posted January 27, 2010 06:23 AM         

I have too much to say. Too much that is too new, or too old, to be heard now, even by me. Just the same, I invite you to listen with me, and, if possible, hear me out. It may be that only when we have heard the last proof of this philosophy will we be able to adequately render our verdict of the first, and all that stands between.

The sketch here is another groping attempt to explore certain delicate themes, insights, and theories which have taken possession of me and which I do not expect to understand and communicate to my satisfaction until some time in my fifties, as much as a quarter of a century from now. My faith that there is a philosophy of worth contained within these loose-jointed thoughts, and that it is taking shape organically, in good time, preserves me. These notes are already precious to me, as seeds which yeild new life whenever I water them. I do not know what others may see or find in them, but I already see, and daily discover, in them the suggestions of something revolutionary, -- nay, epoch shattering. Someday, it will be my greatest joy to see them masterfully articulated and expressed, whether by myself, or by someone more keen, more masterful, than I could ever be.

In the meantime, I am reading the essays of the greats, and giving more attention to the development of both my craft and my vision. The time to engage with the world is not yet, but when it comes, I hope, and nearly expect, to be engaged for many centuries to come. Perhaps I should blush to confess such a thing, but some manner of pride prevents it. I'm certain that, if my name and words will not be remembered, at least I will have dramatically aligned myself in spirit with the ideals and realizations of a more progressive time. That is my heart's ambition. For now, just to be understood, even a little, seems a great and somewhat rare treat.

But perhaps it is the same for all of us -- perhaps we all have insight into some aspect of the future, and we all feel desperately misunderstood, since no insight could ever be more precious or poignant for us than our own; no business but our own could seem so urgent and inspired. We are therefore encouraged in the belief that no person has given sufficient attention and shown sufficient reverence for the exalted objects of our own personal interest -- not even ourselves! And so it should be. With the stipulation that we not forget to discover one another, in the infinitely more pressing, interesting, and important business of discovering ourselves. "Aye, there's the rub", and all the charm to boot. Thanks for your interest.

Let the Bull Have the Strength

I'll say it again: I praise the minimal, the immaterial, unmanifest, inchoate, and all that flashes through the mind like a bolt; out of nowhere, and going nowhere. I honor the indolent, aimless, wandering exception, and the divine right of every individual to spend their lifetime in search of a truly solid place to stand, and a truly clear word to speak.

I say that the surplus of the rich, gifted, favored, or resourceful should supply the basic requirements, not only of the frail and the decrepit, but of the licentious as well; of those who are weak, but also strong, in ways which men have been taught to damn, and to read as wicked.

I positively assert the value of spontaneous, self-initiated action, and the lack of external responsibility; of undirected reflection and contemplation as greater than or equal to the devoted pursuit of material goods and worldly gains (to say nothing, at this time, of spiritual devotions), whether they be acquired for one's own, or for community's sake.

If a duty is owed, I say, let it be owed to those who live, -- that their fundamental needs should be met, and the integrity of their natural dispositions respected, -- and to the unborn, -- that they ought not to be lightly and arrogantly ushered into a world as yet unprepared for, and still so unsure of, them.

How ironic, and yet, how appropriate, -- how ironically appropriate, -- is the expression "expectant parents", when you consider just how much is expected, not merely by one's parents, but by the society at large! If most people do not despair of meeting, and even come to defend as their own, these expectations, it is only because they are not of the type which most suffers and strains to meet, or else to renounce (and, if called, denounce) the expectations of the present civilization.

The community of incarnate souls here on earth ought to provide a paradise capable of reflecting the magnificence of the highest realms of the spirit if they are going to presume to weild the creative power, and to potentially drag noble spirits down to be encumbered by the flesh. Instead, we are seemingly born to satisfy the whims and expectations of our progenitors (often themselves merely fulfilling some blind mandate from "The Joneses" on high), and to labour in accordance with the prescribed values of an obsessively materialistic, competitive, and warlike civilization.

We are like men in private skiffs, lured aboard a ship only to find that the vessel has sprung a leak and is sinking, -- moreover, that it is the intention of the crew to put us to work, jettisoning water and various articles. Is it not strange, that ballast should be brought aboard a ship for the purpose of jettisoning ballast? Such is our condition.

Or, perhaps more fitting, we board this ship only to discover that she is presently under attack by ruthless cutthroats, and we have been drafted, as it were, onto the losing side. Of course, no man, however lately aboard the ship, may refuse the order, for he is instantly conferred with the rank of soldier, and any such refussal would only spell mutiny.

If we make the least complaint, and suggest that a human being, or a soul, is entitled to a warmer reception than this, we are met with the scorn and contempt of those whom we might otherwise have exalted. It is not enough that we must be subject to alien obligations, we must pretend to approve of them as well.

All the evils in our world correspond to (I do not say "originate from") the overestimation of what is solid, clear, direct, complete, finite, settled, known, and manifest; and, conversely, to the underestimation, and, finally, stigmatization (in some cases, criminalization), of what is subtle, ambivalent, mysterious, numenous, and indirect. While many claim to appreciate, or, at least, to tolerate, these latter, the experience of unusually subtle, ambivalent, etc., people testifies to their profound isolation and marginal status in the face of what has come to be called the world, or the civilized world.

Some are lucky enough to find support with a spouse, among friends, or, in the rarest of cases, with a community of wise and accepting individuals. Far more end up dead or half-dead, in the streets with an addiction, or hanging from a belt in the closet; the coroner's report reads: SUICIDE But, like most things in the modern world, its ostensible; the true guilt, if there is anything worthy of that name, belongs to all of us, -- and, if I may say so, to those of us, chiefly, who promote an agenda of materiality, productivity, and consumerism, which essentially forces sensitive natures to conform with a value system which they had no say in erecting, and which plays almost exclusively to their weaknesses, while effectively demonizing their strengths.

The great irony is that these are the ones we now think of as burdens to society, but they are burdens only to a corrupt system, and a false way of visioning the world. The future geniuses of mankind will arise from the ranks of these marginal, "oversensitive" types; not necessarily more sensitive, but, sensitive to more; sensitive, perhaps, only to the present form of society, which rubs them utterly the wrong way. Somehow, their brilliance will illuminate the folly of our civilization, and many who mock and jeer now, if only they live to see it, will unconsciously proclaim, and order their lives according to, the very philosophy which they now consider a foolish and damnable heresy.

How can such a people be instructed? They praise lofty, immortal, and incorporeal things, while enthroning (as imperative!) the laborious production and accumulation of what is essentially shallow, perishable, and corporeal. They admire the subtle and the ponderous, but just so much; their true sympathy is for what is solid, simple, clear, and direct. They, ultimately and immediately, have no patience for the receptive, introverted, retiring, and questioning soul. The only coin they'll approve is action. The only truth they trust is a dollar and a paying customer. If they attract an audience, any audience, they feel confirmed in calling the performance a success.

It is only because they themselves are relatively simple, instinctive, and unconcerned with reconciling diverse elements within themselves (why should they concern themselves? -- they are reconciled already; self-satisfied, locked into a secure identity, relative to an equally air-tight and infallible, or, in any case, superior, worldview) that they have no true capacity for empathy or the wisdom of vicarious experience; which, no doubt, the most witty among them will not hesitate to call "the experience of vicarious wisdom".

Admire them, by all means, for the homogenous, unified, and masculine front they project, even as individuals (we use the term lightly). Envy them the majority. They are neither fragmented, self-occupied, God-occupied, eccentric, nor marginal. There is much that deserves respect in their dispositions, talents, and characters. If anything, they are too modest in some respects; not mindful enough of the strengths, advantages, and gifts which they possess, -- for they wrongly believe these are the common possession of all men; and that it is only the brave or cowardly use of "free will" which determines whether or not one will make use of these things. They do not see resourcefulness, pragmatism, or singlepointedness of will, as privileges afforded them by nature, and withheld from so many others -- not just from the injured, deformed, or insane, but from those whom they have seen fit to credit with an unclaimed will; to label "losers", "deadbeats", "dreamers", and so on. For this reason, and because their temperaments immure them from criticism, both internal and external, and from anything that might effectively challenge their convictions, they remain persuaded that what works for them must work for all.

What we call Western Civilization firmly bears out this persuasion. There is an unshakable faith in their right to deny help to the person who cannot help him or herself. Excepting only the most extreme cases of lunatics and invalids, they invariably interpret the words "can not" as "will not". Since their faith in the universality of this will (which amounts to a will to conform -- or, else, a will to oppose, always in a socially engaged, institutionally sanctioned, and, most importantly, paying form -- but never a will to abstain, to wait, withdraw, observe, or reflect) is beyond question, so also is their right to set it up as an injunction for all.

The result is a dramatically perverse culture, driven by competition rather than cooperation, and rooted in other perverse cultures. So deep do these roots go.. thousands of years.. maybe tens of thousands... such that it has even become difficult to speak, and so conceive, of something so unorthodox as what I desire to propose here.

We haven't the language to say what must be said. Our words are rooted in the errors of the past; "the sins of the fathers". We even employ the expression "root words" to indicate the ancient lodestones of our modern language. But our words, and fathers, have steered us wrong. It's time to plant a new seed.

Hemingway, in his essay "Death in the Afternoon", relates the following anecdote:

"Once someone asked Rafael Gomez, El Gallo, nearing fifty years old, a gipsy, brother of Jose Gomez, Gallito, and the then last living member of the great family of gipsy bulllfighters of that name, what physical exercise he, Gallo, took to keep his strength up for bullfighting.
"Strength," Gallo said. "What do I want with strength man? The bull weighs half a ton. Should I take exercises for strength to match him? Let the bull have the strength."

I cite this passage to help illustrate a difficult problem. Everywhere, strength is praised and, praise being insufficient, advocated. Or this, or that, virtue. It doesn't matter which. The point is that we are enjoined to exhibit, not only the virtues granted us by our creator, but, all, or nearly all, the virtues which have ever belonged to a human being. The case of the nonconformist is only a microcosm which, one hopes, may clarify this issue of unnatural expectations which all of us face to some extent. We are judged every day according to schemes which we do not respect, and someone is always ready to inform us that we are in grave danger of losing a race which we have no intention of, and no business, running in the first place. Not all are fit to reflect the mysteries. Not all are fit to engage in, say, commerce, diplomacy, or, for that matter, romance. We should praise and practice those gifts we have, without giving too much attention to those we lack. And learn to respect the gifts of others, without recognizing the injunction to develop them ourselves. "Let the bull have the strength."

posted January 28, 2010 09:40 AM         

The feedback I got on Facebook
is making me very happy.

love you