I hate it when people use their blogs to speak in a passive aggressive fashion to someone instead of just directly speaking to them. For that matter I hate it when someone will throw hate, etc via email (cowards) instead of having enough ethics to actually speak to the person. What I'm about to write is not an attempt to say something ugly to anyone, it's for my own personal purposes only. When I have something to say to someone, I say it directly to them. If I have something negative to say and yet they won't even speak to me on the phone, then they basically don't exist anyway. I want nothing to do with any retarded email wars. In fact I want nothing period to do with anyone who only communicates via written text online. Anyone who thinks that's a proper way to (solely) communicate is behaving in a completely dysfunctional manner. Anyone who then acts all offended when their victim has had enough is being perfectly selfish; too concerned solely about themselves to notice the harm they're causing to others.
Of course some people are so bad off they simply can't take the feelings of others into account. (All the more so through the miscommunication which is the rule of email, etc.) And I do feel for such people. But if said people refuse to actually communicate there is certainly nothing I can do about that. I can't just pop into their heads telepathically to make up for all they're refusing to do.
Anyone who's taking part in discussion boards, blog comment sections, and email to a great extent, without actually speaking to the people their spending so much time on, is doing it woefully wrong. And I'm sorry, genuinely sorry for all the people who are continuing to fuck it up so bad.
Anyway, a few years ago I had to babysit a 14 year old autistic boy. I say boy, although when I was 14 I was not a boy. I was grown up by 14. But anyway this was definitely some sort of boy.
His father had recently jumped out a window because the boy had driven him mad. This was the story anyway, that he had literally just finally screamed and literally ran across the room and right out the window thus killing himself. During the evening I had to take care of him, he threw a cup of pee on me. And not with anger, but with a demonical giggle.
At one point in the evening though, I let him surf the internet. And he knew to do things online that I didn't know how to do. So, he was both an idiot and in some ways quite intelligent. Which normally is something I really like; as we all have our strengths and weaknesses, and in order to be really really good at something, something else is going to have to give...
But in this case the result was a monster. He had absolutely no concept of the feelings of other people. And when you tried to tell him he was wrong about anything he simply ignored you. You see, ultimately, he was utterly closeminded. He could never be wrong. And he's throwing cups of pee on people he's just met and laughing while at the same time able to surf the web better than me.
And so, I sat there beside him, to make sure he didn't hurt himself or someone else, while he sat there with a slightly empty look in his eye, flying all over the internet. And whenever I've interacted with someone online since who seemed 'a tad bit off' who refused to actually speak to me, I've remembered that 14 year old autistic boy, sitting there, flying all over the internet with a slightly vacant look in his eye.
Where will that boy be in 20 years? He'll probably have enough technical skills that for a while he'll manage to hold down a job. Then he'll throw a cup of pee on someone and when they fire him scream about how they're all sociopaths. He'll get another job and the same will happen. And eventually he'll be permanently unemployed, living on disability, surfing the internet, and screaming about how everyone in the whole world is a sociopath. All the while refusing to even speak to the people who try to help him. Unless they're female. In which case he'll try to get in their pants. And he'll be so good at surfing the web, he'll probably find some woman that's so lonely and terrified of any normal man, some woman that can only be with a guy that seems so pitiful she doesn't feel threatened of him, that he probably will find a woman.
And he'll sit there in his dump of a house and scream about how unfair it is. Scream about how awful the world is, and except for the poontang, he'll reject anyone else who offers help. Refuse to even speak to anyone else. And of course, when such people eventually give up and say goodbye, he'll of course then scream that they too were sociopaths.
And imagine again, that 14 year old, throwing pee on people and laughing, a slightly vacant, kind of scary, empty look in his eye, flying all over the web with ease.
And despite it all, here I am, compelled by my over-I, by the ethical laws my I, my ego, has set for me, to still attempt to help such demons that I find online. I've spent my life being Dostoevsky's Idiot, being too good for this world, pushing myself to the edge.
But I'm not going to go jump out any windows.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
101 is not very original. A short piano piece in just intonation. In c major. I had Joanna run through a number of other tunings while I had to say what she was in. Like going from 12TET to supposedly Bach's well temperament but I don't trust HG piano. According to this:
http://www.larips.com/
the only different note was b. But I was able to tell TET from whatever WT HG piano was using. The problem is that I could tell HG just intonation from an imported (identical) just intonation scala file. The bigger problem is that in c major the differences in all these things are minimized.
Unfortunately I can't say that JI matters at all here. This song is so totally lacking in dissonance such that the steady dissonance of 12TET maybe helps it.
100 is divided by 3, 4 and 5. It really doesn't sound good. The best part is the lack of a fade for the sudden jump to 99.
99 is divided by 6 the same as 91 and they have the same flavor... although I ended up sticking one of the same instruments in... Yet, just messing around I stuck that scale on 101 and it also had the same flavor. A sort of mystical feel. I like it.
98 and 95 are divided by 7. In a way both highly dissonant and yet I like them both. Especially 98. HG piano doesn't sound very good in 95. Seems like any note works. Which makes for very easy song writing. And also makes it easy to stick a ton of tracks together.
97 is divided by 10. I love it. Maybe because it's similar to a 12TET minor scale? 6/5, 7/5, etc minor thirds... Need to try it again.
96 is divided by 9 and the majority of notes will just sound horribly out of tune. So few notes are left that it's bland.
94 is divided by 8 and maybe is just an awful song. Have to try again.
I like 6, 7 and 10 more than 12TET. Well temperament, just intonation, pythagorean, etc, meh, slight enough adjustments that even with being able to generally correctly guess what something is, it's difficult to say how much I really care. I think it may be hitting my subconscious though. Finally my ears change from day to day. One day the difference is huge and such a breath of fresh air. Other days, who cares? Like the episode of red dwarf that I was told about. It does amount to that unfortunately. But it's better than any alternative I'm aware of.
http://www.larips.com/
the only different note was b. But I was able to tell TET from whatever WT HG piano was using. The problem is that I could tell HG just intonation from an imported (identical) just intonation scala file. The bigger problem is that in c major the differences in all these things are minimized.
Unfortunately I can't say that JI matters at all here. This song is so totally lacking in dissonance such that the steady dissonance of 12TET maybe helps it.
100 is divided by 3, 4 and 5. It really doesn't sound good. The best part is the lack of a fade for the sudden jump to 99.
99 is divided by 6 the same as 91 and they have the same flavor... although I ended up sticking one of the same instruments in... Yet, just messing around I stuck that scale on 101 and it also had the same flavor. A sort of mystical feel. I like it.
98 and 95 are divided by 7. In a way both highly dissonant and yet I like them both. Especially 98. HG piano doesn't sound very good in 95. Seems like any note works. Which makes for very easy song writing. And also makes it easy to stick a ton of tracks together.
97 is divided by 10. I love it. Maybe because it's similar to a 12TET minor scale? 6/5, 7/5, etc minor thirds... Need to try it again.
96 is divided by 9 and the majority of notes will just sound horribly out of tune. So few notes are left that it's bland.
94 is divided by 8 and maybe is just an awful song. Have to try again.
I like 6, 7 and 10 more than 12TET. Well temperament, just intonation, pythagorean, etc, meh, slight enough adjustments that even with being able to generally correctly guess what something is, it's difficult to say how much I really care. I think it may be hitting my subconscious though. Finally my ears change from day to day. One day the difference is huge and such a breath of fresh air. Other days, who cares? Like the episode of red dwarf that I was told about. It does amount to that unfortunately. But it's better than any alternative I'm aware of.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
A large SUV swerved into my car today knocking my off the road and causing at least 4300 dollars worth of damage. The young guy begged me not to call the police. He gave me his rolex which he says is worth 7000 dollars as collateral (I didn't ask for it, he offered it.) The whole ordeal just brings home again how fucked our society is, such that there's nothing for it but that extreme suspicion and distrust must constantly dictate our behavior. Of course I didn't call the police though and am trusting that he'll show up in the parking lot with 4300 dollars in cash on friday...
Which has my wife bringing up every possible negative scenario she can think of and trying to lecture me on the need to be completely untrusting of everyone.
---
For what it's worth I've written 6 'songs' in the last week and just finished my 100th 'song'. I think 97 is my alltime favorite. Not sure what conclusions I can draw from my fundamental scale experiments yet though.
8/7, 9/7, 10/7, 11/7, 12/7, 13/7, 14/7 can actually work just fine. Not so awfully discordant as I thought it might be. Not at all really. I suppose 8/7ths is still relatively low whole numbers. I already knew I prefer 6/5 instead of 5/4... I think I need to do them all on the same instrument to more safely draw conclusions... But homegrown piano sounds bad enough that I'm not going to use it. Have to buy something... Can't buy anything till I see if this guy shows up with the 4300 dollars CASH, lol. I guess next I'll write something emphasizing thirds in meantone comma on homegrown piano, as for someone unknown reason that one sounds OK, as if there were a very few scales for which he didn't just pitch shift everything from a single note.
Which has my wife bringing up every possible negative scenario she can think of and trying to lecture me on the need to be completely untrusting of everyone.
---
For what it's worth I've written 6 'songs' in the last week and just finished my 100th 'song'. I think 97 is my alltime favorite. Not sure what conclusions I can draw from my fundamental scale experiments yet though.
8/7, 9/7, 10/7, 11/7, 12/7, 13/7, 14/7 can actually work just fine. Not so awfully discordant as I thought it might be. Not at all really. I suppose 8/7ths is still relatively low whole numbers. I already knew I prefer 6/5 instead of 5/4... I think I need to do them all on the same instrument to more safely draw conclusions... But homegrown piano sounds bad enough that I'm not going to use it. Have to buy something... Can't buy anything till I see if this guy shows up with the 4300 dollars CASH, lol. I guess next I'll write something emphasizing thirds in meantone comma on homegrown piano, as for someone unknown reason that one sounds OK, as if there were a very few scales for which he didn't just pitch shift everything from a single note.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Two books:
How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony (And Why You Should Care) by Ross Duffin.
Duffin mostly advocates bringing the thirds a little less out of tune, as they are so far out of tune in 12TET. That would mean something like quarter comma meantone. He does say the best tuning depends on the song.
Actually this article here compares Duffin and Isacoff's books and I mainly agree with it.
http://www.artsjournal.com/postclassic/2007/01/the_tuning_tide_turns.html
Evening in the Palace of Reason by James R. Gaines.
Sort of biography of JS Bach and Frederick the Great. Bach kept making tons of music because of his faith in god. He actually wasn't all that popular at the time. The galant style was more popular, which seems to mean lighthearted, fluffy, etc. Bach was darker, and more profound. And his counterpoint, lots of stuff happening at the same time, instead of a single melody line. People supposedly found that too serious. So the author says. Bach was just about forgotten until long after his death. Some of his greatest works were barely played even once until decades and even up to a century later.
It is hard to imagine putting the effort into writing all that music, knowing it might only get played a single time. Or that you'll send the sheet music to Frederick The Great (some of your best work ever) who's just going to throw it aside and never listen to it even once. It would seem to take something like faith in a god, and a belief that your music was written for the glory of god, to bother continuing to compose so much. To work so hard at it. If not that exactly, something else about as mystical.
How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony (And Why You Should Care) by Ross Duffin.
Duffin mostly advocates bringing the thirds a little less out of tune, as they are so far out of tune in 12TET. That would mean something like quarter comma meantone. He does say the best tuning depends on the song.
Actually this article here compares Duffin and Isacoff's books and I mainly agree with it.
http://www.artsjournal.com/postclassic/2007/01/the_tuning_tide_turns.html
Evening in the Palace of Reason by James R. Gaines.
Sort of biography of JS Bach and Frederick the Great. Bach kept making tons of music because of his faith in god. He actually wasn't all that popular at the time. The galant style was more popular, which seems to mean lighthearted, fluffy, etc. Bach was darker, and more profound. And his counterpoint, lots of stuff happening at the same time, instead of a single melody line. People supposedly found that too serious. So the author says. Bach was just about forgotten until long after his death. Some of his greatest works were barely played even once until decades and even up to a century later.
It is hard to imagine putting the effort into writing all that music, knowing it might only get played a single time. Or that you'll send the sheet music to Frederick The Great (some of your best work ever) who's just going to throw it aside and never listen to it even once. It would seem to take something like faith in a god, and a belief that your music was written for the glory of god, to bother continuing to compose so much. To work so hard at it. If not that exactly, something else about as mystical.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
And that's it then. I've told a number of people to either communicate by using the phone or just go away, basically. I may not have come across as very nice but I cannot think of any way to sound nice about it. If there was anything else to do to manage to sound nice that I could have thought of (along with being world record good even as it's killing me) I would have done it.
So the phone: I don't think that's asking so much really. Really it's not asking hardly anything at all. And so then, these people I communicated online to for years without ever actually speaking to, how many do you think simply picked up the phone and chose to be a real actual human being?
Try zero. And ask yourself, what kind of person will spend endless hours communicating online with someone that they won't even once speak to on the phone for even a few minutes?
People with issues clearly. And although it appears to be disgusting indifference. Although it appears to be postindustrial living, (so easily dropping people). And it appears to show a complete lack of empathy. And it appears to be dishonest (communicating online with someone you don't actually think enough of to actually speak to). I try, to somehow just leave it at fear. Fear which has overwhelmed people. And of course being a weak, fearfilled person means you cannot show compassion for others. Such people can only be indifferent, or worse.
And it's no good feeling frustration that just about everyone is so well assimilated (thanks to their fear.) To not be assimilated is generally to be dead. Literally. It's no good being frustrated with those who aren't dead. So all these people are owned by Fear. The personal muppets of Fear.
And finally I've never used this blog with much concern for how I appeared. It should have always been a given that this gives a warped picture of me. And it's always been a given that anyone who knows me through this, is probably going to run in the other direction in fear. Occasionally I've allowed a tiny bit of hope that a person or two maybe was intelligent enough to manage better. But with one exception, all have failed. And that's OK.
The only people who know me through this blog, did so exactly because they expressed great unhappiness and it's a matter of my ethical laws (the same ones which would have meant immediately picking up the phone to speak to someone I had communicated online with for years) that I respond to people in distress. I saw them in distress and had no choice in the matter.
Perhaps though, when the need to follow my ethics, exactly when it does not appear at all to coincide with my own self interest. Perhaps I need to think harder at such times, instead of usually being kind of fatalistic. I'm fatalistic exactly because I know I'm almost certainly going to pay one way or another for my kindness. But perhaps at the same time whatever altruistic act I then perform isn't thought out well enough...
...mmm no, not really. Being openminded, I persecute myself. Always looking for flaws. But here, at least, there isn't one. It's more just that there's nothing to be done. I do the right thing, knowing it will do no good and will only hurt me, but there really isn't anything else that can be done. Over and over, it's hopeless. You reach out to people and they respond, "Don't pity me!" Or with suspicion. Or anyway, basically you're not allowed to actually do anything helpful for them anyway as to actually do anything would go against social norms. (I'm married!) Nuclear families. Post-industrial living. Fear of any action that even looks vaguely gay. Simply just fear really. Fear that both stops people from giving compassion and ever receiving any compassion. Fear that keeps people isolated. And makes it all basically hopeless. And thus the only solutions are completely personal solutions. Learning to not mind the established order.
-
Books I've read lately:
The Tyranny of Email: Nothing actually stupendous in it. Just mirrors actually what I've been thinking increasingly for the last decade. Been thinking it but trying so hard to be understanding to all these people who will only communicate online because they're so overwhelmed by fear... Decided I'm just encouraging something harmful, for everyone involved, finally, as a result of reading this. So, life changing book.
Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglas: Excellent writing. Excellent insights on slavery that reach far beyond actual slavery in my opinion. Best book I've ever read on this issue. I'm wondering if instead of my crude attempts at depicting a Dante type hell, I should be going more in this direction here...
Temperament by Stuart Isacoff: Smirky 12TET polemic. Still useful. In trying to decide whether or not one should use TET (not just 12, by TET in general). I had decided that one might as well just use TET. That art is ultimately about symbols. To complain about TET is like complaining about seeing a zipper of a Dr. Who monters. As long as the symbolization is made it really doesn't matter... And then I finally slept well after a long bout with insomnia. And suddenly music just sounded so much better. And I listened to my pythagorean song and the tuning gave it so much more... So I still don't really know. It does seem that laziness played a huge role in eventually just deciding on TET. And that with today's technology, any thinking composer would be questioning it and experimenting with other tunings.
Heaven and Earth by Robert Johnson: (Haven't finished this one and not sure I will.)Jung disciple. At first I liked it but the language is getting so vague. I agree some mysticism is necessary but this guy just personally got extremely lucky. And then after the fact attributes all that luck to some divine power. That is incredibly annoying to me. (People don't normally literally find a suitcase full of money sitting in their hotel room given as charity by a crook so that they're able to continue their studies at the newly opened Jungian institute.) It's always incredibly annoying to hear the few lucky people giving what amounts to motivational speeches. They like to pretend something other than luck had anything to do with it. Johnson thought he was just following his 'thin threads'. And apparently if we all did the same we'd all be so happy. Bullshit. You got lucky. Extremely lucky. If 'following your thin threads' had led you to being stuck working at mickie D's I bet you wouldn't be going on about following your thin threads. And the majority of people who act like you did, (commune new age, wandering to a foreign land without a penny, etc) it doesn't work out so well for at all. Ultimately you're combining some wise insights about modern society with stuff that sounds like someone stuck a blender in your ear.
But, I understand, for a thinking man, finding a way to keep some mysticism is difficult to do... To believe that 'religion/spirituality,etc' is within our dreams, is for example one road forward, I suppose... But Johnson really it seems is so much strengthening his mysticism just through the incredible luck he's personally had. And that is nauseating BS.
So the phone: I don't think that's asking so much really. Really it's not asking hardly anything at all. And so then, these people I communicated online to for years without ever actually speaking to, how many do you think simply picked up the phone and chose to be a real actual human being?
Try zero. And ask yourself, what kind of person will spend endless hours communicating online with someone that they won't even once speak to on the phone for even a few minutes?
People with issues clearly. And although it appears to be disgusting indifference. Although it appears to be postindustrial living, (so easily dropping people). And it appears to show a complete lack of empathy. And it appears to be dishonest (communicating online with someone you don't actually think enough of to actually speak to). I try, to somehow just leave it at fear. Fear which has overwhelmed people. And of course being a weak, fearfilled person means you cannot show compassion for others. Such people can only be indifferent, or worse.
And it's no good feeling frustration that just about everyone is so well assimilated (thanks to their fear.) To not be assimilated is generally to be dead. Literally. It's no good being frustrated with those who aren't dead. So all these people are owned by Fear. The personal muppets of Fear.
And finally I've never used this blog with much concern for how I appeared. It should have always been a given that this gives a warped picture of me. And it's always been a given that anyone who knows me through this, is probably going to run in the other direction in fear. Occasionally I've allowed a tiny bit of hope that a person or two maybe was intelligent enough to manage better. But with one exception, all have failed. And that's OK.
The only people who know me through this blog, did so exactly because they expressed great unhappiness and it's a matter of my ethical laws (the same ones which would have meant immediately picking up the phone to speak to someone I had communicated online with for years) that I respond to people in distress. I saw them in distress and had no choice in the matter.
Perhaps though, when the need to follow my ethics, exactly when it does not appear at all to coincide with my own self interest. Perhaps I need to think harder at such times, instead of usually being kind of fatalistic. I'm fatalistic exactly because I know I'm almost certainly going to pay one way or another for my kindness. But perhaps at the same time whatever altruistic act I then perform isn't thought out well enough...
...mmm no, not really. Being openminded, I persecute myself. Always looking for flaws. But here, at least, there isn't one. It's more just that there's nothing to be done. I do the right thing, knowing it will do no good and will only hurt me, but there really isn't anything else that can be done. Over and over, it's hopeless. You reach out to people and they respond, "Don't pity me!" Or with suspicion. Or anyway, basically you're not allowed to actually do anything helpful for them anyway as to actually do anything would go against social norms. (I'm married!) Nuclear families. Post-industrial living. Fear of any action that even looks vaguely gay. Simply just fear really. Fear that both stops people from giving compassion and ever receiving any compassion. Fear that keeps people isolated. And makes it all basically hopeless. And thus the only solutions are completely personal solutions. Learning to not mind the established order.
-
Books I've read lately:
The Tyranny of Email: Nothing actually stupendous in it. Just mirrors actually what I've been thinking increasingly for the last decade. Been thinking it but trying so hard to be understanding to all these people who will only communicate online because they're so overwhelmed by fear... Decided I'm just encouraging something harmful, for everyone involved, finally, as a result of reading this. So, life changing book.
Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglas: Excellent writing. Excellent insights on slavery that reach far beyond actual slavery in my opinion. Best book I've ever read on this issue. I'm wondering if instead of my crude attempts at depicting a Dante type hell, I should be going more in this direction here...
Temperament by Stuart Isacoff: Smirky 12TET polemic. Still useful. In trying to decide whether or not one should use TET (not just 12, by TET in general). I had decided that one might as well just use TET. That art is ultimately about symbols. To complain about TET is like complaining about seeing a zipper of a Dr. Who monters. As long as the symbolization is made it really doesn't matter... And then I finally slept well after a long bout with insomnia. And suddenly music just sounded so much better. And I listened to my pythagorean song and the tuning gave it so much more... So I still don't really know. It does seem that laziness played a huge role in eventually just deciding on TET. And that with today's technology, any thinking composer would be questioning it and experimenting with other tunings.
Heaven and Earth by Robert Johnson: (Haven't finished this one and not sure I will.)Jung disciple. At first I liked it but the language is getting so vague. I agree some mysticism is necessary but this guy just personally got extremely lucky. And then after the fact attributes all that luck to some divine power. That is incredibly annoying to me. (People don't normally literally find a suitcase full of money sitting in their hotel room given as charity by a crook so that they're able to continue their studies at the newly opened Jungian institute.) It's always incredibly annoying to hear the few lucky people giving what amounts to motivational speeches. They like to pretend something other than luck had anything to do with it. Johnson thought he was just following his 'thin threads'. And apparently if we all did the same we'd all be so happy. Bullshit. You got lucky. Extremely lucky. If 'following your thin threads' had led you to being stuck working at mickie D's I bet you wouldn't be going on about following your thin threads. And the majority of people who act like you did, (commune new age, wandering to a foreign land without a penny, etc) it doesn't work out so well for at all. Ultimately you're combining some wise insights about modern society with stuff that sounds like someone stuck a blender in your ear.
But, I understand, for a thinking man, finding a way to keep some mysticism is difficult to do... To believe that 'religion/spirituality,etc' is within our dreams, is for example one road forward, I suppose... But Johnson really it seems is so much strengthening his mysticism just through the incredible luck he's personally had. And that is nauseating BS.
Friday, February 5, 2010
How Much Money Do You Make?
"How much money do you make?"
In 'utopia', this is at worst an entirely innocent question. A bit of mild curiousity. Even better, if you don't make much, the utopianist now knows that he should keep an eye open to the possibility of offering you any help you might need.
You make a lot? Perhaps you own a lot of neat toys and have a cool house to invite people over to for parties and so on.
If nothing else it's just a bit of information. People who do such and such job make good money. Perhaps I should look into a career change?
In dystopia this is a wildly inappropriate question. Why? Because if the person doesn't make as much money as the questioner, the questioner will then judge them as beneath them, reducing their interaction to an incredibly crude materialistic competition. And if the person makes more than the questioner, the questioner will be jealous and who knows? possibly try to rob them?
Really those are The Reasons it's an inappropriate question to ask in this world. In this dystopia. Although if you ask someone in this dystopia why it's an inappropriate question, chances are very good they won't be able to say other than it's just inappropriate. Or 'it's private!' They don't even hardly really know why. They just know that you ask, and they feel fear. They feel offended by your invasiveness.
The default is fear, don't you know that?
It's private!
"What do you do for a living?"
A bit of small talk? A way to break the ice at a party? As often as not considered the same as asking how much money someone makes. Again, the default is fear. Stay away! Keep your interactions meaningless. Talk about the fucking weather. Make a stupid joke. You're not supposed to be collecting information you could use against the person. Just don't even ask questions! Just fucking sit there and shut up. Or, 'we've certainly been having nice weather lately.'
'Oh, why yes we have, haven't we?' (SCREEEEEEECCH!! THIS IS FEAR! THIS IS THE DYSTOPIA. YOU ARE A POSSIBLE ENEMY. Perhaps over the course of some very long time span I'll quit considering you an enemy. If I'm single and you stick your penis in me. Otherwise, really no need to take any chances.)
In 'utopia', this is at worst an entirely innocent question. A bit of mild curiousity. Even better, if you don't make much, the utopianist now knows that he should keep an eye open to the possibility of offering you any help you might need.
You make a lot? Perhaps you own a lot of neat toys and have a cool house to invite people over to for parties and so on.
If nothing else it's just a bit of information. People who do such and such job make good money. Perhaps I should look into a career change?
In dystopia this is a wildly inappropriate question. Why? Because if the person doesn't make as much money as the questioner, the questioner will then judge them as beneath them, reducing their interaction to an incredibly crude materialistic competition. And if the person makes more than the questioner, the questioner will be jealous and who knows? possibly try to rob them?
Really those are The Reasons it's an inappropriate question to ask in this world. In this dystopia. Although if you ask someone in this dystopia why it's an inappropriate question, chances are very good they won't be able to say other than it's just inappropriate. Or 'it's private!' They don't even hardly really know why. They just know that you ask, and they feel fear. They feel offended by your invasiveness.
The default is fear, don't you know that?
It's private!
"What do you do for a living?"
A bit of small talk? A way to break the ice at a party? As often as not considered the same as asking how much money someone makes. Again, the default is fear. Stay away! Keep your interactions meaningless. Talk about the fucking weather. Make a stupid joke. You're not supposed to be collecting information you could use against the person. Just don't even ask questions! Just fucking sit there and shut up. Or, 'we've certainly been having nice weather lately.'
'Oh, why yes we have, haven't we?' (SCREEEEEEECCH!! THIS IS FEAR! THIS IS THE DYSTOPIA. YOU ARE A POSSIBLE ENEMY. Perhaps over the course of some very long time span I'll quit considering you an enemy. If I'm single and you stick your penis in me. Otherwise, really no need to take any chances.)
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
"The more I read, the more I was led to abhor and detest my enslavers. I could regard them in no other light than a band of successful robbers, who had left their homes, and gone to Africa, and stolen us from our homes, and in a strange land reduced us to slavery. I loathed them as being the meanest as well as the most wicked of men. As I read and contemplated the subject, behold! that very discontentment which Master Hugh had predicted would follow my learning to read had already come, to torment and sting my soul to unnutterable anguish. As I writhed under it, I would at times feel that learning to read had been a curse rather than a blessing. It had given me a view of my wretched condition, without the remedy. It opened my eyes to the horrible pit, but to no ladder upon which to get out. In moments of agony, I envied my fellow slaves for their stupidity. I have often wished myself a beast. I preferred the condition of the meanest reptile to my own. Any thing, no matter what to get rid of thinking! It was this everlasting thinking of my condition that tormented me. There was no getting rid of it. It was pressed upon me by every object within sight of hearing."
"Were I to be again reduced to the chains of slavery, to that enslavement, I should regard being the slave of a religious master the greatest calamity that could befall me. For of all slaveholders with whom I have ever met, religious slaveholders are the worst. I have ever found them the meanest and basest, the most cruel and cowardly, of all others."
"It would astonish one, unaccustomed to a slaveholding life, to see with what wonderful ease a slaveholder can find things, of which to make occasion to whip a slave. A mere look, word, or motion,-a mistake, accident, or want of power,-are all matters for which a slave may be whipped at any time. Does a slave look dissatisfied? It is said, he has the devil in him, and it must be whipped out. Does he speak loudly when spoken to by his master? Then he is getting high-minded, and should be taken down a button-hole lower. Does he forget to pull off his hat at the approach of a white person? Then he is wanting in reverence, and should be whipped for it. Does he ever venture to vindicate his conduct, when censured for it? Then he is guilty of impudence,-one of the greatest crimes of which a slave can be guilty. Does he ever venture to suggest a different mode of doing things from that pointed out by his master? He is indeed presumptouos, and getting above himself; and nothing less than a flogging will do for him. Does he, while ploughing, break a plough,-or, while hoeing, break a hoe? It is owing to his carelessness, and for it a slave must always be whipped."
"I have found that, to make a contented slave, it is necessary to make a thoughtless one. It is necessary to darken his moral and mental vision, and, as far as possible, to annihilate the power of reason."
"Were I to be again reduced to the chains of slavery, to that enslavement, I should regard being the slave of a religious master the greatest calamity that could befall me. For of all slaveholders with whom I have ever met, religious slaveholders are the worst. I have ever found them the meanest and basest, the most cruel and cowardly, of all others."
"It would astonish one, unaccustomed to a slaveholding life, to see with what wonderful ease a slaveholder can find things, of which to make occasion to whip a slave. A mere look, word, or motion,-a mistake, accident, or want of power,-are all matters for which a slave may be whipped at any time. Does a slave look dissatisfied? It is said, he has the devil in him, and it must be whipped out. Does he speak loudly when spoken to by his master? Then he is getting high-minded, and should be taken down a button-hole lower. Does he forget to pull off his hat at the approach of a white person? Then he is wanting in reverence, and should be whipped for it. Does he ever venture to vindicate his conduct, when censured for it? Then he is guilty of impudence,-one of the greatest crimes of which a slave can be guilty. Does he ever venture to suggest a different mode of doing things from that pointed out by his master? He is indeed presumptouos, and getting above himself; and nothing less than a flogging will do for him. Does he, while ploughing, break a plough,-or, while hoeing, break a hoe? It is owing to his carelessness, and for it a slave must always be whipped."
"I have found that, to make a contented slave, it is necessary to make a thoughtless one. It is necessary to darken his moral and mental vision, and, as far as possible, to annihilate the power of reason."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
