The Challenge of the New
If one only repeats what has been said before, then language will be very familiar, trite, cliched -- and not pose a challenge to understanding, and it is the challenge to present understanding, which is the challenge of the new. The old will insist that it must be stated in the terms and language of the old -- in which it is familiar and dictates the rules for. That would be like having a “sensitivity session” or an intimate conversation, using Robert’s Rules of Order -- nothing that hadn’t been said before could ever be said, because it would be “out of order” -- a violation of an unpremeditated moment.
So there is no possibility of a breakthrough in understanding and insight -- if one has to accept the old -- before one can explain the new, yet the truly new is this revolution in the very perceiving -- with no assumptions about how things ought to be, because it is the very assumptions that are under review and question. That is where the flaw usually lies -- at the very beginning of the inquiry, and not at the end, which would be the fault of logic.
The well-known art of deception and manipulation is to get one to agree to one’s faulty and invalid premises, and in doing so, one has to arrive at the conclusions they have preordained for us. A very common example are those who use newspaper “events” to arrive at their conclusions (opinions), and think they have done a superior job in deduction, when the “facts” provided, may actually be nothing more than opinions, suppositions, and conjectures. In fact, they can actually manufacture whatever opinions they desire by citing polls, studies, experts -- while deliberately and selectively omitting others.
The prime motivation for doing so is to achieve sensationalism in whatever manner it can be obtained. It is the need to gain attention -- from those usually not deserving of it; so they have to lie, cheat and steal to obtain that attention. It never occurs to them that they might obtain it in a legitimate way -- of just having a genuinely new perspective. Instead, they take the “known,” and twist it into the unrecognizable, whereupon they can claim it as original material, which they otherwise, are not capable of producing. They would have no idea of an original idea because they have been trained entirely to accept somebody else’s old ideas as the new, just because they hadn’t heard it before.
In that manner, the novel becomes the new, rather than the new being a challenge to the old and familiar, which they unquestionably accept as the inviolable truth, which they think can never be questioned. It is simply handed down from the proper authorities -- of which they hope to be certified to have some status in the hierarchy. These are obviously the most dangerous people in society -- because they are so sure of what there is no reason to be.
And they will think that such strange thoughts that make them pause and wonder, is illegal, forbidden, “incorrect,” -- because it is not what is commonly believed, the conventional wisdom that is only what most people believe -- and not the actual truth of anything. It is mostly important, to realize this difference -- before one goes spouting off, “ I know the truth; I should be President of the United States. I should tell everybody what to do and what to think. I know everything that has been said before”