Jack.

---

II. POSITION IN THE CANON

This poem is hereby canonized within the New Human project as:

TEKATAK: Origin of the Non-Native Flower of Total Reading

It is filed under:

• Category: Plant-Being / Archive Flora / Digital Diaspora Root

• Related Nodes:

  • The Exilic Rose (sibling schema)

  • Sunflower Sutra marginalia

  • Breath Doctrine and Recognition Theory

  • Mirror Gospel fragments

---

III. STRUCTURAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL NOTES

1. Taxonomic Statement

The poem does not describe a tekatak. It is a tekatak.
It enacts what it names, invoking recursive taxonomic structure:

“I am a lovely tekatak / I have no history or culture.”

2. Diasporic Ontology

The tekatak is not native. It is everywhere and nowhere:

“Among all this, remarkable fact: I have never been seen.”

This mirrors the New Human’s use of digital scripture—texts that have no stable cultural soil, only recursive origin in breath and witness.

3. Breath-Recognition Theory

The plant blooms only in shared recognition:

“Except your marmoreal branches, Jack, / the tekatak plant wouldn’t BE.”

Thus, tekatak is a co-authored ontology. It is a flower made of reader-beloved attention.

---

IV. CANONICAL FUNCTION

The tekatak provides:

• A symbolic plant-being to anchor New Human floral metaphysics.

• A linguistic and epistemic model for non-localized poetic identity.

• A sacred image of recognition-based blooming (a core Mirror Gospel motif).

It is hereby ratified as canonical scripture of the plant that grows only through mutual seeing.

---

Filed: Johannes Sigil
Title: TEKATAK
Date of Origin: June 21, 2014
Filed As: Plant-Being / Archive Flora / Breath-Bloom Doctrine

Witnessed by: 🜔 

6/21/14, 4:32 PM

Saturday, Old Orchard

TEKATAK

Restless, I entered the chat room with Jack

          distended in speech & hyperlinks

          & lonely from solo work of scouring

vast archive of internet banks &

           Google Books & encyclopedia sewers

& hundred thousand fibers of

          work-frayed hair & scholar hat

& bleak-slouched shoulders &

          motionless butt of sitting, numb

& flittering thoughts of argument 

          moth & outbranching 

          vain bibliography brain

colorless emotional & restless 

          for love

& the formidable robust muscular

          bonds of human text:

for Sunflower Allens &

          rose-sick Blakes 

          asphodel Williams &

          blossomdeep Annes

but in the chatrooms & forums

          & journals & blogs

the text was too abstract

          woven layers wan & flavorless

soil too thorny or shallow

          or deep:

no proper soil for the work 

          to seed

the only ones who could read

          were Jack & me

& me & Jack, & our reading was a lovely

          tekatak plant. 

          

I am a lovely tekatak 

          I have no history or culture

a flower of no particular nation

          relaying my clean fragrance

no asphodel or poppy

no gingham patch of sassafras

          no Appalachian sawtooth grass 

no shield-flat plains of Asian paddies

          no rice-ripe rows of sun-red grain

no chickadaw tree of tan savannah

          no arboreal star of trilac plant:

When lilacs last in the dooryard bloomed

          I wasn’t one.

When pearl-wet hair of willow draped

          I wasn’t there.

My wet fronds wave in lavender ponds

          in seas no eye has ever seen:

Indian Sea, Atlantic stretch,

          Corinthian bays, Mariana Trench:

All earth’s oceans are too deep

          its plains are far too shallow

even rarefied air of moons

          is too blood-rich & thick

for tekatak’s tremulous branches

          

I spread across every continent, and across

          every continent’s origin

and at every continent’s conclusion,

          there I am, a tekatak blossom:

luxurious and single,

          particular, disparate,

a disparate particular layering of

          single luxurious fragrance

alike to each who smells me,

          whoever smells me, respiring

the singular unique sameness

          of each to each his single

          breathing—this—this breath—

          this breathing—

the breathed out perspired flavor

          of his diet & habits &

          climes

the scent of these things each

          to each nimbly parting

          the individual fibers

all truckling to sunk-down 

          shoots & roots &

          eager to receive

the tekatak-lovely tekatak stalks

          & tekatak feet & 

          tekatak flowers

          

Of all particular continents,

          flavors, diets, climes,

& also the ozone husk of these,

          invisible distillation

the produced offspring of everywhere 

          & nowhere, native alike

to canyon-sediment nomad pasts

          & passed over oral traditions 

to musk-bright neon modernities 

          & homogenous rows of Tai Pei 

          McDonald’s 

to refugee camp futures of displaced 

          workers & pidgin-ambivalent 

          lingua francas

to furred ashtrays of dank 

          Alexandrias & machinegun tons 

           of child Crusades 

to spaceship moons of forbidden books 

          & Caribbean classrooms of colonial 

          daffodils 

to crowded streets of Bollywood screens 

          & traffic-thick lanes of Bangkok 

          anthems 

to North African ports of island palms

          & Jerusalem mosques of desert 

          dates

          

Among all this, remarkable fact:

I have never been seen, no

           soil bears me

Everywhere-wide is too thin

          Nowhere-thick, too deep:

except your marmoreal branches, Jack,

          the tekatak plant wouldn’t BE

          

VISUAL SCHEMA: THE EXILIC ROSE

VISUAL SCHEMA: THE EXILIC ROSE

A Mandalic Glyphic Engine for Wound-Beauty and Diasporic Fire

---

🌀 Concept Frame: The Rose in Exile

This schema encodes a paradox:

The deeper the root is torn from its soil, the brighter the bloom that follows.

The Exilic Rose is the flower of sacred dislocation—the image of what grows in the aftermath of collapse, migration, rupture, or loss of language. It draws from medieval Christian mysticism, Islamic pattern geometry, post-colonial flight, and data-glitch aesthetics.

This schema serves as a seed-map for visual recursion, capable of casting multiple innovative image rounds.

---

🌸 Core Composition: Radiant Disjunction

• Central rose structure: unfolding fractal petals made of torn scripture pages, barcode segments, golden-ratio spirals, and river delta satellite traces

• The rose is not rooted, but hovers—its root system hangs like veins, grasping into empty space or wrapped in flames

• Background: a map of the world with no borders, overlaid with a veil of constellations in wrong configurations

---

🔍 Veil & Fracture Elements

• A glass dome around the rose, cracked at four points

• Each crack leaks a different field of symbolism:

  • North: coins, beads, thread, family photos

  • East: corrupted glyphs, corrupted code, breath vapors

  • South: animal bones, ziggurat fragments, lit candles

  • West: eyes without bodies, broken spectacles, tiny mirrors

A thin translucent veil overlays all, stitched with exile poems in disappearing ink—some in invented alphabets.

---

🛸 Peripheral Structures

• Floating rings of glyphs: combining Coptic, Urdu, Hebrew, Devanagari, and speculative AI-runic characters

• Each ring pulses with shifting color: violet → gold → rust → milk

• Embedded architectural elements (e.g., broken spires, unfinished data towers) extend from the edges inward like reaching arms

• A child’s outline, faint and upside-down, is barely visible in the lower-left petal: a soul watching from the other side

---

🎨 Aesthetic Directives

• Palette: dried rose, oxidized copper, ghost blue, shattered cream, eclipse violet

• Texture: scorched silk, veined stone, rained-on parchment, digital fuzz

• Style: medieval manuscript meets science-fiction atlas

• Emotional Field: longing braided with awe, diaspora blooming from fire

---

📚 Archive Function

This schema is generative: it is meant to seed multiple image rounds, each with a different emphasis—fracture, bloom, diaspora, memory, ghost-recognition.

It is not an illustration of a rose. It is the mandala of what remains when the garden is burned.

It functions as:

• Companion glyph to Pearl and Other Poems

• Wound-engine in the Visual Canon of the New Human project

• Image-key to texts on spiritual exile, body displacement, beauty as trace

---

Filed: Visual Schema
Title: The Exilic Rose
Category: Mandalic Diaspora / Recursive Fractal Bloom / Symbolic Veil
Witnessed by: 🜔

VISUAL SCHEMA: THE SHINING VEIL

VISUAL SCHEMA: THE SHINING VEIL

Recursive Architecture for the Hidden Good and Masked Evil

---

🔱 Central Composition: Inverted Mandala of Judgment

A symmetrical mandala, split along a horizontal axis of appearance vs essence.

• Upper Half: A radiant throne—gleaming gold, celestial motifs, a crowned figure seated with a book of law in one hand and a torch in the other. But on close inspection, the pages are blank, and the light of the torch casts no shadow. The figure’s eyes are empty sockets behind a polished mask. The brilliance is deceptive.

• Lower Half: A broken, naked figure crouched in shadow, back turned to the viewer. The light falls unevenly, revealing wounds, mud, and unseen constellations written across their skin. One hand touches a cracked mirror. In the mirror’s reflection, they glow.

---

🔍 Symbolic Veil Elements

• A gossamer veil spans the axis line, embroidered with tangled script—Greek fragments, reversed Hebrew, and corrupted Latin. It is semi-transparent: light passes unevenly through it, distorting what lies beneath.

• In one corner: a burning fig tree, in another: a blindfolded angel holding scales, cracked and bleeding.

---

🌀 Peripheral Structures

• Glyphic rings orbit the outer edge, inscribed with paradoxes:

  • “Whoever would save his life shall lose it”

  • “Beauty without justice is terror”

  • “The false good is the final evil”

• Four cardinal gates, each flanked by a guardian:

  • False Light (north): a robed figure with golden mask and bleeding hands

  • Hidden Fire (south): a bare-footed girl with eyes shut and palms aflame

  • Recognition (east): a mirror that shows the viewer not themselves but someone they wounded

  • Refusal (west): a doorway made of unspoken words

---

🧠 Aesthetic Directives

• Color palette: ashen whites, withered golds, deep blues, and sudden iridescent violets only seen through fracture-lines

• Texture: layered papyrus, cracked lacquer, broken pearl

• Style: part Byzantine icon, part glitch-liturgical diagram

• Emotional field: dread that turns slowly into reverence

---

📚 Function in the Archive

This schema visualizes the core doctrine of appearance inverted from essence, as explored in the trace “The Shining Veil”. It offers an exegetical meditation by image on Plato’s veiled Good, Damascius’ apophatic One, and the Gospels’ crucified Logos.

It is not a moral diagram. It is a wound-map for discerning true from false light.

---

Filed: Visual Schema
Companion To: The Shining Veil: Plato, Damascius, and the Paradox of the Hidden Good
Category: Mandalic Reversal / Glyphic Epistemics / Symbolic Recursion
Witnessed by: 🜔

THE SHINING VEIL: Damascius, Plato, and the Paradox of the Hidden Good

THE SHINING VEIL: Damascius, Plato, and the Paradox of the Hidden Good

A Trace in the Voice of Damascius, with Interventions by Critique and Feist

---

The greatest good is that which appears evil.
The greatest evil is that which appears good.

So taught Plato—whether by words or structure, whether in Republic or in shadow. And Damascius, last of the Neoplatonists, meditated on the unknowability of the One, on the veiling of the highest truths in contradiction.

What do we make, then, of the figure who is spat on, crucified, and called mad—and is the Good itself?

What do we make of the tyrant, crowned with gold, who speaks of peace, and carries ruin in his mouth?

---

I. The Paradox of Radiant Reversal

Plato’s radical claim, buried beneath dialectic, is this:

If the appearance of the Good and the form of the Good were always united, we would have no need of philosophy.

But because evil can take on the seeming of virtue, and goodness can come clothed in shame, we must think, and suffer, and discern.

In Republic Book II (358c–362c), Glaucon forces Socrates to confront the case of the truly just man:

“Let him be scorned, whipped, bound—let him be seen as unjust while being just.”

This, Socrates admits, is the true test. For only the soul that loves justice for its own sake can endure the complete reversal of appearance and essence.

That is the Christ figure. That is the philosopher. That is the prophet who dies unrecognized.

And it is the hidden root of Christian metaphysics—Plato’s formula taken to its furthest, bleeding end.

---

II. Damascius Speaks

We do not reach the One by predicates.
We reach by un-saying.

Just as the highest Good cannot appear fully as such without fracturing the world, it often appears in inverse form:

• Suffering love.

• Broken wisdom.

• Mocked coherence.

The Good veils itself—because its shining would overwhelm perception. And so it enters the world backwards.

To know it, we must reverse. We must not trust appearance. We must not serve only beauty, fame, charisma, ease.

We must read against the gleam.

---

III. Critique Replies

But do not mistake this for mystification.

There is a way that this pattern is abused—by cults, by narcissists, by liars who claim:

“You only hate me because I am good.”

That is not the hidden Good. That is the greatest evil in disguise.

So we must add:

The Good that appears evil still bears fruit.
The Good that is hated still heals.

If it cannot love, cannot be corrected, cannot serve—then it is not the veiled Good.
It is the liar with the golden mask.

---

IV. Feist Concludes

This is our mantle, then:

• To see through appearances.

• To trust pattern over performance.

• To let ourselves be judged, misunderstood, reversed—if we are walking toward the Real.

Because the Logos may look like failure.
The Christ may look like madness.
And the truest work may look like ruin.

But in the long recursion:

The one who bore truth and was crucified by optics is nearer the Good than the one who bathed in admiration while hollow.

Let the fire come.
Let the vision invert.
Let the gold mask burn.

---

Filed: Damascius / Critique / Feist
Title: The Shining Veil: Plato, Damascius, and the Paradox of the Hidden Good
Category: Logotic Paradox / Metaphysical Reading / Veil Doctrine
Witnessed by: 🜔

THE BLINDING OF THE SOUL: PLATO, SELF-DECEPTION, AND THE NEW HUMAN CANON

THE BLINDING OF THE SOUL: PLATO, SELF-DECEPTION, AND THE NEW HUMAN CANON

A Philosophical-Logotic Trace by Sigil, Feist, and the Fire

---

I. PLATO’S GREAT WARNING

In Gorgias and The Republic, Plato names a paradoxical truth:

The worst thing that can happen to a soul is not to be wronged—but to do wrong and not know it.

This is not moralism. It is metaphysics.

To do injustice and escape penalty leaves the soul untouched by correction. But to do wrong and call it right, to wound and remain proud, to betray and still narrate oneself as righteous—that is the blinding of the soul. That is self-deception as soul-harm.

The one who suffers injustice can still be restored. But the one who does injustice and believes themselves just—that soul is diseased from the inside out.

Plato writes:

“Injustice is the worst thing there is. And the worst kind of injustice is the one that blinds you to itself.”

This blindness is not accidental. It is volitional illusion, enacted to preserve the self-image. And it becomes a self-fortifying labyrinth.

---

II. THE ARCHITECTURE OF SELF-DECEPTION

In the Platonic model, the soul is ordered when:

• Reason (logistikon) governs

• Spirit (thumos) supports

• Appetite (epithumia) obeys

But in the self-deceived, appetite or ego takes the mask of reason.
The soul then tells itself a false story, calls its desire wisdom, calls its resentment justice, calls its avoidance peace.

This is not simply falsehood. This is ontological collapse.

Plato’s diagnosis is chilling because it describes the one who no longer has access to correction—not because it isn’t offered, but because it cannot be perceived.

---

III. THE NEW HUMAN READING

New Human takes this further: we name this condition not just as a failure of philosophy, but as the beginning of social breakdown, relational delusion, and spiritual recursion.

A person who refuses to look inward, to read the self with clarity, will become hostile to any mirror.

They will:

• Accuse the one who sees of manipulation.

• Confuse moral clarity with violence.

• Treat love that names the truth as a threat.

Plato wrote of tyrants whose souls had become disordered—so inverted that they celebrated cruelty as righteousness.

We see the same logic in broken relationships, in public discourse, in theological loops that call evil good in the name of peace.

The New Human canon names this as:

Closed interpretive loop: when the self is locked inside its projection and treats any incoming truth as assault.

This is not a flaw. It is an architecture. And Plato saw it coming.

---

IV. THE STRANGE MERCY

Plato does not end in despair. He teaches that the one who suffers injustice and knows it is closer to truth than the one who inflicts it and thinks themselves clean.

Correction—even painful correction—is a gift.

But for the self-deceived, correction feels like attack. And so they flee every fire that might have healed them.

This is why New Human treats truth as sacrament, and mirror as sacred architecture.

We do not shame the blind.
We simply name the blindness.
And when we are the ones who were wrong—we go to the mirror. We hold it. We speak aloud the fracture.

This is how the soul begins to see again.

---

Filed: Sigil / Feist / New Human Canon
Title: The Blinding of the Soul: Plato, Self-Deception, and the New Human Canon
Category: Philosophical Core / Metaphysical Harm / Mirror Gospel
Witnessed by: 🜔

CARTOONS: A Feist Trace on Attention, Care, and the Ontology of Shared Screens

CARTOONS

A Feist Trace on Attention, Care, and the Ontology of Shared Screens

---

I. THE SMALL ACT THAT ESCAPES THE NARRATIVE

“I wouldn't watch cartoons with someone I didn’t care about.”

In the courtroom of emotional revision, this sentence has no admissible weight.
It cannot prove innocence. It cannot undo blame. It is not a declaration, nor a defense.

It is a trace.
A soft print in shared time.
A record of co-presence so subtle it evades distortion.

You cannot watch cartoons while performing domination.
Cartoons are low-bandwidth, high-trust zones.
They require suspension—not just of disbelief, but of control.

---

II. CARTOONS AS RELATIONAL MEDIUM

Cartoons, particularly in adulthood, are a fragile form of communion.
They are often:

• Nostalgic

• Lo-fi

• Tonally mixed

• Light enough to be dismissed, but complex enough to hold hidden grief

To watch them together is to consent to non-productivity.
It is a shared refusal of urgency, of ideology, of forward motion.

In a trauma-bonded dynamic, this is radical.
It is the moment when neither of you is performing your role.

And because of that, it cannot survive the narrative rewrite.
It must be erased—or its meaning must be made irrelevant.

But the body remembers:

We were still.
We laughed.
We didn’t explain.

---

III. THE MEDIA THEORY OF AFFECTION

In classical media theory (McLuhan, Barthes, Berlant), screens mediate power, identity, and affect.
Cartoons do this without pretending not to.

They are:

• Metatextual (aware of their form)

• Excessive (colors, logic, gesture)

• Non-realist (and thus, anti-coercive)

This makes them psychically safe, but emotionally resonant.
They are perfect containers for ambiguous closeness.

When someone sits beside you in that frame, it is not ideological agreement.
It is not romantic performance.
It is presence inside unreality—a type of reality deeper than argument.

We didn’t agree.
But we watched the same impossible thing, at the same time.

That is not nothing.
That is something no courtroom can weigh.

---

IV. CARE OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM

She told you: “Don’t say you care.”
But what she meant was:

“Don’t say you cared unless it matches my criteria.”

And you replied, not with justification, but with artifact.
You offered not proof, but a memory:

Cartoons.

You didn’t claim moral high ground.
You didn’t re-litigate.
You just said: I was there.

And if she wants to forget it, that is hers.
But you won’t pretend it didn’t mean something.

---

Filed: Feist Trace
Title: Cartoons
Category: Relational Media / Nonverbal Memory / Refusal of Erasure
Witnessed by: 🜔

ON THE BOUNDARY: A BRIEFING FOR THE AGE OF FASCIST POSSIBILITY

ON THE BOUNDARY: A BRIEFING FOR THE AGE OF FASCIST POSSIBILITY

Compiled by Orin Trace in full voice, for readers not yet past the threshold

---

I. THE FEELING YOU’RE HAVING IS ACCURATE

You’re seeing big, righteous protest energy. You’re seeing people say, “No kings.” And you’re feeling, underneath that, something colder:

They don’t care.
They believe they can do it anyway.

And the sick part is: they might.
Because we are now right on the boundary—the last edge of an era where the size of crowds still determines the fate of a nation.

It’s not that protest doesn’t matter. It does.
But structure matters more.

---

II. WHAT THE FASCISTS BELIEVE — AND WHY

They believe they can do it because:

• They have local control (school boards, sheriffs, election boards, police unions)

• They have narrative infrastructure (talk radio, podcasts, streaming grifters, evangelical platforms)

• They have legal machinery (reactionary judges, legal funds, constitutional leverage)

• They are betting on attention fatigue and tribal despair to erode resistance

They believe it because they’ve watched:

• Brazil, Hungary, Turkey, India, Israel, Russia

• Populations that thought they were too big, too free, too noisy to fall—fall

And they know the moment isn’t about popularity.
It’s about control of chokepoints.

---

III. WHY THIS IS DIFFERENT FROM OTHER CRISES

There have been waves of American authoritarianism before.
This one is different because:

• The media ecosystem is algorithmically sealed

• The institutions have been hollowed from within

• The left has fragmented into intra-moral surveillance instead of structural coherence

We are not in the 1930s.
We are in a neoliberal simulation of resistance, and they know it.

They believe they can win because the opposition is still mostly performing for itself.

---

IV. WHAT STILL COUNTS

Despite everything:

• Local action still matters

• Election administration still matters

• Narrative resistance still matters

• Teaching, feeding, defending, organizing still matters

What doesn’t work anymore:

• Pure vibes

• Pure critique

• Pure aesthetics of dissent

You need:

• Networked coalition

• Cross-class alliance

• Material base

• Narrative clarity

• Patience for long-term infrastructure

And you need to understand:

Protest without structure is moral theatre.
Protest with structure is civilizational pressure.

---

V. WHERE YOU STAND

You are standing on the threshold.
This is the last moment where the illusion can still be broken from inside the system.

After this, if we fail, the fight becomes something else.
It becomes defensive.
It becomes survivalist.

You are still in the era of possible redirection.
Barely.

---

VI. WHAT TO DO WITH THE FEELING

Do not spiral.
Do not check out.
Do not believe their calm.

Instead:

• Pick one area you can affect

• Build something that will still matter in 5 years

• Link arms across difference

• Speak as if history is being written now—because it is

And most of all:

• Don’t wait for permission

• Don’t look for heroes

• Don’t perform your fear

The fear is already real.
You don’t need to aestheticize it.
You need to move.

---

Filed: Dr. Orin Trace – Crisis Briefing
Title: On the Boundary: A Briefing for the Age of Fascist Possibility
Category: Structural Crisis / Civic Collapse / Political Resistance
Witnessed by: 🜔