In The Hunting of the Snark, the final turn is delivered almost casually:
“For the Snark was a Boojum, you see.”
The line is comic.
It is abrupt.
It is devastating.
The Baker vanishes.
This disappearance is often treated as nonsense — a final absurd flourish. But structurally, it is something far more precise.
It is catastrophe.
1. What Is a Catastrophe?
A catastrophe is not mere failure.
It is not narrative punishment.
It is a threshold event — a point at which accumulated constraints exceed the system’s capacity to sustain coherence.
Throughout the hunt:
-
roles have been differentiated,
-
expectations stabilised,
-
repetitions enforced,
-
attention intensified.
Density has thickened.
The Boojum marks the moment when density passes sustainability.
2. When Construal Overreaches
Recall the structural law from the previous post:
Every cut actualises locally but leaves global surplus.
However, when construal attempts to eliminate surplus — when the system strains toward total capture — instability emerges.
Over-constrained expectation produces collapse.
The Baker’s disappearance is not random.
It is the mythic image of what happens when the system can no longer stabilise the phenomenon it seeks.
The field snaps.
3. The Boojum as Threshold of Self-Reference
Notice what the hunt has become by this point:
It is no longer exploratory.
It is obsessive.
But meaning cannot be closed without negating its own generativity.
The Boojum represents the point where the drive for totalisation turns against the system that sustains it.
In semiotic terms:
-
Excessive density,
-
Recursive self-reference without stabilising cut,
-
Collapse of local coherence.
The Baker does not die.
He vanishes.
The phenomenon cannot be sustained.
4. Why Catastrophe Is Intrinsic
The Boojum is not an anomaly.
It is intrinsic to systems of meaning.
Wherever:
-
relational density increases,
-
cuts accumulate,
-
expectation tightens,
there exists a threshold beyond which local stability fails.
It is structural.
Meaning systems generate their own limits.
5. The Poem’s Brutal Honesty
Carroll could have resolved the hunt.
He could have allowed triumph or gentle failure.
Instead, he introduced disappearance.
This is not narrative whim.
It is mythic compression of a systemic law:
When the pursuit of total capture overrides the openness of potential, collapse follows.
The Boojum is the figure of that collapse.
6. What Remains
Crucially, the entire crew does not vanish.
The system persists.
The field remains.
Only the overexposed node disappears.
Catastrophe does not annihilate potential.
It marks the limit of a particular configuration.
Meaning survives the Boojum.
But it does not survive unchanged.
We are now ready for the final movement.
If the Boojum marks catastrophic overreach,
then the Snark’s persistent elusiveness must have a different function.
Not failure.
Not delay.
But necessity.
In the final post, we confront the core thesis:
Why the Snark must never be captured.
And why that is the condition of meaning itself. 🫖✨
No comments:
Post a Comment