Aphs. 130-150

130. If nationalism and internationalism are antithetical, then so are supernationalism and supra-nationalism, if rather more in terms of an (horizontal) alpha/omega axis than of a (vertical) worldly/purgatorial one. For while nationalism is of the lunar purgatory and internationalism of the planar world, supernationalism is of the solar alpha (hell) and supra-nationalism of the stellar omega (heaven). Hence while nationalism is bourgeois and internationalism proletarian, supernationalism is upper class and supra-nationalism classless. Nationalism is therefore a democratic/plutocratic norm, whereas internationalism is bureaucratic/technocratic. Supernationalism is therefore an aristocratic/autocratic norm, whereas supra-nationalism is theocratic/meritocratic. Nationalism accords with neutrons and internationalism with atoms. Supernationalism accords with protons and supra-nationalism with electrons.

131i. Politically, nationalism is liberal and internationalism republican, while supernationalism is authoritarian and supra-nationalism totalitarian.

ii. Religiously, nationalism is ethical and internationalism aesthetic, while supernationalism is ritualistic and supra-nationalism cultural.

iii. Scientifically, nationalism is technological and internationalism biological (or sociological), while supernationalism is physical and supra-nationalism chemical.

iv. Economically, nationalism is capitalist and internationalism socialist, while supernationalism is feudal and supra-nationalism corporate.

132. Whereas nationalism and internationalism are phenomenal, the former existentially and the latter with regard to sentience, supernationalism and supra-nationalism are noumenal, the former with regard to doing and the latter beingfully. Materialism and realism flanked by naturalism on the one side and idealism on the other - alpha and omega either side of a phenomenal dichotomy between the purgatorial and the worldly.

133. 'Good' and 'bad' are terms which can only be applied to the realistic and the materialistic in regard to a phenomenal evaluation, with sentient and existential distinctions, whereas they have to be applied to the naturalistic and the idealistic in regard to a noumenal evaluation, i.e. as diabolic or divine, goodness or evil. We cannot say of a clock, for instance, that it is diabolic or divine, since evil and goodness are not applicable to the existential, but only that it works well or badly, is functional (and therefore 'good') or malfunctional (and therefore 'bad'). Likewise, we cannot say of an animal that it is diabolic or divine, since evil and goodness are no more applicable to the sentient than to the existential, but only that it is well or ill, is healthy (and therefore 'good') or sick (and therefore 'bad'). Moral judgements are therefore irrelevant to the, by and large, amoral realms of materialism and realism, as appertaining to inner and outer phenomenality. They are solely relevant to the realms of naturalism and idealism, as appertaining to outer and inner noumenality. Now for anyone who is centred in inner noumenality, then outer noumenality must appear immoral, and hence evil. God alone is good in moral terms, in contrast to which the Devil is noumenally evil (immoral). Hence, judged from a divine standpoint, anything that pertains to the outer noumenal is diabolical or morally evil, and accordingly damnable if not already damned. The solar is diabolic, or noumenally evil (immoral), from a stellar point-of-view, since the solar corresponds to the outer noumenal and the stellar to the inner noumenal, in consequence of which the solar exists in a fallen state vis-à-vis the stellar from which it originally fell. Yet if this is true of the solar and stellar, how much truer is it of the superstellar vis-à-vis not only the solar but, more particularly, the supersolar, or artificial alpha of humanistic modernity. A monarch may be evil to a pope, who is closer to the stellar than to the solar, but a president will be no less evil to a guru, or spiritual leader in the more evolved context of new-brain modernity, since the president is a kind of artificial alpha, or supersolar equivalence, vis-à-vis those who aspire to leading the People towards spiritual fulfilment in electron-wavicle, or superstellar, salvation. The president is to artificial modernity what the monarch was to naturalistic antiquity, and in both cases one has a correspondence, albeit on very different terms, to outer noumenality. Nationalism may be existentially good or bad and internationalism ill or well, but supernationalism, the ideological core of hard-line outer noumenality, is morally evil from a supra-national (global) point of view, the viewpoint of inner noumenality, and hence divine goodness. The superleader, equivalent to, though more evolved than, any pope, may not be for nationalism or internationalism (given his supra-national bias), but he can only be against supernationalism and the diabolical imposition by a strong people of an ideological straitjacket upon surrounding weaker peoples. For such a straitjacket can only be authoritarian, and where the authoritarian exists there can be no prospect of the totalitarian, and hence the liberation of the People from both nationalism (parliamentarianism) and internationalism (republicanism) in the interests of supra-national freedom. If the outer noumenal is anterior to phenomenal good and bad (in both sentient and existential contexts), then the inner noumenal is posterior to it, and whereas the former is morally evil, the latter alone is morally good, a goodness which is truly 'beyond good and evil'.

134. Earrings as noumenally centrifugal, and therefore alpha; badges as noumenally centripetal, and therefore omega. In between, the phenomenally centrifugal nature of rings as worldly, and the phenomenally centripetal nature of pendants as purgatorial, which is to say lunar. Hence one could argue that earrings are autocratic, badges theocratic, rings bureaucratic, and pendants democratic. Or, alternatively, that earrings are aristocratic, badges meritocratic, rings technocratic, and pendants plutocratic - a difference, I would contend, between those that are particle-suggesting and those, by contrast, which are wavicle-suggesting. Yet if all earrings are noumenally centrifugal and all badges noumenally centripetal, then earrings are scientific and badges religious, which is to say affiliated to proton and electron extremes. Similarly, if all rings are phenomenally centrifugal and all pendants phenomenally centripetal, then rings are economic and pendants political, which is to say, affiliated to atomic and neutron extremes. Hence we can no more speak of some earrings as religious, than of some badges as scientific. All earrings are objective and all badges subjective, even if in different ways and to different extents. Therefore there will be earrings of the Antifather, the Antimother, the Antison, and the Antispirit, as opposed to badges of the Father, the Mother, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Likewise we can no more speak of some rings as political, than of some pendants as economic. All rings are subjectively objective and all pendants objectively subjective, even if in different ways and to different extents. Therefore there will be rings of the Outer Father, the Outer Mother, the Outer Son, and the Outer Spirit, as opposed to pendants of the Inner Antifather, the Inner Antimother, the Inner Antison, and the Inner Antispirit. Doubtless we are dealing with naturalistic, realistic, materialistic, and idealistic distinctions in each case, though, whatever the distinction, it would appear that earrings are solar, rings planar (planetary), pendants lunar, and badges stellar, with upper-class, lower-class, middle-class, and classless implications respectively. The wearing of earrings normally excludes the wearing of a badge, and vice versa. The wearing of a ring usually excludes the wearing of a pendant, and vice versa, though this is not invariably the case, since the phenomenal is inherently relative, and relativities have a way of co-existing in amoral phenomenality. Only the alpha and omega extremes of the noumenal are exclusive by dint of their absolutist constitutions.

135. To distinguish between pop, rock, classical, and jazz on the basis of a solar, planar, lunar, and stellar quadruplicity paralleling the above-mentioned distinctions between earrings, rings, pendants, and badges. For it seems to me that pop is solar on account of its predominantly vocal bias (in centrifugal naturalism), whereas jazz is stellar on account of its predominantly wind-biased nature (in centripetal idealism) - a distinction, broadly, between emotion and awareness, soul and spirit, the Devil and God. Likewise it seems to me that rock is planar on account of its predominantly guitar-biased nature (in centrifugal realism), whereas classical is lunar on account of its predominating bias for keyboards (in centripetal materialism) - a distinction, broadly, between flesh and brain, will and intellect, the world and purgatory. Hence whereas pop (which includes soul) and jazz form an alpha/omega antithesis, rock and classical form a worldly/purgatorial antithesis, as between objective and subjective modes of musical phenomenality rather than, as in the case of the former antithesis, objective and subjective modes of musical noumenality. Therefore it could be said that, despite its popular essence, pop is fundamentally upper class, and hence authoritarian, in contrast to the classless, and hence totalitarian, essence of jazz. Whereas, in between, would come rock as lower-class music and classical as middle-class music, the former somewhat republican in character and the latter parliamentary, as befitting feminine and masculine poles. Thus if pop is authoritarian, it is proton orientated; if jazz is totalitarian, it is electron orientated; if rock is republican, it is atom orientated; and if classical is liberal, it is neutron orientated. Though this is only to categorize each of the aforementioned kinds of music according to political criteria which, while applicable to politically-motivated forms of whatever kind of music, would not do justice to those forms of it that had been motivated by scientific, economic, or religious criteria, and could only be described accordingly. Hence while some pop is authoritarian (solo singing), there are other forms of pop which are physical (dance), or communal (group orientated) or ritualistic (theatrical), as the case may be. Now what applies to pop applies no less to jazz, rock, and classical, which also come in a variety of forms and guises. Yet, whatever its bias, pop will be predominantly objective, and hence scientific, whereas jazz will be predominantly subjective, and hence religious. Likewise rock will be predominantly subjectively objective, and hence economic, whereas classical will be predominantly objectively subjective, and hence political. Put in terms of our earring, ring, pendant, and badge quadruplicity, one could say that whereas physical pop will be unequivocally earring-like in character, communal pop is of a ring-like earring, authoritarian pop of a pendant-like earring, and ritualistic pop of a badge-like earring, with (relatively) naturalistic, realistic, materialistic, and idealistic distinctions respectively, distinctions no less applicable, in their various contexts, to the other kinds of music. Hence pop can no more depart the earring, or alpha centrifugal, than jazz depart the badge, or omega centripetal. While rock can no more depart the ring, or worldly centrifugal, than classical depart the pendant, or purgatorial centripetal. At its best, or most omega orientated, pop can become quasi-ritualistic in terms of a correspondence to a badge-like earring, but it cannot become genuinely ritualistic, like the least form of jazz, i.e. vocal jazz, since the ritualistic appertains to the alpha of the religious quadruplicity, and jazz is the music of religion, just as pop is the music of science, rock the music of economics, and classical the music of politics. Genuine ritual corresponds to an earring-like badge, not to a badge-like earring.

136. Pop can usually be distinguished from rock on the basis of a vocals-only, or stand-alone, singer, whether this singer be solo (and authoritarian) or part of a group (and communal) or both to greater (dance) or lesser (ritualistic) extents. The pop singer does not also play a guitar or a piano, for he is not, like a rock singer, of the planar world but of the solar alpha, and consequently he stands alone and above an instrumental commitment.

137. The bourgeoisie always contrive to intellectualize music, and consequently they rely on printed and/or computerized scores to enable them to perform in an objectively subjective manner, with due regard to the inner conceptual. They may despise the rock musician, with his bodily approach to music, but they are fearful of the pop musician, with his soulful approach to music, and envious of the jazz musician, whose spiritual approach to music, based on spontaneous improvisation, transcends the intellect to the degree that the stellar transcends the lunar, or air transcends water. Even the most intellectual of jazz musicians, who are generally keyboardists, transcend the intellect to a degree which makes even the most spiritual of classical musicians, the wind concertoist, seem comparatively intellectual.

138. An attempt to illustrate the fourfold subdivisions of each kind of music, beginning with pop, the musical alpha:-

POP

SOLO VOCAL/GROUP VOCAL/SOLO THEATRICAL

DANCE

proceeding to rock, the worldly kind of music:-

ROCK

POP-ROCK HARD ROCK JAZZ-ROCK

* | *

*|*

SOFT ROCK

continuing with classical, the purgatorial kind of music:-

CLASSICAL

OPERAS/SYMPHONIES/CONCERTOS

BALLET

and culminating in jazz, the omega kind of music:-

JAZZ

VOCAL JAZZ PIANO JAZZ WIND JAZZ

* | *

*|*

GUITAR JAZZ

with broadly naturalistic, realistic, materialistic, and idealistic distinctions respectively, which parallel, so I shall argue, earrings, rings, pendants, and badges (as already discussed), as well as our more familiar proton, atom, neutron, and electron divisions ... with effect to fire, earth, water, and air or, in theological parlance, hell, world, purgatory, and heaven. Hence while soul is the essence of pop (including 'black pop', or soul), spirit is the essence of jazz (including 'white jazz', or blues). And while will is the essence of rock (including 'black rock', or rap), intellect is the essence of classical (including 'black classical', or big band trad). No more than pop can depart soul without ceasing to be pop ... can jazz depart spirit and remain jazz. Now what applies to pop and jazz, to the Devil and God, applies no less to rock and classical, to the world and purgatory, so that rock can no more depart will and remain rock than classical depart intellect without ceasing to be itself.

139. Rock classical is the classical of a liberal republic; classic rock the rock of a social republic. A parallel, one might argue, to 'classics' in paperback and original popular paperbacks. Or, more contemporaneously, to 'classics' on tape and to classic rock tapes.

140. In terms of Marxian class-war, pop and classical are the upper-class and middle-class enemies of the rock-biased working class, and therefore the hard-line Marxist will desire nothing less than the salvation of rock, or working-class music, from pop and classical, solar and lunar, oppression, viz. subversive influence. Yet if the Marxian Communist desires the salvation of the world from both hellish and purgatorial oppression, the Nietzschean Fascist (the genuine and not bogus, or authoritarian, 'Fascist') desires nothing less than the salvation of the world, viz. the rock-biased working class, from itself, in order that it may embrace the 'Kingdom of Heaven' and thus achieve a true salvation in jazz; the ultimate kind of music in the ultimate kind of society. It is not the Marxian 'free from' but the Nietzschean 'free for' which is the ultimate question, and this can only be answered in terms of a superstellar binding of the saved People to God, and hence to spiritual self-realization in the classless society of an omega-oriented paradise.

141. To distinguish the genuine Fascism of a Mussolini or a Primo de Rivera from the false Fascism of a military dictator like Franco or the Hitlerite sell-out of the Nazi Party to the military. True Fascism can only be party totalitarian, unlike the bogus Fascism of military dictators, who function as authoritarian individuals in the service of the Devil, viz. the development of superstate imperialism. The Nazi Party, which was never genuinely fascist in the first place (since Catholicism was of negligible significance to it), lost what pretences it may have had to being fascist on the day when Hitler did a deal with the Junker-dominated military and effectively sold it out for authoritarian gain, becoming, thereafter, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Hence from being a sort of totalitarian God, Hitler ultimately became an authoritarian Devil, and the Nazi Party went steadily downhill, losing whatever moral authority it may once have possessed. Mussolini remained (just) a totalitarian God, but he fell increasingly under the Devil's influence and was unable to prevent his political damnation. Authoritarianism must always perish, but genuine totalitarianism has yet to live!

142. The fact that the American president, whether Democratic or Republican, is also Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces ... is what prevents America from being a genuine democracy and, instead, makes it an elected dictatorship, an authoritarian dictatorship in which the President effectively becomes the Devil personified and America remains the world's most powerful Superstate, the 'Great Satan' as I believe the Ayatollah Khomeini metaphorically called it. Such a diabolical country will not hesitate to prop-up or establish, by military force if necessary, authoritarian regimes wherever it can ... ostensibly in defence of freedom but, in reality, to safeguard its own power and keep America free of God. For God can only do business where the world has triumphed (and the meek have accordingly inherited the earth). Where it has not triumphed, the Devil still holds sway, whether directly, as in the case of authoritarian regimes, or indirectly, through bourgeois democracy. Either way, the world is under the cosh and in no position to be saved.

143. I am always on the side of the world against lunar or solar oppression, the oppression of the People by bourgeoisie and/or aristocracy. Thus I am always on the side of Marxism, Socialism, Communism (call it by what name you like) against Liberalism, Capitalism, Imperialism, and Authoritarianism. But the People's struggle against the bourgeoisie is not and cannot be regarded as an end-in-itself. Where the People are free of lunar and/or solar oppression, they will exist in a People's Republic, which is not the ultimate form of totalitarianism, since republicanism falls short of true totalitarianism to the extent that the world falls short of Heaven, or worldly people of God (the Holy Spirit). Only when the Social Transcendentalist Centre is democratically established at the expense of socialist republicanism ... will the People be saved from the world, saved from their own worldly sins - judicial and economic no less than political - for the privilege of religious sovereignty and the right, thereby, to spiritual self-realization. Such a true totalitarianism, as signified by Social Transcendentalism, is obviously fascistic (and religious) rather than communistic (and economic), and it will lead to the Nietzschean Millennium ... of post-human life forms, viz. supermen and/or superbeings and supra-beings, who will carry on the spiritual journey from where man, in his humanistic imperfection and limitation, leaves off. The Millennium as envisaged, communistically, from the Marxian perspective of bogus, or worldly, totalitarianism is necessarily humanistic, and therefore falls woefully short of a divine insight into the need for and justification of post-humanist criteria. Only the true totalitarianism of a Social Transcendentalist Centre will provide the criteria necessary for an advance towards a true, or post-human, Millennium ... in which man is accordingly 'overcome' and Heaven becomes a reality. But such totalitarianism will be as far removed from the bogus Fascism of authoritarian regimes as from the bogus totalitarianism of republican regimes - indeed, even farther removed from it, insofar as authoritarianism and totalitarianism are nothing less than the alpha and omega of politics, supernationalism and supra-nationalism, with effective diabolic and divine connotations accordingly. No greater ideological distance could be imagined! Now if the world is closer to Heaven than to Hell, then its lunar oppressor is closer to Hell than to Heaven - indeed, may even take an authoritarian form, as in the case of the American presidency, with its overly militaristic powers and military standing as Commander-in-Chief. Hence the slide of liberalism towards authoritarianism is balanced or countered only by the advance of republicanism towards totalitarianism, as liberalism and republicanism are wrenched asunder by opposing forces, the forces of the Devil on the one side and of God on the other, authoritarianism and totalitarianism, in what has to be regarded as an ultimate conflict for control of this planet. If the Devil wins, then Hell is the ideological result. But if God wins, then Heaven will be the prize and such a prize is beyond price! At present, the globe still revolves on a liberal/republican axis, even when liberalism veers towards authoritarianism and republicanism veers towards totalitarianism; for purgatory and the world are the North and South poles of contemporary civilization. But, one day, I am convinced that this will not be the case and that, due to a cataclysmic upheaval the likes of which it has never before witnessed, the globe will change to an authoritarian/totalitarian axis in which, politically speaking, the Devil and God will struggle for control of the planet and, if divine justice be done, God will vanquish the Devil, and hence authoritarianism, for all time, thereby saving the People (who, after all, are closer to God) from the Devil's clutches ... in order that they may enter the 'Kingdom of Heaven' and be religiously sovereign through all eternity, joining those of their kind who had already made it through to Eternity and were One with God in His crusade against the Devil.

144. The materialist's heaven of computerized (VDU text) inner light; the naturalist's heaven of chemical (narcotic) inner light; the idealist's heaven of spiritual (meditative) inner light. Lunar, solar, and stellar forms of Heaven, with the stellar or spiritual heaven alone commensurate with true divinity and thus ultimate salvation. For the materialistic heaven of mechanical inner light is really lunar (and hence middle class); the naturalistic heaven of chemical inner light is really solar (and hence upper class); while the idealistic heaven of spiritual inner light is really stellar (and hence classless). Contrasted to which, one could speak, if rather paradoxically, of the realistic heaven of sexual (orgasmic) inner light being planar (and hence working class), but such a heaven would be at a bodily remove from definitive heaven and no more than a worldly approach to transcendence. And yet, even the bodily is closer, in a manner of speaking, to the spiritual than are the mechanical and chemical ... to the extent that the world is closer to God than to either purgatory or Hell. One might say that whereas the realistic heaven of the fleshy inner light is republican, the idealistic heaven of the spiritual inner light is totalitarian. In contrast to which, it would seem that whereas the materialistic heaven of the computerized inner light is liberal, the naturalistic heaven of the chemical inner light is authoritarian. Hence no less than the republican is closer to the totalitarian, so the fleshy inner light is closer to the spiritual inner light. And no less than the liberal is closer to the authoritarian, so the mechanical inner light is closer to the chemical inner light. In fact, it should be apparent that where the republican is triumphant the fleshy inner light will prevail, whereas the triumph of totalitarianism at the expense of republicanism will entail the ascendancy of the spiritual inner light, as relative to religious sovereignty. Conversely, it should be no less apparent that where the liberal is triumphant the material inner light (of computers, etc.) will prevail, whereas the triumph of authoritarianism at the expense of liberalism will entail the ascendancy of the chemical inner light (of hard drugs), as relative to the Devil. Therefore no less than the orgasmic inner light of sex and the mechanical inner light of computers constitute competing poles of a republican/liberal axis, so the chemical inner light of hard drugs and the spiritual inner light of meditation constitute competing poles of an authoritarian/totalitarian axis, with, in the former case, worldly/purgatorial implications, and, in the latter case, diabolic/divine ones. Clearly if God is to triumph over the Devil, then the spiritual inner light must get the better of the chemical inner light. But before this can happen, God must first triumph over the world and thus save the People from the orgasmic inner light of their worldly sin. For the flesh is just as much an obstacle to the spirit as republicanism to totalitarianism, and therefore it must be transcended if the true heaven of spiritual inner light is to come properly (and officially) to pass ... on the basis of religious sovereignty in the People. Only from the standpoint of this spiritual inner light will it be possible to defeat the chemical inner light of the Devil; only from a totalitarian standpoint can the authoritarian dragon finally be laid to rest.

145. Was Aldous Huxley, with his predilection for the chemical inner light (of LSD and mescaline) a devil's advocate? Yes, manifestly he was, and one can infer an authoritarian bias from his chemical predilections ... in contrast, I would argue, to the rather more republican bias of the carnal D.H. Lawrence, whose predilection for orgasmic inner light needs no amplification here! Hence an upper-class/working-class distinction that puts Huxley in a somewhat unfavourable light from God's standpoint.

146. The element of the scientific (objective) person is fire; the element of the political (objectively subjective) person is water; the element of the economic (subjectively objective) person is earth; and the element of the religious (subjective) person is air. Hence from Hell to Heaven via purgatory and the world, since science is of the Devil no less than religion of God, while politics is masculine and economics feminine, with male and female correlations accordingly.

147i. Just as physics is the naturalism of science and chemistry its idealism, so technology is the materialism of science and biology its realism. Hence the solar which is truly solar and the solar which is quasi-stellar, as against the solar which is quasi-lunar and the solar which is quasi-planar. (Read: one type of earring or another).

ii. Just as authoritarianism is the naturalism of politics and totalitarianism its idealism, so liberalism is the materialism of politics and republicanism its realism. Hence the lunar which is quasi-solar and the lunar which is quasi-stellar, as against the lunar which is truly lunar and the lunar which is quasi-planar. (Read: one type of pendant or another.)

iii. Just as feudalism is the naturalism of economics and corporatism its idealism, so capitalism is the materialism of economics and socialism its realism. Hence the planar which is quasi-solar and the planar which is quasi-stellar, as against the planar which is quasi-lunar and the planar which is truly planar. (Read: one type of ring or another.)

iv. Just as ritual is the naturalism of religion and devotion its idealism, so ethics is the materialism of religion and aesthetics its realism. Hence the stellar which is quasi-solar and the stellar which is truly stellar, as against the stellar which is quasi-lunar and the stellar which is quasi-planar. (Read: one type of badge or another).

148. To distinguish the alpha of wind instruments from the omega of wind instruments, with all due antithetical gradations in between, on the following basis: harmonicas as opposed to clarinets on the alpha/omega poles of a centrifugal/centripetal dichotomy. Then: flutes and saxophones as antithetical within the confines of a relatively centrifugal/centripetal dichotomy. After which, trombones and trumpets as antithetical within the confines of a more centrist centrifugal/centripetal dichotomy. Finally, French horns and English horns as antithetical within the centrist confines of a centrifugal/centripetal dichotomy. Hence from harmonicas at one end of the wind spectrum to clarinets at the other end via flutes/saxes, trombones/trumpets, and French horns/English horns. Since wind instruments, corresponding to air, are the most religious of all instruments, it follows that those at the alpha pole will approximate to fundamentalism and those at the omega pole to transcendentalism, with all due gradations coming in-between. For fundamentalism and transcendentalism are to religion what, for example, authoritarianism and totalitarianism are to politics - the alpha and omega poles of an elemental spectrum (in this case electron), and where fundamentalism is ritualistic, transcendentalism, by contrast, is devotional, as befitting a particle/wavicle, collectivistic/ individualistic distinction. Hence, in music, all the difference between blues and jazz, woe and joy, the subjective beset by external (objective) distractions and the subjective joyfully wrapped-up in self-contemplation.

149. In literature, fiction is a sort of intellectual extrapolation from the world, a lunar perspective on life which contrasts with the worldly perspective of drama much the way that Protestant Christianity contrasts with Catholic Christianity, or Christ with the Blessed Virgin, or the middle class with the working class, or liberalism with republicanism, or capitalism with socialism, or water with earth, or neutrons with atoms, or ... man with woman and intellect with will. For, in truth, the world is rather more will (contrary to Schopenhauer) than will and idea, and in drama the world finds its will no less than, in novelistic fiction, the Antiworld (of purgatory) finds its intellect, and accordingly interprets the world from the lunar elevation, as it were, of the idea. Hence where drama is concrete and subjectively objective, fiction is abstract and objectively subjective, in contrast to the objectivity of philosophy (which is quasi-scientific) and the subjectivity of poetry (which is quasi-religious), the alpha and omega (relatively speaking) of literature, which, of all the arts, is the branch most correlative of the intellect, and hence purgatory. In fact, one could argue that, unlike music (which stands closer to science) and art (which stands closer to religion), literature is closest to politics and thus stands above architecture as the art closest of all to economics, and hence the world. Regarded thus, literature would be the most political branch of the arts, and whilst it is safe to assume a liberal/republican dichotomy between fiction and drama, it is by no means unsafe to assume an authoritarian/totalitarian distinction between philosophy and poetry, conceiving of the former distinction in a relatively middle-class/working-class light, and the latter distinction in a relatively upper-class/classless light (although it has to be remembered that literature, being of the intellect, is essentially middle class and therefore only quasi-upper class, quasi-working class, or quasi-classless, depending on the genre in question, i.e. philosophy, drama, or poetry.)

150. If literature, being intellectual, is the branch of the arts that most approximates to a middle-class, and therefore political, equation, then architecture, being wilful, is the branch most approximating to a lower-class, and therefore economic, equation, with sculpture coming in-between as a kind of cross or compromise between intellectual and wilful, masculine and feminine alternatives, much as though it were equivalent to a bourgeois republic in between a parliamentary democracy (bourgeois) and a social democracy (proletarian), or, alternatively, to heterosexuality in between homosexual and lesbian extremes, as appertaining to the lunar and the planar respectively. Hence, unlike literature (which is essentially masculine) and equally unlike architecture (which is essentially feminine), sculpture is androgynous and thus a marriage of idea and will, of middle- and lower-class elements. However, if sculpture is neither fish nor fowl (this metaphor being particularly appropriate to a water/earth correlation), then music, being emotional, is the branch of the arts that most approximates to an upper-class, and therefore scientific, equation, whereas art-proper, being spiritual, is the branch that most approximates to a classless, and therefore religious, equation. If literature and architecture are vertically antithetical, as between purgatory and the world, then music and art are horizontally antithetical, as between Hell (alpha) and Heaven (omega). Literature may be masculine and architecture feminine, but music is diabolic and art divine, as befitting noumenal extremes which flank the phenomenal in both its lunar and planar manifestations, and flank it, therefore, in solar and stellar terms, protons and electrons either side, so to speak, of the neutron/atomic dichotomy between literature and architecture.