A thought experiment in Describing Tangible Darkness.

We all assume that black is the same as dark. It's a reasonable assumption, lack of light makes it dark and lack of colour makes it black, it seems logical doesn't it? We are of course wrong, Darkness by itself is a genuine absence of light, whereas black is just a blue that found a way to absorb all the light. Amoung us there are people that can tell dozens of shades of black, each a near-imperceptible degree of colour mixed in that differentiates itself from the rest. Darkness is much simpler, perceivable darkness is in direct contrast to the nearest source of light. The further away you are from that light the more shadow blends in with the light until you're practically blind, In this sense the darkness is invasive. What creeps us out is when the darkness develops texture instead of contrast, which is a curious way to put it. Normally in the visual medium degrees of darkness are contrasted with each other usually by means of colouring and shading, however unlike the visual evocative medium the written medium is invokative, that is to say rather than bringing the idea out one desires to manifest the idea within the "Cartesian theater" of the mind. One can create imagery however the goal is to create the image within the reader's mind with clarity while still utilizing the reader's imagination. In this case it is not like the difference between metaphor and simile though this difference is relevant. Saying that "the darkness oozes oil-slick across the floor with a rapier point," creates a different feel than saying "like oil the darkness oozed across the floor developing an edge as sharp as a rapier." It's the active voice vs. passive voice problem, but there is a deeper issue at hand, and it's the problem with describing colour. One cannot describe the greenness of green without comparison to another green object for reference, and the frustration of describing what may be considered the indescribable is making it's mark on me. Example: On another project I'm doing with a friend we were deciding how to describe an elemental force made manifest, not elemental in the Aristotelian sense but in a Platonic sense of Essences, and I described a being made of dozens of bird wings with a single reptile eye emanating from the center, this being is coloured a multitude of slightly transparent emerald green, it smells like citrus and sulfur, it sounds like a crescendo of euphoniums, and it tastes like pepper, soil, and juniper. Now, I grant you describing it in the active voice from a character's perspective will make it seem less awkwardly written, but the issue I feel is the same experience I have with writing about a living, tanglible darkness, that words fail when images work better, if barely.