I don’t know that am less than clueless about both genes and epigenes. All I seem to invent in my mind is that genes are codes in alphabetic terms which are arranged in various sequences, eg words(??), and that epigenes are repetitions, punctuation marks, spaces, etc*. that provide the ability for these sequences to have unique, and inheritable, characters..
* using etc. because am not sure there is a need to expand the linguistic metaphor.. Am not really sure about the epigenetic materials – perhaps i should research that later??
For a while now I attempted to consider the focus on epigenetics and felt a certain reluctance through disturbance. It seems that the epigenetic focus places the data/genetic question as a secondary. Perhaps am wrong, and most likely wrong in terms of professional biologists usage. However, in terms of biology untrained and an occasional rider – bio-punk? – by focusing on the epi, genetics seem to get the 2ns look in a sort of hierarchy.
What if we could combine the focus? What if we could get the genes and epigenes as they are, as unified elements that together make some other stuff?
It seems that perhaps the way to do that is as Modes. Question modes. Am not entirely clear about this now, however, from a grand scale, it seems to me that Modes are precisely the kind of elements which in and of themselves provide a focus on micro-wholes. Relatively small elements – micro – that comprised of self sustaining/maintaining/slow-collapsable ingredients/processes, eg genes and epigenes..
The other “sense” it gives me, the question of modes, is that there is an ongoing ring to saying something like:
am doing search modes. search modes is art. the artist does search modes. perhaps just modes. that way the artist is neither on the code, nor on the punctuation/expression of the cultural code..