Mikhail Veller.
Excerpt from The Last Great Chance.
2006.
Translation: mine ©
14. Urban Development
This feature is demonstrated fully and with amazing directness in the appearance of Russian cities.
Russian cities are astonishingly unattractive. They are nondescript. They are not even cities from the point of view of architecture and aesthetic spatial organization. They are simply an accumulation of buildings for the purpose of life and work. These buildings are set in every which way, based on the financial means and the logic of the labor process.
You know, we usually don’t notice this, don’t see it. We were born and live here, grow up and love – “This is our motherland, sonny boy…” You must visit the cities of the world – not brilliant capitals, but rather various cities and towns, in order to ruin your mood because of your destiny. It’s harmful, harmful to allow Russians abroad!...
The best, the most convenient example – Moscow-“the-beautiful”. We are not talking about outskirt, sleeper districts – they are equally faceless and outwardly talent-lacking, pitiful, and cookie-cutter all over Russia. Dwellings for crowds of cheap labor. But – look at the center! Meaningless piling of each and every trend, style, storey, purpose, a complete and utter lack of coordination of the space between the buildings, blocks, alleys, a disorganized alternation of facings, store windows, asphalt, and tiles. Everyone barged in with his structure in any way he could, not giving a damn about the neighbors, with which nothing could be done anyway.
The idea of Moscow as a city is a horde, pile, overcrowding, clutter, apathy towards those who and which are nearby; above all – the desire to rip off and assert one’s own interest, the power of money above any power, chaos as the principle of life.
Take a look at the historic cobble stone of the Red Square – look at the waves, by the means of which the first, most important, grand distance of the Empire marches on! What – is it really impossible to even it out like a table? The utter horror of the VIP box seats – Red Square’s waves. And if this – a continuous sloping pothole – isn’t visible on TV – so to hell with it, let’s leave it as is! – then what else can one expect?...Can the public really respect itself with such a pothole?
So there you have your piss-covered entrances and broken bottles. And thugs.
And until the first faces of the country – yes, just like back in the day, only for real! – come out with actual brooms and participate in subbotniks, while the punks littering all over the city get prosecuted in an orderly fashion…Eh, empty words…
Deliberately flawed reasoning. State’s armored military machinery is no longer capable of participating in Red Square parades, due to the fact that Manezhnaya Square had been thoroughly tunneled by an underground shopping center; the tanks would simply fall through into it. And this underground shopping center largely belongs to (or is it – in part? Or does it rake off plenty?) Moscow mayor Luzhkov, which means that it’s absolutely impossible to challenge this trade, since it’s too profitable.
Private business money is more valuable than the power and pride of the nation.
And this is the nation’s folk? This is whoring trash.
A city, like nothing else, embodies the system-forming instinct of the people. The city is not a pile of houses. It is a system, created out of buildings and the space between them in their congruency and interrelation. The creation of the city as a system is a skill and an independent art form.
The city – is when vertical and horizontal lines of buildings and the space between them in the aggregate are that very totality, which a simple sum, a simple place-conjunction of houses and blocks is not.
The city is intentionality, an organism, a painting and a sculpture per se, self-value.
The only city in the Empire is St. Petersburg. It was built by Italians – the best architects in the world at that time. They knew, and consequently tsars understood – a city is a single whole, its system reflects the nation’s system, its systematic spirit.
Italy, Germany, Spain, France, England, Austria are filled with cities. Russia is not.
And let’s do without arrogance. Pride must be constructive. Negation of one’s own negative traits is the most certain way toward their development and furthermore – toward our very own harm and demise.
An organized space means: we are together, a united community, of one fate, each other’s defenders and helpers, together we are better and stronger rather than alone and apart. It is therefore not surprising that only the citizens of Leningrad were known in the USSR for their goodwill, decency, honesty, pride without arrogance, and an overall embodied blueprint of virtue.
SHOW ME YOUR CITY – I’LL UNDERSTAND YOUR SOUL.
Showing posts with label mikhail veller. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mikhail veller. Show all posts
06 October 2007
07 May 2006
A National Idea
Komsomol'skaya Pravda.
12-Oct-2005
Searching for a National Idea.
http://www.kp.ru/daily/23594/45470/print/
Translation: mine.
Writer Mikhail Veller: Maybe we should swap the Kuril islands for Crimea and implement a Christian dictatorship.
Having completed his new book The Last Great Chance, this renowed author visited Komsomol'skaya Pravda and told us what this chance entails.
-Mikhail Iosifovich, please tells us - are all of us rossiyane (Note: Russian citizens) or Russians?
-Russians, of course! Because the Russian nation is collective in origin. Even "Moscow", rather than being Slavic, is a Finno-Ugric word "Moskova". Here we have Mordovians, Turkic peoples, Caucasians, and guys of northern Germanic-Scandinavian descent. All of this had been melted together and became the Russian peoples. All great nations have always been collective. Even the concept of "Russians" only emerged under Ivan the Terrible.
-Then why didn't Russians melt Ukraine into their pot? Or at least tiny Estonia?
-Had the Soviet Union existed for another thousand years, then one may have anticipated the assimilation of all people. Because when a person was worth anything or wanted to have a good career in the Russian Empire or in the Soviet Union, he inevitably underwent russification. Everything passed through the Russian language, Russian culture, Russian capital. The Baltics were joined to the Russian Empire somewhat late. And the Soviet Union led rather sparing national politics there.
-What about Ukraine?
-Well, Ukraine is not simply russified, this was the original Rus' - Kievan. If it weren't for the Tartar-Mongolian invasion, this would have been a unified pot of culturally equal slavic principalities. And as a result, all of this would have been baked into a single state, like a layered cake.
-Why did the Empire collapse?
-Because it exhausted itself. Keep in mind that Russia was initially created via the force of weapons, as were all empires in history. Not otherwise. For a thousand years our national idea was the unification of principalities, then the takeover of new territories, then - their "digestion".
And then all of a sudden, the Empire informed all of its subjects that it just so happens that imperial politics are bad, and we are giving up on them. What was there left to do? Only let itself dissipate.
A thief must be jailed
-And what now?
-And now everyone rushed to create a new national idea. But you cannot just make one up. It has to be natural, a problem projected onto psychology of the people.
This problem is yet to be posed. We are offered the following: let us live comfortably with our bellies full, dear Russians. Thanks a lot. Consumerism cannot embody a national idea. Then it's more beneficial to steal a bunch of goods and say - okay, guys, I think I've fulfilled my idea!
Even a mouse wants a good life - to live in a warm burrow with a full granary and to comfortably produce its offspring. Therefore today's idea is simply that of a mouse.
-In that case, please suggest to us something more interesting.
-Russia's national idea can only arise with departure of liberalism, which is the cause of Europe's current demise. An accelerated demise. Because liberalism states: everyone is equal and identical.
In a normal country, however, a murderer hangs, a thief is jailed, a hard worker lives well, while a lazy worker lives poorly. And the one who does not work at all gets the hell out, without stinking up the country or mooching off the welfare system. Or goes to live in a shelter. Into reservations.
-One who does not work, does not get to eat?
-Yes, something like that. As a result, liberalism cultivates parasitism. Not unlike the Roman Empire - bread and entertainment. Where is this empire now? Modern social parasites in Europe are the classic Roman plebeians, who do not wish to work, but wish to lives in accordance with their desires. They demand this via demonstrations. And the government flirts with them, because it wants votes.
-Exactly. People vote for this type of government. Therefore, they must like it.
-Russian people are not fully spoiled by this. They have a different idea. I doubt that you'd print it...
-...well, now we'd certainly have to print it.
-We'll see. To quote a vendor [I met] by the subway - she will be completely satisfied, when oligarchs and parliamentarians are strung up on light posts along the street. That's the kind of national idea that's blooming from below.
Europe will sell us out
-Is Russia not Europe?
-No, it is not Europe, because the very posing of the question garners doubts. No one asks: is Germany - Europe?
-Do you seriously believe that this [concept] is good for Russia?
-Forty years ago it would have been very bad - that we are not Europe. Today - it is good. Today this is our chance. If we were to join Europe, we would not have a single chance left.
When we say that we want to be part of Europe, we really mean that we want to be wealthy and live freely. At the same time we don't want to change our mentality. We do not feel insecure about all things Russian in front of all things French and German.
And if we do join them, do you really think that our mentality would immediately change? No. This [union] will only result in diminished customs control at the border. This is only beneficial to those who send oil, gas, forestry products, and metal to the West.
It, however, is not beneficial to the rest, because our manufacturing sector cannot handle a competion with Europe. We will ultimately become a source of natural resources and nothing more.
-But is it not better to sell ourselves to Europe than be swallowed by China?
-China will compromise with Europe. Europe does not want to fight or even save itself from complete islamification. And when Europe is face to face with a powerful totalitarian state armed to its teeth, it’ll hand Siberia over to China, and that’ll be the end of it. Back in the day, it handed the Czech Republic over to Hitler. Europe does not give a damn about Russian interests.
-Then maybe America will save us?
-Riiiight! America is also afraid of China. But America does not need Europe as a competitor. America would prefer to have Russia against China and Europe. Therefore in reality, Russia is a strategic partner for America.
-But for now it looks like we are better friends with China against the U.S.A...
-That’s just for show. America does not have any territorial grievances with Russia. No ideologic disagreements. Russia does not participate in anything that would outright horrify America. And further more, it is America, not Europe and China, that above all respects power. Russia’s nuclear arsenal is still present. And for the U.S.A. this is a big argument in our favor.
Eastern Orthodoxy must have fists
-What specifically should our national idea involve?
-The preservation of the Christian civilization.
-What are we going to do with muslims, jews, and atheists? Send them to Siberia too?
-They don’t have to be sent anywhere. And no one should be baptized by force either. By “Christianity” I don't refer to the type of religious worship, but rather - societal values. But they are loosened. Why did Christianity conquer ancient Rome? Because Rome became liberal and allowed everything. While Christianity said – none of this crap. This you have to do, but that will send you to hell. Christians had a definite set of values – what is good, and what is evil.
Europe and Russia no longer follow them. This is why Islam is winning. It has definite values. Islam tells you what is allowed and what is not.
This is why, among others, Russia needs an Eastern Orthodox reform. Orthodoxy must become a living religion, rather than a ritual, as it is now, when bureaucrats hold candles next to their lenten mugs, while yawning priests stand nearby, having successfully purchased a candle factory for the occasion.
-What should we do in particular?
-We must walk one step ahead of destiny. It is unnecessary to wait for inevitability. Kuril islands are already lost for Russia. Today we have absolutely no useful purpose for them. We don’t have the money or a reason to maintain serious bases there. And today we can still bargain for these islands, but in 15 years they will be gone free of charge.
The same applies to East Prussia - Kaliningrad region. Its residents don't need Russia. If the EU tells them, "Hey guys, have dual citizenship, have social welfare up to our standards"; oh my God, what a celebration this would cause! Today we can still rent East Prussia to Germans for 49 years. And milk German blood and gold with tankers thanks to this [transaction]. But in 15 years it will leave on its own, and nothing will get milked.
-You are suggesting that we give them away....
-I am suggesting that we receive the maximum out of what we can hope for. These territories are suitcases without handles for us, regardless.
-But when Abkhazia cries out to us, "Hey guys, we are your brothers, we want to live in Russia", for some reason we think, "What would Georgia and Europe say?" Who gives a damn about what Georgia and Europe would say! All that they can really do is freeze our guys' bank accounts in the West. Well, then, we just need to warn our guys - let them return their money to Russia. Otherwise it will be too late.
-What else are you offering to trade?
-Eastern Russia. It is not ours. Only 145 years had passed since Vladivostok's foundation. We need to give up this stuff as concession to the Japanese and the Koreans against China. We need to create a standard brawl between one type of barbarians against the other on our borders. This is how all shrewed governments acted.
However, that, which is ours and is located nearby, becomes part of Russia, without giving a damn about political correctness.
-Crimea, for example...
-Crimea first and foremost! They need to have a referendum. People, of course, will vote for unification with Russia. Then Moscow imposes a visa regime, which must be satisfied. And then there will be a celebration that will greatly exceed that in East Prussia after its return to Germans.
All skin, but no kielbasa
-What will then happen to the organization of the state?
-For now, it has to be a dictatorship, I'm afraid.
-And democracy is absolutely impossible?
-Democarcy is an optimal speed for a car. But when you are stuck in mud, you need extreme measures in order to get back on the road.
-It seems that certain individuals already scream that we almost have a "bloody regime"
-What regime? Please. Our dictatorship is like kielbasa - we've got the skin, but not the kielbasa itself.
-Who will elect the first dicator? The government or the people?
-Representatives of all parties and movements are locked up for a week. They are not allowed to come out, until they elect someone. Otherwise in France we easily find pedigree-lacking corsican Napoleon, while here we get Ryurikovich - prince Trubetskoy, who does not at all show up to Senatsky square during the Decembrists' rebellion.
-Does the dictator have to be Russian?
-Ideally, it's better for him to be Russian and Christian. But, you know, if he really needs to, he can get baptized himself.
-Wouldn't all of this result in ordinary fascism?
-There are 10-12 chances out of 100 that we will reach a dictatorship of a fascistic nature, and this will be very bad.
-What is your dictatorship like?
-Constitutional. My dictator is an unconditional ruler. Not a tyrant, but rather the highest executive person in possession of emergency powers and specific targets for the duration of a rigidly defined term. If you don't leave on the day your term ends - you are outside of the law, have no civil rights, and are an enemy of the people.
-This sounds like GKChP (Note: leaders of 1991 Russian coup)
-GKChP is the diminution of people's rights and the expansionof authorities' rights. A constitutional dictatorship, in contrast, is the rights' reduction of the very bureaucratic apparatus in question. Because in this case the will of the people directly transforms into action via the dictator's will, instead of being skewed when passing the bureaucratic ladder along the way. It is the bureaucrat, who loses his rights.
-And then we will become the greatest country in the world?
-Greater than America - doubtful. America is like a combined world team. It is difficult to compete with such. With China as well. That, however, which was once Europe, can exist in Russia in its best manifestation, once Germany and France no longer exist. It's most important for people to live like people. Throughout history our nobility and later the party elite lived like Europeans, while the rest of the people - like Russian "aboriginals". Essentially, there have always been two peoples within Russia. Euro-Russians and simply Russians. Today this must no longer be the case.
12-Oct-2005
Searching for a National Idea.
http://www.kp.ru/daily/23594/45470/print/
Translation: mine.
Writer Mikhail Veller: Maybe we should swap the Kuril islands for Crimea and implement a Christian dictatorship.
Having completed his new book The Last Great Chance, this renowed author visited Komsomol'skaya Pravda and told us what this chance entails.
-Mikhail Iosifovich, please tells us - are all of us rossiyane (Note: Russian citizens) or Russians?
-Russians, of course! Because the Russian nation is collective in origin. Even "Moscow", rather than being Slavic, is a Finno-Ugric word "Moskova". Here we have Mordovians, Turkic peoples, Caucasians, and guys of northern Germanic-Scandinavian descent. All of this had been melted together and became the Russian peoples. All great nations have always been collective. Even the concept of "Russians" only emerged under Ivan the Terrible.
-Then why didn't Russians melt Ukraine into their pot? Or at least tiny Estonia?
-Had the Soviet Union existed for another thousand years, then one may have anticipated the assimilation of all people. Because when a person was worth anything or wanted to have a good career in the Russian Empire or in the Soviet Union, he inevitably underwent russification. Everything passed through the Russian language, Russian culture, Russian capital. The Baltics were joined to the Russian Empire somewhat late. And the Soviet Union led rather sparing national politics there.
-What about Ukraine?
-Well, Ukraine is not simply russified, this was the original Rus' - Kievan. If it weren't for the Tartar-Mongolian invasion, this would have been a unified pot of culturally equal slavic principalities. And as a result, all of this would have been baked into a single state, like a layered cake.
-Why did the Empire collapse?
-Because it exhausted itself. Keep in mind that Russia was initially created via the force of weapons, as were all empires in history. Not otherwise. For a thousand years our national idea was the unification of principalities, then the takeover of new territories, then - their "digestion".
And then all of a sudden, the Empire informed all of its subjects that it just so happens that imperial politics are bad, and we are giving up on them. What was there left to do? Only let itself dissipate.
A thief must be jailed
-And what now?
-And now everyone rushed to create a new national idea. But you cannot just make one up. It has to be natural, a problem projected onto psychology of the people.
This problem is yet to be posed. We are offered the following: let us live comfortably with our bellies full, dear Russians. Thanks a lot. Consumerism cannot embody a national idea. Then it's more beneficial to steal a bunch of goods and say - okay, guys, I think I've fulfilled my idea!
Even a mouse wants a good life - to live in a warm burrow with a full granary and to comfortably produce its offspring. Therefore today's idea is simply that of a mouse.
-In that case, please suggest to us something more interesting.
-Russia's national idea can only arise with departure of liberalism, which is the cause of Europe's current demise. An accelerated demise. Because liberalism states: everyone is equal and identical.
In a normal country, however, a murderer hangs, a thief is jailed, a hard worker lives well, while a lazy worker lives poorly. And the one who does not work at all gets the hell out, without stinking up the country or mooching off the welfare system. Or goes to live in a shelter. Into reservations.
-One who does not work, does not get to eat?
-Yes, something like that. As a result, liberalism cultivates parasitism. Not unlike the Roman Empire - bread and entertainment. Where is this empire now? Modern social parasites in Europe are the classic Roman plebeians, who do not wish to work, but wish to lives in accordance with their desires. They demand this via demonstrations. And the government flirts with them, because it wants votes.
-Exactly. People vote for this type of government. Therefore, they must like it.
-Russian people are not fully spoiled by this. They have a different idea. I doubt that you'd print it...
-...well, now we'd certainly have to print it.
-We'll see. To quote a vendor [I met] by the subway - she will be completely satisfied, when oligarchs and parliamentarians are strung up on light posts along the street. That's the kind of national idea that's blooming from below.
Europe will sell us out
-Is Russia not Europe?
-No, it is not Europe, because the very posing of the question garners doubts. No one asks: is Germany - Europe?
-Do you seriously believe that this [concept] is good for Russia?
-Forty years ago it would have been very bad - that we are not Europe. Today - it is good. Today this is our chance. If we were to join Europe, we would not have a single chance left.
When we say that we want to be part of Europe, we really mean that we want to be wealthy and live freely. At the same time we don't want to change our mentality. We do not feel insecure about all things Russian in front of all things French and German.
And if we do join them, do you really think that our mentality would immediately change? No. This [union] will only result in diminished customs control at the border. This is only beneficial to those who send oil, gas, forestry products, and metal to the West.
It, however, is not beneficial to the rest, because our manufacturing sector cannot handle a competion with Europe. We will ultimately become a source of natural resources and nothing more.
-But is it not better to sell ourselves to Europe than be swallowed by China?
-China will compromise with Europe. Europe does not want to fight or even save itself from complete islamification. And when Europe is face to face with a powerful totalitarian state armed to its teeth, it’ll hand Siberia over to China, and that’ll be the end of it. Back in the day, it handed the Czech Republic over to Hitler. Europe does not give a damn about Russian interests.
-Then maybe America will save us?
-Riiiight! America is also afraid of China. But America does not need Europe as a competitor. America would prefer to have Russia against China and Europe. Therefore in reality, Russia is a strategic partner for America.
-But for now it looks like we are better friends with China against the U.S.A...
-That’s just for show. America does not have any territorial grievances with Russia. No ideologic disagreements. Russia does not participate in anything that would outright horrify America. And further more, it is America, not Europe and China, that above all respects power. Russia’s nuclear arsenal is still present. And for the U.S.A. this is a big argument in our favor.
Eastern Orthodoxy must have fists
-What specifically should our national idea involve?
-The preservation of the Christian civilization.
-What are we going to do with muslims, jews, and atheists? Send them to Siberia too?
-They don’t have to be sent anywhere. And no one should be baptized by force either. By “Christianity” I don't refer to the type of religious worship, but rather - societal values. But they are loosened. Why did Christianity conquer ancient Rome? Because Rome became liberal and allowed everything. While Christianity said – none of this crap. This you have to do, but that will send you to hell. Christians had a definite set of values – what is good, and what is evil.
Europe and Russia no longer follow them. This is why Islam is winning. It has definite values. Islam tells you what is allowed and what is not.
This is why, among others, Russia needs an Eastern Orthodox reform. Orthodoxy must become a living religion, rather than a ritual, as it is now, when bureaucrats hold candles next to their lenten mugs, while yawning priests stand nearby, having successfully purchased a candle factory for the occasion.
-What should we do in particular?
-We must walk one step ahead of destiny. It is unnecessary to wait for inevitability. Kuril islands are already lost for Russia. Today we have absolutely no useful purpose for them. We don’t have the money or a reason to maintain serious bases there. And today we can still bargain for these islands, but in 15 years they will be gone free of charge.
The same applies to East Prussia - Kaliningrad region. Its residents don't need Russia. If the EU tells them, "Hey guys, have dual citizenship, have social welfare up to our standards"; oh my God, what a celebration this would cause! Today we can still rent East Prussia to Germans for 49 years. And milk German blood and gold with tankers thanks to this [transaction]. But in 15 years it will leave on its own, and nothing will get milked.
-You are suggesting that we give them away....
-I am suggesting that we receive the maximum out of what we can hope for. These territories are suitcases without handles for us, regardless.
-But when Abkhazia cries out to us, "Hey guys, we are your brothers, we want to live in Russia", for some reason we think, "What would Georgia and Europe say?" Who gives a damn about what Georgia and Europe would say! All that they can really do is freeze our guys' bank accounts in the West. Well, then, we just need to warn our guys - let them return their money to Russia. Otherwise it will be too late.
-What else are you offering to trade?
-Eastern Russia. It is not ours. Only 145 years had passed since Vladivostok's foundation. We need to give up this stuff as concession to the Japanese and the Koreans against China. We need to create a standard brawl between one type of barbarians against the other on our borders. This is how all shrewed governments acted.
However, that, which is ours and is located nearby, becomes part of Russia, without giving a damn about political correctness.
-Crimea, for example...
-Crimea first and foremost! They need to have a referendum. People, of course, will vote for unification with Russia. Then Moscow imposes a visa regime, which must be satisfied. And then there will be a celebration that will greatly exceed that in East Prussia after its return to Germans.
All skin, but no kielbasa
-What will then happen to the organization of the state?
-For now, it has to be a dictatorship, I'm afraid.
-And democracy is absolutely impossible?
-Democarcy is an optimal speed for a car. But when you are stuck in mud, you need extreme measures in order to get back on the road.
-It seems that certain individuals already scream that we almost have a "bloody regime"
-What regime? Please. Our dictatorship is like kielbasa - we've got the skin, but not the kielbasa itself.
-Who will elect the first dicator? The government or the people?
-Representatives of all parties and movements are locked up for a week. They are not allowed to come out, until they elect someone. Otherwise in France we easily find pedigree-lacking corsican Napoleon, while here we get Ryurikovich - prince Trubetskoy, who does not at all show up to Senatsky square during the Decembrists' rebellion.
-Does the dictator have to be Russian?
-Ideally, it's better for him to be Russian and Christian. But, you know, if he really needs to, he can get baptized himself.
-Wouldn't all of this result in ordinary fascism?
-There are 10-12 chances out of 100 that we will reach a dictatorship of a fascistic nature, and this will be very bad.
-What is your dictatorship like?
-Constitutional. My dictator is an unconditional ruler. Not a tyrant, but rather the highest executive person in possession of emergency powers and specific targets for the duration of a rigidly defined term. If you don't leave on the day your term ends - you are outside of the law, have no civil rights, and are an enemy of the people.
-This sounds like GKChP (Note: leaders of 1991 Russian coup)
-GKChP is the diminution of people's rights and the expansionof authorities' rights. A constitutional dictatorship, in contrast, is the rights' reduction of the very bureaucratic apparatus in question. Because in this case the will of the people directly transforms into action via the dictator's will, instead of being skewed when passing the bureaucratic ladder along the way. It is the bureaucrat, who loses his rights.
-And then we will become the greatest country in the world?
-Greater than America - doubtful. America is like a combined world team. It is difficult to compete with such. With China as well. That, however, which was once Europe, can exist in Russia in its best manifestation, once Germany and France no longer exist. It's most important for people to live like people. Throughout history our nobility and later the party elite lived like Europeans, while the rest of the people - like Russian "aboriginals". Essentially, there have always been two peoples within Russia. Euro-Russians and simply Russians. Today this must no longer be the case.
20 March 2006
A Cup of Hemlock to Call Our Own
It is 1:00 am. I am in bed. Sharikov is too, grumpy from his midnight bath. He is trying to sleep. I am not. Instead I review modal verbs - nothing too complicated at this hour - and memorize German vocabulary. I am determined.
beliebt
bequem
Besichtingung
This late-night motivation reaches its limits at a 20-minute mark.
"Forget it", I sigh, "I haven't read anything for the sheer pleasure of reading in months". The book-a-week rule of my undergrad days is certainly forsaken, but this self-educational masochism implemented at odd hours of the night is bordering on ridiculous, even by my standards.
I pick up Veller's Kassandra, recommended by I. many moons ago, purchased somewhat fewer moons ago, and started around the same time. It is
A book about the world, in which you live,
and about its end, -
and about you,
in whom this world lives,
and about your immortality
Contrary to certain snooty critics, who are not too keen on his considerable sales and therefore, gasp, popularity - evidently a major "no-no" in the elite literary circles, I enjoy his humorous fiction. I enjoy his brief asides into the Death of the West even more. I. recommended Kassandra to me precisely for its focused non-fictional, quasi-philosophic, culturally critical purpose.
We, the Concerned, the Hopeless, and therefore the Angry typically represent this Death in light of the past hundred years of history. A little Hegelianism and a lot of Delayed Suicide. Simply put, we civilized ourselves to Death. We discuss this issue to death too. We cannot function in any other way, because We are the Concerned.
Like I said.
I finally said I wanted a new perspective, as a result of these ongoing morbid exchanges. I got it - before I even got to it.
I've only read the first forty pages - one tenth of a compact book that boldly aims to analyze the cultural evolution of man and his society; a book that begins almost as a paraphrase of the tired joke about the chicken crossing the road, "interpreted" by various philosophers; only here the chicken is human.
Between the brief synopsis that commences with the Greeks but exasparatedly ends with Nietzsche and the analysis of societal units like family or state, Veller references Socrates' life-long goal to determine why people act - choose to act - wrongly, despite their knowledge otherwise. Then in a manner expected of Veller's humor, he concludes that we all know how this endeavor ended.
He proceeds to demonstrate casual examples of sluggishly suicidal behavior in men as obvious as a smoking habit or sleep-deprived, workaholic stroke at the age of 45. Even clearly dysfunctional relationships such as the girl loves wife-beating alcoholic asshole A, although she has the option of being with nice-guy-with-a-good-job B scenario qualify. Veller's examples are presented in the context of happiness, defined fairly well by every human according to his specific needs, yet rarely attained. Veller therefore probes the often out-of-sync nature of morality and action because he too wants to know why men act against their better judgement.
I do not.
At least not under such generic circumstances. His conflation of morality and maximized aptitude for survival is also problematic, however my interest lies elsewhere: the empirical validity of Veller's observations regarding the suicidal drive of an individual can easily be extended to the collective suicide of a culture. This is not a clean abstraction by any means: in each of the author's examples, the person in question is aware of the detrimental nature of his actions, while cultural self-destruction seems to largely be an incognizant occurrence, until its signs are too blatant to ignore. Furthermore, this murder-of-self is not a result of losing animal survival insticts, but rather the inability to react due to the lack of overt danger signs.
For example, a rapidly spreading epidemic can be one of such signs. Its fatal effects can be countered with increased procreation to reverse population decline and to preserve the genofund. However, this solution will only be partial until the nature of the disease and consequently the methods of preventing its spread are discovered, advertised, and implemented.
What if no such warnings exist? What if the relatively high standard of living translates into misleading assumptions about demographics? What if those communally designated to proclaim otherwise do no such thing? What if in addition to the illusion of well-being, a culture slowly loses its defining pillars, while its carriers are systematically taught collective self-abasement as the principal value?
The delayed suicide drive of a single individual united with this cancerous group mentality produces a concoction much more lethal than the Concerned anticipated, and it is consumed just as willingly as Socrates' hemlock. Is this the conclusion that Kassandra will reach?
I might not find out until the next midnight linguistic pursuit.
beliebt
bequem
Besichtingung
This late-night motivation reaches its limits at a 20-minute mark.
"Forget it", I sigh, "I haven't read anything for the sheer pleasure of reading in months". The book-a-week rule of my undergrad days is certainly forsaken, but this self-educational masochism implemented at odd hours of the night is bordering on ridiculous, even by my standards.
I pick up Veller's Kassandra, recommended by I. many moons ago, purchased somewhat fewer moons ago, and started around the same time. It is
A book about the world, in which you live,
and about its end, -
and about you,
in whom this world lives,
and about your immortality
Contrary to certain snooty critics, who are not too keen on his considerable sales and therefore, gasp, popularity - evidently a major "no-no" in the elite literary circles, I enjoy his humorous fiction. I enjoy his brief asides into the Death of the West even more. I. recommended Kassandra to me precisely for its focused non-fictional, quasi-philosophic, culturally critical purpose.
We, the Concerned, the Hopeless, and therefore the Angry typically represent this Death in light of the past hundred years of history. A little Hegelianism and a lot of Delayed Suicide. Simply put, we civilized ourselves to Death. We discuss this issue to death too. We cannot function in any other way, because We are the Concerned.
Like I said.
I finally said I wanted a new perspective, as a result of these ongoing morbid exchanges. I got it - before I even got to it.
I've only read the first forty pages - one tenth of a compact book that boldly aims to analyze the cultural evolution of man and his society; a book that begins almost as a paraphrase of the tired joke about the chicken crossing the road, "interpreted" by various philosophers; only here the chicken is human.
Between the brief synopsis that commences with the Greeks but exasparatedly ends with Nietzsche and the analysis of societal units like family or state, Veller references Socrates' life-long goal to determine why people act - choose to act - wrongly, despite their knowledge otherwise. Then in a manner expected of Veller's humor, he concludes that we all know how this endeavor ended.
He proceeds to demonstrate casual examples of sluggishly suicidal behavior in men as obvious as a smoking habit or sleep-deprived, workaholic stroke at the age of 45. Even clearly dysfunctional relationships such as the girl loves wife-beating alcoholic asshole A, although she has the option of being with nice-guy-with-a-good-job B scenario qualify. Veller's examples are presented in the context of happiness, defined fairly well by every human according to his specific needs, yet rarely attained. Veller therefore probes the often out-of-sync nature of morality and action because he too wants to know why men act against their better judgement.
I do not.
At least not under such generic circumstances. His conflation of morality and maximized aptitude for survival is also problematic, however my interest lies elsewhere: the empirical validity of Veller's observations regarding the suicidal drive of an individual can easily be extended to the collective suicide of a culture. This is not a clean abstraction by any means: in each of the author's examples, the person in question is aware of the detrimental nature of his actions, while cultural self-destruction seems to largely be an incognizant occurrence, until its signs are too blatant to ignore. Furthermore, this murder-of-self is not a result of losing animal survival insticts, but rather the inability to react due to the lack of overt danger signs.
For example, a rapidly spreading epidemic can be one of such signs. Its fatal effects can be countered with increased procreation to reverse population decline and to preserve the genofund. However, this solution will only be partial until the nature of the disease and consequently the methods of preventing its spread are discovered, advertised, and implemented.
What if no such warnings exist? What if the relatively high standard of living translates into misleading assumptions about demographics? What if those communally designated to proclaim otherwise do no such thing? What if in addition to the illusion of well-being, a culture slowly loses its defining pillars, while its carriers are systematically taught collective self-abasement as the principal value?
The delayed suicide drive of a single individual united with this cancerous group mentality produces a concoction much more lethal than the Concerned anticipated, and it is consumed just as willingly as Socrates' hemlock. Is this the conclusion that Kassandra will reach?
I might not find out until the next midnight linguistic pursuit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)