ABSTRACT
This chapter considers the philosophical implications of “whiteness,” which posits an essence to that particular hue, versus the notion of “white,” which treats that hue as a nominal presence in language use and so need not be of that particular color when named, nor even be visible. White may be an elaborate figurative condensation. Film theorists have certainly seen the light, i.e., have been busy seeing the whitish light on screen in many different ways. I argue that ordinary language as well as theoretical language—and the community life they spring from and support—are forms of manufacture for exchange and use like other technologies in society. It should not be surprising, therefore, that language colors white, colors the other hues, and generally colors color. The essence of a thing is not a timeless and unchanging thing-ness, but lies in our uses of language. Color-being-seen moves through life as do we.
The present book treats the notion of “essence” as merely a shorthand way of talking about a thing of interest when one wishes to shine a spotlight on a part of some process, cutting off before and after, i.e., making the thing stand alone out of time, out of its natural or aberrant thread of meaning in the midst of its transformation. Not just time may be cut off, but also what lies above, below, and alongside, i.e., proximate contexts for the thing involving juxtaposition and association. Since the issue of essence involves the significance of physical or quasi-physical matter, a better description of the process than “transformation” is perhaps “transfiguration.” Things are made to be—to be seen for what they are, i.e., appear to be in the moment—within or under present figures of language.
