Provision, Musing, and Early Experience

## Consentiousness, Early Provision, and Absence

I was thinking along the lines that **Consentiousness** is similar or somewhat correlates with _early environmental provision_. The idea is that early environments provide good enough stability and constancy, which leads, in _Winnicott's_ terms, to "good enough parenting." This allows an infant to develop internal continuity in a way that develops or fosters physical health.

_Andre Green_ often talks in terms of **the negative**, which focuses on parental availability during childhood. When a child has an absent parent, it creates a "**blank object**" (_deuil blanc_ / blank mourning), which consumes available mental space related to facets of the parent's absences. I believe this concept of absences, when discussed, is similar to, or at least the same as, _early environmental provision_. Thus, the existence of such provision and the lack thereof have similar implications.
Returning to _Christopher Bollas_, besides _early environmental provision_, there are other concepts such as the **mother as a transformational object** and the "**unthought known**." If one were to draw a diagram, I believe it would look like this:

Although _Christopher Bollas_ never explicitly talks about attachment, _early environmental provision_ and the general concept of _provision_ are aligned with, or prototypical of, **attachment**. The idea is that the mothering figure can be adequately provisioned and provide, thus leading to the filling of this _blank mourning_.

## Provisioning for Oneself: The Role of Musing

How does one **provision for themselves**? It depends, since every person is different. Thus, when discussing "**provisioning**," it implies a _personalized space_ that is able to present consistent and persistent internal and external objective/environmental statuses. So, how can one provision for oneself? I think the key lies in **musing**.

_Musing_, in this context, means an absorbed state, evoking and representing the "great outside," which in turn develops an _internal object_. I would argue that _musing_ is a dopaminergic act. _Provision_, rather than being a static object, seems to function through _attachment processes_, which require a cornerstone for changes to secure attachment.

### Changes, The dynamics of musing

I think it is an instrumental task to move one's own **ego**. But why doesn't one move first? Perhaps it's because of the availability (or lack thereof) within a given space.
The requirement of **change**: is it really a change?

Why does _musing_ rehabilitate such **mourning**? I might suggest _sibling rivalry_, which involves the _decathexis_ of an _affordance_ as if it were second nature. Does it really affect the _analysand_ by decathecting an already _internalized object_? I think there's a theme of _hunger_, or at least _ignored starvation_. I believe _sibling rivalry_ is not without cause; it somewhat entails "nutritional envy." _Musing_ doesn't just happen; it can be forcefully replaced by _absences_ or even an _extractive incapacitation_.

## Odyssey

Is this a naive view, or even a borderline **pre-Oedipal** one, since it tells of a preoccupation with acceptance from both _parental figures_? I don't believe so. However, I do think it depends. I should understand that it does contain a _misdirected hope_. What I don't understand is whether this is due to _duplicative rather than generative processes_, leading to the unwitting status of the _first child_, "killing" any personalization or even _de-individuating inkling_. But that should not cost the firstborn a _core virtue_ derived from a _bundle of promise_—an _aborted fantasy_ derived from either the mother or the child itself. I think every such "abortion" (of fantasy/potential) is laborious and life-shattering. Whose dream it is depends on whether the child's position at birth is **Oedipal** or **pre-Oedipal**.

Back to _musing_: should every _loss_ and _grief_ be accommodated, or is the _grief_ merely wasted, akin to shallow water that remains characteristic? (I don't fully understand this metaphor myself, as you noted). The point is that _progress_ can be stunted, delayed, and outright counter-intuitive against the flow of _progress_ as we know it. And yet, _progress_ still happens. During quiet times, the subject amasses _recollections_ of the past. And what, or how, can this be brought forward as part of the _self_, cast into the _continuous future_?

## The role of Chaperone

_Musing_ means to adore, savor, or take inspiration from the _external world_ to mend and recollect _mental objects_ which were stolen or destroyed. It is somewhat similar to the **Openness facet of the Big Five** personality traits: to adore _aesthetics_, to recall proponents of the _self_ which have been cast away or buried—not to revive a dead body, but to revisit what it all means to "be," rather than _passively grieving_. A tombstone is for the dead, but the visitor is still alive.

Something is missing from my analysis: **aesthetic experience** shouldn't just be about reviving something. Perhaps it is the _quality of silence_ that allows proper time to _process_ and satisfy a _monumental catharsis_, rather than an immediate jump from a problem to an aesthetic experience as a quick fix.

Again, **The role of a chaperone is the provision of experiences.**.