Philosophical Truth

PHILOSOPHICAL TRUTH

Supernotational Philosophy

____________

1. Perceptual and conceptual, appearances and essences, extrovert and introvert, imagination and intuition, protons and electrons, alpha and omega, external and internal, centrifugal and centripetal, dreams and thoughts, films and meditations, etc., etc. A duality that applies as much to the new brain as to the old one. For the brain is of course divisible into 'new' (cerebrum) and 'old' (cerebellum), and it is my belief that whereas everything naturalistic appertains to the old brain, that which is supernatualistic, or artificial, appertains to the new brain. Thus we can speak of an alpha/omega dichotomy in both the old and the new brains, with, for example, dreams and thoughts appertaining to the former but films and meditations to the latter. Furthermore, it seems to me that if alpha is perceptual and omega conceptual, then alpha is immoral and omega moral, since the one is apparent and the other essential, as relative to protons and electrons, imagination and intuition, centrifugal and centripetal, etc. Whether alpha is absolutely immoral or relatively immoral will depend on the brain to which it pertains, i.e. 'old' or 'new', and we may believe that it will be absolutely immoral (alpha) in the former case, but relatively immoral (alpha-in-the-omega) in the latter case. Likewise, whether omega is relatively moral or absolutely moral will depend on the brain to which it pertains, i.e. 'old' or 'new', and again we may believe that it will be relatively immoral in the former case (omega-in-the-alpha), but absolutely moral in the latter case (omega). Now if dreams, appertaining to the old brain, are absolutely immoral (perceptual) in relation to films, which, so I argue, appertain to the new brain, then thoughts, appertaining to the old brain, will be relatively moral (conceptual) in relation to meditation, which, so I contend, appertains to the new brain. But in between dreams and thoughts we shall find the relatively negative and positive amoral equivalents (protons/electrons) ... of fantasies and books, whereas in between films and meditation we shall find the relatively negative and positive amoral equivalents (protons/electrons) of videos and word processors. However, in between fantasies and books (or the reading thereof) we shall find the absolutely negative and positive amoral equivalents (dynamic neutrons) of seeing and speaking, whereas in between videos and word processors (or the reading thereof via VDU) we shall find the absolutely negative and positive amoral equivalents (dynamic neutrons) of cameras and talking computers. Finally, in between seeing and speaking we shall find the absolute amoral equivalent (static neutrons) of natural visionary experience, whereas in between cameras and talking computers we shall find the absolute amoral equivalent (static neutrons) of trips, or artificial visionary experience. Thus in the naturalistic context of the old brain we shall find the following: dreams - fantasies - seeing - visions - talking - book reading - thinking, with dreams and thinking immoral alpha and moral omega, but fantasies and reading, seeing and talking, and visions pertaining to different degrees and kinds of old-brain amorality. Likewise in the supernatural context of the new brain we shall find the following: films - videos - cameras - trips - speaking computers - WP reading - meditation, with films and meditation immoral alpha and moral omega, but videos and WP reading, cameras and speaking computers, and trips pertaining to different degrees and kinds of new-brain amorality. The old brain context is naturalistic, the new brain context supernaturalistic (artificial). Alpha is perceptual, omega conceptual. The perceptual precedes the conceptual. The VDU screen leads to meditation just as surely as the Bible (books) leads to prayer (a religious form of thought). But before the conceptual can arise on either level (or in either brain), the perceptual must have its day, with videos superseding cinema films just as surely as fantasies supersede dreams.

2. Where, formerly, I was disposed to regarding Fascism and Communism in terms of a new-brain alpha/omega dichotomy, I can now (and I believe correctly) perceive Fascism - and especially Nazism - in terms of an old-brain omega, but Communism in terms of a new-brain alpha, which is to say, as natural conceptual verses artificial perceptual, the book verses the film, the 'broken cross' (for Nazism was, after all, an extreme form of conceptual ideology) verses the star, 'the bourgeoisie in arms' verses the proletariat, a warped 'good' (omega) verses a straight 'bad' (alpha), and for that very reason a doomed cause, insofar as the 'March of History' demands that the new-brain alpha supersedes the old-brain omega. However, if Fascism could never ultimately triumph over Communism, the probability of Social Transcendentalism doing so, or at any rate triumphing over Communism's democratic successor (about which more in due course), can only be much greater, insofar as I envisage this as the ultimate conceptual ideology, the ultimate ideology, and thus one that, appertaining to the new-brain omega, is as much beyond Communism as Fascism was before it, the supercross verses the star, the computer disc verses the film, the civilized proletariat verses the barbarous proletariat, a supergood verses a super-evil, conceptual morality verses perceptual immorality, the goal of all historical striving. No, Fascism was not alpha but very much a 'bent' omega, a petty-bourgeois extremism which reacted against the political barbarism of the star, a star-like cross which overlapped with Socialism while remaining fundamentally capitalist. For Capitalism is a bourgeois (naturalistic) omega, a relatively moral, because centralized and individualized, mode of economics, whereas Socialism, particularly in its mass-participatory manifestation of literal worker ownership of the means of production, is a proletarian (artificial) alpha, a relatively immoral, because decentralized and collectivized, mode of economics.

3. Whereas we used to think that Socialism automatically led to Communism, we now know that while Communism is beyond democratic socialism, the 'theocratic' socialism of a social democracy lies beyond Communism. Socialism is democratic, Communism totalitarian, and while democratic socialism can only exist within the liberal framework of a capitalist democracy, 'theocratic' socialism, its proletarian equivalent, will only exist within the socialist framework of a social democracy, or a democracy in which a variety of proletarian parties are in socialistic contention beyond the totalitarian bounds of Communism or, more correctly, Bolshevism. Thus a social democracy can only be socialist, whereas a liberal democracy will be capitalist - the difference, in short, between bourgeois and proletarian forms of pluralism. It is good that autocratic Bolshevism (Stalinism) should, as a new-brain alpha, have been superseded by social democracy. But such supersession can only be sustained on the basis of socialist economics, not by any compromise with Capitalism which, by contrast, would signify a regression from 'Communism' rather than a progression beyond it. However, if democratic socialism, pertaining to a bourgeois democracy, is anterior to totalitarian communism, and social democracy, pertaining to a proletarian democracy, posterior to it, then the only thing that lies beyond social democracy is ... social theocracy, or the democratic acceptance by the proletariat of religious sovereignty, the ultimate mode of sovereignty, which will bring about the 'Kingdom of Heaven' and thus salvation from 'the World', i.e. democratic sovereignty and its judicial and economic concomitants. Such religious sovereignty will effectively mean that the proletariat have rights appertaining to their spiritual self-realization, the right to artificial visionary experience and regular meditation in specially-built meditation centres not least among them, and these religious rights would have taken the place of such political rights as appertained to democratic republicanism. For all such political rights, not to mention their judicial and economic concomitants, would have to devolve upon the Social Transcendentalist Centre through its Messianic figurehead, in order that the proletariat could be saved from them ('sins of the world') and be all the more credibly divine (as ultimate Godhead) in consequence. Only the political Centre, through its chief figurehead, would then be politically sovereign, and it would be the duty of this political Centre to serve the religious sovereignty of the proletariat, like Moses outside the Promised Land or Christ bearing 'sins of the world', in their spiritual interests. Hence an ultimate totalitarianism which will be the logical successor to republican democracy, a sort of supertheocratic dictatorship designed to lead and encourage the People out of the 'darkness' of the world and into the 'light' of Heaven.

4. Speaking atomically, one could say that, within the old-brain context, dreams correspond to proton wavicles, thoughts to electron wavicles; fantasies correspond to proton particles, book reading to electron particles; seeing corresponds to proton-biased neutron particles, talking to electron-biased neutron particles; visions correspond to neutron wavicles. Likewise, within the new-brain context, it could be said that films correspond to proton wavicles, meditation to electron wavicles; videos correspond to proton particles, VDU-reading to electron particles; cameras correspond to proton-biased neutron particles, voice computers to electron-biased neutron particles; LSD trips correspond to neutron wavicles. Hence, within the contexts of both the old and new brains, we find devolution, on the one hand, from proton wavicles to neutrons via proton particles and proton-biased neutron particles, and an evolution, on the other hand, from neutrons to electron wavicles via electron-biased neutron particles and electron particles. A devolution from negative divine immorality, whether absolute or relative (depending on the brain context in question) to worldly amorality via negative diabolic immorality and negative purgatorial amorality on the one hand, and an evolution from worldly amorality to positive divine morality via positive purgatorial amorality and positive diabolic immorality on the other hand.

5. Rather than 'In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was God', it should be said that 'In the End was the Word and the Word was Truth (the Idea). For 'in the beginning' was the Dream, and the Dream was God or, depending on your point of view, Strength (the Almighty).

6. Music is the most conceptual of the Arts, which is to say, the most idealistic, whereas painting is the most perceptual of the Arts, which is to say, the most naturalistic. In between these naturalistic and idealistic extremes, corresponding to alpha and omega, one finds the realistic and materialistic arts of literature and sculpture respectively - the former conceptual and the latter perceptual. Put theologically, one could say that music is the divine art, painting the diabolic art, sculpture the purgatorial art, and literature the worldly art, given their correspondences to idealism, naturalism, materialism, and realism respectively, or, in elemental terms, to air, fire, water, and earth. Thus music and literature would be as far apart as earth and air, or the world and heaven, whereas painting and sculpture would be akin to fire and water, or hell and purgatory, and therefore come in-between the other two arts when considered in terms of a vertical, or elemental, hierarchy. In Spenglerian parlance, painting would correspond to 'Historyless Chaos', literature to 'the Culture', sculpture to 'the Civilization', and music to 'Second Religiousness', assuming a chronologically historical progression, as it were, from naturalism to idealism via realism and materialism. Thus music is not only the most idealistic art form, it is the ultimate and final art form, towards which history would seem to tend. And music is never more idealistic than when highly or even absolutely conceptual, which is to say, when rhythm triumphs over pitch to a degree which puts it beyond any melodic/harmonic compromise ... in an intensely rhythmic purism. For in music, pitch corresponds to the perceptual (is perceptible as notes on scores), whereas rhythm corresponds to the conceptual (the duration of notes), and the more conceptual and, hence, essential the society, the less pitch and the more rhythm will there be. The most evolved music, which can only be of the Holy Spirit, will be the most rhythmic (though not necessarily the most percussive), and thus of a degree of centripetal idealism which is positively divine. In the twentieth-century cleavage between rhythm and pitch, which typified the retreat from 'liberal' melodic/harmonic civilization, rhythm was of the omega and pitch of the alpha, the one effectively centripetal and thus of the Saved, while the other was effectively centrifugal and thus of the Damned - a cleavage between theocracy and autocracy, electrons and protons, introvert and extrovert, conceptual and perceptual, idealism and naturalism, the Holy Spirit and the Father, profound and superficial, etc., etc. Melody, corresponding to materialism, and harmony, corresponding to realism, are akin to Christ and the Blessed Virgin within the vertical axis of 'liberal', or Western, civilization, and thus will be flanked by the naturalism of pitch and the idealism of rhythm, as Christ is flanked by the Father and the Holy Spirit within the Blessed Trinity. Thus whereas pitch is a proton equivalent and rhythm, by contrast, an electron equivalent, melody reflects a proton/electron compromise, while harmony is a neutron equivalent. In fact, harmony is inherently feminine and therefore supportive, traditionally, of masculine melody ... as the Blessed Virgin was (and remains) supportive of Christ. Only pitch and rhythm, corresponding to the horizontal axis, as it were, of a sort of Judeo-Eastern civilization (see diagram),

PITCH/MELODY/RHYTHM

(naturalism)(materialism)(idealism)

HARMONY

(realism)

are mutually exclusive or, depending on your point of view, absolutely antagonistic. For the more of the one the less there can be of the other, and in the end rhythm must triumph over pitch if music is to attain to an ultimate salvation in the most divine idealism. Verily, the omega supercross (of rhythm) must triumph over the alpha star (of pitch) and transcend both the purgatorial cross (of melody) and the worldly star (of harmony), if the 'Kingdom of Heaven' is to come to pass in musical no less than all other terms!

7. Anyone familiar with both alpha and omega music, or pitch-oriented and rhythmic alternatives, will know that whereas the former constrains one to idolatrous worship and reverential self-transcendence, the latter, by contrast, sets one free to realize the self in some degree or kind of 'groovy' self-indulgence. Thus whereas the one is autocratic, the other can only be theocratic, and there will be all the difference in the world, or perhaps I should say above it, between these two kinds of music. Whether one transcends the self through idolatrous worship of some great pitch-oriented composition, or realizes the self through 'groovy' response to some great rhythmic composition, will depend upon whether one is disposed to alpha or to omega, autocracy or theocracy, the Father or the Holy Ghost, and is thus of the naturalistic centrifugal or of the idealistic centripetal. Evolution is on the latter's side, but the former still exists in all 'open societies', where the worship of pitch-oriented compositions will have especial appeal to those who, as autocrats, are accustomed to selflessly imposing themselves upon others, and who can only relate to self-transcendence in consequence.

8. Autocratic pitch-oriented virtuoso at a grand piano in, say, some concerto or jazz context. Democratic melodic/harmonic pianist at an upright piano in, say, some pop or rock context. Theocratic rhythmic pianist at an electric piano in, say, some soul or funk context. Perceptual-perceptual/conceptual-conceptual distinctions which range right across the musical spectrum. Additionally, one could argue that a harmonic pianist at a baby grand in some folk or pop context would correspond to a Catholic equivalent, and that the upright piano should be confined to rock or punk contexts in which melody predominates over harmony in typically Protestant fashion (see diagram 1).

GRAND PIANO/UPRIGHT/ELECTRIC PIANO

(Father)(Christ)(Holy Spirit)

BABY GRAND

(Virgin Mary)

Thus whereas the harmonic pianist would be realistic and the melodic pianist materialistic, the pitch-oriented pianist would be naturalistic and the rhythmic pianist idealistic. An inharmonious type of 'harmonic' playing on the baby grand would be liberal as opposed to Catholic, whereas an unmelodic type of 'melodic' playing on an upright piano would be republican as opposed to Protestant. In the former case, pop as opposed to folk. In the latter case, punk as opposed to rock. Likewise it could be argued that when pitch-oriented virtuoso playing is less regularly scalar (and thus perceptual) than in concerto playing, it is jazz, which is a sort of decadent 'classical', whereas when rhythmic playing is less soulful (and thus conceptual) than in soul, it is funk, which is a kind of decadent soul music, a rhythmic music that has lost its soul and become soulless (see diagram 2).

CONCERTO/JAZZ(ROCK/PUNK)SOUL/FUNK

FOLK/POP

In this respect, funk stands to soul as word processing to teletext, which is to say, as a kind of particle rather than wavicle omega equivalent within the artificial terms of their respective contexts. Now what applies to funk in relation to soul applies just as much to each of the other pairs, viz. jazz in relation to classical, punk in relation to rock, and pop in relation to folk, which are likewise particle 'falls' from the wavicle ideal. In terms of the cross and the star, it should follow that whereas the full-sized grand piano and classical/jazz will correspond to the superstar (alpha), the baby grand and folk/pop will correspond to the star (alpha-in-the-omega), the upright piano and rock/punk to the cross (omega-in-the-alpha), and the electric piano and soul/funk to the supercross (omega), as in diagram 3.

SUPERSTAR/CROSS/SUPERCROSS

(Classical)(Rock)(Soul)

STAR

(Folk)

Although, strictly speaking, religious references should be confined to classical, folk, rock, and soul, considering that jazz, pop, punk, and funk correspond to particle falls as opposed to wavicle ideals, and are thus effectively secular and political, as applying to Communism, Liberalism, Republicanism, and Fascism respectively (see diagram 4):-

COMMUNISM/REPUBLICANISM/FASCISM

(jazz)(punk)(funk)

LIBERALISM

(pop)

in contrast to the religious alternatives of Marxism, Catholicism, Protestantism, and Nietzscheanism (see diagram 5):-

MARXISM/PROTESTANTISM/NIETZSCHEANISM

(concerto)(rock)(soul)

CATHOLICISM

(folk)

with their musical correspondences, as described above.

9. Socialism is of the star, whereas Capitalism, by contrast, is of the cross, insofar as the former is public and decentralized vis-à-vis the collective, but the latter is private and centralized vis-à-vis the individual. Socialism is alpha but Capitalism omega, and whereas both Communism and Liberalism are socialistic, Republicanism and Fascism are capitalistic. Superstar (alpha) and star (alpha-in-the-omega) on the one hand, cross (omega-in-the-alpha) and supercross (omega) on the other hand. Or, rather, super-antistar and antistar on the one hand, (for here we are dealing with the political, and hence secular, falls from religion), anticross and super-anticross on the other hand. For, in reality, Marxism (a paternalistic religious creed) is of the superstar and Catholicism (centred in the Virgin Mary) of the star. Protestantism is of the cross (centred in Christ) and Social Transcendentalism of the supercross (centred in the Holy Spirit).

10. Impossible not to see a connection between pro-filmic literature, by which I mean novels or other prose works of a strongly narrative bent, and trad jazz, conceiving of the latter as in some sense pro-electronic ... to the extent that it reflects a strongly rhythmic bias within a largely acoustic, and hence traditional, musical framework. Thus a direct parallel between jazz and the popular novel, as, on higher terms, between, say, rock and film.

11. Realistic law, materialistic economics, naturalistic politics, and idealistic religion. Earth, water, fire, and air equivalents, with worldly, purgatorial, diabolic, and divine connotations respectively. No less than religion is a thing of God ... it can be said that politics is a thing of the Devil. Law and economics, by contrast, are of the world and purgatory respectively, having feminine and masculine connotations along a sort of Catholic/Protestant or, more correctly, Liberal/Republican axis ... such that, in terms of our T-like framework, would accord with the vertical rather than the horizontal bar, as follows:-

POLITICS/ECONOMICS/RELIGION

LAW

with politics and religion more alpha and omega than anything else. Thus whereas law is dark (earth) and economics cold (water), politics is hot (fire) and religion light (air). In terms of their relationship to the arts, law and literature would be no less hand-in-glove than economics and sculpture, whereas politics and painting would be no less hand-in-glove than religion and music. For literature is the realistic art form par excellence, sculpture the materialistic art form par excellence, painting the naturalistic art form par excellence, and music the idealistic art form par excellence.

12. Now that the autocratic star is crumbling towards worldly or, rather, superworldly democracy ... in a majority of those countries formerly under its centrifugal sway, the ground will soon be ripe for the planting of the supercross, in order that the People may be led towards the divine blossoming of a religious sovereignty, and thus achieve Superchristic salvation (from the world/superworld) in the interests of their spiritual betterment.

13. The sign of the Messiah is the supercross (Y), which is intended to eclipse the star. The political or, rather, politico-religious ideology of the supercross is Social Transcendentalism - a supra-national ideology which derives its inspiration from Nietzsche's idea that 'man is something that should be overcome' ... in the interests of 'the Superman' ... 'the meaning of the earth', etc., and points towards the possibility of a post-Human Millennium. It is as a champion of the notion of religious sovereignty in the masses ... that Social Transcendentalism stakes and, in my view, justifies its claim to be the true religion of 'Kingdom Come', a religion so intensely ideological and omega orientated ... as to be in an idealistic class of its own. Only through Social Transcendentalism can the People achieve salvation - a condition of religious sovereignty in a 'Kingdom of Heaven' which has its origin and powerbase here on earth.

14. Speaking is realistic, writing materialistic, reading naturalistic, and thinking idealistic - an elemental progression, as it were, from earth to air via water and fire. It could be said that one talks in order to write, one writes in order to be read, and one reads in order to think. Speaking, being bodily in relation to writing, is of the will; writing, being of the brain in relation to reading, is of the intellect; reading, being of the mind in relation to thinking, is of the soul; and thinking, being of the mind in relation to itself, is of the spirit. Although all four activities are effectively of the cross instead of the star, since on the omega-oriented side of life, each of them pertains to the old brain and is accordingly naturalistic, forming positive amoral and moral conceptual contrasts to seeing, hallucinating, fantasizing, and dreaming respectively. For just as seeing and talking are antithetical on a perceptual/conceptual basis, so are hallucinating and writing, fantasizing and reading, dreaming and thinking, with worldly, purgatorial, diabolic, and divine implications. Treating each context in the T-like framework to which we have grown accustomed, we shall find the following:-

READING/WRITING/THINKING

TALKING

FANTASIZING/HALLUCINATING/DREAMING

SEEING

with seeing and talking antithetical in their equivalent realistic (earth) positions, hallucinating and writing antithetical in their equivalent materialistic (water) positions, fantasizing and reading antithetical in their equivalent naturalistic (fire) positions, and dreaming and thinking antithetical in their equivalent idealistic (air) positions, as between alpha (perceptual) and omega (conceptual) manifestations of the world, purgatory, hell, and heaven. Realism is statically amoral (neutron), materialism is dynamically amoral (proton/electron), naturalism is immoral, both negatively and positively, and idealism is moral, both negatively and positively, which is to say, in relation to alpha and to omega.

15. Marxist idealism, Communist naturalism, Socialist materialism, and Liberal realism - an alpha-stemming devolutionary regression from the divine to the worldly (superworldly in the context of social democracy) via the diabolic and the purgatorial, as from religion (theocracy) and politics (autocracy) to economics (bureaucracy) and law (democracy). Conversely, Capital Democratic realism, Capitalist materialism, Fascist naturalism, and Nietzschean idealism - an omega-oriented evolutionary progression from the worldly (superworldly in the context of capitalist democracy) to the divine via the purgatorial and the diabolic, as from law (democracy) and economics (bureaucracy) to politics (autocracy) and ideology (theocracy). Hence:-

COMMUNISM/SOCIALISM/MARXISM

SOCIAL DEMOCRACY

FASCISM/CAPITALISM/NIETZSCHEANISM

CAPITAL DEMOCRACY

with perceptual (alpha) and conceptual (omega) implications between the two contexts, divisible, as they are, into the fourfold antitheses of Social Democracy and Capital Democracy, Socialism and Capitalism, Communism and Fascism, and Marxism and Nietzscheanism, in accordance with realistic, materialistic, naturalistic, and idealistic alternatives broadly within the context of the new brain. Thus a particle/wavicle distinction between the perceptual, which is public, and the conceptual, which is private - collectivism and individualism in alpha/omega confrontation. Actually the divine dichotomy is rather more within the context of an old-brain/new-brain distinction, with omega and alpha implications. For while Capital Democracy, Capitalism, Fascism and Nietzcheanism may all be conceptual, and thus pertain to the wavicle aspect of a continuum which is both private and individualistic, they are decidedly naturalistic, and therefore of the old brain in a kind of anterior rather than posterior moral relation to Social Democracy, Socialism, Communism, and Marxism, which, by contrast, are effectively super-alpha. The super-omega alternative to the latter has still to come, but when it does it will have a superconceptual status pertaining to the supercross, and will ascend from a superworldly basis in Social Democracy to a superdivine culmination in Loughlinism via superpurgatorial Centrist and superdiabolic Social Transcendentalist stages, as in the following diagram:-

SOCIAL TRANSCENDENTALISM/CENTRISM/LOUGHLINISM

SOCIAL DEMOCRACY

where Social Democracy is the pluralist context which permits the politically sovereign People to vote for religious sovereignty (and thus effectively put an end to democracy), Centrism is the economic framework whereby the means of production are transferred, by the sovereign People, to the trusteeship of the Centre, Social Transcendentalism is the politico-religious manifestation of the ideology of 'Kingdom Come', and Loughlinism is the ideological inspiration and fount from which Social Transcendentalism draws its justification as the means through which the People may be lead to salvation from the world ... of Social Democracy, the democracy in which Social Transcendentalism was permitted to exist and appeal to the People, in the name of the Second Coming, to vote for religious sovereignty and thus, by implication, put an end to the democratic pluralism of Social Democracy in the interests of the supertheocratic totalitarianism of Social Transcendentalism and the coming to pass of the 'Kingdom of Heaven' on earth.

16. Where, formerly, I was inclined to see rhythm and pitch in alpha/omega terms, or even in omega/alpha terms (if my most recent thoughts on the subject of music are anything to judge by), I now see them as both alpha and omega or, depending on your standpoint, as neither alpha nor omega specifically, but parallel quantities which can be either alpha or omega, immoral or moral, depending on the context, which is to say on whether the rhythm/pitch is outer and centrifugal or inner and centripetal, apparent or essential. If outer, then we are talking of reactive musical techniques and instruments. If inner, we are talking, by contrast, of attractive musical techniques and instruments. In the former case, for example, drums and guitars; in the latter case, electronic percussion and keyboards.... Though here, as elsewhere, a distinction between old- and new-brain alpha/omega divisions has to be borne in mind, so that the outer/inner dichotomy is perceived as being either absolute or relative, depending on the musical context. Clearly, while drums are of the new brain, hand percussion, being more naturalistic, is their old-brain counterpart, an absolute outer which forms an alpha pole to music boxes, in which rhythm and pitch are inner to the extent and in the sense that they stem from the internal workings of the music box and are relatively essential, not perceptible to the eyes, like the manipulation of hand percussion, but contained in and surrounded by the music box, which is to the old brain what drum machines are to the new one - an inner alternative to the outer, and thus effectively a moral pole to it which, certainly in the case of drum machines, indicates an absolutely inner, or moral, mode of percussive instrumentation suitable to a centripetal, and hence attractive, musical bias commensurate with theocratic as opposed to autocratic criteria. For in this distinction between the 'outer' and the 'inner' we have an autocratic/theocratic dichotomy, germane to alpha and omega, which pertains to opposite types of music - the former reactive and the latter attractive, the former centrifugal and the latter centripetal, as, for example, between jazz and soul. Only when outer and inner instruments/music are combined in the same musical group/format, can we speak of a sort of democratic cross between the two extremes. For democracy is effectively a middle ground in between autocratic and theocratic extremes - a pluralistic relativity in between totalitarian absolutes, and when, for example, drums and drum machines, or guitars and violins, or xylophones and pianos, or even saxophones and electronic wind instruments are found together in the same band, it seems to me that one has a democratic state-of-affairs existing in-between the above-mentioned extremes which, while morally and ideologically preferable to the autocratic, is inferior, as the world vis-à-vis heaven, to the theocratic, i.e. to a context in which only the inner instruments/musical techniques exist on both rhythmic and pitch-oriented terms, in deference to a more enlightened, and hence moral, age - an age of centripetal attractiveness. Thus while bands that embrace keyboards, drum machines, violins, etc., in addition to reactive instruments, will be ideologically preferable to those which are rooted in an effectively autocratic format of guitars, drums, vocals, with perhaps an alpha-stemming wind instrument like the saxophone or an alpha-stemming keyboard instrument like the xylophone thrown in for good measure, they can only be ideologically inferior to bands which exclude the reactive instruments altogether, in fidelity to an omega-oriented centripetal absolute which avails itself of violins, keyboards, drum machines, synthesized wind instruments, in pursuit of a more attractive and interiorized kind of music. Such music, it has to be said, was rather the exception to the rule in the late-twentieth century, but it is the only way forwards from democratic compromise, and should eventually come into its own as theocratic criteria begin to supersede both democratic and autocratic norms in the interests of heavenly salvation. It will also have to come into its own on increasingly idealistic and divine-oriented terms, which will slough off the lower attractive instrument families, including violins and keyboards, in favour of synthesizers, synthesized wind instruments, and other such higher attractive instruments germane to a moral-biased naturalistic and/or idealistic (though preferably idealistic) society. Doubtless, drum machines will have a significant role to play in this ultimate music, the funky soul of the future. But (contrary to what I wrote earlier) rhythm is arguably more naturalistic than idealistic, and in a truly idealistic society the emphasis could only be on pitch, since pitch is a wavicle equivalent commensurate with individualism, and in a society stressing spiritual self-realization, pitch could only take precedence, for ideological purposes, over rhythm, especially when percussive, that particle equivalent more suited to political collectivism, and hence diabolic naturalism, than to divine idealism. Again, one is made conscious of a sort of Social Transcendentalist/Loughlinist distinction between the political and religious sides of the ultimate ideology, which contrasts absolutely with Marxism/Communism, the religious and political sides of the alpha-stemming ideology, whose music, whether pitch- or rhythm-orientated, could only be reactive and centrifugal, as befitting its autocratic essence. But the star, fortunately, is being eclipsed by superworldly democracy, and one day even that will be superseded by the supercross, as supertheocracy lays claim to the World in the name of divine salvation and the establishment, thereby, of the omega 'Kingdom of Heaven', wherein only the attractive will prevail.

17. An autocratic band, a band under the star, will be one in which bass, guitar, and drums hold sway to the accompaniment, more usually, of vocals. A theocratic band, a band of the supercross, will be one in which drum machines, synthesizers, and electric wind instruments of a centripetal design hold sway to the accompaniment, it may be, of synthesized vocals. A democratic band, or a band in between the star and the supercross, will be one in which a combination of reactive and attractive, or autocratic and theocratic, instruments holds sway to the accompaniment, more usually, of vocals, whether straight or synthesized. Alpha - world - omega, with outer - outer/inner - inner rhythmic/pitch implications respectively. Additionally, one must allow for the bureaucratic possibility of 'harmonic' instrumentals involving a variety of 'bodily' instruments, including guitars and violins, in a context which is a kind of worldly inner of folk/pop instrumentation in which finger-picking/string-plucking, rather than strumming/bowing, is the technical norm. Again, in terms of our T-like design, we would have something as follows:-

AUTOCRATIC/DEMOCRATIC/THEOCRATIC

(jazz)(rock)(soul)

BUREAUCRATIC

(pop)

which, in theological terms, amounts to:-

FATHER/SON/HOLY GHOST

(protons)(protons/electrons)(electrons)

VIRGIN MARY

(neutrons)

though this is, of course, a generalization which currently overlooks particle/wavicle distinctions between one type of music and another within any given ideological context. It also tends to concentrate on the new brain and, by implication, electric instruments rather than on the old brain and its acoustic instrumental parallels.

18. Like rhythm and pitch, collectivism and individualism are less alpha and omega polarities than parallel alternatives which can be either alpha or omega, centrifugal or centripetal. Royalism is a naturalistic outer form of collectivism, Fascism a naturalistic inner form of collectivism - alpha and omega of the old brain. Communism is an artificial outer form of collectivism, Social Transcendentalism an artificial inner form of collectivism - alpha and omega of the new brain. Paganism is a naturalistic outer form of individualism, Christianity a naturalistic inner form of individualism - alpha and omega of the old brain. Marxism is an artificial outer form of individualism, Loughlinism an artificial inner form of individualism - alpha and omega of the new brain. Individualism is no less superior to collectivism than religion to politics or, put metaphysically, wavicles to particles, and this is so whether we are referring to alpha or omega (in whatever brain) or, indeed, to some 'democratic' cross between the two. Royalism and Paganism are alike tribal, Fascism and Christianity alike nationalist; Marxism and Communism are alike internationalist, Loughlinism and Social Transcendentalism alike supra-nationalist. However, it could also be said that terms like tribalism, nationalism, internationalism and supra-nationalism are essentially collectivist and accordingly have more applicability to the collectivity than to the individual, since they concern society and the nature, whether outer or inner, of society, which in turn conditions the individualism of its individual members. For one can no more completely separate the individual from society than society from the individual. Societies are composed of individuals, but individuals are also the products of the society in which they live, and their individualism is coloured thereby. As unlikely that prayerful individualism could flourish in a pagan society as meditative individualism in a Marxist one. Only the outer individualism of dreams and films respectively, in accordance with the perceptual criteria of the outer, could be expected to flourish there. Likewise collectives will be perceptual or conceptual depending on whether the alpha or omega type of collectivism prevails - perceptual in Royalist and Communist contexts, conceptual in Fascist and Social Transcendentalist contexts ... where the word will take precedence over the visual image in the preservation of collective cohesion. Thus from art to the printed word (book) in the old-brain context of Royalism/Fascism, and from photography to the VDU word (computer disc) in the new-brain context of Communism/Social Transcendentalism. Through such media the collective psyche of society is forged, but the collective psyche of society will be of little avail unless supplemented by the individualized psyche of the individual, and wavicles accordingly eclipse particles in the achievement of culture: self-transcendently in the outer contexts of dreams and films, self-realizingly in the inner contexts of prayer and meditation - alpha barbarism and omega civilization of the old and the new brains respectively.

19. If nationalism is bourgeois and internationalism proletarian, then supra-nationalism is proletarian in a civilized, and hence centripetal, rather than a barbarous, and hence centrifugal, way - the way of unity between proletarian peoples of different ethnic or cultural traditions. It is for this reason that nationalist struggles by peoples who reject the federal unity of the broadly proletarian states against which they are in revolt constitute a reactionary tendency compatible with bourgeois criteria. Proletarian progress cannot come from reactionary nationalist backslidings, but only from greater regional autonomy within the federal framework of the supra-national State. Thus it is with a view to granting as much regional autonomy as is commensurate with the maintenance of the supra-national integrity of the proletarian State that the prevailing governments should dedicate themselves - difficult though this may be in the face of countervailing reactionary currents which, in the guise of bourgeois nationalism, threaten the integrity in question. A difficult balancing act, but one that must succeed if the worst is not to come to the worst and proletarian progress be rendered impossible.

20. Socialism is collective ownership of the means of production by the People (or persons of any given factory, office, shop, etc.) rather than individual ownership in the interests of the individual capitalist, who makes private profits in consequence. A mixed economy between the private and the public would fall as short of Socialism as a mixed political pluralism between capitalist and socialist parties inevitably falls short of Social Democracy. Like Social Democracy, Socialism has to do with the proletariat, who own the means of production. If at first this was done, in the name of the proletariat, through state bureaucracy, which effectively functioned as an autocracy, it must subsequently be done through the proletariat themselves in accordance with a progression from 'Bolshevik vanguardism' and state control to Social Democracy and the assumption of economic responsibility by the proletariat. For in taking economic, together with political and judicial, power upon themselves the proletariat are then in a position whereby they, and they alone, can opt to fob off such 'sins of the world' upon the Messiah (or his chosen representatives) in return for religious sovereignty, and hence salvation from their 'sins'. Unless they acquire power in all contexts, the proletariat will simply not be in a position to make the historic move from democracy to theocracy, when the possibility of such a move finally presents itself. They will be under the heel of 'vanguard autocracy', and while that autocracy may have been historically necessary and beneficial to the proletariat in the struggle against bourgeois and aristocratic precedent, its perpetuation could only be an obstacle to the achievement, by the proletariat themselves, of the democratic power which is the precondition of theocratic salvation. For while there is no contiguity between alpha autocracy and omega theocracy, there is certainly contiguity, and thus the possibility of progress, between worldly democracy and omega theocracy, the latter of which can only emerge from the former once the proletariat decide to vote for it, and thus achieve salvation.

21. Will Socialism, within the Social Democratic context outlined above, really work? No, I don't think so. Nor do I think it would ultimately be desirable, since the proletariat would then bog down, as it were, within the bodily darkness of a superworldly context, and probably be unwilling to make the move towards theocratic salvation. Yet, as a short-term expedience, its value is incontrovertible, and the achievement of Social Democracy is of the utmost historical importance. Only, we should perhaps see it more in terms of a transition (from new-brain autocracy) than as an end-in-itself. For if it could work, it would most certainly be an end-in-itself and not, as I believe, a means to a greater end - the end, namely, of Social Transcendentalism and the concomitant assumption, by the proletariat, of religious sovereignty.

22. There are people who foolishly divide the brain into left and right hemispheres and leave it at that, as though there was nothing more to it than logic and sentience. There are others who just as foolishly divide it into backbrain and forebrain, as though it was simply torn between dreams and awareness. Both are equally wrong. For in reality the brain is divisible into both the former and the latter, being akin to the fourfold divisions of the elements, as indeed of the many other divisions we have already investigated (see, for example, the Critique of Post-Dialectical Idealism) with the help, by any large, of our T-like framework - a framework which serves just as well in this context, viz:-

BACKBRAIN/LEFT BRAIN/FOREBRAIN

RIGHT BRAIN

where we have a vertical axis of left- and right-brain hemispheres, contrasted to which we find a horizontal axis of backbrain and forebrain hemispheres, the former axis relative, by and large, to Western, though in particular Anglo-Saxon, civilization, and the latter axis relative to non-Western, though in particular Third World, countries, which are rather more disposed to alpha/omega distinctions than to worldly and purgatorial ones corresponding, in theological terms, to the Blessed Virgin and to Christ. Thus if the right brain can be equated, in such terms, with the Blessed Virgin, and the left brain with Christ, then it behoves us to equate the backbrain with the Father (Creator) and the forebrain with the Holy Spirit, thereby affirming an allegiance both anterior and posterior to the left-brain/right-brain divisions. Treated diagrammatically, we shall find the following:-

THE FATHER/THE SON/THE HOLY SPIRIT

(backbrain)(left brain)(forebrain)

THE BLESSED VIRGIN

(right brain)

with, broadly, naturalistic, materialistic, idealistic, and realistic implications, as we proceed through the Trinity on the one hand, and then down to the Blessed Virgin on the other. Actually, history proceeds rather more on the basis of naturalism (the Father) to realism (the Blessed Virgin) on the one hand, and from materialism (Christ) to idealism (the Holy Spirit) on the other, so that we start with a backbrain emphasis and proceed to a right-brain one. After which time, corresponding to the rise of Protestantism at the expense of Catholicism, we have a left-brain emphasis which is destined to be eclipsed or, at any rate, superseded by the forebrain, as the Holy Spirit eclipses Christ, and 'Civilization', in Spenglerian parlance, gives way to 'Second Religiousness', to the meditative self-realization which is no mere identification with nature (contrary to the almost Buddhist sentience of right-brain realism) but a supra-natural transcendence of the world which is its own goal and justification. Thus whereas the right brain is integral to the world, the forebrain has the capacity to lift one beyond it in the interests of spiritual salvation. For it is the forebrain which is commensurate with the utmost superconsciousness, just as, in contrast to the left brain, the backbrain is commensurate with the utmost subconsciousness and, hence, dreamy immanence. The right brain, by contrast, is less subconscious than conscious in a subconscious manner, i.e. sensual and sentient, whereas the left brain is less superconscious than conscious in a superconscious manner, which is to say, logical and rational, a profoundly intellectual part of the brain which contrasts, as Christ to the Virgin, with the wilful sentience of the right brain. Of course, what applies in this religious context applies no less in the secular, or political one underneath, where we are concerned with the 'anti' manifestations of each of the four divisions, and which accordingly take a particle rather than a wavicle manifestation commensurate with the secular (the collective). For there is an Antichristic left brain no less than a Christic one, and while the latter is commensurate with love and goodness, the former, by contrast, will be commensurate with hate and evil, as befitting a sort of Protestant/Republican cleavage in the left, or logical, brain between wavicle and particle, positive and negative poles. Now what applies to the left brain also applies to the right one, with the religious/secular cleavage in question taking a Catholic/Liberal guise, as befitting a distinction between beauty and pleasure on the one hand (the Blessed Virgin) and ugliness and pain on the other hand (the Antivirgin). Thus whereas goodness and love/evil and hate appertain to the left brain, beauty and pleasure/ugliness and pain just as surely appertain to the right brain, albeit on the basis of a positive/negative, wavicle/particle division. Similarly, whereas the backbrain is divisible between strength and pride on the wavicle side, that of the Creator as it were, its particle side takes the form of a division between weakness and humiliation, as befitting the Antifather (read: Satan). Now whereas the forebrain is divisible between truth and joy on the wavicle side, that of the Holy Spirit, its particle side takes the form of a division between falsity and woe, as befitting the Antispirit (read: Marx). Thus strength and pride/weakness and humiliation appertain to the backbrain no less than truth and joy/falsity and woe to the forebrain. For each component of the overall brain has its own positive and negative extremes, and can be known accordingly. Were this not so, how could we distinguish between good and evil, right and wrong, or have any sense of moral direction or ideological distinctions? We can no more heap all the quantitative and qualitative attributes of the brain together in one place ... than accord the Father, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Blessed Virgin an equal status. What may be relevant to a given people at one point in time may become quite irrelevant to them at another point. We change to live, and live to evolve. Thus whereas strength and pride/weakness and humiliation are of the backbrain, they are naturalistic attributes ever pertinent to the alpha. Whereas beauty and pleasure/ugliness and pain are of the right brain, they are realistic attributes ever pertinent to the worldly. Whereas goodness and love/evil and hatred are of the left brain, they are materialistic attributes ever pertinent to the purgatorial. And whereas truth and joy/falsity and woe are of the forebrain, they are idealistic attributes ever pertinent to the omega. The only difference is that in the one case, that of the positive attributes, we are dealing with religious wavicles, whereas in the other case, that of the negative attributes, we are dealing with secular particles.

23. It seems to me that whereas trad jazz is essentially nazistic in its acoustic introversion, modern jazz is fundamentally communistic in its electric extroversion. A distinction, if you will, between joy/truth in the one context, and pride/strength in the other - the former a naturalistic omega, the latter an artificial alpha. Trad jazz avails itself of traditional acoustic instruments, including string basses, and plays them in a decadent or particle-biased (plucking) manner. Modern jazz avails, by contrast, of contemporary electric instruments, including guitars, and plays them in a particle-biased manner. Thus we have a distinction, it seems to me, between bourgeois decadence (the broken cross) and proletarian barbarism (the modern star); between, for example, the plucking or pizzicato playing of acoustic instruments and the plucking of electric ones - the technique, in each case, reactive and hence centrifugal, albeit in the acoustic case stemming from a centripetal (bowing) tradition. A sexual parallel to the above Nazi/Communist distinction would, I believe, involve oral sex on the one hand and masturbation on the other, since the one is essentially extreme centripetal whereas the other is extreme centrifugal, with the suggestion of a naturalistic/artificial distinction between couples and films, or the use thereof.

24. Where formerly I would have thought of the aggressive proletarian slang-words 'cunt' and 'prick', so often used in books/films and on the street these days, in a sort of alpha/omega sense, I now find that I am disposed to regarding them in relation to the vertical axis, as it were, of the world/purgatory, the Blessed Virgin/Christ, realism/materialism, earth/water, etc., so that the word 'cunt' conveys a worldly connotation and 'prick', by contrast, a lunar one, as between, say, Liberals and Republicans. Both are applicable, it seems, to Anglo-American civilization, and whereas a person described in regard to the former term of abuse tends to have a parting in his hair, those defined in regard to the latter don't, since their hair is brushed back from the forehead. Thus 'cunts' and 'pricks' are confined more to the Christian West than to either what preceded it in the pagan past or to what may succeed it in the transcendental future. It should also be noted that 'cunts' and 'pricks' are terms of abuse with rather more reference to bourgeois, or middle-class, elements within this civilization than to its proletarian, or working-class, elements, who are more usually derided in terms of 'arseholes' (the American word 'asshole' is of course an equivalent term of abuse) and 'sods' respectively - the former worldly and the latter lunar (purgatorial). In this respect, it could be argued that 'arseholes' and 'sods' appertain rather more to Liberalism and Republicanism respectively than to, say, Catholicism and Protestantism, given the more decadent and particle-biased nature of the former phenomena and their correspondence to the sexuality in question, which is less bourgeois than proletarian, less biased towards the wavicle than towards the particle, and less religious than secular. The only apparent difference between a 'cunt' and an 'arsehole', given their similarly-parted hairstyles, would be in regard to the wearing of a collar shirt without tie in the one case, that of the 'cunt', and a T-shirt hanging loosely in the other case, that of the 'arsehole', whereas the 'prick'/'sod' distinction above would be no less sartorially apparent on the basis, given their non-parted combed-back hair, of a tie-and-collar/tucked-in T-shirt dichotomy. Thus whereas the 'cunt'/'prick' is a shirt man, the 'arsehole'/'sod' is a T-shirt man.

25. While on the subject of hair, it should be possible for us to distinguish, further to the above parted/non-parted styles, a sort of alpha/omega, or horizontal, dichotomy between non-parted hair that is centrifugal, and hence worn in a kind of pudding-basin style, and non-parted hair that is centripetal, and hence tied back in a ponytail. Both these latter kinds of hairstyle are outside the official pale of Anglo-American civilization, since they are neither Catholic/Liberal nor Protestant/Republican in character, but pertain, in their antithetically absolutist ways, to autocratic and theocratic options which, depending on their length, will be either anterior or posterior to its essentially democratic essence - anterior if very long, posterior if relatively short, and hence of the new brain rather than the old one.

26. For me, the terms 'old brain' and 'new brain' have long signified an alpha/omega dichotomy in each case between alpha/omega-in-the-alpha on the one hand, and alpha-in-the-omega/omega on the other hand, and therefore I have no hesitation in dovetailing such terms as backbrain/forebrain and left brain/right brain into these long-standing terms in such a way as to correspond to the above subdivision. Hence alpha backbrain and omega-in-the-alpha left brain in relation to the old brain, and alpha-in-the-omega right brain and omega forebrain in relation to the new brain. Full-star dream immorality and half-cross intellectual morality are the alpha/omega poles of the old brain, whereas half-star filmic immorality and full-cross meditative morality are the alpha/omega poles of the new brain, with naturalistic and artificial distinctions between each brain. Hence superstar alpha vis-à-vis cross omega-in-the-alpha for the backbrain/left-brain polarity of the old brain, in contrast to star alpha-in-the-omega vis-à-vis supercross omega for the right-brain/forebrain polarity of the new brain.

27. Returning to the trad jazz/modern jazz distinction which I was thinking about several entries (and indeed days) ago, it seems to me that, on deeper and subsequent reflection, modern jazz is less Communist than Transcendentalist, to the extent that we are concerned with jazz on an artificial (and hence electric) as opposed to a naturalistic (and hence acoustic) basis, and therefore it parallels trad jazz on new-brain omega terms, terms which emphasize joy and truth as opposed, for instance, to pride and strength. Hence if trad jazz and modern jazz exist on parallel omega terms, it seems that the new-brain alpha position would have to be reserved for soul music, so that soul and jazz are perceived to be antithetical not, as I had formerly supposed, on a sort of jazz/soul basis, corresponding to alpha and omega, but on a soul/jazz basis, with a soul/spirit dichotomy as between fire and light or, more literally, emotion and awareness, the Father and the Holy Spirit. Thus, in contrast to our previous estimation, soul and jazz would constitute the alpha and omega of new-brain music, with rock and pop constituting lunar and worldly (mundane/terrestrial) poles as before (see diagram 1).

SOUL/ROCK/JAZZ

(alpha/solar)(lunar)(omega/stellar)

POP

(worldly)

However, if these four contemporary types of music are of a wavicle bias, and hence essentially religious on their respective alpha/omega and lunar/worldly terms, then it seems to me that the four particle-biased, and hence secular, types of contemporary music which parallel them will be rap in the case of soul, punk in the case of rock, funk in the case of pop, and blues in the case of jazz (see diagram 2):-

RAP/PUNK/BLUES

(anti-alpha)(anti-lunar)(anti-omega)

FUNK

(anti-worldy)

and that these alternative types of contemporary music, no less relative to the new brain, will be 'anti'-music in relation to the wavicle-biased types of music above them, as it were, in the religious contexts corresponding to the Father - the Son - the Holy Ghost - and to the Blessed Virgin, the Father and the Holy Ghost no less antithetical on an alpha/omega basis than the Son and the Blessed Virgin on a lunar/mundane one. Thus if soul corresponds to the Father (Creator), then rap, by contrast, corresponds to the Devil (Satan). If jazz corresponds to the Holy Spirit, then blues corresponds to the Antispirit. If rock corresponds to Christ, then punk corresponds to the Antichrist. And if pop corresponds to the Blessed Virgin, then funk corresponds to the Antivirgin. Or, put another way, if soul corresponds to pride and strength, then rap corresponds to humiliation and weakness. If jazz corresponds to joy and truth, then blues corresponds to woe and illusion. If rock corresponds to love and goodness, then punk corresponds to hate and evil. And if pop corresponds to pleasure and beauty, then funk corresponds to pain and ugliness. Thus whereas rock is Protestant and pop Catholic, punk is Republican and funk Liberal. And whereas soul is Marxist and jazz Transcendentalist, rap is Communist and blues Fascist or, at any rate, Social Transcendentalist (bearing in mind the old-brain/new-brain distinction between acoustic and electric blues). Thus punk is to funk what rock is to pop - the lunar/worldly poles of a materialistic/realistic axis. Likewise, soul is to jazz what rap is to blues - the alpha/omega poles of a naturalistic/idealistic axis. Speaking in elemental terms, one could contend that whereas soul is wavicle fire and jazz wavicle light, rap is particle fire and blues particle light. Similarly, one could contend that whereas rock is wavicle water and pop wavicle earth, punk is particle water and funk particle earth. Again this would correspond to religious and secular, or divine and diabolic, distinctions. Of course, I didn't get to this position all-in-one-go, and the reader may recall that formerly I regarded folk and pop as constituting a wavicle/particle dichotomy with regard to the worldly religious and secular positions. Yet, on deeper reflection, it does seem to me that funk is the most likely and credible candidate for a particle-worldly (liberal) status, bearing in mind its highly rhythmic essence. It also seems to me that the fact of folk's acoustic constitution precludes one from equating it with a new-brain standing or position, insofar as that brain correlates with the artificial (and hence electric) rather than with the naturalistic (and hence acoustic), thereby confining one's choice to electric music, which, of course, both pop and funk usually are. As good a definition of pop as any would be dance music or, at any rate, electric music one can dance to, and if this applies on a wavicle basis to pop, then it must surely apply on a particle basis to funk, which is more intensely and even unambiguously rhythmic. Funk is no less a fall from pop than ... punk a fall from rock, wherein the terms of our wavicle/particle dichotomy are less wilful than intellectual, given the cerebral as opposed to bodily parallel of the lunar, or purgatorial, option, corresponding to Protestantism and Republicanism respectively, and thus to Christ and Antichrist. If both pop and funk are the music of 'bodies', or worldly types, then rock and punk, by contrast, are the music of 'heads', albeit on intellectual/anti-intellectual rather than either soulful/anti-soulful or spiritual/anti-spiritual terms, and the 'head', conceived in regard to the cranial, corresponds to the moon, which hangs over the earth like Christ over the Blessed Virgin, or, for that matter, Britain over Ireland. However that may be, soul and rap are of the alpha, on divine and diabolic terms, and are thus more the music of the subconscious psyche in its wavicle and particle subatomic manifestations than of the brain as such, just as jazz and blues, corresponding to the omega on both divine and diabolic terms, are musical forms of the superconscious psyche in its wavicle and particle supra-atomic manifestations, and are thus as much beyond the brain (intellect) as soul and rap would seem to be before or behind it. If soul/rap is the music of the emotional Damned (no matter how seemingly positive that emotion may be), then jazz/blues is the music of the spiritually Saved, who are never more saved than when woe and illusion give way to joy and truth, and the Holy Spirit accordingly prevails, through jazz, over the Antispirit. Whereas alpha is outer and selfless, omega is inner and selfish; whereas alpha is centrifugal and apparent, omega is centripetal and essential. Soul may be proud and strong, but it is still alpha-like in relation to jazz, which is the music that inspires joy and confirms truth. If rap is weakness and humiliation, that is because it tends to be politically aggressive, like Communism, and thus a particle fall, paralleling the sun vis-à-vis the central star of the Galaxy, from wavicle (soulful) grace. Rap is musical hell, and all musical hell is let loose wherever rap prevails. Blues, too, is musical hell, but it is an inner hell of woe and illusion, and thus morally preferable to, and superior than, the outer hell which burns, in Satanic humiliation and weakness, against the light. Blues can lead to jazz, whereas rap is doomed to burn in fallen isolation from soul, as Satan from the Father, and to rage, in particle declamation, until it burns itself up and can rage no more. In this respect, it resembles comic opera, which stands to grand opera as proton particles to wavicles, the sun to the central star of the Galaxy, albeit within the context of the old brain as opposed to the new one. For, of course, the acoustic and, hence, naturalistic forms of music are no less intelligible in terms of our basic fourfold wavicle/particle divisions, with, so I contend, opera as the old-brain equivalent of soul and concerto music as the old-brain equivalent of jazz, symphonies and ballet coming in-between on a basis paralleling rock and pop (see diagram 3):-

OPERA/SYMPHONIES/CONCERTOS

BALLET

so that soul, intellect, spirit, and will are all granted musical representation, as in the new brain, and can be known accordingly. As, of course, can their 'anti', or secular, manifestations which, if I am not mistaken, will take the forms of comic opera, symphonic poems, concerto grosso, and light dance music (see diagram 4) in the more naturalistic criteria of

COMIC OPERA/SYMPHONIC POEMS/CONCERTO GROSSO

LIGHT DANCE

(Ballroom dancing)

old-brain culture, which is rather more bourgeois than proletarian, though subject to similar divisions, both politically and religiously. Yet if soul is more intense in the old brain than in the new one on account of that brain's closer extrapolation from cosmic parallels, spirit is less intense there than in the new brain, and accordingly wavicle grand opera corresponds to alpha and soul to alpha-in-the-omega, concerto music corresponds to omega-in-the-alpha and jazz to omega. One might say that although the backbrain figures in both opera and soul, the backbrain of the opera singer is more connected to a naturalistic environment, whereas the backbrain of the soul singer is rather more habituated to an urban environment, and is accordingly proletarian rather than bourgeois. Conversely, the forebrain of the concerto performer is less spiritually advanced than the forebrain of the jazz musician because he is accustomed to a provincial or even rural rather than to an urban milieu, and has a less-well developed forebrain in consequence. His morality is relative, whereas the jazz musician's morality is capable of opening towards the absolute. As to the left brain of the symphonic composer and the rock musician respectively, similar environmental distinctions can be drawn, though whereas the former corresponds to purgatory-in-the-world, the latter corresponds to purgatory per se, being so much more materialistic and intellectually extreme in consequence of his urban background. Likewise, whereas the right brain figures prominently in both ballet and pop, it figures more prominently in ballet than in pop on account of the environmental distinctions between proletarian and bourgeois culture, which makes ballet correspond to the world but pop to the-world-in-purgatory on account of its less wilful constitution. More intellect in the urban left brain than in the provincial left brain, though less will in the urban right brain than in the provincial right brain, given the urban correspondence to purgatory (the moon) and the provincial/rural correspondence to the world (the earth). Hence more will in the provincial old brain than in the urban new brain, but less intellect in the provincial old brain than in the urban new brain. Hence, too, more soul in the provincial old brain than in the urban new brain, but less spirit in the provincial old brain than in the urban new brain. For whereas soul and will are devolutionary, corresponding to the star, intellect and spirit are evolutionary, and thereby correspond to the cross. Now what applies to each of the wavicle types of music, in relation to our more basic fourfold divisions of the human brain, applies no less to the particle types of music which form a secular counterpart to their religious essence.

28. It would seem that my concept of an old-brain/new-brain dichotomy is less a matter of cerebral division into two brains than an acknowledgement of the effects of different environments on the fourfold division of the overall brain, viz. backbrain/forebrain along a horizontal axis, and left brain/right brain along a vertical one. Hence while the backbrain, for example, will be effected in a naturalistic way by a rural environment and thus pertain to the old brain, it will be effected in an artificial way by an urban environment and thus pertain to the new brain. For this naturalistic/artificial division, conditioned in large part by environment, is at the root of the distinction I have drawn between the old brain (with its fourfold cerebral divisions) and the new brain (also with fourfold cerebral divisions). Furthermore, it seems to me that I have opted, hitherto, for a sort of bourgeois/proletarian dichotomy between the old brain and the new brain, and thus settled for fourfold divisions along roughly naturalistic and artificial lines on the basis of such a class distinction. However, while this is expedient in terms of the contemporary world and its capitalist/socialist dichotomy, it is less than objectively correct. For, in reality, the bourgeois category is less naturalistic than a sort of cross, or compromise, between naturalistic and artificial antitheses, a compromise corresponding, in environmental terms, to a provincial and/or suburban milieu as opposed to either a rural or an urban one, and stands approximately in between the purely naturalistic and artificial antitheses of, on the one hand, a feudal peasant society and, on the other hand, a socialistic proletarian society, much the way that the ego stands in between the subconscious and the superconscious, or democracy in between autocracy and theocracy. Hence the real naturalistic category, corresponding to the old brain, is a feudal peasant one, and it is in this rural context that naturalism has its true voice, one musically expressed in terms, for example, of folk music, gigs, reels, and other traditional modes of acoustic music which may be said to have preceded the bourgeois contexts of classical music, and which stand in an antithetical relationship to the contemporary forms of electric music, as discussed above. I do not feel qualified to speculate on the individual standings of traditional music in relation to our fourfold division of the brain and its T-like diagrams, for I am effectively a creature of the city rather than of the country, and have little experience of such traditional acoustic music. But it is clear that it pertains to the old brain as a purely naturalistic phenomenon relative to a peasant society, wherein we are dealing with a rural as opposed to a suburban or an urban influence, and that it is accordingly autocratic rather than democratic, like bourgeois music, or theocratic, like proletarian music, with a corresponding correlation with the first part of the Trinity - the autocratic part par excellence. Its backbrain musical equivalent would be much more soulful than both the bourgeois and proletarian forms of backbrain music, viz. opera and soul, and accordingly be the most naturalistic mode of alpha music, whereas its forebrain musical equivalent, by contrast, would be much less spiritual than both the bourgeois and proletarian forms of forebrain music, viz. concertos and jazz, and accordingly be the least idealistic mode of omega music. Conversely, its right-brain musical equivalent would be much more wilful, or will-based, than both the bourgeois and proletarian forms of right-brain music, viz. ballet and pop, and accordingly be the most realistic mode of worldly music, whereas its left-brain musical equivalent would be much less intellectual than both the bourgeois and proletarian forms of left-brain music, viz. symphonies and rock, and accordingly be the least materialistic mode of purgatorial music. Obviously, the alpha and worldly contexts of this peasant music will involve singing and dancing respectively, whereas the purgatorial and omega contexts will involve instrumentals of an intellectual and a spiritual order respectively, with collective and individual distinctions. Now what applies to the wavicle modes of this naturalistic music will also apply to its particle modes, where we are conscious of different kinds of antimusic which signify a fall, in moral terms, from the religious plane to that of the secular, or political, one - a fall which both necessitates and implies a cruder approach to any given mode of traditional acoustic music.

29. Barbarism is always collectivistic, civilization individualistic. A man is innocent until proven guilty in a civilized society, but guilty until proven innocent in a barbarous one, the reason being that moral innocence, or rectitude, and individualism are commensurate, as, on barbarous terms, are moral guilt and collectivism. A collectivistic society is alpha, an individualistic society omega, the difference between the star and the cross. For the one is external whereas the other is internal, the one autocratic and the other theocratic. In between comes the democratic compromise between collectivism, embodied in the People as electorate, and the individual, embodied in the People's representative, who is elected to govern on behalf of the People and thus, by implication, to maintain an individualistic bias commensurate with civilization. Too much democracy in the People and we would not have civilization but barbarism, the collective chaos of a People's democracy (conceiving of that term on a purely collectivistic basis). The great artist/philosopher is profoundly moral because he has the duty to uphold private individualism in the face of public collectivism, and thus keep the torch of civilization shining as a beacon and guide to the less-enlightened masses. The ultimate artist/philosopher is the Second Coming, who leads from above on the basis of his divine individualism and the truth it signifies.

30. The British flag, the so-called Union Jack, can be perceived as predominantly either a cross or a star, depending how it is hung. Hung vertically, and one has a predominating cross. Hung horizontally, and one has a predominating star. The British, being relative, can thus show either a bourgeois or a proletarian face to their flag, depending, in large measure, upon the nature of the context in which it is being displayed. Co-operative and moral (relatively) and one is likely to see the Union Jack hanging vertically. Competitive and immoral (relatively) and one will see it hanging horizontally. In the former context, the Union Jack is bourgeois and capitalistic; in the latter context, by contrast, it will be proletarian and socialistic. Private and public alternatives, as reflecting the relative (atomic) nature of British civilization. Previously, I had seen the Union Jack as either a star or a cross. Now I am able to synthesize my view according to the context, which is indicative, after all, of how the struggle for truth, objectivity, and perspective progresses - by degrees!

31. If one were to generalize in terms of the most characteristic contemporary form of music for each of the four countries which make up the British Isles, I think the result would be: Welsh soul, English rock, Scotch jazz, and Irish pop, as follows:-

WELSH SOUL/ENGLISH ROCK/SCOTCH JAZZ

IRISH POP

with, broadly, alpha-purgatorial-omega-and worldly distinctions, as regards the Trinity above and the Blessed Virgin below. Likewise, it should also be possible to generalize on an identical basis where the fallen, or secular, types of contemporary music are concerned, so that one could speak, for instance, of Welsh rap, English punk, Scotch blues, and Irish funk, with negative, or particle-biased, implications respectively. However that may be, it would seem that, by and large, the Welsh are naturalistic, and hence fiery; the English materialistic, and hence watery; the Scotch idealistic, and hence airy; and the Irish realistic, and hence earthy. Welsh fire, English water, Scotch air, and Irish earth, corresponding to heat, coldness, light, and darkness, or soul, intellect, spirit, and will respectively, as applicable, so I would argue, to each of the above-mentioned musical forms and, within negative terms, to their secular, or fallen, counterparts. The red of Wales, the white of England, the blue of Scotland, and the green of Ireland. Certainly it has not escaped my attention that most of the best jazz musicians in the British Isles tend to be either Scotch or of Scots descent, whereas probably the best-known and most powerful soul singer happens to be a Welshman, viz. Tom Jones. Conversely, no-one would doubt that the English contribution to rock, with its intellectual bias, is second-to-none, while the Irish have steadily taken over and continue to dominate pop music, with its more wilful bias, and hence dance-oriented sensibility.

32. If one were to accord each of the four major arts, viz. sculpture, literature, music, and painting a specific ideal, both quantitatively and qualitatively, my choice of ideals would be as follows: strength and pride for sculpture; goodness and love for music; truth and joy for literature; and beauty and pleasure for painting. Thus each of the four major branches of the arts could be ascribed a generalized position within the T-like framework of Truth, viz:-

SCULPTURE/MUSIC/LITERATURE

PAINTING

which would suggest that sculpture is the naturalistic art par excellence, painting the realistic art par excellence, music the materialistic art par excellence, and literature the idealistic art par excellence, with alpha, worldly, purgatorial, and omega correspondences respectively - sculpture and literature, or strength (pride) and truth (joy) no less antithetical than ... painting and music, or beauty (pleasure) and goodness (love). Thus it could be said that, in their positive manifestations (wavicle), sculpture is of the Father, painting of the Blessed Virgin, music of the Son, and literature of the Holy Ghost. The genuine sculptor strives to convey pride through strength, the genuine painter to convey pleasure through beauty, the genuine musician to convey love through goodness, and, finally, the genuine writer to convey joy through truth.

33. Nationalism, corresponding to democracy, is a neutron equivalent in between the proton equivalent of internationalism, corresponding to autocracy, and the electron equivalent of supra-nationalism, corresponding to theocracy. Democracy being a kind of proton/electron compromise or balance within the neutron equivalent of the Nation State, it follows that a State must first of all achieve independence from autocratic internationalism before democracy can come to pass and the People accordingly be in a position to achieve a long-term theocratic supra-nationalism. For nationalism is not an end-in-itself but a means to a supra-national end. Nationalism, like democracy, is decentralized, because it signifies freedom from the centralized control of autocratic internationalism, the imperialistic imposition on weaker countries/peoples by a stronger power. Yet when the peoples of such national states are given the opportunity to vote for religious sovereignty, and thus achieve salvation from the world (of political, judicial, and economic sovereignties), there will be a return to centralized control on the basis of a Christ-like sacrifice of bearing 'sins of the world' (those lesser sovereignties in relation to religious sovereignty) by the followers of the Second Coming, in order that the People may be saved from them. Yet such centralized control will be localized, i.e. exist within the national framework, and thus be quite distinct from the autocratic centrality of international imperialism, which cuts across state boundaries. The religiously sovereign peoples will have their own economic/political centres, and their supra-nationalism will be religious and cultural - the unity, voluntarily entered into, of the Saved.

34. Communist autocracy melts towards Social Democracy as the hard-line proton equivalent is superseded by a soft-line proton equivalent which will co-exist with the soft-line electron equivalent of what may well be an embryonic Social Transcendentalist Party in the neutron equivalent of democratic nationalism. The soft line is middle ground, and hence democratic, whereas the hard line is extreme, whether autocratic, as in the case of the Communist Party, or theocratic, following the democratic achievement of religious sovereignty by the People, and the consequent bearing of 'sins of the world' by a Social Transcendentalist administration in a regional centralized aside to the ultimate mass sovereignty. Once such a theocratic sovereignty comes to pass, as ultimately it must, the supercross will have effectively eclipsed the star, and there will no longer be need of a democratic compromise between the two. Conceived in terms of our T-like framework, it would seem that the neutron equivalent of the national State is rather more bureaucratic, and feminine, than democratic, if by 'democracy' we mean a compromise, or balance, between protons and electrons, social democracy and social theocracy, the soft Right and the soft Left:-

PROTON(PROTON/ELECTRON)ELECTRON

(autocracy)(democracy)(theocracy)

NEUTRON

(bureaucracy)

with, of course, the possibility of a truly liberal compromise party coming in-between the soft proton and electron positions, thereby constituting a Christic trinity of democratic options. However, the relativity of a social democracy should not, as with a capital democracy, be economically conditioned, since there can be no scope for capitalist exploitation of the People by a plutocratic elite, but would effectively be with regard to the degree to which the People should be economically sovereign on the one hand, primarily that of social democracy, and to the emergence of a social theocratic alternative on the other hand, which would have the religious sovereignty of the People as its long-term goal and be working towards the democratic establishment of religious sovereignty and, by implication, the supersession of democratic relativity in due course. My belief is that considerations of socialist economics, and its corollary of collectivism vis-à-vis state ownership of the means of production, will be paramount in the early stages of Social Democracy, until such time as Social Transcendentalism acquires greater definition and religious considerations accordingly predominate, leading, eventually, to a full-blown social theocracy in which there is neither state ownership nor collective ownership of the means of production but Centre trusteeship of those means - less materialist than cultural - in the interests of the religiously sovereign People.

35. Impossible to conceive of a free and genuine transvaluation, in regard to the acceptance of religious sovereignty by the People, without the concomitant necessity of nature being extensively undermined and transcended, so that the People will not be exposed to the open-society acceptance of and acquiescence in nature which keeps them tied to the alpha and in no position to accept the omega - at least not fully, and hence to a completely transvaluated extent. An acknowledgement of the Holy Spirit is, of course, possible in an open-society context. But there is a great deal of difference between acknowledging and actually being it ... compliments of a democratic acceptance of religious sovereignty through the Second Coming. Only after nature has been effectively eclipsed by historical progress ... can a genuine transvaluation be embraced; one that is more than in name only, but essentially a matter of life-and-death for its recipients. For it is either nature or the Holy Spirit, not both! The People must choose and be aware of the consequences of their choice. And they must have the means to survive above and beyond nature once that choice has been made, since being able to transcend nature positively as well as negatively, constructively as well as destructively, is a precondition of such a choice, without which it cannot reasonably be entertained.

36. Antinaturalism is a precondition of supernaturalism. Unless one is first against nature, one cannot be for supernature. For supernature cannot thrive while nature is extant, but only after it has been overcome.

37. Literature, when true to itself, is as superior to music as truth to goodness, or joy to love. Superior, that is to say as the Holy Spirit to Christ, the pursuit of joy through truth to the achievement of love through goodness. But only he who is true will pursue literature truthfully.

38. When autocracy crumbles (as in the Soviet Union in 1991) sculpture does so, too. For sculpture, as the art of strength ... with its correlation of pride, and autocracy are commensurate.

39. Sculpture is fundamentally a pagan art form, an art of the alpha star, and is never 'truer' to itself than when strength and pride are its chief concerns.

40. If sculpture, when most 'true' to itself, corresponds to the Father and music to the Son, then painting, when most 'true' to itself, corresponds to the Blessed Virgin and literature ... to the Holy Spirit. A naturalistic society will have a sculptural bias, in contrast (as alpha vis-à-vis omega) to the literary bias of an idealistic society. Conversely, a realistic society will have a painterly bias, in contrast (as purgatory vis-à-vis the world) to the musical bias of a materialistic society. Contemporary Western society, being materialistic, is a predominantly musical society, with love, the essence of music, being its principal concern. In this moon-struck society the other arts are, to varying extents, marginalized and/or 'bovaryized', in accordance with the prevailing materialism. Painting is no less subordinate to music than Catholicism to Protestantism, or the Blessed Virgin to Christ - the converse of what used to be the case in the Catholic Middle Ages, when realism and, hence, painting was the principal art form.

41. Authoritarian monarchism is the autocracy of the Father; feudal democracy (or constitutional monarchy) the democracy of the Father; Catholicism the theocracy of the Father. Cromwellian dictatorship is the autocracy of Christ; parliamentary democracy the democracy of Christ; Protestantism the theocracy of Christ. Soviet Communism is the autocracy of the Holy Ghost; Social Democracy the democracy of the Holy Ghost; Social Transcendentalism the theocracy of the Holy Ghost. It is my belief that whereas autocracy starts out strongly in the context of the Father, it becomes progressively weaker as we move via the autocracy of Christ to the autocracy of the Holy Spirit, whereas, from the converse standpoint, theocracy starts out weakly in the theocracy of the Father and becomes progressively stronger as we move via the theocracy of Christ to the theocracy of the Holy Spirit. Hence one could speak of a strong autocracy of the Father (authoritarian monarchy), a medium-strong autocracy of Christ (Cromwellian dictatorship), and a weak autocracy of the Holy Ghost (communism). In contrast to which we would find a weak theocracy of the Father (Roman Catholicism), a medium-strong theocracy of Christ (Protestantism), and a strong theocracy of the Holy Spirit (social transcendentalism). The democratic positions of the Father (feudalism), the Son (parliamentarianism), and the Holy Spirit (social democracy) would be relatively medium strong in each case, as befitting a middle-ground context.

42. However, although the Trinitarian divisions listed above pertain to Western civilization, and thus to the 'modern world', beginning in Feudalism, progressing to Capitalism, and culminating in Socialism, they have no real relevance to the East, neither Near nor Far. In fact, it is precisely because Western civilization is a transvaluated one, beginning in autocracy and progressing via democracy to theocracy, that it is the 'modern world', and hence evolutionary. For Eastern civilization had no such transvaluation, but was rooted in theocracy, the theocracy, more specifically, of the Creator (Jehovah, Allah, etc.) from which, to a limited extent, democratic and autocratic alternatives stemmed in due devolutionary fashion. Thus while the West was evolutionary, the 'ancient world', as we may call the East, remained largely devolutionary and, as regards Islam and Judaism, continues to remain so to this day, being rooted in Creator-theocracy and having no evolutionary momentum or dynamic, neither in regard to the Father, the Son, nor the Holy Spirit, as outlined above in the successive progressions of Western civilization from Feudalism to Socialism via Capitalism. Where the devolutionary regression from theocracy to autocracy via democracy applies, as in the Islamic world, we are effectively dealing with ancient-world primitivism, with a naturalism that, being untransvaluated, remains diametrically opposed to the evolutionary realism, materialism, and idealism of the successive stages, or manifestations, of Western civilization. Certainly no transvaluation can be expected where this ancient-world mentality prevails, as throughout the Islamic world, and it is my belief that it will not be possible for the evolutionary dynamic of Western civilization to attain to its peak in the theocracy of the Holy Spirit, the theocracy of theocracies and omega-of-omegas, until and unless those peoples still enslaved to the theocracy of the Creator, the alpha-of-alphas, have been freed from their enslavement and encouraged to join the evolutionary march of the free spirit towards its omega destination in total salvation. Then and only then will the triumph of the West be complete, and its evolutionary dynamism fully vindicated!

43. Sculpture, being naturalistic, is the oldest of the arts, the one most pertinent to the 'ancient world', with its untransvaluated binding to alpha theocracy. Then comes painting, which is essentially a Western art form, and one especially pertinent to the feudal and medieval manifestations of the 'modern world', with its worldly realism. After which we find music which, in its lunar materialism, is the art form most relevant to the capitalist and liberal manifestations of the modern world, the contemporary age par excellence. Finally we have literature, the youngest and most idealistic of the arts, which should reach full maturity in the socialist and transcendentalist manifestations of the 'modern world', the age which, though inevitable, will not fully materialize until the 'ancient world' is finally defeated and civilization progresses to an unequivocal identification with omega theocracy. Then and only then will idealism have reached a civilized peak and literature, preferably on computer disc, along with it, a literature which is so truth orientated as to be effectively superconceptual, the prelude to pure meditation.

44. Alpha and omega are incommensurable, and until alpha is discredited and overthrown, omega will lack credibility and true moral standing. It will remain more a dream than an actuality. Hence not only the defeat of the 'ancient world', but of nature, autocracy, strength.

45. Though literary tapes, or cassettes of the spoken word, have a right to existence and are of an unquestionable benefit to society, they are as inferior to computer discs, for purposes of literary dissemination, as ... the oral transmission of literature to the printed word, the reason being that the audible, being naturalistic, is inferior to the optical, which, in its idealism, stands to the former as light to heat, or omega to alpha. If literary dissemination begins orally, it ends optically, whether through the printed word or, increasingly in the future, through the electronic word on the Visual Display Unit (VDU) of computers. If the oral transmission of the word is populist, then its optical transmission can only be classical, an omega flowering from an alpha soil. Thus as the oral transmission of the word through the medium of cassettes is alpha, and hence pertinent to an autocratic stage of People's civilization (the civilization of the Holy Ghost), it should follow that this autocratic populism will, in due course, be superseded by a democratic balance, as it were, between literary cassettes and literary discs, or computer discs used for literary purposes, which should in turn be superseded by a theocratic classicism in which, compliments of the acceptance of religious sovereignty by the People and its concomitance of salvation in the light, literary discs become the presiding norm, a norm paving the way, through the word as light, for the spiritual light-of-lights in the contemplative purism of ultimate essence, the full-flowering of the superconceptual in transcendental meditation.

46. Race is to the devolutionary ancient world what class, profession, and ideology (in that order) are to the evolutionary modern one, that is to say, the principal social characteristic of the age of naturalism, no less than class is the principal social characteristic of the age of realism, profession the principal social characteristic of the age of materialism, and ideology the principal social characteristic of the age of idealism. Using Spenglerian epochal distinctions, one might argue that race corresponds to 'Historyless Chaos', class to 'the Culture', profession to 'the Civilization', and ideology to 'Second Religiousness' - in that chronological order of historical periods stretching from the alpha to the omega of human civilization. Thus one might define the twentieth century as the age of the profession par excellence, since it corresponded to the age of materialism, 'the Civilization' in Spenglerian parlance, and thus to the Christic period of Western civilization, with particular reference to its political and economic manifestations in Liberalism and Capitalism. The coming age of idealism, on the other hand, can only be ideological, as befitting its spiritual essence as the evolutionary period corresponding to the Holy Ghost, and such an ideological integrity can only be in opposition to racism, as, superseding both class and profession, it strives to extend its omega bias at the expense of outmoded alpha naturalism, of which race is, as already remarked, the chief social characteristic. Now just as class, being realistic, is wilful, and profession, being materialistic, intellectual, as pertaining to the world and purgatory respectively, so race, being naturalistic, is soulful, and ideology, being idealistic, spiritual, as pertaining to alpha and omega, or paganism and transcendentalism respectively. Now, no less than profession eclipsed class in the former context, so ideology must eclipse race in the latter one - and eclipse it not merely relatively, as in the former context, but absolutely, as befitting the incommensurability, within their extreme contexts, of alpha and omega, the ancient world and the furthest reach of the modern one.

47. No less than autocracy, democracy, and theocracy constitute a sort of Blessed Trinity of masculine options stretching from alpha to omega, so do science, politics, and religion ... in that order. For science is to autocracy what politics is to democracy and religion to theocracy, which is to say, its practical essence, and no less than autocracy is scientific, so democracy is political and theocracy religious. In the West, or 'modern world', science is objective and religion subjective, as reflecting the centrifugal and centripetal natures of alpha and omega, with their corollary of collectivism and individualism, society and selfhood respectively. In the East, or 'ancient world', science is/was subjective and religion objective, given the fact that, in contrast to the West, Eastern civilization was rooted in theocracy and thus, by implication, in a centrifugal and collective religion which had an objective essence vis-à-vis the Creator and His worship/propitiation thereof, whereas science, appertaining to the autocratic, could only be centripetal and individual, as befitting the subjective. Hence the science of astrology, or the 'influence' of the 'heavenly bodies' on the individual, which followed from a subjective premise, and which existed in antithetical complement to the religious objectivity of astronomy. To us Westerners, astrology is occult and astronomy science, but that is only because, unlike the ancient East, we are transvaluated, and thus disposed to regard the objective scientifically and the subjective religiously, albeit our own religious subjectivity is quite distinct from the scientific subjectivity of astrology, in consequence of which we are not disposed to regarding astrology in genuinely religious terms. Our God is not the Creator, viz. Jehovah, Allah, etc., but the Father - Son - and Holy Ghost of the Blessed Trinity in progressively more omega-oriented subjective terms.

48. The Pilgrimage to Mecca, which is so crucial to the Islamic world, is a reflection of the collectivism of alpha-oriented objectivity, and is thus something totally alien to and inconceivable within the framework of Western society. To us, the crowd is a refutation of God, i.e. omega-oriented subjectivity, and thus not something that we can interpret in religious terms, since more congenial, in its alpha-oriented objectivity, to modern science, wherein the centrifugal takes precedence over the centripetal, and the individual is accordingly subordinated to the collective. No less than we reject collectivism with regard to religion, the East rejects individualism with regard to it, considering that alpha and omega are antithetical, and that which pertains to the one is effectively a threat to and refutation of the other. The lone figure of Christ, suffering by Himself in the Garden of Gethsemane, is unique to the West, with its evolutionary dynamism. If Christ's suffering perfectly illustrates the uphill struggle of those who have turned their back on the alpha-oriented status quo and accordingly become 'reborn', then the Pilgrimage to Mecca aptly illustrates the collective subservience of the Islamic East to the Will of Allah, which tolerates no subjective individualism! The 'ancient world' is bound to theocratic objectivity in the collective will; the 'modern world', by contrast, is free from such a binding in the theocratic subjectivity of individual conscience. Alpha and omega, beginning and end, slavery and freedom. To us moderns, God is not alpha but omega, and increasingly, as proletarian criteria replace bourgeois and aristocratic criteria, it is the Holy Spirit rather than Christ or the Father that becomes the focal-point of our sense of divinity, the omega-of-omegas, in contrast to which the alpha-of-alphas, monotheistic rather than polytheistic, must appear diabolic. In fact, the very Devil itself, the worship of which can only be regarded as a threat to the full-flowering of God as omega, since a refutation of freedom.

49. Jehovah Witnesses are perhaps the most paradoxical of all Christian sects, the reason being that they endeavour to reconcile Christ with Jehovah, the 'modern world' with the 'ancient one', and to speak of the former through the latter. But in practice this is a contradiction in terms, since Christ appertains to the Western world, with particular reference to its bourgeois manifestation, whereas Jehovah, like Allah, appertains to the Eastern one, the world rooted in Creator theocracy and enslaved by it. Jehovah is the alpha and Christ to some extent the omega, at any rate to the extent of affirming the 'Kingdom of Heaven' within the self, and thus effectively pointing in the direction of the Holy Spirit, the omega-of-omegas which is diametrically antithetical to the alpha-of-alphas, viz. Jehovah. Those who uphold belief in Jehovah are simply the slaves of objective theocracy. For Jehovah is alone sovereign. Those, on the other hand, who believe in the 'Kingdom of Heaven' within the self are free from such enslavement ... for subjective theocracy. Now such theocracy, pushed to its ultimate extreme in the Holy Spirit, places sovereignty within the self, the spiritual essence of man, and such sovereignty, once acknowledged and affirmed, is commensurate with salvation. By contrast, those who remain rooted in the Creator, including Jehovah Witnesses, appear damned, for they are effectively slaves, not freemen. Everything they say about life and the 'modern world' is compromised by their adherence to the 'ancient' one, with its Old Testament fundamentalism. They are not really evolutionary but devolutionary, since Jehovah is alone sovereign. They are like children who have not grown to full independence of their progenitor, but remain dependent on him for guidance and instruction. Were they real Christians, and not Judaists in disguise, this would not be the case. For Christ would have set them free (of the alpha-of-alphas), and they would now be awaiting His Second Coming and thus, by implication, the advent of the Holy Spirit.

50. The autocracy of drinking wine, beer, or cola from a bottle. The theocracy of drinking wine, beer, or cola from a can. The democracy of drinking wine, beer, or cola from either a bottle into a glass on the Right or a can into a glass on the Left, with the possibility of a liberal, centrist compromise between the two in the guise, more probably, of barrel into glass. Now since, in my view, wine corresponds to the Father, beer to the Son, and cola to the Holy Ghost, it will follow that wine drunk from a bottle, a glass, or a can corresponds to the autocracy, democracy, and theocracy of the Father; beer drunk from a bottle, a glass, or a can corresponds to the autocracy, democracy, and theocracy of Christ; and cola drunk from a bottle, a glass, or a can corresponds to the autocracy, democracy, and theocracy of the Holy Spirit. If there is or could be such a thing as the bureaucracy of drinking wine, beer, or cola, as relative to the Blessed Virgin, and hence by worldly implication to a bodily neutrality in between proton and electron extremes, it would probably take the form of barrels, kegs, containers, etc., though I, for one, rather doubt the applicability of such mind-altering drinks to a bureaucratic and hence feminine mean, preferring to speculate in terms of the applicability of milk and fruit juices to it within a bottle - glass - can/carton triad stretching from fruit juices in the context of the Father, or the bureaucracy thereof, to flavoured milk and/or milk shakes in the context of the Holy Ghost via plain milk in the context of Christ, milk having to do with the Mother (Blessed Virgin) and thus being closer to the Son than, say, fruit juices, which are rather more naturalistic in their derivation from nature (fruit) and vitamin-providing essence. To me, fruit juices are the bureaucratic complement to wine, no less than milk to beer and milk shakes to cola.

51. Although Western societies tend to be rooted in autocracy, not all countries share the same bias. For it is clear that while some, like Britain, have an autocratic bias, others, like Ireland, a theocratic bias, and still others, like France, profess to a bias for democracy. This means that while Britain, for example, will be partial to science and thus, by implication, to empirical objectivity, Ireland will be partial to religion and, thus, by implication, to faithful subjectivity. For science is no less autocratic than religion theocratic, and a bias for the one will tend to preclude the other from being taken particularly seriously - religion being no less alien to the British empirical bias than science to the Irish faithful one, given the subjective/objective, individual/collective distinctions between the two extremes, the former idealistic and the latter naturalistic. Hence while religion gets a comparatively raw deal in England, where the grain is ever objective and empiricism accordingly rules the roost, science will be given comparatively short shrift in Ireland where, by contrast, the grain is ever subjective and faith accordingly takes considerable precedence. Were the two countries identical, Britain would not be a Constitutional Monarchy nor Ireland a Catholic Republic. But, as history attests, they are and remain antithetical, and religious subjectivity has as much chance of being taken seriously in England, with its autocratic traditions, as scientific empiricism in Ireland, the theocratic traditions of which minister to faith to a degree which, outside Catholic circles, would be inconceivable in Britain. Hence Britain is ever conservative and right wing, whilst Ireland is ever radical and effectively left wing - at any rate, as regards theocracy. For theocracy in Britain, which is Protestant, tends to be compromised by the autocratic traditions of British monarchism, especially in its English manifestation, and is consequently intensely conservative, deferring to scientific objectivity in a way and to an extent that the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland never would nor ever could, bearing in mind its radical commitment to faith and thus to the task of keeping alive the People's hope of Messianic redemption in the 'Kingdom of Heaven', which the Saviour will establish at His Second Coming. Such faith will, no doubt, be vindicated, but not in a way that an overly objective 'Bible-punching' fundamentalist would expect, assuming he were capable of any faith in the Second Coming, which seems to me rather doubtful in view of the connection between objectivity and science.

52. If I were asked to define sexuality in relation to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, or the historical periods thereof, I would have no hesitation in ascribing a horizontal bias to sexuality within the context of the Father, whether autocratically, democratically, or theocratically; a seated bias to sexuality within the context of the Son, whether autocratically, democratically, or theocratically; and a vertical bias to sexuality within the context of the Holy Ghost, whether autocratically, democratically, or theocratically. Since the autocratic tends to be masturbatory and the theocratic voyeuristic, the democratic may be ascribed a coital status within a broadly heterosexual framework, in contrast to the coital status of bureaucratic sex, or sex within basically worldly terms, which is homosexual on both feminine (lesbian) and masculine (gay) terms, albeit the former tends to predominate within the bureaucracy of the Father and the latter within the bureaucracy of the Holy Ghost, whereas the bureaucracy of Christ would indicate, in its bourgeois relativity, the likelihood of a balance between lesbian and gay modes of homosexuality. Now since my interest is more with the democratic modes of coital sex than with the bureaucratic in this entry, I shall concentrate on heterosexuality to the exclusion of homosexuality, and draw distinctions, over and above the horizontal, seated, and vertical ones to which I have already alluded, between the different approaches to coital heterosexuality. To begin with, there is what I would call the right-wing approach to copulation between a man and a woman in which the man inserts his penis into the woman's vagina from behind, the man being the sexually active, or aggressive, partner. Contrasted to which we shall find the left-wing approach to heterosexual copulation in which the woman takes sexual control of the man's penis with her back turned on him. In between these extreme democratic positions we shall find the liberal, or centrist, positions of face-to-face heterosexuality, with the man active in the right-liberal context but the woman active in the left-liberal context, the possibility of simultaneous or alternate sexual activity being reserved a centre-liberal status, as befitting its balanced integrity. Hence from the extreme right to the extreme left via a liberal compromise in between, heterosexuality will be masculine-dominated on the Right, feminine-dominated on the Left, and androgynous in the Centre. However, whether these different approaches to heterosexuality are conducted on a horizontal, a seated, or a vertical basis should depend, in my view, on the type of democracy to which their participants relate and the degree of their fidelity, consciously or unconsciously, to a class-conscious identity; though I have no doubt that most people do not consciously draw parallels between their sexual preferences and their politics. However that may be, it is my duty, as a self-taught philosopher, to attempt to draw such parallels, if only to clarify the matter in my own eyes and bring order to the possible chaos of choices and options which, if not understood metaphysically, will remain merely physical, without deeper meaning or significance. Since we are men and not animals, it behoves us to ascribe meaning to our acts and thus to lift them above the merely physical realm in which they would otherwise languish, like soulless automata, to a realm where they may be morally evaluated. Clearly then, since horizontal heterosexuality appertains to the democracy of the Father, we have no logical alternative but to ascribe a Conservative peer significance to horizontal right-wing heterosexuality, a Labour peer significance to horizontal left-wing heterosexuality, and a Liberal and/or Liberal-Democratic peer significance to horizontal centrist heterosexuality, so that anyone who has intercourse with the opposite sex in a horizontal position is effectively having sex that finds its political parallel in the House of Lords and is accordingly aristocratic. Compared to which we shall find that, as seated heterosexuality appertains to the democracy of Christ, we have no alternative but to ascribe a Conservative significance to seated right-wing heterosexuality, a Labour significance to seated left-wing heterosexuality, and a Liberal Democratic significance to seated centrist heterosexuality, so that anyone who regularly has intercourse in a seated position is effectively having sex that finds its political parallel in the House of Commons, and is accordingly bourgeois. After which we shall find that, since vertical heterosexuality appertains to the democracy of the Holy Ghost, we have no alternative but to ascribe a Social Democratic significance to vertical right-wing heterosexuality, a Social Radical significance to vertical left-wing heterosexuality, and a 'Social Liberal' significance to vertical centrist heterosexuality, so that anyone who regularly has heterosexual intercourse in a vertical position is effectively having sex that finds its political parallel in the 'Social Democratic' parliaments of the former East-European Communist countries, and is accordingly proletarian. In fact, treating our aristocratic, bourgeois, and proletarian distinctions economically, one could say that the heterosexuality of the Father is effectively feudal, the heterosexuality of the Son effectively capitalist, and the heterosexuality of the Holy Ghost effectively socialist, as relative to the different class societies corresponding to each of the aforementioned stages of civilized evolution. Therefore it ought to be logically possible to infer that a person who considers himself socialistic should prefer vertical heterosexuality to either of the other kinds, whereas a capitalist ought logically to find seated heterosexuality more congenial, etc. Once again, I would have to doubt that total consistency between one's sexuality and politics was a matter of principle for most people, who are less godlike than animalistic in their comparative thoughtlessness. Only a select few within each class or stage of Western civilization would strive after such consistency, which is, after all, the mark of true civilization.

53. In reference to the above, I should like to draw attention to the fact that, for women, dresses and skirts can be either flounced, straight, or tapered, and that a correlation can indeed be inferred to exist between flounced dresses/skirts and the civilization/class of the Father; straight dresses/skirts and the civilization/class of the Son; and tapered dresses/skirts and the civilization/class of the Holy Ghost, so that what a woman wears will inevitably tell one something about her class/civilized allegiance and the type of heterosexuality to which she should relate and/or be subjected. For the flounce, being centrifugal, conveys a proton-biased significance commensurate with the civilization/class of the Father, whereas the taper, being centripetal, conveys an electron-biased significance commensurate with the civilization/class of the Holy Ghost, and the straight, being neither centrifugal nor centripetal but neutral, conveys a neutron significance commensurate with the civilization/class of the Son. Hence the nature of a woman's dress/skirt will reveal to the interested male more than simply meets the eye, and she can be known accordingly. To my way of thinking, dresses are right wing and skirts left wing, so that a woman who habitually dresses in one or the other can be known in relation to either right- or left-wing politics and should be treated accordingly, i.e. approached from either a right- or a left-wing point of view. On the other hand, a woman who regularly alternates between dresses and skirts is effectively liberal, and should be regarded/sexually approached from a centrist point of view, the exact approach depending on the nature of her clothing at any given time. Hence the use of a dress would entitle the male to take face-to-face sexual initiative, whereas the use of a skirt would entitle the female to take such initiative within the face-to-face parameters of liberal heterosexuality, irrespective of the class stage to which the partners ordinarily relate. A tapering dress and one is in the context of Social Democracy. A tapering skirt and one is in the context of Social Radicalism. Some women will tend to be one or the other, and should be treated accordingly, whereas others will prefer to alternate between such dresses and skirts in response to a Social Liberal persuasion which would indicate a preference for face-to-face heterosexuality within the vertical context of the democracy of the Holy Ghost. I needn't list the other class stages or allegiances here, since what applies in this tapered context applies no less in the flounced and straight contexts which precede it and are just as subject to right- and left-wing options, as well as to a compromise between the two. On the other hand, a woman is more likely to transcend her gender in the electron-biased context of the Holy Ghost than in the proton-biased context of the Father or in the proton/electron oscillation of Christ, given the evolutionary pressures towards liberation which particularly affect proletarian women these days.... Though that is not to say that bourgeois and aristocratic women can't also seek liberation from their gender in a theocratic alternative which will take the form of trousers or jeans rather than, say, tights. For it should be apparent that flared, straight, and tapered trousers, jeans, etc., will correspond no less to the centrifugal, neutral, and centripetal alternatives of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost than in the case of dresses and skirts, and that a woman in tapered jeans and/or tights can be said to have transcended her gender in a much more radically centripetal, and hence theocratic, way than one who wears flared pants or straight jeans, and thus corresponds to a theocratic complement to the Father or to the Son, as the case may be. The 'woman' in tapered jeans is effectively proletarian and corresponds to the theocracy of the Holy Ghost, which, being the ultimate theocracy, is beyond gender, masculine as well as feminine, and thus transcendental through and through. However, much as there are women who have transcended their gender on a more or less permanent basis, most women are as yet neither so liberated nor so radical as to prefer pants of one description or another all of the time, and thus be effectively above and beyond heterosexuality in a private voyeuristic sexuality of their own. The majority still cling, if intermittently, to skirts, if not to dresses as well, and are consequently open, in worldly femininity, to heterosexual imposition by men.

54. Further to my entry on drinks, both trinitarian and bureaucratic, I should like to add a contention that water and spirits correspond to the civilization/class of Jehovah, which is to say, the alpha-of-alphas, with, for example, whisky corresponding to the theocracy, democracy, and autocracy (in that devolutionary order) of Jehovah, but water corresponding to the bureaucracy of Jehovah. Thus, unlike wine, beer, and cola, whisky would correspond to the untransvaluated 'ancient world', as would water in relation to fruit juices, milk, and milk shakes ... in that ascending, or evolutionary order. Since the untransvaluated civilization begins in theocracy and proceeds via a type of royalist democracy to autocracy, it would seem feasible to contend that whisky in a box and/or jar corresponds to the theocratic, whereas whisky in a bottle corresponds to the autocratic, and whisky in a glass to the democratic ... so that we proceed from a sort of can equivalent to bottles via glasses. Thus a small bottle of whisky in, say, a cardboard box would correspond to the alpha theocratic ... which, unlike the omega theocratic correspondence of, say, a can of cola, is fundamentally centrifugal (and, hence, relative to bottles as opposed to cans), even if appearances would suggest the contrary, as with the addition of a cardboard box. For, of course, in relating alpha theocracy to the Cosmos, we are obliged to accept that the central star of the Galaxy, from which monotheistic alpha divinity would seem to have been extrapolated, is still a star, despite its central position, and therefore subject, like the other alpha stars of the Galaxy, to proton-proton reactions. As to the bureaucracy of Jehovah, the feminine drink of the world, water can be consumed via bottles or cans, from a left- or a right-wing standpoint, as well as from the more middle-ground position of glasses, except that the can will be closer to the right-wing theocratic and the bottle closer to the left-wing autocratic, as germane to the untransvaluated standing of Eastern civilization. For whereas theocracy is Left in the West, it is Right in the East, or 'ancient world', since theocracy is everywhere the root condition. As regards water, I include, besides ordinary drinking water, mineral and soda water, as well as, to a lesser extent, cream soda.

55. Since theocracy is Right in the 'ancient world', of which Islam is the most conspicuous contemporary example, autocracy is comparatively Left, particularly when, as in the case [formerly] of Sadam Hussein's Iraq, it tends to liberalize Islamic society along relatively secular lines, a tendency which can only be anathema to the hard-line clerical Right. In fact, the war between President Sadam's Iraq and the Ayatollah Khomeini's Iran was effectively a struggle, within Islamic civilization, between the autocratic Left and the theocratic Right, autocratic liberalism and theocratic conservatism, with Iraq broadly representative of secular freedom and Iran of religious binding. Yet such freedom is a far cry from Western notions of freedom, which are rather more democratic than autocratic, insofar as freedom is from autocratic binding and has, as its ultimate end, a theocratic salvation which is the omega-of-omegas: a theocratic Left as opposed to an autocratic Right, an evolutionary culmination as opposed to an evolutionary inception. What a contrast with the devolutionary culmination of Eastern autocracy vis-à-vis the devolutionary inception of theocratic fundamentalism! For such a devolutionary culmination is not a means to a new end, an evolutionary inception, so much as an end-in-itself: one necessarily hostile to Western notions of democracy, with their anti-autocratic essence. Such a devolutionary culmination remains loyal to theocratic fundamentalism even as it opposes theocratic control of society. In this it is in complete contrast to Western autocracy which, no matter how right-wing, remains loyal to Christianity and its theocratic hope. For the progression from the Father to the Holy Ghost via the Son is a logical one, and must pass through autocratic, democratic, and theocratic stages in each case.

56. Probably the term 'Holy Ghost' is inadequate to define divinity on the level of the omega-of-omegas, given its Christian relativity as the 'Third Person' of the Blessed Trinity. If, as I have contended, Jehovah/Allah and the Father are not really one-and-the-same but indicative of an ancient/modern distinction between that which, as Jehovah/Allah, was effectively extrapolated from the central star of the Galaxy, and that which, as the Father, was partly extrapolated from the sun and partly from pagan phallic precedent, so that we have a divine/diabolic - worldly distinction relative to devolutionary and (at least in part) evolutionary positions, the former wholly devolutionary and the latter devolutionary in regard to the sun (diabolic alpha) but evolutionary in regard to the phallus (worldly omega), then one would have no logical justification in believing that the Holy Ghost was truly commensurate with superconscious mind and thus effectively equivalent to the omega-of-omegas. On the contrary, it would appear to be the nearest Western model to such a possibility and therefore inadequate for a truly global civilization which, as the term suggests, will be neither Eastern nor Western but beyond both the ancient East and the modern West in an omega futurity of superconscious divinity, a divinity as much omega as Jehovah/Allah is alpha. This ultimate divinity, corresponding to superconscious mind, could be described as pure spirit, superconsciousness, or indeed the omega-of-omegas, and probably such a description would be closer to Teilhard de Chardin's 'Omega Point' than the term 'Holy Ghost'. For it seems to me that the Holy Ghost is less superconscious mind per se than mind, including thoughts and fantasies, and is therefore no less a Western definition of omega divinity than the Father is, at any rate partly, a Western definition of alpha divinity - assuming the terms 'alpha' and 'omega' really do have any applicability here and we are not, rather, dealing with equally humanistic definitions which, together with Christ, pertain to a co-existential 'Three in One', the Father having bodily implications (with especial reference to the phallus), the Son soulful implications (with especial reference to the heart), and the Holy Ghost spiritual implications (with especial reference to the mind), so that body, soul, and mind are equally acknowledged, within the parameters of this Western civilization, on a co-existentially humanistic basis, a basis which inevitably falls short or, depending on your standpoint, fights shy of alpha and omega divine extremes, as relative to Jehovah/Allah on the one hand, that of the ancient cosmic-oriented civilizations, and to some as-yet-unarticulated superconscious divinity on the other hand, that of the coming global civilization which will be completely beyond both alpha and worldly alternatives ... in its own unequivocally omega-oriented integrity. Clearly, trinitarian terminology would be no less irrelevant to this future global civilization than Jehovah or Allah is irrelevant to the Christian civilization of humanistic modernity. This future global civilization will be as posterior to humanism as the civilizations of the 'ancient world', and the Near East in particular, were anterior to it. Hence neither the Father and the Son nor the Holy Ghost, but only that which is correlative with superconscious mind and, hence, ultimate divinity.

57. It would seem that, in relation to the mind as described above, the subconscious is no less anterior to the Holy Ghost than the superconscious posterior to it. And yet, if the Father is not solely a phallic extrapolation but was also extrapolated from the sun, then we can argue in terms of an alpha definition to the extent that a solar extrapolation is being inferred, which would suggest, contrary to the above, that the Father can pertain to the subconscious to a degree - namely to the degree of ordinary dreams as opposed to pure subconsciousness. Now if the Father can pertain to the subconscious to a degree, then it seems not unlikely that the Holy Ghost can pertain to the superconscious to a degree, and thus be relatively omega orientated on lines, antithetical to dreams, which approximate to the artificial visionary experience of, say, an LSD trip. Yet such a relative omega orientation would fall no less short of pure superconsciousness, and hence omega purism, than the relative alpha-oriented subconsciousness of dreams falls short of pure subconsciousness, and hence alpha purism, as germane to Allah/Jehovah, which may embrace those dreams of exceptional clarity and significance. Logically, I have of course been inconsistent to speak of the Father as extrapolated from the sun on the one hand and from the phallus of pagan precedent on the other; for the sun and the phallus are no more in parallel alignment than would be the subconscious and the fiery core of the earth. It would be more consistently logical to speak in terms of the Father either as an extrapolation from the sun and the fiery core of the earth or as an extrapolation from the subconscious and the phallus, since the former terms are no less cosmic than the latter are humanistic, and one should aim for consistency in these matters if one is not to be at cross-purposes with oneself. Clearly, either the cosmic or the humanistic correlations will suffice for such a theological extrapolation as the Father, though I fancy that the latter will have more relevance to a specifically humanistic age and civilization than the former, if only because they are indicative of a more evolved viewpoint. Of course, some people would question whether the Father, as indeed Christ and the Holy Ghost, need be extrapolated from anywhere. But such scepticism would fail to take cognizance of the fact that without some anterior source from which to extrapolate theological postulates, such postulates would lack both credibility and substance. In fact, they would be no more than mere figments of the imagination, and you cannot base a religion or religious observance on insubstantial figments! Unless there is a real correspondence to cosmic and/or natural precedent, such postulates would be meaningless.

58. If there is a parallel between the male orgasm and an active volcano, then we can believe that that aspect of the Father which is a phallic extrapolation (from pagan precedent) would have more relevance to the core of the earth than to nature generally, and so much so that, diabolic asides notwithstanding, one would have difficulty not associating the Mother (Blessed Virgin) with the latter in view of its comparatively superficial, and hence apparent, standing in relation to the masculine core - a standing which parallels that of the vagina to the penis in heterosexual relations. Hence 'Mother Nature' would indeed be confined to nature and not to the rather more cosmic core of the earth, which, in its fiery essence, would seem to have masculine connotations which make it logical to infer a phallic and, in particular, scrotal extrapolation in regard to the male pudenda. Thus fiery core vis-à-vis nature as a blueprint for scrotal phallus vis-à-vis vagina, and we may well believe that where the phallus is in harmony with the heart in a loving partnership between the two, its relationship to the vagina will be akin to that of the Father towards the Son in a loving relationship with the Mother. Conversely, the absence of love from the heart will reduce sexual relations between the phallus and the vagina, and thus by implication men and women, to one of lust, and thereby signify a diabolic rather than a divine situation in which, effectively, the Devil (rather than the Father) is imposing upon the world, the fiery core upon nature ... without reference to the moon and, hence, the loving Christ. Hence while the loving heart grants to the scrotal phallus a subworldly divine standing in relation to the Father, a sexually active phallus untempered by love is simply subworldly on a diabolic basis - the Devil as opposed to the Father, since lust, being cold-hearted, has no connection with love and therefore no relationship of Father to Son, alias the earth's core to the moon.

59. Just as I discussed drinks in relation to the Trinity/Virgin and then returned to the subject at a later juncture in order to fill-in the drinks relative, as I saw it, to Jehovah and thus, by implication, the 'ancient world', viz. spirits in relation to theocratic, democratic, and autocratic alternatives, but water in relation to the bureaucratic position underneath, so I will now return to the subject of sex and fill-in the sexuality relative to that world, with particular reference to its 'democratic' manifestations on account of their heterosexual nature. But before I do so I must point out that the sartorial norm for women in the context in question is of a wrap-around mode of attire akin to saris. Hence not only will the attire be ring-like ... to the extent that it is wrapped around the woman's body, but so too, I contend, will the approach to heterosexuality, by which is meant that one or both partner's legs will be wrapped around the other's body in a ring-like manner, reflective of the centrifugal nature of alpha-stemming, fundamentalist civilization. Hence for the right-wing 'democratic' approach to heterosexuality, the man will insert himself into the woman from behind while holding her by the thighs in a roughly horizontal position, the greater length of her legs thereby extending beyond his waist in a loose ring-like formation. In the case of the right-wing liberal position, however, the couple will be horizontally face-to-face with the man on top but the legs of the woman wrapped around his back, thereby establishing a ring-like impression. In the case of the left-wing liberal position, by contrast, the woman will be on top and the man's legs will be wrapped around her back. Finally, in the left-wing 'democratic' approach to heterosexuality, the woman will have her back turned on the man while his legs are wrapped around her stomach or even the underside of her thighs if she has her legs drawn up and, as in the left-liberal position, she will be the dominant partner. In all cases, however, the ring-like connotation of legs wrapped around one's partner will indicate the fundamentalist nature of this sexuality, which, so I contend, pertains to the centrifugal civilization of the 'ancient world' and not to any of the stages - Father, Son, or Holy Ghost - of Western civilization. As to theocratic and autocratic alternatives to the 'democratic' sexuality discussed above, I would argue that wet dreams pertain to the theocratic as the most alpha mode of voyeuristic sexuality, whereas masturbatory stimulation of the penis by a woman's hand would correspond to the devolutionary autocracy of oriental civilization, given the autocratic nature of masturbatory sexuality and the probability of a woman's involvement in view of the comparatively left-wing standing of autocracy in the ancient Islamic and oriental world, a standing in marked contrast to the right-wing theocracy, for example, of Islamic fundamentalism and its alpha-oriented conservatism. Hence involvement of the female in this autocratic mode of sexuality would confirm, it seems to me, the leftwards drift of sexuality from female-dominated intercourse to female-dominated masturbation. In contrast, it should be noted, to Western masturbatory sexual practices which, pertaining to an autocracy which is fundamentally alpha instead of omega (and therefore right wing instead of left), will be solely a male preserve, i.e. something indulged in by the male himself.

60. Broadly, thus far, I have argued as follows: that heterosexuality is essentially a democratic mode of sexuality which is flanked, as it were, by masturbatory and voyeuristic extremes - the former autocratic and the latter theocratic, whilst under this 'trinity' of sexual alternatives will be found the bureaucratic sexuality of lesbians and/or gays, pretty much as the Virgin under the Trinity - at least as far as lesbians are concerned. Though with gays I would argue that the rather more liberal (than Catholic) parallel of an Antivirgin under an Antitrinity would be the more relevant description, since one is dealing less with the religious than with the secular, less with wavicles than with particles, and therefore less with love than lust. Hence, for example, both the Antichristic and the Antivirginal modes of heterosexuality and homosexuality, respectively, would be comparatively diabolic because uninformed by love. Which is not to say that gays are invariably loveless, any more than lesbians invariably love each other, but that homosexuality is more often an expression of self-love than of love for another person, the fiery core turned back upon itself in defiance or rejection of nature. Yet both the Virginal and Antivirginal manifestations of homosexuality remain worldly or, rather, worldly in the case of lesbians (nature) but subworldly in the case of gays (fiery core), and hence modes of sexuality more appropriate to 'bodies' than to 'heads', which is to say to feminine bureaucrats rather than to masculine autocrats, democrats, or theocrats. Now in the case of the latter it will usually be found that voyeurism takes an oral turn, since oral sex is the most voyeuristic mode of sexuality, whether the vagina or the penis or, indeed, both at once be the focus of attention. As I see it, cunnilingus is relative to the theocracy of the Father (the theocracy of Jehovah having more intimate connections with wet dreams, as already discussed), and fellatio to both the theocracy of the Son and the Holy Ghost, depending on the context. In the case of cunnilingus, it is as though the sun rather than the core of the earth were imposing upon nature, a voyeuristic imposition upon the Mother by a transcendent Father, whereas in the case of fellatio it is as though the fiery core was being voyeuristically imposed upon by a flaming nature, a voyeuristic imposition upon the subworldly Father by a transcendent Mother. However, in the case of homosexual fellatio we are rather more in the context of the Holy Ghost, with a transcendent Father voyeuristically imposing upon the fiery core of the earth. Yet lesbian and gay oral sex is less theocratic than personally bureaucratic, or bureaucratic in a theocratic way, and should not be equated with genuinely theocratic sex. And even fellatio is less radically theocratic when indulged in by couples of the same race than when mixed-race couples are involved. For whereas the one pertains to the Son, the other pertains to the theocracy of the Holy Ghost and is therefore the most radical mode of fellatio, a mode which contrasts with the ring-like voyeurism of a cunnilingus/fellatio balance, as relative, so I contend, to the less extreme form of alpha theocracy within the context of Eastern civilization. But no less than a balanced ring-like oral indulgence is less extreme than wet dreams, so mixed-race fellatio is less extreme than gadget and/or video-induced phallic stimulation, which may or may not result in orgasm. This is the omega-of-omegas in theocratic sexual terms, the antithesis to wet dreams, and something which is effectively beyond reference to Western theocracy (of the Holy Ghost) in a context of sexual omega.

61. If masturbation is broadly autocratic in relation to coitus on the one hand and to oral sex on the other, then we still have to clarify the different class stages of masturbation (no less than of coitus and oral sex formerly) ... on the basis of a horizontal position for both ancient and modern aristocratic autocracies (the former with female assistance and the latter without), a seated position for bourgeois autocracy, and a standing position for proletarian autocracy, bearing in mind the contentions already put forward in relation to both coitus and oral sex. A man who masturbates himself while lying down would suggest, irrespective of his perceived class, a sexual affinity with the autocracy of the Father and thus, by implication, Royalism. A man who masturbates himself while seated in a chair and/or kneeling down would suggest a sexual affinity with the autocracy of Christ and thus, by implication, Parliamentarianism (Cromwell). A man who masturbates himself while standing up would suggest a sexual affinity with the autocracy of the Holy Ghost and thus, by implication, Communism. In each case, however, the centrifugal nature of his sexuality would confirm an autocratic bias, though it is more likely that the stimulus employed would differ as we progressed, as it were, from aristocratic naturalism to proletarian idealism via bourgeois materialism, the erotic stimulus becoming more artificial the higher the class stage of masturbation, so that whereas the man who prefers to masturbate while lying down would probably rely on fantasy to stimulate his masturbation, the man who habitually masturbates while standing up will more than likely rely on pornographic images of the sort to be found in men's magazines. Whether the man in between, the seated and/or kneeling one, would prefer to avail himself of the assistance of pornographic writings and/or drawings in books ... is perhaps a moot point. Though it does seem the most likely alternative, in view of the bourgeois status of seated masturbation and the inevitable corollary with books that leaps to mind whenever bourgeois criteria are under discussion. However that may be, we need not doubt that the masturbator is more a creature of orgasmic heat than of voyeuristic light, and that, no matter what the superficial stimulus may happen to be, his primary motivation for masturbating is to experience the thrill of orgasm within the fiery context of an autocratic bent. In this respect, he is the antithesis of the voyeur, whose principal motivation for having oral sex is the voyeuristic thrill of looking at his partner's face and/or scrutinizing her sex at close range, as the case may be. Yet more extreme than either the orgasmic masturbator or the oral voyeur is the theocratic contemplative who, whether in the naturalistic context of erotic dreams or in the artificial context of erotic videos, allows himself to be stimulated by the erotic spectacle alone, without reference to masturbatory or oral means. Such men, relative to the alpha and omega of theocratic sexuality, are above the body, and thus relate to the mind, whether anterior or posterior to the flesh.

62. It should be possible to distinguish between American-style baseball caps with emblem and those with logo on the front on the basis of a perceptual/conceptual dichotomy, and to accord to the former a Social Democratic status while reserving for the latter a Social Radical one, since it seems to me that these peaked caps are broadly democratic in terms of the democracy of the Holy Ghost, i.e. Social Democracy, and therefore correspond to a proletarian middle-ground in between 'autocratic' collapsibles and 'theocratic' hoods, the former communistic on account of their centrifugal construction and the latter transcendentalist on account of their centripetal construction - at least within the recognizably proletarian context of waist-length zipper jackets. Yet if emblematic baseball caps are right wing and logo-sporting ones left wing within broadly democratic terms, then it seems to me that those peaked caps which have neither emblem nor logo on the front are centrist and thus effectively Social Liberal. Hence one can distinguish between Social Democratic, Social Liberal, and Social Radical caps, which are rivalled by collapsible umbrellas and fold-in hoods ... on the autocratic and theocratic flanks of proletarian civilization, the civilization, I need hardly stress, of the Holy Ghost. Beneath this 'trinity', however, we shall find the bureaucracy of the Holy Ghost, and that those who relate more to bureaucracy than to autocracy, democracy, or theocracy will generally prefer not to wear headgear and/or protect their heads from the rain, being, by nature, more bodily than of the head.

63. A generic definition of Communism would be Social Autocracy, thereby bringing it into line with notions of Social Democracy and Social Theocracy in the autocracy, democracy, and theocracy, respectively, of the Holy Ghost. In contrast to which we of course have the liberal, or capitalist, autocracy, democracy, and theocracy of the Son, viz., in England, Cromwellian autocracy, parliamentary democracy, and Puritan theocracy, not to mention the royalist, or feudal, autocracy, democracy, and theocracy of the Father, viz., in England, monarchic autocracy, peerist democracy (the House of Lords being the focal-point of this democracy), and Anglican/Catholic theocracy. Hence three stages of Western society with their trinitarian subdivisions - stages which can be regarded from a variety of angles, such as, for example, feudal, capitalist, and socialist (economic); aristocratic, bourgeois, and proletarian (social class); royalist, liberal, and communist (political); the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (religious); body, soul, and mind (physical/metaphysical); protons, neutrons, and electrons (elemental); realism, materialism, and idealism (ideological); beauty, goodness, and truth (moral). Such definitions, however, exclude the theocracy-democracy-autocracy divisions of traditional oriental civilization, which are rather more naturalistic, and hence cosmic orientated, than worldly or humanistic.

64. There seems to be a sense in which each decade aspires to reflecting a different ideological tendency, be it naturalistic, realistic, materialistic, or idealistic. Thus, for example, the idealistic 1950s (time of anti-Communist witch hunts and sci-fi films), but the naturalistic 1960s (time of hippy paganism and left-wing subversion). Contrasted to which the 1970s (with their grim strikes and class struggles) may well appear realistic, and the 1980s (time of Thatcherite enterprise culture) comparatively materialistic. In which case, we need not doubt that, like the '50s, the 1990s were an idealistic decade (the decade of the collapse of Communism and affirmation of spiritual values). In fact, if decades do follow a sort of naturalistic-realistic-materialistic-idealistic progression, then we could draw up a list stretching back into the nineteenth century and forwards into the twenty-first century, as follows: naturalistic 1880s, realistic 1890s, materialistic 1900s, idealistic 1910s; naturalistic 1920s, realistic 1930s, materialistic 1940s, idealistic 1950s; naturalistic 1960s, realistic 1970s, materialistic 1980s, idealistic 1990s; naturalistic 2000s, realistic 2010s, materialistic 2020s, idealistic 2030s, and so on.

65. The philosopher, the ultimate type of writer because the most idealistic, can only be 'king', in Plato's legendary sense, when society itself is ready to make an accommodation with idealism, and hence philosophy. So long as society is more given to either naturalism, realism, or materialism, the dramatist, poet, and novelist respectively will be 'king', in accordance with autocratic, bureaucratic, and democratic criteria, which necessarily exclude or marginalize the theocratic. For, ultimately, the philosopher is theocratic, and if he is excluded in an age of drama, he will be marginalized in an age of poetry or fiction. Conversely, it is the dramatist who will be excluded in an age of philosophy, and the poet and novelist marginalized, since idealism excludes naturalism no less than naturalism excludes idealism, and therefore truth will eclipse strength as literature, the most idealistic of the arts, comes properly into its own on the most idealistic and hence philosophical terms. But if truth must ultimately eclipse strength, neither beauty nor goodness can expect the same recognition or standing as would have been theirs in a less idealistic age, an age, as we have seen, of realism and materialism. Philosophy is assuredly as much 'beyond good and evil' as the Holy Spirit is beyond Christ. But it is also above beauty and ugliness, and consequently antithetical to strength and weakness. Alpha and omega cannot co-exist, unlike, to some extent, the world and purgatory, poetry and fiction. Omega must triumph utterly over alpha if the philosopher is truly to become 'king', and thus the most respected and beloved of writers. Literally the leader and teacher of the ultimate society.

66. When true to itself literature has no other business than the pursuit of truth, the meaning and purpose of life, and that literature which pursues the True most truly and comprehensively is the ultimate literature - the philosophy of philosophies, beyond which it is impossible to progress. That literature which, in novels, is more concerned with the Good than the True, with love than joy, is inferior to this ultimate literature, as, to a greater extent, is that literature which, in poetry, is more concerned with beauty, and hence pleasure, or that literature which, in drama, is more concerned with strength, and hence pride - the least truth-oriented literature and therefore the least moral and idealistic form of literary endeavour. No less than poetry and fiction are polar on a realistic/materialistic basis, so drama and philosophy would seem to be polar on a naturalistic/idealistic basis - the former polarity equivalent to earth and water, the latter polarity to fire and air. Now in a society which is omega orientated, the less drama and the more philosophy there will be ... in contrast to alpha-stemming societies, in which drama takes precedence over philosophy, and therefore strength over truth. The writer who affirms both drama and philosophy is neither fish nor fowl but a kind of amoral paradox who seemingly swings between alpha and omega extremes, and probably in such a fashion as to do justice neither to the one nor to the other. Similarly the man who swings between fictional and poetic extremes, purgatorial materialism and worldly realism, is neither fish nor fowl, Protestant nor Catholic, but a kind of paradoxical combination of the two, who may well be less of a poet or more of a novelist than he imagines himself to be. For one can no more serve goodness and beauty, love and pleasure, equally than ... serve strength and truth, pride and joy. Ethics is a Protestant concern, aesthetics a Catholic one, and in this polarity lies all the difference between Christ and the Blessed Virgin. Of course, fiction and poetry can also deal primarily with evil and ugliness, just as drama and philosophy can be primarily concerned with weakness and illusion, though these negative forms of the literary arts will be less literary than anti-literary and, hence, decadent and/or bogus, as relative to those who pertain not to the wavicle but to the particle aspect of any given atomicity, and may thus be identified, in theological parlance, with a fall from (wavicle) grace. Such 'antiliterature' is rather more characteristic of a secular than of a religious age, of 'the Civilization' as opposed to 'the Culture', to revert to Spengler again, and will therefore be more at home within the particle confines of journalistic media, including newspapers and magazines, than within the wavicle confines of literary media, such as paperbacks and hardbacks, irrespective of the fact that books are often subverted by material of an anti-literary nature, which, in relation to journalistic media, would seem to indicate an intrinsic as opposed to an extrinsic form of decadence, the subversion of 'the Culture' rather than the outright philistinism of 'the Civilization', which, contrary to what that term may suggest, is rather more barbarous than civilized, given its particle bias.

67. It is not that realism is biased towards the particle and materialism biased towards the wavicle, since both realism and materialism can be either religious or secular, Catholic/ Protestant or Liberal/Republican, as, of course, can naturalism and idealism, paganism and transcendentalism, alpha and omega of pre- and post-Western civilizations. Beauty and goodness, appertaining to realism and to materialism respectively, are biased towards the wavicle, whereas ugliness and evil, their negative concomitants, are biased towards the particle. Therefore while pleasure is the essence of Catholicism and love the essence of Protestantism, ugliness is the appearance of Liberalism and evil the appearance of Republicanism. For no more do wavicles have a primary appearance than particles a primary essence, and it would be no less contradictory to speak of the will of Liberalism than ... the body of Catholicism or the soul of Republicanism than ... the heart of Puritanism. With wavicles the essence is primary and the appearance secondary - pleasure before beauty, love before goodness, whereas with particles the appearance is primary and the essence secondary - ugliness before pain, evil before hate. We can no more judge a book (essential) by its cover (appearance) than a magazine (appearance) by its contents (essence). In the case of wavicle realism, the essence takes precedence over the appearance - say, pleasure over beauty in a volume of poetry (not antipoetry). In the case of particle realism, however, the appearance takes precedence over the essence - say, ugliness over pain in a liberal magazine. We read for pleasure (or love, pride, joy). We look for ugliness (or evil, weakness, illusion). Hence pleasure before beauty, but ugliness before pain; love before goodness, but evil before hate; pride before strength, but weakness before humiliation; joy before truth, but illusion before woe.

68. The essence of wavicles conditions their appearance. The appearance of particles conditions their essence. Wavicles - and, by extrapolation, wavicle-biased people - have the grace of the Elect. Particles - and, by extrapolation, particle-biased people - have the shame of the Fallen. The former, within their respective contexts, are saved, the latter ... damned. The most saved are the joyful and the least saved the proud. The most damned are the weak and the least damned the illusory. The others are saved and damned somewhere in between.

69. If strength/pride is the characteristic expression of rock music, particularly hard rock, then it would seem that rock is alpha, and hence autocratic. If truth/joy is the characteristic expression of jazz music, particularly modern jazz, then it would seem that jazz is omega, and hence theocratic. If goodness/love is the characteristic expression of soul music, then it would seem that soul is lunar, and hence democratic. If beauty/pleasure is the characteristic expression of pop music, then it would seem that pop is worldly, and hence bureaucratic. Put theologically, one could argue that rock is of the Father, soul of the Son, jazz of the Holy Ghost, and pop of the Virgin Mary. One could also argue that, instrumentally speaking, rock music is typified by drums, soul by keyboards, jazz by wind, and pop by guitars, since drums correspond to fire, keyboards to water, wind to air, and guitars to earth, and fire, water, air, and earth are the respective elements of alpha, purgatory, omega, and the world, or, put more bluntly and sweepingly, of the diabolic, the purgatorial, the divine, and the mundane, always bearing in mind, however, that wavicle/particle distinctions do exist within each category which are more symptomatic of positive and negative alternatives. Thus it could be argued that punk is more literally particle orientated, and hence diabolic, than rock, just as rap is more particle orientated than soul, blues more particle orientated than jazz, and funk more particle orientated than pop, so that we have anti-manifestations of their respective contexts which testify to a fallen status analogous to, though not necessarily commensurate with, the secular and diabolic. Of course, we also have in-between contexts, like soft rock in between hard rock and soul, rhythm 'n' blues in between soul and jazz, heavy metal in between punk and rap, house in between rap and blues, reggae in between pop and soul, hip-hop in between funk and rap, which somewhat complexify the issue and suggest that whether the spectrum be wavicle or particle, the axis vertical or horizontal, intermediate musical forms also have to be taken into account and accorded their ideological or moral dues. Yet it would seem that, broadly, rock is strength orientated, and therefore autocratic; soul goodness orientated, and therefore democratic; jazz truth orientated, and therefore theocratic; and pop beauty orientated, and therefore bureaucratic. Put in diagrammatic form, this would indicate, contrary to my previous speculations, that rock was alpha and soul purgatorial, with pop and jazz staying in their respective worldly and omega positions, as follows:-

ROCK/SOUL/JAZZ

(strength/pride)(goodness/love)(truth/joy)

POP

(beauty/pleasure)

with the particle (as opposed to wavicle) complementary forms listed in similar fashion, viz:-

PUNK/RAP/BLUES

(weakness/humiliation)(evil/hate)(illusion/woe)

FUNK

(ugliness/pain)

Should I be nearer the truth now, with regard to this particular subject, it could be that I can at last lay it to rest and conclude by saying that soul and pop are no less antithetical on a vertical axis than rock and jazz on a horizontal one, with soul being every bit as superior to pop as love to pleasure, or goodness to beauty, and jazz being every bit as superior to rock as joy to pride, or truth to strength.

70. From the external apparent (the Father, naturalism, 'Historyless Chaos') to the external essential (the Blessed Virgin, realism, 'the Culture') on the one hand, and from the internal apparent (Christ, materialism, 'the Civilization') to the internal essential (the Holy Spirit, idealism, 'Second Religiousness') on the other hand. Such, it would seem, is the course of evolution, which progresses from strength to beauty on the one hand (that of the external apparent and essential), and from goodness to truth on the other hand (that of the internal apparent and essential), with emblematic implications of the superstar and star in the cases of strength and beauty, but of the cross and supercross in the cases of goodness and truth. Put in terms of literary genres, it would seem that this evolution reflects a progression from drama to poetry on the one side (that of the superstar and star), but from narrative literature (fiction) to philosophy on the other side (that of the cross and supercross), so that drama and philosophy are polarized along an axis with the Father as its alpha and the Holy Spirit as its omega - strength and truth, the superstar and the supercross.

71. If the sixteenth century was an age of drama par excellence (Shakespeare), then it would seem logical to describe the seventeenth century as an age of poetry (Milton), the eighteenth century as an age of fiction (Swift), and the nineteenth century as an age of philosophy (Marx). For the twentieth century was most emphatically an age of film, and hence celluloid drama, and thereby resembled the sixteenth century - the first Elizabethan age. Probably the twelfth century was also, comparatively speaking, an age of drama ... as regards the enactment of medieval masks, nativity plays, etc., with the thirteenth century being an age of poetry (Chaucer), the fourteenth century an age of narrative literature (Boccaccio), and the fifteenth century an age of philosophy (Medieval scholasticism). Would it be stretching the imagination too far, I wonder, to contend that, the twentieth century being an age of film and hence artificial drama, the twenty-first century will be an age of poetry, the twenty-second century an age of fiction, and the twenty-third century an age of philosophy, albeit on equally artificial, or synthetic, terms? Only time will tell!

72. To speak of theism, deism, and atheism in a trinitarian light, viz. theism of the Father, deism of the Son, and atheism of the Holy Spirit, so that the Father is identified with Creation, the Son with a personalized non-revelationary deity, and the Holy Spirit with an atheistic rejection of theism and deism in the name of self-realization - internal essence at the expense of (the worship of) external and internal appearances, superstar and cross.

73. Rock being the alpha and jazz the omega of contemporary music (supermusic), one can logically speak of rock superstars, pop stars, soul crosses, and jazz supercrosses (not of soul stars and jazz stars), with an absolutist implication to both rock and jazz, but a relativistic implication to pop and soul, which are rather more worldly and lunar respectively. Likewise, one could also speak, if rather slangfully, of rock 'supercunts', pop 'cunts', soul 'pricks', and jazz 'superpricks', though the use of the prefixes in relation to the alpha and omega of contemporary music carries an ideological (autocratic/theocratic) implication rather than a sexual one, having less to do with a distinction between (good) males and (beautiful) females than between centrifugal and centripetal antitheses (strength and truth). In a sense, this reflects the head/body dichotomy relative to the 'super' and 'worldly' alternatives.

74. Just as there is a perceptual/conceptual distinction in literature between oral and literate traditions, the former uncivilized and the latter civilized, so this distinction can be found in music, with 'civilized' music being read from scores and 'uncivilized' music simply made up and played by ear - the former conceptual and the latter perceptual. For until and unless music is conceptualized through symbolic representation, it is not civilized but ... popular, populist, uncivilized. Traditionally, conceptual music, otherwise definable as 'classical', is on a par with literary books, whereas perceptual music, otherwise definable as 'pop', is on a par with films, so that one has a kind of bourgeois/proletarian distinction. Increasingly, in the future, conceptual music will be on a par with computer discs used for literary purposes, since its conceptualization will take the form of computers rather than music scores, and it will have grown out of and overhauled pop music (just as classical music grew out of folk music). Hence a sort of civilized proletarian music with 'superclassical' implications ... reminiscent of Jean-Michel Jarre in the late-twentieth century.

75. The conceptualization of music not only has the effect of centralizing it in symbolic representation, but also of elevating it from the aural to the optical, as from heat to light, alpha to omega, and thus rendering it truly civilized. It is in and through conceptualization that, like literature, music is 'divinized', i.e. elevated above the diabolic alpha of a purely aural heat. Not only is it given a centripetal focus, it is simultaneously eternalized through a symbolic representation which is optically accessible to all or, at any rate, to those who can read music. If folk music is uncivilized because purely aural, then classical is civilized because elevated to the optical. If pop is uncivilized because purely aural, then what may be termed superclassical is civilized because elevated to the optical. In fact, music availing itself of computerized scores would be 'supercivilized', in view of the connection between computers and electricity, a sort of artificial rather than naturalistic conceptualization which manifests through the medium of computer light. Hence while pop is artificial, or electric, in relation to folk, superclassical will be artificial, or electronic, in relation to classical, and we may hold that while folk and classical appertain to Christic naturalism, pop and superclassical appertain to transcendental supernaturalism, effectively being aligned with the Holy Spirit, whether autocratically (as in pop), democratically (as in pop/superclassical), or theocratically (as in superclassical), in which third context it is at an optical-light remove from aural heat and, hence, truly civilized or, what amounts to the same thing, saved. Probably the music of Jean-Michel Jarre pertains more to the democratic pop/superclassical compromise than to theocratic superclassicism, given its accommodation of drums, bass guitar, occasional electric guitar, etc. which are the sort of instruments more prevalent in pop (using that term in its widest, most generalized sense). A truly theocratic superclassicism would, one feels, be beyond any such compromise with alpha-stemming reactive instruments, i.e. instruments that are plucked, banged, etc., and to such an extent of being wholly synthesized and computerized, with percussion and rhythm electronically generated, in civilized autonomy.

76. Slaves live to work, whereas freemen work to live. In the twentieth century, the working class broadly pertained to the former category, while the middle class broadly pertained to the latter one. There is also a sense in which living to play is characteristic of the professional class (sportsmen, artists, etc.), while playing to live is characteristic of the leisure, or upper class - the former superslaves and the latter superfreemen. Hence work/play distinctions between, on the one hand, the working and middle classes, and, on the other hand, the professional and leisure classes - the former given to work (for whatever reasons), and the latter given to play (for whatever reasons). In fact, this work/play dichotomy is essentially one between naturalism and realism on the one hand (that of the working and middle classes), and between materialism and idealism on the other hand (that of the professional and leisure classes), so that we have a kind of progression from alpha naturalism to worldly realism (as from autocracy to bureaucracy) in the former case, and a progression from purgatorial materialism to omega idealism (as from democracy to theocracy) in the latter case, as in the following diagram:-

WORKING CLASS/PROFESSIONAL CLASS/LEISURE CLASS

(autocracy)(democracy)(theocracy)

MIDDLE CLASS

(bureaucracy)

with all the usual elemental implications. Stars and crosses, whether super or straight, on both wavicle and particle levels through successive class stages, viz. aristocratic, bourgeois, and proletarian, within broadly trinitarian categories.

77. Socialism stands to Communism as an economic system to an ideological one, which is to say in a bureaucratic context vis-à-vis autocratic, democratic, and theocratic alternatives above ... in the masculine contexts of trinitarian transcendentalism. Thus Socialism, being economic, is feminine and, in a narrow sense, 'worldly', with 'bodily' as opposed to 'head' implications ... such that accrue to science, politics, and religion, the autocratic, democratic, and theocratic norms. Likewise, Capitalism is feminine in relation to Liberalism ... in each of its ideological manifestations, and so is Feudalism in relation to Royalism, whether autocratic, democratic, or theocratic, since, like Socialism, Capitalism and Feudalism are overwhelmingly economic definitions, and can only be properly understood within a largely bureaucratic context.... This is equally true of Agrarianism, except that, unlike Feudalism, it pertains to the alpha-stemming civilization of the ‘ancient world’ and thus stands in an economic relationship to ideological Fundamentalism, whether theocratic, democratic, or autocratic. Hence one might speak of a devolutionary regression from Agrarianism/Fundamentalism to Feudalism/Royalism on the one hand, and of an evolutionary progression from Capitalism/Liberalism to Socialism/Communism on the other hand, a regression from naturalistic economic and ideological collectivism to naturalistic economic and ideological individualism in the one case, and a progression from artificial economic and ideological individualism to artificial economic and ideological collectivism in the other case, as from naturalism to realism, and from materialism to idealism. Which is equivalent, in Spenglerian terms, to saying a regression from 'Historyless Chaos' to 'the Culture' on the one hand, and a progression from 'the Civilization' to 'Second Religiousness' on the other, as, indeed, from fire to earth, and from water (the Age of Aquarius) to air ... in the rather more basic elemental terms to which I have dedicated a not inconsiderable portion of my mature philosophical quest. Thus Agrarianism/Fundamentalism and Socialism/Communism are alike collectivist, whereas both Feudalism/Royalism and Capitalism/Liberalism are individualist - a distinction between unity and diversity, co-operation and competition, the One and the Many. For, paradoxically, it is collectivism which, in its aspirations towards unity, appertains to the One, whereas individualism, with its competitive emphasis, relates to the Many. And so we can justly contend that the naturalistic distinction between, for instance, agrarian collectivism and feudal individualism is indeed commensurate with a devolutionary regression from the One to the Many, just as the ensuing artificial distinction between, for instance, capitalist individualism and socialist collectivism is no less commensurate with an evolutionary progression from the Many to the One, from economic competition between capitalistic individuals to economic co-operation between socialistic collectives. Hence whereas alpha and omega, whether economic (as above) or ideological, alike pertain to the One, the realistic and materialistic contexts in between are of the Many, and we can safely say that the return (evolution-wise) to the One can only be achieved on the basis of proletarian collectivism, whether economically or ideologically, and that this Oneness, in being omega rather than alpha, is the goal and resolution of all historical unfolding, the ultimate unity of the Holy Ghost which will put the apparent unity of the Creator considerably in the economic/ideological shade.

78. It could be argued that the naturalistic contexts of Agrarianism/Fundamentalism and Feudalism/Royalism are barbarous or uncivilized in relation to the artificial contexts of Capitalism/Liberalism and Socialism/Communism, since we are dealing with a devolutionary regression on the one hand, but with an evolutionary progression on the other hand. Yet it could also be argued - and with far greater justification - that the contexts which pertain to the One, and hence to collectivism rather than to individualism, are civilized in their antithetical ways, whereas only the individualistic contexts of the Many, whether Feudal/Royalist or Capitalist/Liberal, are uncivilized or barbarous, given their competitive rather than co-operative essence. Hence one could not speak of a progression from alpha barbarism to omega civilization, as if barbarism was inherently naturalistic and civilization inherently artificial, but would have to acknowledge that, like barbarism, civilization could be either natural or artificial, and that the real criterion to apply here is the moral nature of the society/age in question, i.e. whether primarily concerned with collectivism, and hence co-operation, or with individualism, and hence competition - the former making for unity and the latter for strife, that is to say, for disunity, oppression, class war, inequality, etc. Therefore, if civilization is commensurate with unity and, by contrast, barbarism with disunity, then it must be that the Agrarian/Fundamentalist societies, for instance, of the ancient East were civilized, and that the ensuing Feudal/Royalist and Capitalist/Liberal societies of the modern West were comparatively barbarous, the former in natural terms and the latter artificially (industrially) so. Hence the return to civilization can only be pursued on the basis of proletarian collectivism, and thus Socialism/Communism, so that unity and co-operation once again prevail in the world and it accordingly attains to salvation in the Oneness of the ultimate civilization, one as intensely artificial as Agrarian/ Fundamentalist civilization was - and still remains - naturalistic, but no less collective in its moral essence.

79. It could be said that ancient civilization was snuffed out by modern barbarism, and that this barbarism, now well-advanced in its artificial phase, corresponds to what is broadly regarded as Western 'civilization', a 'civilization' rooted in Feudalism/Royalism and having a Capitalist/Liberal offshoot which has since dominated, both economically and ideologically, the greater part of the world. Only since the rise of Socialism/Communism has this so-called civilization regarded itself as being under threat, and accordingly done everything in its not inconsiderable powers to defend its competitive/individualistic integrity from co-operative/collective alternatives. Yet a time must surely come when the 'darkness' of Western barbarism will be eclipsed by the light of ultimate civilization, and the world go forward in collective unity to its divine destination in the Holy Spirit. If the ancient light was outer, the ultimate light is inner, and it will shine for ever.

80. Whereas the collectivity of civilization liberates the individual from his phenomenal individualism, the individuality of barbarism enslaves him to it, and thus makes him a tool or component of the competitive will. He is no longer free from his phenomenal self in the interests of a noumenal salvation. On the contrary, he is bound to his phenomenal self as the slave of an individual employer or company. It is thus that barbarism, as we have here defined it in relation to competitive individualism, is by nature imperialist, and that we cannot conceive of a barbarous society being other than imperialistic vis-à-vis civilized societies, the oldest and most naturalistic of which will be its natural prey. For the phenomenality of barbarism, its physical darkness, cannot be reconciled with the noumenality of civilization, and it will seek to snuff out the metaphysical light of civilization in the name of its own material interests. Hence Western so-called civilization, in both its Feudal/Royalist and Capitalist/Liberal phases, could only be imperialist vis-à-vis the natural civilizations of the Agrarian/Fundamentalist world, including, be it noted, the agrarian collectivism of ancient Ireland, as first it invaded and then subjugated natural civilization to its own barbarous will, the Feudal/Royalist barbarism subsequently superseded by the more artificial Capitalist/Liberal barbarism, as materialism came to replace realism in the course of phenomenal time. In Ireland, one might distinguish, in this respect, between the early English imperialism, which was feudal, and the subsequent Cromwellian invasion, which was capitalist or, at any rate, which paved the way for the Capitalist/Liberal phase of barbarism to follow. Hence while barbarism is profoundly imperialistic, civilization is self-contained, self-sufficient, and selfless to the degree that the phenomenal self is subordinated to the noumenal one, which is universal and therefore only possible in the collective. In fact, civilization is both anterior and posterior to imperialism, and it has to be said that in the formative phase of its artificial manifestation it is anti-imperialist, which is to say, ranged against imperialism as against a foe which has to be fought and vanquished, if the world is to become safe for civilization and, indeed, become universally civilized. For only through a return to co-operative collectivism can the light of civilization once more shine in the world, to illuminate the spirit in its quest for noumenal resolution.

81. It should be noted that whereas Roman Catholicism is matriarchal in its devotion to and dependence on the Blessed Virgin, Eastern Orthodoxy is patriarchal and, hence, more rooted in the Father, as a paternalistic deity who rules over the world in his capacity as a sort of compromise between oriental Fundamentalism and occidental Christianity. In fact, Orthodoxy is the nearest thing to a Western fundamentalism, albeit one rooted, as already noted, in the Father and thus, effectively, in a partly transvaluated creator deity who is far from being commensurate with, say, Allah or Jehovah or any other manifestation of oriental Fundamentalism. For whilst oriental Fundamentalism pertains to the alpha, the divine source of cosmic strength, Eastern Orthodoxy, in acknowledging Christ as the 'Son of God', is no less susceptible to a fall from monotheistic objectivity than Roman Catholicism, and is accordingly partly evolutionary in its accommodation of Christ, the Father being partly derived from the earth's core/phallus of pagan precedent and therefore not entirely centred in the Cosmos or, more specifically, in a solar fall from stellar objectivity. Yet it is this bias towards the Father, as opposed to the Blessed Virgin, or Mother, which makes Eastern Orthodoxy more tolerant of priestly carnality than its Catholic counterpart, which, focusing on the Blessed Virgin, puts a greater emphasis on clerical celibacy. In this respect, Eastern Orthodoxy resembles Protestantism in that, both the Father and Son being masculine, if in different ways, there is less emphasis upon virginity and consequently on the desirability of clerical celibacy than in Roman Catholicism, which is the only Christianity of the world and thus the only mode of Christianity with a feminine essence. Put ideologically, one could argue that whereas Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism are respectively 'autocratic' and 'democratic', Catholicism is 'bureaucratic', with Transcendentalism alone being truly 'theocratic' on account of its unequivocal identification with the Holy Spirit, as in the following diagram:-

'AUTOCRATIC' EASTERN ORTHODOXY/'DEMOCRATIC' PROTESTANTISM/'THEOCRATIC' TRANSCENDENTALISM

(the Father)(the Son)(the Holy Ghost)

'BUREAUCRATIC' CATHOLICISM

(the Blessed Virgin)

where we move from the outer to the inner via intermediate stages of worldly and purgatorial Christianity, and all within the broadly dynamic framework of Western civilization, a civilization at an evolutionary remove from oriental Fundamentalism and its cosmic objectivity in regard to a monotheistic Creator, viz. Allah, Jehovah, etc. Hence whereas Eastern Orthodoxy is fundamentalist in its bias towards the Father, it is far from being fundamentalist in an oriental sense, and consequently appertains to the patriarchal as opposed to matriarchal stage of a civilization which has evolved from the Father to the Son via the Mother, and which should be capable of evolving from the Son to the Holy Spirit, as from filial to transcendental stages in due course, passing, as Social Theocracy becomes ever more transcendentalist, to a position diametrically antithetical to that of oriental Fundamentalism, in which it will be obliged to affirm its universality and seek the globalization of Transcendentalism in the interests of a world civilization which transcends both Eastern and Western, oriental and occidental, definition. Only when this ultimate civilization is global will it be universal and thus neither Eastern nor Western, devolutionary nor evolutionary, but transcendent.

82. In the sense that we have characterized Eastern Orthodoxy as 'autocratic' on account of its bias towards the Father, Catholicism as 'bureaucratic' on account of its bias towards the Virgin Mary (the Mother), Protestantism as 'democratic' on account of its bias towards Christ (the Son), and Transcendentalism or, as we could alternatively call it, Western Unorthodoxy as 'theocratic' on account of its bias towards the Holy Spirit, so nationalism, it seems to me, can be divided into autocratic, bureaucratic, democratic, and theocratic alternatives, with nationalism in the autocratic context broadly classifiable as supernationalism, nationalism in the bureaucratic context broadly classifiable as nationalism, nationalism in the democratic context broadly classifiable as internationalism, and nationalism in the theocratic context broadly classifiable as supra-nationalism, as in the following diagram:-

AUTOCRATIC SUPERNATIONALISM/DEMOCRATIC INTERNATIONALISM/THEOCRATIC SUPRA-NATIONALISM

BUREAUCRATIC NATIONALISM

For it seems to me that whereas bureaucracy is nationalist and democracy internationalist, autocracy is supernationalist and theocracy supra-nationalist - the former pair worldly and purgatorial, the latter pair alpha and omega, contractive and expansive, divergent and convergent. Hence whether we are dealing with National Socialism or 'Socialism in One Country', Nazism or Stalinism, we have supernationalist positions rooted in autocracy, and such positions can only be at an alpha remove from supra-national unity between omega-oriented theocratic societies, which will be transcendentalist. In between comes the nationalism and internationalism of bureaucratic and democratic societies, the former generally Catholic (as in Eire) and the latter Protestant (as in Britain), though this is, as ever, to generalize the case for the sake of clarification.

83. The autocratic emphasis is strength, the bureaucratic emphasis beauty, the democratic emphasis goodness, and the theocratic emphasis truth. Hence while supernationalism and Eastern Orthodoxy will emphasize strength, supra-nationalism and Transcendentalism will emphasize truth. Whilst, in between the alpha and omega extremes, nationalism and Catholicism will emphasize beauty, whereas internationalism and Protestantism will emphasize goodness, as befitting their respective bureaucratic and democratic essences. May I be so bold as to suggest that while supernationalism is fascist (including the 'Red Fascism' of Stalinism), supra-nationalism is communist (in the true ideological sense of that word)? Likewise, I find it difficult not to believe that whereas nationalism is conservative, internationalism is liberal, Liberalism being to democracy what Conservatism is to bureaucracy, using the terms 'conservative' and 'liberal' in a loosely political sense. Hence from Fascism to Conservatism on the one hand, and from Liberalism to Communism on the other, a political parallel to the progression from Eastern Orthodoxy to Catholicism on the one hand, and from Protestantism to Transcendentalism (Western Unorthodoxy) on the other hand - the former under the star and the latter under the cross.

84. Aristocracy is the essence of autocracy, technocracy the essence of bureaucracy, plutocracy the essence of democracy, and meritocracy the essence of theocracy. Which is to say that whilst, for example, autocracy is the phenomenal appearance, aristocracy is the noumenal essence, a wavicle as opposed to a particle attribute. Thus it could be argued that autocracy is aristocratic, bureaucracy technocratic, democracy plutocratic, and theocracy meritocratic, and that whereas essence conditions appearance in the cases of autocracy and theocracy, appearance conditions essence in the cases of bureaucracy and democracy, which are more intrinsically phenomenal.

85. Scientific Communism (Social Autocracy) is dead; long live political Communism (Social Democracy)! Such a slogan would undoubtedly appeal to anyone not acquainted with the concept of religious Communism (Social Theocracy), a concept which might well condition the formation of a slogan to the effect of: may Social Democracy lead to the birth of Social Theocracy in due communistic course, so that the Holy Ghost can come into its own on the most unequivocally theocratic terms, and the 'Kingdom of Heaven' accordingly come properly to pass!

86. The only real difference between so-called Communists (Social Autocrats) and Social Democrats ... is that whereas the former believe absolutely in State Socialism, the latter have a relative belief in it which they are prepared to put on the line of democratic compromise with those who, whether absolutely or relatively, believe in popular Socialism and its concomitance of greater working-class control of the means of production. Hence, unlike their Stalinist counterparts, Social Democrats accept democratic alternatives to the management of Socialism, alternatives which can be either Radical or Liberal, populist or centrist, wholeheartedly in favour of working-class ownership or in favour of a balance between the State and the People. Socialism, in this democratic plurality, is not at issue. For the only alternative to Socialism is Capitalism, and that would be retrogressive. What is at issue is the way in which Socialism is run. However, from a Social Theocratic standpoint it is important that the People should achieve the maximum political, economic, and judicial power commensurate with the avoidance of social chaos, since it is the People who will eventually have to decide whether they want salvation from this power, and thus from 'sins of the world', in the form of religious sovereignty, a decision which they will not be entitled to make unless they are sufficiently mired in 'worldly sins' to begin with, and thus in a position, democratically, to fob them off upon the Second Coming in return for religious salvation. Hence Social Theocracy, with its extreme left-wing, or theocratic, bias, can only look with favour upon the progress of radicalism within Social Democracy, since the democratic left are the means of ensuring that the People assume greater political and economic responsibility. Ultimately, Social Theocracy is dependent on the leftwards drift of Social Democracy and cannot expect to supersede Social Democracy until Radical tendencies are preponderant. However, the assumption of economic and political responsibility ('sins of the world') in a Christ-like sacrifice by the ideological leadership of Social Theocracy would automatically create a new centre of power contiguous with religious sovereignty and pledged to its service. Such a centre, at both regional and supra-national levels, would render the old (Social Autocratic) centre redundant, and so be obliged to assume responsibility for matters formerly in its power, including the military. In such fashion the military would acquire a moral standing, through the defence of religious sovereignty, that it could only have lacked in the old context of Social Autocracy. It would also acquire, if and when thought necessary, a moral directive.

87. The principal enemy for the Transcendentalist forever will be, both within and without himself, the Fundamentalist, and he must defeat this shadow self if he is truly to live in the Light.

88. The masculine is characterized by an autocratic tendency to be reactively destructive, a theocratic tendency to be actively constructive, and a democratic tendency to balance, whether inclusively or exclusively, both destructive and constructive elements. The feminine, traditionally, is characterized by a bureaucratic tendency to be passively and/or attractively instructive. Hence woman's instructiveness has had to co-exist, in the world, with masculine destructiveness and constructiveness ranging, so to speak, above it in contrary ideological tendencies of negative and positive will. Have we not here a confirmation of Schopenhauer's conception of the world as 'Will and Representation', with the former broadly masculine and the latter feminine? Whether or not we agree with his contention that we inherit will from our male progenitor and intellect from our female one, there can be little question that the will is destructive and/or constructive, and the intellect instructive.

89. Destructiveness is naturalistic, constructiveness idealistic, a destructive/constructive compromise materialistic, and instructiveness realistic. Now since, within the British Isles, it would be credible to contend that the Welsh are fundamentally naturalistic, the Scots idealistic, the English materialistic, and the Irish realistic, we should have no difficulty in equating destructiveness with the Welsh, constructiveness with the Scotch, destructive/constructive compromises with the English, and instructiveness with the Irish who, alone of the four peoples, appertain, through Catholicism, to the feminine, and hence to the harp as opposed to the lion in each of its 'trinitarian' guises, viz. horizontal and individual in the case of the fiery Welsh, vertical and individual in the case of the airy Scots, and horizontal and collective (three lions one above the other) in the case of the watery English. For whereas Ireland is feminine, Britain is masculine, and thus less a land of (instructive) saints and scholars than of (destructive) soldiers and (constructive) artisans, of will as opposed to intellect. One might say that whereas the Virgin Mary is most characteristic of Ireland and Irish Catholicism, the Father is the 'Person' of the Blessed Trinity most characteristic of and appropriate to the fundamentalist Protestantism of the naturalistic Welsh, the Holy Spirit is the 'Person' of the Blessed Trinity most characteristic of and appropriate to the transcendentalist Protestantism of the idealistic Scots, and the Son is the 'Person' of the Blessed Trinity most characteristic of and appropriate to the liberal Protestantism of the materialistic English, whose Christianity is less autocratic or theocratic than democratic, forming a sort of polar antithesis to the 'bureaucratic' Christianity of the Catholic Irish.

90. Because the Scots are predominantly an idealistic people, for whom the spirit takes precedence over the soul, it need not surprise us if the best philosophers in the British Isles tend to be Scottish or, at any rate, of Scotch extraction, in contrast to the best dramatists and actors being Welsh. Even Shakespeare, who was born in Stratford-upon-Avon, was not all that far removed from being a Welshman! Likewise, it need not surprise us if the best poets in the British Isles tend to be Irish, since the Irish are predominantly a realistic people for whom the intellect takes precedence over the will, in contrast to the materialistic English, who tend to excel in the novel, a genre in which the will is torn between destructive and constructive appetites as soul and spirit, heat and light, battle it out in the 'liberal' arena of the fictional narrative. On the other hand, the poetic novel is in some sense an Irish extrapolation, just as the philosophical novel is Scotch and the dramatic novel Welsh, since reflecting a national tendency in some 'alien' genre to which, strictly speaking, it does not pertain, the result being a kind of 'bovaryization' or subversion of the genre in question. It is for this reason that, as a rule, English poetry is rather more prosaic than poetical, its conception less constructively instructive than politically destructive and/or constructive in essence.

91. I repress myself but am oppressed by others. I express myself but am impressed by others. I compress myself but am depressed by others. Repression, expression, and compression are subjective and therefore largely self-inflicted. Oppression, impression, and depression are objective and therefore a consequence of what others have inflicted upon one. We no more oppress, impress, or depress ourselves than we are repressed, expressed, or compressed by others. I repress myself, but he oppresses me. I express myself (as here), but she impresses me. I compress myself, but they depress me. Others can suppress me, but only I can press myself, as with regard to a pressing engagement which it is imperative for me to keep.

92. The aggressive selflessness of naturalistic Paganism (the Father); the serving selflessness of realistic Catholicism (the Virgin Mary); the self-serving selfishness of materialistic Protestantism (the Son); the self-transcending selfishness of idealistic Transcendentalism (the Holy Spirit). Hence from the superstar and star of naturalistic and realistic selflessness to the cross and supercross of materialistic and idealistic selfishness. From noumenal selfless alpha to noumenal selfish omega via phenomenal selflessness and selfishness of a worldly and purgatorial relativity. The path to ultimate salvation lies in transcending the phenomenal self in the interests of spiritual self-realization. It is, in Spengler's terms, to abandon 'the Civilization' for 'Second Religiousness', to abandon materialism in the name of an ultimate idealism the subjective realization of which will usher in the 'Kingdom of Heaven' on earth.

93. Democracy resembles the ego, inasmuch as it is a composite of selves that jostle one another in a confrontation between objective and subjective reality. In fact, we could argue that democracy is egocentric, whereas autocracy is rather a thing of the objective subconscious, and theocracy ... a thing of the subjective superconscious. Hence, whereas science strives to illuminate the subconscious, and by implication both internal and (especially) external nature, religion strives to advance the illumination of the superconscious, and by implication external and (especially) internal supernature. Politics, on the other hand, strives to bolster the ego, of which it is the ideological corollary.

94. Male sexuality vis-à-vis women is only possible on the basis of noumenal selflessness, and is thus a mode of aggressive or, as I could alternatively describe it, reactive destructiveness. Female sexuality, on the other hand, traditionally follows from phenomenal selflessness, which is a comparatively passive thing which offers itself to male aggression. Hence whereas male sexuality is essentially rooted in ill-will towards women, female sexuality is a predominantly sentient passivity which allows itself to be imposed upon in the interests, primarily, of procreation. There is nothing selfish about sexuality, neither in its masculine nor its feminine manifestations, and for this reason it can never be a moral thing but is rooted, as Christianity relates, in 'Original Sin', which is to say, in the aggressive naturalism of noumenal selflessness. In this respect it is the opposite of noumenal selfishness, which follows from a self-realizing idealism, whether indirectly ... through art, or directly ... through self-contemplation, and is accordingly a thing of good-will ... directly towards the spiritual self, but indirectly towards mankind. As Baudelaire put it: 'The more a man cultivates the arts, the less he fornicates. A more and more apparent cleavage occurs between the spirit and the brute'. Elsewhere in his Intimate Journals he writes: 'To fornicate is to aspire to enter into another; the artist never emerges from himself'. It is this knowledge of how completely contrary the two wills are, the ill-will of noumenal selflessness and the good-will of noumenal selfishness, that makes it impossible for the great artist, the genius saint, ever to be a lecher or, conversely, for the lecher ever to be a great artist. For alpha and omega are incommensurable, like strength and truth. On the other hand, the phenomenal selfishness of the highly acquisitive or pedantically intellectual person, whilst it is arguably better than noumenal selflessness and, within certain limits, can serve as a means to a higher (spiritual) end, may well prove no less an obstacle to the attainment of true enlightenment and moral salvation, if pursued too far, than its selfless counterpart in the phenomenal realm. For existential goodness can all-too-easily become an end-in-itself, shutting out the light of the spirit, the spirit of good-will, towards which all noumenally-minded people aspire. It is a poor sort of morality, this phenomenal selfishness, since it enslaves one to materialism and thus to the amassing of riches at the expense of spiritual freedom. It turns the world into a lunar purgatory which, though arguably preferable to a worldly hell of phenomenal selflessness or a solar hell of noumenal selflessness, is a far cry from the otherworldly heaven to which men of good-will aspire. Better a spiritual selfishness that lifts one out of the world than a material selfishness which keeps one enchained, no matter how existentially, to it!

95. Friendship is a thing corresponding, in its phenomenal selflessness, to a worldly folly. The worldly fool may have friends and the hellish fool enemies, but the truly wise man will be as much above and beyond friendship as is compatible with his spiritual selfishness. Even the relatively wise selfishness of the materialist should put him above friendship in the usual selfless sense, since he will be too busy making money and/or profiting from his acquisitions to have either much time or inclination to spend on the rather feminine art of cultivating friends.

96. Helping others is not the prerogative of the true man, nor even the good man, but of the beautiful and pleasure-giving woman. The man who can't help himself, whether materially or (preferably) spiritually, is not really wise at all but either an evil fool (assuming he prefers to hinder others) or a worldly fool who may well be a woman at heart. Certainly it is better to help oneself than to help others, but if one cannot help oneself, it is better to help others than to hinder them (and by 'hinder' I include to have aggressive sex with them). For the man who hinders others necessarily prevents them from helping themselves. He perpetuates their tendency to help others through selfless subservience, and in all helping others there is a loss to self.

97. He who is most spiritually selfish is the most divine - in a word, God. He, on the contrary, who is most brutally selfless is the most diabolic - in a word, the Devil. The Devil is a lecher but God a celibate. We are 'born under one law (but) to another bound'. Born under nature but bound, if civilized, to the supernatural idealism of God. Or, more correctly, born from the brutal selflessness of the procreative act, but baptized into Christ and a spiritual rebirth. Born from ill-will but bound, through the Saviour, to good-will, with being and existence, beauty and goodness, coming in-between the alpha of strength and the omega of truth - a worldly given (passive instruction) and a purgatorial becoming (active instruction) in between the negative doing (reactive destruction) of ill-will and the positive doing (attractive construction) of good-will. Born, therefore, of the Father but bound, through the Son (and his 'Kingdom of Heaven' within the self) to the Holy Ghost. One day, it is to be hoped that we will not be born of the Father, nor even of the Mother (who allows herself to be selflessly imposed upon), but live in an eternity of spirit made possible through a combination of scientific technology and religious transcendentalism, which will enable us to be more completely bound to the Holy Spirit than ever before - indeed, so completely bound to it as to be inseparable from it, and therefore One with God in the ultimate salvation.

98. From the immorality of noumenal selflessness to the morality of noumenal selfishness via the negative amorality of phenomenal selflessness and the positive amorality of phenomenal selfishness; a devolution, in effect, from the Father to the Mother, and an evolution from the Son to the Holy Spirit. From outer essence to outer appearance, and from inner appearance to inner essence (as from 'Historyless Chaos' to 'the Culture' on the one hand, and from 'the Civilization' to 'Second Religiousness' on the other), a superstar/star naturalism, but a cross/supercross supernaturalism - such is the historical distinction between that which stems from the diabolic alpha and that which aspires towards the divine omega, whether directly or indirectly, absolutely or relatively, noumenally or phenomenally.

99. In music one might speak, in relation to the above, of an opera/ballet naturalism on the one hand, but of a symphony/concerto supernaturalism on the other hand - opera corresponding to outer essence and ballet to outer appearance, the symphony corresponding to inner appearance and the concerto to inner essence. Likewise (notwithstanding the soul/pop, rock/jazz supermusical parallels to the above), we could speak, where literature is concerned, of a poetry/drama naturalism on the one hand, but of a fiction/philosophy supernaturalism on the other hand - the former pair perceptual and the latter pair conceptual, alpha and omega, beginning and end, outer and inner, devil and god. From declaimer to actor, and from writer to thinker - poetry being no less of the Father (and hence noumenal selflessness) than drama is of the Mother (and hence phenomenal selflessness); novels being no less of the Son (and hence phenomenal selfishness) than philosophy is of the Holy Ghost (and hence noumenal selfishness). From literary immorality to literary morality via negative (drama) and positive (fiction) amorality, a devolutionary/evolutionary dichotomy between that which stems, like poetry and to a lesser extent drama, from the diabolic alpha, and that which aspires, like philosophy and to a lesser extent narrative literature, towards the divine omega. From absolutely bad to relatively bad, and from relatively good to absolutely good, which is the utmost truth. The Devil may be a strong poet, but God is a true philosopher, and in his truth he is revealed!

100. It would seem that since (contrary to my previous evaluations) poetry is the alpha and philosophy the omega of literature, poetry is an autocratic art form and philosophy, by contrast, theocratic, whereas novel-writing, coming in-between the 'evil' and 'good' extremes, is a democratic art form, whether right wing (poetic), left wing (philosophic), or centrist (balanced between poetic and philosophic alternatives), and drama, corresponding to the Blessed Virgin at the foot of the Cross, is bureaucratic, requiring, amongst other things, a theatre in which the actors can act out their phenomenally selfless roles. Thus whereas poetry should appeal to enslavers, philosophy, by contrast, is the devotion of the saviours, or those who would free men from the tyranny of the selfless ... in order that they may come to know themselves or, rather, their selves, and accordingly realize their spiritual potential to the full, becoming one with that self which is truly divine and in which resides heaven, the end and resolution of all striving. Verily, the day of the true theocrat is nigh, and when his triumph is complete there will be neither autocrats nor bureaucrats, nor even democrats, but only the theocratic inheritors of an omega salvation. Rejoice, for the day of theocratic deliverance is at hand!

101. No less than we can morally distinguish between different types of literature, so a like-distinction can be drawn between different approaches to the word, ranging from the alpha of noumenal selflessness (outer essence) to the omega of noumenal selfishness (inner essence) via the phenomenal selflessness (outer appearance) and phenomenal selfishness (inner appearance) of the feminine/masculine world. Hence distinctions, on the one hand, between the spoken word as noumenal selflessness and the written word as phenomenal selflessness, outer essence and outer appearance, but distinctions, on the other hand, between the read word as phenomenal selfishness and the thought word as noumenal selfishness, inner appearance and inner essence, with all due moral and ideological implications. For no less than the spoken word, corresponding to outer essence, is immoral in relation to the negative amorality of the written word, so the thought word, corresponding to inner essence, is moral in relation to the positive amorality of the read word, speech and thought thereby corresponding to a sort of autocratic/theocratic antithesis flanking the rather more democratic (above) and bureaucratic (below) antithesis between the read word and the written word, which, in their phenomenality, pertain rather more to the world than to either the alpha or omega extremes such that, logically, are both anterior and posterior to it. Thus, in the diagrammatic traditions of this work, we may sum up as follows:-

SPOKEN WORD/READ WORD/THOUGHT WORD

(the Father)(the Son)(the Holy Ghost)

WRITTEN WORD

(the Blessed Virgin)

reserving to the spoken word a connotation with fiery naturalism, to the written word a connotation with earthy realism, to the read word a connotation with watery materialism, and to the thought word, the word of words, a connotation with airy idealism. Verily, 'T' is for Truth, and Truth is never as true as when thought or, better still, meditated upon! For a writer is neither a saint nor a scholar, but someone who falls morally short of each.

102. I do not write for the mere sake of writing; only a fool or a scoundrel would do that! I write to be read, and, in being read, my writing is redeemed, much as a woman's sexuality is redeemed through the act of procreation, of bringing forth children. Writing-for-writing's-sake would be no better than sex-for-sex's-sake, a sort of negative amorality with no real positive consequences.

103. Musically, the People have not yet achieved Social Democracy; for Social Democracy is tied-up with musical literacy, and for the most part the People are still musically illiterate, living in the inner darkness of a memorized and improvised music which, whether ass rock or jazz, soul or dance, conforms to a sort of Social Autocratic (communistic) barbarism ... symptomatic of pop music in general. Only when groups begin to use computerized scores and show themselves to be locked into an optical redemption (through musical light) ... will the darkness of pop music be eclipsed by the light of a superclassicism heralding the age of proletarian civilization. Yet musical Social Democracy is not the end but the beginning of People's civilization, a secular precondition of a religious culmination which, issuing in Social Theocracy, will consign to musical oblivion not only all instruments - guitars, drums, xylophones, etc. - requiring reactive playing techniques, but the whole declamatory tradition of vocals, which, rooted in the poetic alpha, can have no place in the philosophic omega, in which only the airy essence of a noumenal selfishness will figure. Thus will the Social Autocratic tradition of vocal music be consigned to the rubbish heap of musical history as, growing even beyond Social Democratic compromises between reactive and attractive instrumentation (whether relatively in regard to a centrist balance or absolutely in regard to right- and left-wing distinctions), as well as to the continuing recourse to vocals, the ultimate People's music converges to a musical omega in which a synth-based instrumentation will be put to the service of the Holy Spirit and accordingly defer to the computerized score as a sort of musical manifestation of the inner light. Naturally, by then, and even to a certain extent before that, i.e. in the Social Democratic middle ground, the outer lights of the 'heathen' light shows would no longer obtain. For outer light is no less correlative with inner darkness than outer darkness (relatively) correlates with inner light, and the full attainment of the latter must logically exclude the former, rendering the need for extensive stage lighting superfluous to the point of an immoral irrelevance.

104. Of course, what I have said above, concerning the perceptual/conceptual dichotomy in music between pop on the one hand and the envisaged 'superclassicism' of a more civilized age on the other hand, is no less applicable to the other arts, where we may note a like-dichotomy, potential if not latent, between the barbarous perceptual, germane to the autocratic alpha, and the civilized conceptual, germane to the theocratic omega, with all due gradations of compromise coming in-between. Thus, in art, we may note a distinction between photography and/or light art on the one hand and computer art on the other; in literature, between film on the one hand and computer literature, read via VDU, on the other; and, in sculpture, between light sculpture and/or holography on the one hand and computer sculpture on the other hand. Clearly, the computer is the medium through which the conceptual can be made manifest, and especially is this true of literature, the most conceptual of all the arts. For literature touches the spirit like no other art, and it is towards the spirit that all religious idealism tends, an idealism which transcends both the soul and the senses ... as light transcends fire and flesh. Only the spirit itself transcends literature, but the highest, most philosophic literature will ever be in the service of the spirit, as it strives to bring conceptual truth to the door of Heaven itself.

105. In relation to our T-like design, we had broadly established - at any rate prior to an experimental re-evaluation - that soul is of the Father, dance music of the Mother, rock of the Son, and jazz of the Holy Ghost, considering that soul is naturalistic, dance realistic, rock materialistic, and jazz idealistic. We have yet to establish that, like Christ, rock can approximate to the 'Three in One', to the extent that it is divisible, either side of pure rock, into soul-rock and jazz-rock alternatives, the former right wing and the latter left, while soul extends, via rock-soul, towards soul-rock, and jazz extends, via rock-jazz, towards jazz-rock, as the Father and the Holy Ghost respectively approach the Son (see diagram).

SOUL/ROCK-SOUL/(SOUL-ROCK/ROCK/JAZZ-ROCK)/ROCK-JAZZ/JAZZ

(the Father)(the Son)(the Holy Spirit)

DANCE

(the Mother)

Hence rock-soul is still of the Father and rock-jazz still of the Holy Ghost, the only difference with soul and jazz being that they are relative rather than absolute, and are thus contiguous with the Son. Put politically, this means that both rock-soul and rock-jazz are on the fringes of democracy and may even desire a compromise with democracy which brings them into contact with soul-rock and jazz-rock within a broadly Social Democratic framework. For while soul is communistic and jazz transcendentalist, rock is decidedly centrist and thus susceptible to pluralistic distinctions. One might argue that rock-soul would be theoretically in favour of Social Democracy and rock-jazz likewise, though neither of them is strictly of the Son. In fact, while rock-soul and soul-rock will liaise between the autocratic left and the democratic right, rock-jazz and jazz-rock will be in liaison between the theocratic right and the democratic left, rock-jazz using the democratic platform in the interests of jazz, and hence the assumption of pure theocracy in the extreme-left context of Transcendentalism. For although there is a radical side (jazz-rock) to Social Democracy, Social Theocracy must prevail on the People (through rock-jazz) to achieve Transcendentalism (jazz) and thus come fully into line with the Holy Ghost. The interests of the left democratic (jazz-rock) are sufficient unto the needs of the Son and not directly connected with those of the Holy Ghost. Thus to sum up, we may speak of an absolute antithesis, paralleling Communism/Transcendentalism, between soul and jazz; a relative antithesis, paralleling Social Autocracy/Social Theocracy, between rock-soul and rock-jazz; and an antithesis, within a broadly Social Democratic framework, between soul-rock and jazz-rock; pure rock being a centrist middle-ground in between the democratically right-wing (conservative) and left-wing (radical) alternatives. However, before I abandon this subject, I should like to remind the reader that all the above-listed types of modern music, not to mention their less-elevated derivatives (like rap, punk, funk, hip-hop) pertain to the age, culture, society, and class of the Holy Ghost, so that soul is never as musically of the Father as, for example, opera or plainsong, any more than rock is as musically of the Son as, say, classical symphonies. Soul is simply of the Father in relation to the autocracy of the Holy Ghost, the patriarchal manifestation of the Holy Ghost which is at the opposite extreme to its musically truer, and therefore theocratic, manifestation in jazz.

106. The transcendent mind does not stare at others or think about others in consequence of perceiving them. On the contrary, the transcendent mind is preoccupied with its own thoughts, which may or may not serve as a springboard to inner perceptions, whether in terms of visionary experience or pure contemplation. For spirit is not a concept so much as an inner perception, the spiritual perception of the higher self, and if the world begins with outer perceptions, the sensuous perceptions of phenomena, it must end with the inner perceptions of spiritual noumena, the goal and essence of the Holy Spirit. Thoughts about external phenomena may be said to conform to an outer conceptual; thoughts about internal noumena, by contrast, will conform to an inner conceptual; and thoughts about thought ... to a neutral conceptual, neither of the subconscious nor the superconscious but of the egocentric conscious alone. Of course, the phenomenal can be external or internal, apparent or essential, and whereas it is external in the Blessed Virgin (outer appearance), it will be internal in Christ (inner appearance). Likewise, the noumenal, as we have seen, can be external or internal, apparent or essential, and whereas it is external in the Father (outer essence), it will be internal in the Holy Ghost (inner essence). Hence there is what one might call a devolution from the noumenal to the phenomenal on the one hand (that of the Father and the Mother), but an evolution from the superphenomenal to the supernoumenal on the other hand (that of the Son and the Holy Ghost). Thoughts relating to the noumenal and to the phenomenal appertain to the outer conceptual; thoughts relating to the superphenomenal (inner appearance) and to the supernoumenal (inner essence) appertain to the inner conceptual. The former appertain to the old brain and the latter to the new brain. Or, more correctly, thoughts relating to the noumenal appertain to the backbrain and thoughts relating to the phenomenal appertain to the right brain; whereas thoughts relating to the superphenomenal appertain to the left brain and thoughts relating to the supernoumenal appertain to the forebrain. The backbrain is the subconscious of the old brain and the forebrain the superconscious of the new brain. The right brain and the left brain are both conscious, the one in relation to external phenomena and the other in relation to internal phenomena - the Blessed Virgin (Catholicism) and the Son (Protestantism) of a phenomenal axis germane to the World.

107. Whether the individual exists for society or society for the individual ... will depend on whether one is in a civilized or a barbarous age, insofar as the individual corresponds to phenomenal divisibility and society to noumenal indivisibility. Hence the individual will exist for society and/or God (to refine upon) in a civilized age, but society will exist for the individual (to exploit) in a barbarous age, like, for example, the feudal and capitalist phases of Western so-called civilization, when exploitation of the collective by a capitalist elite is rather more the prevailing tendency than service of the collective by the individual and/or a particular class of individuals. Of course, the distinction between society and God is a valid one, and in primitive civilizations of the Agrarian/Fundamentalist type it is rather more to serve God (the Creator) than society at large that the individual exists, whereas in the inceptive phase of Socialist/Transcendentalist civilization the individual exists rather more for society (which, in its extreme humanism, is officially atheist vis-à-vis the Creator) than for God. Which isn't to say that God (the Holy Ghost) can't eventually come back into the frame when the People are ready to assume deification, in the interests of full noumenal salvation, through the intermediary vehicle of the Second Coming. But, by then, the exceptional individuals will be serving society rather less than the People as God (the Holy Spirit); for in this service of the Many by the Few, society will have been absorbed into God, its eclipse by God no less certain than the much earlier eclipse of the competitive individual by co-operative society, the divisible phenomenon by the indivisible noumenon, in the interests of true civilization.

108. Where women are concerned, the ponytail corresponds to the noumenal indivisibility of alpha-oriented Fundamentalism and is therefore effectively a pre-Western allegiance, especially germane to the traditional Orient. Where men are concerned, on the other hand, the ponytail corresponds to the noumenal indivisibility of an omega-oriented Transcendentalism; although distinctions relative to the Trinity can, I believe, also be drawn between one ponytail and another on the basis of length, a long ponytail being more symptomatic, it seems to me, of the Father than of the Holy Ghost, which, by contrast, would require recourse to a short one, the Christic omega ... of Protestant theocracy coming somewhere in-between. Now if my contention relating to the respective symbolism of ponytails on men and women is correct, i.e. corresponds to reality, then it stands to reason that women with ponytails will be 'beneath the pale' of men with ponytails, since alpha and omega are incommensurate and the one necessarily excludes the other, fundamentalism and transcendentalism being absolutely antithetical. Hence as soon as a man evolves into a ponytail, particularly as applying to the Holy Ghost, he will be affirming an antithetical orientation to women in ponytails and can logically have no truck with such women, there being no point of contact between two contrary extremes. Only a man whose hairstyle is 'square', i.e. hanging straight or in curls, can logically have relations, whether sexually or socially, with women whose hairstyle signifies a fundamentalist allegiance.

109. Whilst on the subject of ponytails on men, it should be noted that a partial ponytail co-existing with hair which is predominantly straight (as defined above), will indicate a Social Radical allegiance, and thus be germane to Social Democracy. Only a complete ponytail hairstyle will correspond, if relatively short, to a Social Theocratic allegiance, i.e. to that which mediates between communistic Transcendentalism and Social Democracy, since such a hairstyle will signify a centripetally curvilinear norm ... symptomatic of a radically omega-oriented theocracy. Where the communistic Transcendentalism of the 'Kingdom of Heaven' is concerned, as germane to the assumption of religious sovereignty by the masses in a properly Centrist context, the ponytail would probably undergo a more radically transcendental transvaluation, issuing, in splendid isolation, from the crown of a head that had otherwise been completely shaven and was thus more intrinsically centripetal than in the preceding ... Social Theocratic context.

110. A pudding-basin hairstyle on women, while centrifugal, is less alpha orientated than alpha stemming. By which I mean that it corresponds, as on men, to an autocratic absolutism largely germane to Western civilization, and is thus rather more heathen than fundamentalist. In fact, such a centrifugal openness is precisely what oriental fundamentalism strives to avoid, insofar as theocratic fundamentalism is quasi-centripetal in character (in relation, in all probability, to the central star of the Galaxy), for which the ponytail on women is far more relevant, since it corresponds to a quasi-centripetal alignment and is thus theocratic rather than, as with the pudding-basin hairstyle so often found in the West, autocratic. Hence my distinction between the ponytail as alpha orientated and the pudding-basin hairstyle as alpha stemming. Now, in regard to the latter, it could be maintained that, as in the case of ponytails on men within the omega-oriented contexts of Western civilization, the length of the hair in this centrifugal style is of crucial significance in any attempt to determine whether a royalist, a parliamentary, or an extreme republican allegiance was being signified, the longest corresponding to a royalist, or monarchic, allegiance, the shortest ... to an extreme republican, or 'communist', allegiance, and anything in between which could be described as medium length corresponding to a parliamentary, or 'Cromwellian' allegiance. Hence whilst a long-length pudding-basin hairstyle would suggest autocratic royalism, a medium-length one autocratic liberalism, and a shorter-length one autocratic communism, it could be argued, with no less justification, that a long-length ponytail on men is suggestive of theocratic royalism (catholicism), a medium-length one of theocratic liberalism (protestantism), and a short-length one of theocratic communism (transcendentalism), and that these extreme Western styles flank, as alpha and omega, the rather more conventional hairstyles which, whether parted or unparted, suggest an allegiance to democratic and/or bureaucratic plurality - an allegiance no less subject to manifold evaluation on the basis of length. Naturally, such phenomenal hairstyles will be rectilinear (and 'square') rather than curvilinear (and 'hip'), and in women such phenomenality will usually take the form of hair hanging loosely down their back in what is, I guess, a broadly worldly form of the phenomenal, a form rather more selflessly centrifugal than (as in the democratic context above) selfishly centripetal.

111. From the external light of noumenal selflessness to the external darkness of phenomenal selflessness (as from the superstar to the star, the Father to the Blessed Virgin), and from the internal darkness of phenomenal selfishness to the internal light of noumenal selfishness (as from the cross to the supercross, Christ to the Holy Spirit). The external light is apt to be autocratic and the external darkness bureaucratic. Conversely, the internal darkness is apt to be democratic and the internal light theocratic. The light of the Father, being external, is centrifugal; the light of the Holy Spirit, being internal, is centripetal. Alpha and omega flanking the external darkness of the world and the internal darkness of its purgatorial antithesis, the former pertaining to the Virgin Mary and the latter to her lunar Son. Hence noumenal naturalism and idealism flanking phenomenal realism and materialism. Fire is the element of the Father; earth the element of the Blessed Virgin. Water is the element of Christ; air the element of the Holy Spirit.

112. To distinguish between cinema and television on the basis of a Jehovah/Father dichotomy, with cinema (especially in its pre-talkies black-and-white guise) a modern parallel to Jehovah, and television a modern parallel to the Father. As to a parallel with the Mother, one need look no further than radio, which corresponds to an external darkness, whereas in the distinction between video tapes and audio tapes, one has the basis, it seems to me, for a parallel with the Son, Who comes in-between the external light of the Father and the internal light of the Holy Ghost, and precisely as an internal darkness, the darkness, most especially, of audio tapes (when used musically). However, beyond the internal darkness of Christ there can only be the internal light of the Holy Spirit, and for the modern parallel to the Holy Spirit one need look no further than computers. Yet no less than we distinguished between cinema and television on the basis of a Jehovah/Father dichotomy, so a distinction can be drawn between computers and hallucinogenic drugs on the basis of a Holy-Ghost/Inner-Light dichotomy, since contemplation of the superconscious mind signifies a superior degree of noumenal selfishness than can be achieved vis-à-vis the rather more materialistic realm of personal computers, even when they are being utilized in a more perceptual, and hence noumenal, way, as regards games and, especially, graphics. In fact, even an LSD trip is less than purely noumenal, given its partly aural and colourful properties, and one is obliged to admit that, although of the Inner Light, it is less truly of the Inner Light than meditation, and therefore stands to meditation as colour talkies to the pre-talkie black-and-white films of the early cinema, which approximate more closely to a parallel with Jehovah, i.e. the alpha divine. Hence while both LSD trips and meditation are of the omega divine, meditation is more truly and completely of it, and therefore the closest parallel of all to the Inner Light.

113. Of course, one could also draw distinctions in relation to the above media in terms of political as opposed to religious parallels, contending, for example, that cinema and television are autocratic, and hence Marxist, media, whereas radio is bureaucratic, and hence socialistic; video and audio tapes democratic, and hence Social Democratic; and computers and LSD trips theocratic, and hence Transcendentalist (in the Social Theocratic and properly communistic sense). But while this is doubtless no less valid than the religious parallels, such distinctions could only be drawn in relation to particle as opposed to wavicle contexts, i.e. with regard to the content of, particularly, films and trips being less self-transcending than self-asserting, less musical than verbal, and therefore of a relatively secular nature such that more usually connotes with the political than the religious. It is not the media so much as how they are utilized that enables us to project material or spiritual parallels; for that which parallels the Father one moment can parallel a Marxist tyrant the next. And, conversely, that which parallels the Son one moment can become, if utilized in a less self-transcending way, a Liberal demagogue the next, depending on the content, in this context, of the audio and/or video tape. Broadly speaking, music, the most idealistic of the arts, will maintain a wavicle, and hence spiritual, bias; the spoken word, on the other hand, is more likely, on account of the particle nature of speech, to maintain a secular bias, especially when used in a non-narrative, journalistic or factual sort of way. The ratio of the one to the other will determine, as a rule, the nature of the context in question, and accordingly allow us to draw either religious or political, spiritual or material parallels in regard to the medium being used and its particular mode of utilization. Hence a film with a lot of music will more easily lend itself to a religious parallel than one which is predominantly or entirely verbal. Music tapes will likewise lend themselves to a religious parallel, as will computer games and graphics, whereas spoken tapes and verbal compact discs will more easily connote with the secular, even when employed in a religious context, since the word has a particle connotation when spoken but a wavicle one when sung, or used in conjunction with music. Soul may be religious but rap, its spoken counterpart, is predominantly secular, and hence political. Both are alike alpha, albeit of the Father and the 'Leader' (Ruler) respectively. Religion transcends politics, but very often it depends upon politics for support and adversity. We cannot live entirely in either realm, although we should seek, if wise, to subordinate the particle to the wavicle in pursuit of an idealistic goal. For, ultimately, it is the wavicle which leads to salvation - salvation, above all, from the World and its political undertakings.

114i. Music is the most idealistic of the arts and thus the art which, especially in jazz, best approximates to the Holy Ghost. For it uses air (breath) in the service of internal light (noumenal selfishness).

ii. Art is the most naturalistic of the arts and thus the art which, especially in painting, best approximates to the Father. For it uses fire (paint) in the service of external light (noumenal selflessness).

iii. Sculpture is the most realistic of the arts and thus the art which, especially in stone, best approximates to the Blessed Virgin. For it uses earth (clay) in the service of external darkness (phenomenal selflessness).

iv. Literature is the most materialistic of the arts and thus the art which, especially in novels, best approximates to the Son. For it uses water (ink) in the service of internal darkness (phenomenal selfishness).

115i. Music is the art form of the spirit.

ii. Art is the art form of the soul.

iii. Sculpture is the art form of the will.

iv. Literature is the art form of the intellect.

116i. Music can and does intimate of Heaven.

ii. Art can and does depict Hell.

iii. Sculpture can and does embody the World.

iv. Literature can and does define Purgatory.

117. Each major branch of the arts is of course subdivisible according to our fourfold categories, with approximations to one or other of the competing alternatives. But, strictly speaking, each art is defined and limited by its original nature, literature being unable, even in philosophy (the most idealistic and hence metaphysical branch of literature), to transcend the intellect for the spirit to the extent that the best, most idealistic music can. Whereas literature can only speak of or for the spirit indirectly, through the intellect, and hence at a purgatorial remove from Heaven, music can make the spirit directly known through itself, thereby bringing us into closer contact with Heaven, which would be a condition of permanent inner music, the 'music of the (divine) spheres'. If art plunges us back towards the Devil (painting being the art of the soul), music lifts us towards God, and in music alone do we find cultural salvation.

118. If we are damned by art but saved by music, we are half-damned (to the world) by sculpture and half-saved (in purgatory) by literature, since both sculpture and literature are of the phenomenal - the former outwardly (as will) and the latter inwardly (as intellect). Indeed, to be damned is to be confined to the outer noumenal (soul), whereas to be saved is to be admitted to the inner noumenal (spirit), since Hell and Heaven are noumenal extremes of soulful particles and spiritual wavicles, the alpha and omega of noumenal mind. Such mind is perceptual rather than conceptual, for perceptions pertain to the noumenal light, whether external or internal, whereas conceptions pertain, in their worldly relativity, to the phenomenal darkness, whether as will (body) or intellect (brain), externally or internally. The focal-point of the 'Will to Life' is indeed the penis, as Schopenhauer well knew, and in coitus life is conceived (rather than perceived). If sex begins with a perception (of another's beauty), it ends with a conception (of offspring), passing from the realm of soul (focus of the original - and sinful - perception) to that of the will (focus of the coital conception). Such a vicious circle - for it is indeed vicious on account of the immoral and negatively amoral natures of the soul and the will, corresponding, in symbolical terms, to superstar and star - can only be broken out of, or transcended, if the intellect is utilized in the service of the spirit, so that, through inner conceptions, the path may be prepared for inner perceptions (insights), and the possibility of full enlightenment (as the positive amorality of the intellect establishes a virtuous circle with the morality of the spirit), pending the eventual 'eclipse' of the former by the latter in a wholly noumenal salvation of spiritual truth. The cross is a precondition of the supercross, but Christ must eventually be transcended if the Holy Spirit is to come fully to pass, and the virtuous circle of inner conceptions and inner perceptions give way to the omega point of absolute truth, the inner perception of which is the condition of Heaven.

LONDON 1991–92 (Revised 2012)