201. In addition to the above-mentioned musical
styles vis-à-vis political equivalents, I should like to add Neo-Baroque,
conceiving it as a Low Tory equivalence which may or may not fuse with and
blend into the avant-garde. In terms of
the totality of 'democratic' musical styles, one could therefore speak of High
Tory baroque, Whig classical, Liberal romantic, Democratic Socialist
neo-classical, Low Tory neo-baroque/avant-garde,
Liberal Democratic neo-romantic (not to be confused with late romantic, which
culminates in early twentieth-century composers like Berg, Schoenberg, Mahler,
Strauss, and Elgar), all of which would accord with a
parliamentary tradition. Electronic
avant-garde and Social-Realist orchestral music would not be so much democratic
as theocratic, and accordingly beyond even those kinds of music. Admittedly, I have been generalizing where
the moral or ideological standing of each of the above-mentioned categories of
creative endeavour is concerned, and would not wish anyone to get the impression
that I consider all poets diabolic and all philosophers divine or, conversely,
all painters divine and all musicians diabolic.
But I do believe that when a particular discipline, be it literary or
painterly or musical, is being pursued on a basis which is absolutely true to
itself, and therefore not 'bovaryized' or transmuted
in any degree, whether up (if possible) or down (if possible), it will adhere
more closely to whichever of the spectra I regard as inherently germane to
it. Thus philosophy will remain
primarily a thing of the mind and poetry primarily a thing of the brain, with
the same applying to art and to music respectively, so that light/heat
distinctions can be inferred. Similarly,
literature will remain primarily a thing of the body, or flesh, as, to a large
extent, will sculpture, particularly when consciously celebrating motion.
202. Clearly, if we can divide the arts between
light, heat, and motion, there is no reason to suppose that the sciences are
not likewise divisible into three basic categories, with, say, cosmology in the
light category, chemistry in the heat category, and physics in the motion
category. Thus we could define cosmology
as mind science, chemistry as brain science, and physics as body science, with
divine, diabolic, and worldly distinctions respectively. Cosmology would correspond to philosophy and
art, chemistry to poetry and music, and physics to literature and
sculpture. Other sciences could be
divided on a similar tripartite basis.
203. Do we get light from the sun or from our
eyes? Do the planets and stars revolve
around one another through force and mass or because space is curved? Does heredity determine a person's intelligence
or can it be modified by education and nurture?
Is beauty external to us or is it in the 'eye of the beholder'? - One
could ask other such questions and answer them in one of three ways, depending
on the type of person one is, not to mention the historical epoch in which one
lives. An alpha-stemming autocratic type
of person would answer each of the above questions as follows: Yes, light comes
from the sun. Yes, force and mass
determine planetary revolutions. Yes,
heredity is the determining factor where intelligence is concerned. Yes, beauty is external to us. And, objectively considered, he would be
correct! For, of course, light comes
from the sun, which gives us daylight, whereas between sunset and sunrise the
absence of the sun from our horizon causes night, which is a period of extended
darkness. And, of course, the
revolutions of the planets and stars are determined by force and mass, since
that corresponds to the inherently autocratic primitivity
of such basic phenomena. And, of course,
heredity determines intelligence, since it is transmitted through the genes and
is not a contingent acquisition. And, of
course, beauty is external to us, since a matter of harmonious form, and form
is ever apparent. However, in contrast
to the alpha-stemming person, an omega-aspiring theocratic person would, or
should, answer each of the above questions as follows: Light comes from our
eyes. Curved space is responsible for
planetary motions. Intelligence is a
matter of education and conditioning.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
And, subjectively considered, he too would be correct! For such a person will put the emphasis on
the personal and internal rather than on the impersonal and external, and will
accordingly strive to bring everything under human control and render it
accountable to human wishes. In effect,
he will be speaking of a different light, a different space, a different
intelligence, and a different beauty than the autocratic type of person, as
well as speaking from a different brain - the new brain as opposed to the old
brain, which is inherently subjective.
Being more spiritual than his antithesis, he will project his inner
light onto external reality, as though its light came from him and was but a
reflection of his spirit, a phenomenon of his mind. Given his omega-oriented transcendentalism,
he will prefer to think transcendentally vis-à-vis planetary revolutions around
the sun, and thus uphold a closed-society view which accords with this
orientation in defiance of force/mass theories.
And since he is more partial to artificial evaluations than to naturalistic
ones, he will favour education and conditioning as an explanation of
intelligence, since inclined, in his new-brain bias, to identify intelligence
with what he has learnt or is in favour of learning ... through books,
magazines, television, radio, etc., rather than with what or how he thinks, how
quickly or effectively he responds to everyday challenges, what his natural
aptitudes are, and so on - all things which, in any case, have been largely
eclipsed by artificially-conditioned intelligence. Similarly, he will prefer to regard himself
as the arbiter of beauty; for it must be acknowledged that a person with a
new-brain bias will have a different, more subjective and artificial sense of
beauty than one whose bias is towards the old brain, and that what the latter
regards as beautiful may not appear so to the former at all - indeed, may even
appear ugly, in consequence of which no identical criteria could be arrived at,
there being no single type of beauty. So
if one man's meat is another man's poison, we may believe that one man's beauty
is another man's ugliness, taking 'man' in a broader than individual
sense. And yet if we are alluding here
to two radically different types of men, one alpha stemming and the other omega
aspiring, with possibly aquiline and retroussé facial
distinctions between them or their respective senses of beauty, it should not
be forgotten that there is another type of man, who comes in-between them and
reflects a compromise, in evolutionary terms, with each of the extreme
positions. Such a man, whom we shall
characterize as liberal and worldly, is compelled, by the atomic constitution
of his psyche, to take a dualistic view of life and accordingly strive to
reconcile contrasting viewpoints, so that, unlike each of the other types, he
will answer the above questions by asserting that both factors
play an approximately equal part. Yes,
light comes from both the sun and our
eyes. Yes, planetary revolutions around
the sun are determined by both Newtonian force/mass and Einsteinian curved space.
Yes, education can increase intelligence, though
fundamentally it is conditioned by hereditary factors. And finally: Yes, beauty is both subjective and
objective. Balanced between the old and
the new brains in mid-brain compromise, such a democratic type of man can
reasonably attribute equal importance to both sides of each of the
aforementioned questions because, to a greater or lesser extent, he is exposed
to contrasting positions, is in effect speaking of two kinds of light, two kinds
of cosmos, two kinds of intelligence, and two kinds of beauty, though he would
probably be the last person to accept or, indeed, realize the fact!
204. So what can we construe from the above that
will be of benefit to the future? Such a
question can only be answered in one way, and it must be to the effect that
both the autocratic and democratic points-of-view will be entirely eclipsed by
the theocratic point-of-view, as omega-aspiring closed societies supersede all
open societies, and subjectivity accordingly becomes the sole criterion, with
particular reference to the new brain and related phenomena. Evolution will continue towards the ultimate
subjectivity of the omega absolute, and anything opposed to it be consigned to
the rubbish heap of history. The days of
objectivity are already effectively numbered.
Their official dethronement has yet to come!
205. There are what might be called shadow
antitheses and qualities to the principal light, heat, and motion qualities
already discussed, viz. sadness/happiness, hate/love,
and pain/pleasure. These antitheses are:
doubt/faith in the case of light, fear/hope in the case of heat, and
compassion/envy in the case of motion. Doubt
is never very far from sadness, both in terms of self-doubt and the doubt about
one that someone else may feel in the presence of one's sadness, as though it
were something to be held against one, and, conversely, faith is never very far
removed from the expression of happiness, whether that faith be one's own or
someone else's in regard to oneself.
Similarly, fear is ever closer to hate, particularly from the viewpoint
of anyone who is the recipient or cause of an outburst of anger in someone
else, and, conversely, hope is the emotion most often engendered by the
expression of love, as between two lovers, though also in the wider sense of
having one's confidence in life or a particular undertaking rekindled in
consequence of a general expression of love towards one by some other person,
especially when that person is held in deep respect or high regard by dint of
the authority he/she represents.
Likewise, compassion is the most appropriate emotion at the sight of
someone else's pain, the more severe the pain and the less seemingly justified
its existence ... the greater the compassion, which can also be experienced
with regard to oneself, providing the pain is not too great, while, conversely,
the sight of pleasure being experienced by another person can bring forth the
less noble emotion of envy, particularly if, as will usually be the case, one
is unable to experience or is excluded from experiencing any such pleasure
oneself. Such shadow antitheses may also
be termed secondary feelings, and I like to think of the first pair, viz. doubt
and faith, in terms of light-heat; the second pair, viz. fear and hope, in
terms of heat-light; and the third pair, viz. compassion and envy, in terms of
motion-heat and motion-light respectively.
206. As a rule, one is a
philosopher, a poet, or a novelist rather than all three together. For writers, no less than people in general,
are roughly divisible into three categories, viz. those who are essentially
minds, for whom the mind predominates; those who are essentially brains, for
whom the brain predominates; and those - undoubtedly the majority - who are
essentially bodies, for whom the body predominates. In other words divine,
diabolic, and worldly types, corresponding to light, heat, and motion. Thus, for example, if one is centred in the
mind and accordingly an idealist, one is ever likely to be a philosopher even
when, as may occasionally happen, one turns one's hand to poetry or literature
and thereby makes a descent to either the brain or the body, as the case may
be. Doubtless, the result will be more
philosophical than either truly poetical or novelistic, as my own periodic
excursions into these lower realms of writing well attest - the result
sometimes more reminiscent of poetic philosophy and novelistic philosophy than
of philosophical poetry or literature!
However, what apples to the philosopher must surely apply to the poet
and novelist as well, so that the genuine poet, centred in brain naturalism,
will always remain largely a poet even when he abandons the poetic realm for
the realms of philosophy above or literature below, and accordingly writes in a
different genre, just as the genuine novelist, inherently bodily and realistic,
is more likely to write poetry or philosophy from a novelist's standpoint than
from the standpoints of either a poet or a philosopher - the outcome a kind of
literary philosophy or poetry in which the light/heat essences of the
respective genres are diluted by motion, and only a rather second- or
third-rate production, scarcely worthy of the names philosophy or poetry, is
the paradoxical result. For just as the
true idealist will remain an idealist even in the realms of naturalism and
realism, and the true naturalist a naturalist even in the realms of idealism
and realism, so the true realist must remain a realist even in the realms of
naturalism and idealism, poetry and philosophy, producing neither heat nor
light, but subverting and diluting each through motion. Such speculation aside, however, it remains
to be added that the truly true realist, naturalist, and idealist (not to
mention play-writing materialist) will never abandon his own discipline for
that of anyone else's. On the contrary,
he will remain constant to it!
207. Hitherto I have spoken in terms of distinctions
between light, heat, and motion, but the time has now come to add or, rather, prefix
force to the other three, and thereby bring them into line with the materialist
- naturalist - realist - idealist evolutionary spectrum I wrote about
earlier. Thus we can correlate force
with materialism, heat with naturalism, motion with realism, and light with
idealism:-
MATERIALISM NATURALISM REALISM IDEALISM
FORCE HEAT MOTION LIGHT
Clearly,
force precedes motion no less than heat precedes light in the overall
evolutionary progression of humanity from barbarous beginnings in power to a supercivilized culmination in truth. For power, or strength, is no less
correlative with force than beauty with heat, goodness with motion, and truth
with light. Indeed, just as we conceived
quantitative and qualitative attributes for each of the principal evolutionary
distinctions already referred to, so force can be accorded such attributes in
terms of strength on the one hand and pride on the other, with weakness and
humiliation the respective negative antitheses.
Thus the fourth, or force, spectrum should read as follows:-
WEAKNESS STRENGTH
HUMILIATION PRIDE
208. Strictly speaking, we can no more regard a
weakness/strength dichotomy as successive, in evolutionary terms, than any of
the other principal dichotomies already listed.
For it does not follow that weakness precedes strength or evil ...
goodness. On the contrary, just as a
materialistic epoch begins in idealism and gradually descends towards
materialism, while the succeeding naturalistic epoch begins in materialism and
gradually ascends towards idealism (as noted before), so the quantitative and
qualitative attributes of a materialistic epoch proceed in like-fashion from,
as it were, virtue to vice, which is to say from strength and pride (SP) to
weakness and humiliation (WH), while the quantitative and qualitative
attributes of the succeeding naturalistic epoch proceed upwards, so to speak,
from vice to virtue, which is to say from ugliness and hate (UH) to beauty and
love (BL), in line with a progression from the material to the ideal, Feudalism
to Catholicism. Conversely, the
quantitative and qualitative attributes of the ensuing realistic epoch recede,
so to speak, from virtuous beginnings in goodness and pleasure (GP) to a vicious
decadence in evil and pain (EP), while, in complete contrast, the succeeding
idealistic epoch in human evolution begins with illusion and woe (IW) and
proceeds, during the course of idealistic time, towards its culmination in
truth and joy (TJ), proceeds up towards the Holy Ghost from an Antichristic base.
Thus we have an overall evolutionary progression as follows:-
* * *
SP BL GP TJ
* * * *
* HEAT
* *
LIGHT *
* * * *
-----M----------N---------R----------I----
* * * *
FORCE * *
MOTION * *
* * * *
WH UH EP IW
** **
with
materialistic force corresponding to proton particles, naturalistic heat to
proton wavicles, realistic motion to electron
particles, and, finally, idealistic light corresponding to electron wavicles - a progression from Kingdom to Church on the one
hand, and from State to Centre on the other.
Both Kingdom and State correspond to the body, albeit on different, i.e.
force/motion, terms; the former finding its bodily parallel in bone and muscle,
the latter in blood and flesh. Likewise,
both Church and Centre correspond to the head, if again on different, i.e.
heat/light, terms; the former finding its psychic parallel in the subconscious
and the latter in the superconscious. Naturalism and idealism over materialism and
realism, autocracy and democracy no less of the body than theocracy and
transcendentalism are of the head.
209. Although the past three centuries have been
dominated by the motion-body, the head is making a comeback, so to speak, in
the guise of light, and consequently the world is under siege from both divine
and divine-diabolic opponents, from light and light-heat, spirit and
spirit-soul, the latter of which I have defined as 'good soul', in contrast to
the 'bad (alpha-stemming) soul' of old-brain heat. Similarly, 'bad spirit' was defined in terms
of an alpha-stemming spirit commensurate with the subconscious, which we can
identify with heat-light, a kind of diabolic-divine equivalence that stands at
an antithetical (Roman Catholic) remove from 'good spirit', as germane to the
omega-oriented superconscious. It is precisely Social Transcendentalism's
duty to further the light of lights, the good light of pure spirit.
210. The distinction between old-brain heat and
subconscious light, 'bad soul' and 'bad spirit', was maintained within the
context of traditional non-worldly Christianity by slavic Eastern Orthodoxy on the one hand and by latin Roman Catholicism on the other, with natural and
supernatural implications respectively.
Such a distinction was of course superseded, and to a certain extent
eclipsed in the Germanic parts of
211. If the above-mentioned traditional distinction
can be characterized on the basis of a quantitative ugliness/illusion dichotomy
and a qualitative hate/woe dichotomy, then the future distinction would be best
characterized on the basis of a quantitative beauty/truth dichotomy and a
qualitative love/joy dichotomy, as befitting the respective natures of heat and
light. And yet, how can the above
heat-to-light sequence be reconciled with the heat/heat-light/light-heat/light
sequence already referred to? Surely
there is a contradiction involved ... as between two conflicting sets of logic
(the one latitudinal, as it were, and the other longitudinal)? And, to be sure, there is indeed! Yet it is unavoidable, because a more
comprehensive view demands such a relative approach to the fundamental
heat/light dichotomy in question. We can
no more settle exclusively for one or other of the logical modes ... than
accord each of them equal validity. Both
are correct or, more accurately, applicable, and yet not to the same
degree! Essentially, the
illusion-to-truth/woe-to-joy dichotomies are truer of the light spectrum than
of the heat one or later light-heat part of it, and, similarly, the
ugliness-to-beauty/hate-to-love dichotomies are truer of the heat spectrum than
of the light one or earlier heat-light part of it. Consequently, one may speak of primary and
secondary attributes respectively, and if beauty and love are more
characteristic of the heat spectrum in its 'good soul' phase than of the light
spectrum in its 'bad spirit' phase, then illusion and sadness are likewise more
characteristic of the light spectrum in its 'bad spirit' phase than of the heat
spectrum in its 'good soul' phase. Such
beauty and love as accrue to heat-light and such illusion and sadness as accrue
to light-heat are merely secondary attributes, distinctly subordinate to the
primary attributes in each case.
212. In an age of military
defence, the police will go onto the offensive.
A country defended by the army will be liberated by the police.
213. When things are reduced to the body, as they
tend to be in a democracy, it is only natural that equality between man and man
will be stressed at the expense of any inequality between God and man. For bodies are more amenable to equalitarian
assessment than heads or, rather, heads in relation to bodies, which, by
contrast, tend to defy it. It was not by
mere chance that heads rolled with the French Revolution, that true inception
of democratic 'headlessness', and doubtless such
old-brain heads deserved to roll if republican equalitarianism was properly to
emerge in deference to democratic criteria.
But while the body, with particular reference to the flesh, was entitled
to its epoch and worldly triumph, evolution does not stand still but continues
toward a new, higher epoch in which the head once again asserts an ascendancy
over the body, this time on new-brain/superconscious
terms, so that Antichristic/Messianic dictatorships
accordingly arise to lead the masses towards a theocratic future, a future in
which not the world but the Devil and God stake their respective claims to
global hegemony and, hence, ultimate control of mankind's destiny. Such dictatorships, issuing from the head,
necessarily imply a new inequality between, for example, man and God, as
between the democratic masses and the transcendental Second Coming, and
consequently require popular subordination and obedience to the dictatorial
will, which, certainly in the divine context, may be regarded as One with the
Holy Spirit. Hence from an
alpha-stemming inequality between God the Father and man to an omega-oriented
inequality between man and the Holy Ghost via a worldly equality between man
and man - the path of human evolution from the old brain to the new brain via
the body. The resurrection of the head
in terms antithetical to its historical manifestation is commensurate with the
Resurrection as such, and, hence, with a return to divinely-inspired criteria.
214. God needs the Devil if the world is to be
successfully opposed. Only thus is the
Diabolic Omega justified ... from the viewpoint of the Divine Omega. Better the Devil than the world from God's
point of view; for God regards the Devil as a lesser manifestation of Himself,
heat rather than light, but still closer to Him than the world. After all, the body is quite distinct from
both. Whether the distinction is, as
traditionally, between old-brain naturalism and subconscious supernaturalism,
i.e. heat and heat-light, or, in contemporary terms, between new-brain idealism
and superconscious superidealism,
i.e. light-heat and light, the Diabolic and the Divine co-exist above and
beyond the force/motion world.
215. Strictly speaking, evolution is a journey from
heat to light, from protons to electrons via the force/motion world. We do not begin with light, despite
superficial appearances to the contrary, but end with it. Suns are primarily producers of heat, their
light tangential to their fiery essence.
Consequently light is subordinate to heat so long as alpha-stemming criteria
apply. Only in
the superconscious mind does light gain the
ascendancy over heat, and that because it is then a truly divine light which
shines internally in spiritual transcendence.
Such heat as exists is largely a by-product of this shining, subordinate
to the principal essence of the superconscious. Consequently we may speak of a progression
from external heat to internal light via heat-light and light-heat. Just as natural light
depends on the proton-proton production of heat through solar fission, so
supernatural, or divine-diabolic, heat is dependent on the electron-electron
induction of light through mental cohesion, i.e. contemplation. You cannot have the one without the other,
and the only way to improve the heat-feeling of the mind is to cultivate more
awareness, thereby ensuring that the feeling in question be raised above the
emotional level of the Diabolic to the truly spiritual level of the Divine - a
distinction, in other words, between love and bliss.
216. Those that are truly of the head, whether in
terms of brain or mind, will always be opposed to democracy, that 'headless'
ideal of the worldly mass. Only through
heat and light is the world transcended.
217. In relation to Western civilization, it is
customary to speak of the Dark Age which preceded the flowering of the Catholic
Middle Ages, and such darkness would correspond with force-materialism in
relation to heat-naturalism and/or heat-light supernaturalism, i.e. with the
bone-muscle body in relation to the old brain/subconscious. Yet the Catholic Middle
Ages were superseded by the Reformation and ensuing motion-realism of the Age
of Democracy, which would seem to correspond with a second Dark Age, when the
body once more triumphed, this time in the form of the flesh and its social
corollary of democratic equality. It is
precisely against this second darkness that the light-heat of Transcendental
Socialism and the light of Social Transcendentalism must struggle, if a return
to the head is to be globally effected and civilization duly resurrected on the
more idealistic terms of a new-brain/superconscious
allegiance. Thus we can see that it is
not heat or light which makes for a Dark Age but the body, and that the second
epoch of the body, conceived in the blood/flesh terms of democratic relativity,
constitutes a Dark Age against which all men of the head must struggle if there
is to be a New Light, far superior to the old one. For only in the True Light can humanity find
redemption and enter the '
218. In the beginning was
the philosophical Word, and the philosophical Word was God.
219. Man symbolizes truth, woman
beauty, and children goodness.
Surely a latin
point-of-view in relation to man symbolizing goodness, woman beauty, and
children truth?
220. The more a man
cultivates truth, the less he can have to do with beauty - at least in its
external manifestation.
221. From a lesser inner
light with more heat to a greater inner light with less heat - from the
Antichrist to the Second Coming.
222. The Antichrist is the divine-diabolic
equivalent of light-heat which is primarily against the worldly Christ of bodily
darkness.
223. There is a sense in which, considered
traditionally, the Antichrist has more to do with Protestant worldliness
against the divine Catholic Christ than with latter-day Communist opposition to
the world. For it could also be claimed
that such opposition signifies, through the figure of Lenin, a crude
manifestation of the Second Coming, as relative to the Slavic East.
224. Of all true Christian
peoples, the Catholic Irish were the ones most tried and tested by centuries of
worldly oppression ... in the form of British imperialism. No other Christian people have had to endure
such persistent discrimination and denigration for their religious allegiance
than the Catholic Irish, and consequently it is only fair that they should be
chosen as the people most entitled, in the short term, to receive and further
Social Transcendentalist salvation, both as a reward for their loyalty to the
truly divine Christ and in acknowledgement of the fact that such a people, so
thoroughly put to the test for their beliefs, are well-qualified to champion
the new and ultimate level of divinity in the face of foreign opposition. They should make apt Crusaders for the Holy
Ghost!
225. Opera stands to ballet as plays to novels: an
art form celebrating force rather than motion, autocratic as opposed to
democratic in character, the root materialism from which worldly realism has
grown. Passionate declarations, violent
gestures, strong facial expressions - do not operas and plays share these
autocratic qualities in common? Such
bodily art forms could only be taboo from a transcendental point-of-view, which
would be above all force/motion equivalents, including the sculptural.
226. Books on art stand to art as novels to life - a
depiction and account of it from a bourgeois and generally realistic
point-of-view.
227. Symphonies and concertos approximate to the
head rather than to the body, and may be accorded a parallel status with
traditional poetry and philosophy respectively.
Chamber music, particularly with regard to small ensembles, and sonatas
are essentially earlier, more inceptive manifestations of the symphonic and
concerto traditions - necessarily more individualistic and correspondingly less
collective in character, as befitting an old-brain/subconscious bias. They have their latter-day antithetical
equivalents in rock and jazz, which, by contrast, pertain to a new-brain/superconscious bias.
228. A 'head', or brain and/or mind person, is to
'bodily' people often a 'nut', which is their rather disparaging way of
recognizing and acknowledging the fact that he differs from them, that is to
say, from being primarily and essentially bodily. 'Bodies' don't have too many mental problems
or idiosyncrasies, as a rule. They are
easily regimented and inherently docile.
229. Men would not desire power over one another so
much, if women had no power over them.
230. In England, the
hammerer walks proud. Work involving the
hammer is a brute celebration of force, an inherently materialistic and
autocratic mode of self-assertion. If it
pre-eminently pertains to the Kingdom, it would have few sympathizers in the
Centre! Strength and Truth are
incommensurate, like alpha and omega.
231. Those who say one thing and do another are
bourgeois hypocrites, acknowledging the Holy Ghost but rooted in the Father,
incapable of matching thought with action.
232. Goodness is no more
equivalent to truth than ... truth to beauty, or vice versa. Those who imagine the contrary are simply
worldly fools who take the good as the yardstick of all virtue, and project
their ethical bent onto everything else, so that truth can only be conceived in
terms of goodness, i.e. the good act. A
gross Protestant delusion!
233. Those that are 'beyond good and evil' aren't
necessarily creatures of truth. Many are
simply creatures of ugliness or beauty, the Diabolic as opposed to the Divine.
234. Capitalism leads to the pleasure millennium;
Socialism to the love millennium; Centrism to the joy millennium. Nordic, Slavic, and Celtic
distinctions approximately paralleling the world, Devil, and God, with
implications for goodness, beauty, and truth respectively. Pleasure currently 'rules the roost', but the
ultimate victor will be joy!
235. There is no market for philosophy, which is as
it should be. For how can the Divine
have a market? Only the body has a
market, and in literature its market is the novel, that quintessentially
popular genre. But when one writes on
the plane of mind, with regard to the pursuit of truth, one is twice removed
from the popular orbit, at a Platonic remove, so to speak, from the body and
its worldly concerns. Small wonder,
then, if philosophy cannot be guaranteed a mass audience when the great
majority of people are predominantly creatures of the body rather than of the
head! Even the poet will be unable, as a
rule, to achieve market sales, given the fact that he is predominantly a
creature of the brain. The world
continues to spin on its own novelistic axis while heat and light circle above,
like sun and stars, at soulful and spiritual removes from it. One day the philosophers and poets, though
especially the former, will have a wider hearing, but not before the world has
been overcome and the people transmuted upward ... towards the head. Yet that will not mean that philosophy has
become a market proposition. On the
contrary, the market mentality will have been consigned to the rubbish heap of
history, along with the world and its novels, and the uniquely divine philosophy
I have in mind will be available to the People through the State or, rather,
Centre - disseminated by the Centre for the People, in line with the need for
and transcendental justification of theocratic leadership, all publishing
having become public. For God is only
guaranteed a wide audience when, in the guise of the Second Coming, he takes it
upon himself to establish his 'Kingdom of Heaven' on earth and, in doing so,
sweeps away the world and all worldly obstacles, including private publishing,
to the realization of his divine will.
There won't be a market in existence, but his truth will nevertheless
achieve a wider hearing.
236. State-subsidized literature, as in Russia, is a
step in the above-mentioned direction, a kind of Slavic approximation to and
equivalent of theocratic leadership.
Publishing has progressed from the sphere of the body (never
particularly relative to
237. State-subsidized poetry would most accord, in
my estimation, with a Socialist type of head society. Is it mere coincidence, I wonder, that the
best-known Russian writer in the West - namely Yevtoshenko
- happens to be a poet? No, I don't
think so. Russians make good poets, in a
manner of speaking.
238. Credit cards stand to money as cheques to gold
bullion, that is to say, as an idealistic extrapolation from and alternative to
actual currency. Gold, silver, and jewels
are rooted in and especially pertinent to autocratic materialism. Hard currency, whether in coins or notes, is
especially pertinent to democratic realism.
Cheques, by contrast, pertain to theocratic naturalism,
and credit cards to transcendental idealism.
Thus a distinction between two levels of the body, viz. materialistic
and realistic, and two levels of the head, viz. naturalistic and idealistic,
which, taken together, roughly correspond to Kingdom/State and Church/Centre
alternatives, with, in the first case, force/motion equivalents and, in the
second case, heat/light equivalents. Hence an evolutionary spectrum stretching from gold bullion and
cheques to currency and credit cards.
239. In an open society it follows that everything
will stem from the materialistic roots of value-exchange in gold, silver, gems,
etc., but in a divinely-biased closed society no such materialism would be
countenanced and, consequently, only credit cards or something analogous
(counters, vouchers) would apply. Even
currency, as we understand it, would cease to have any place, since too
pertinent to realism, and its democratic capitalist correlations, to be
relevant to an intensely idealistic society.
Once things systematically progress to the new-brain/superconscious
head, there can be no place for the body.
Coins and notes would be equally taboo.
240. In the strictest and
highest sense, God is truth, not beauty or goodness; joy, not love or
pleasure. Only an open-society type of
thinker like Simone Weil would equate all three attributes with the Divine, as
though God were a combination of truth, beauty, and goodness, like man, and
therefore embraced both the diabolic and the worldly in addition to what is
strictly divine! Naturally, it is not
uncharacteristic of people with a bias for the Beautiful to equate beauty with
the Divine. But such people, whether
motivated by cultural or ethnic factors or, indeed, a combination of both, are
simply projecting their own bias onto the Divine and unwittingly reducing God to
their own worldly or diabolic levels.
Such 'divinities' can only be adjudged false from a truly divine and,
hence, truthful standpoint. For God is
neither motion nor heat but light. Yet
to know that, one would have to be a bona fide idealist.
241. When there is neither force and motion nor heat
but only light - then the '
242. Only in the Centre, as advocated by the Social
Transcendentalist Messiah, can man know true salvation. All who are entitled to such a salvation must
come to the Centre if they wish to truly achieve it. Only Social Transcendentalism can give them
that option.
243. Clearly this is a work for some people/peoples
and not others, that the chosen people/peoples may have the opportunity of
heeding the call and achieving true salvation in and through Social
Transcendentalism, which is the resurrection of the spirit and the flesh - the
former in Transcendentalism and the latter in Socialism or, more correctly, the
redeemed and transmuted Socialism which is the 'social' aspect of Social
Transcendentalism, true enemy of Protestant Christianity and Capitalism.
244. The old spirit and
flesh must be defeated if the new spirit and flesh are to prevail, as they must
do if the Resurrection is to become more than just a pious hope of the faithful
millions, but an established fact, paving the way for ultimate salvation in
heavenly bliss. Yet the true fight will
not be easy for those who struggle against the world on behalf of God. And the true fight should not be confused
with the beautiful fight for love or the good fight for pleasure - those diabolical
and worldly alternatives which already exist but must ultimately be eclipsed by
the divine fight for joy. The true fight
is neither a matter of championing worldly individualism nor diabolic
collectivism, but, more importantly, of championing divine transcendentalism,
the joyful realization of which can only be properly achieved by the individual
in the collective, not by either individualism or collectivism alone! Such transcendentalism is the goal and raison
d'être of the true fight, and those who struggle on its behalf are One with
the Holy Spirit and of the Saved. Truly,
they shall inherit the earth!
Preview FROM MATERIALISM TO IDEALISM eBook
