Chapters
0:00:00 Introduction
0:02:40 Following Your Instincts
0:06:36 Theory, Training, Execution
0:10:44 Philosophy, Art, Life
0:13:34 Propaganda and Democracy
0:15:52 Risks and Rewards
0:19:08 Choosing Partners Wisely
0:22:38 Emotional Conditioning in Art
0:27:40 Exploring Personal Growth and Responsibility
0:31:25 Short-Term Desires vs. Long-Term Consequences
0:35:05 The Impact of Propaganda on Personal Beliefs
0:41:04 The Role of Rational Art in Society
0:42:11 Crafting Emotional Depth in Writing
0:43:26 Embodying Emotion in Philosophical Discussions
In this podcast episode from July 29th, 2007, we delve into the fascinating world of rational art, at the suggestion of Monsieur Le Tudela. The main focus is on exploring the concept of rational art and its significance in contrast to propaganda and aesthetics. The discussion leads us through a theory developed by me over the years, tracing back to my novels and the latest book, "On Truth, The Tyranny of Illusion." We touch on a pivotal moment when a listener suggested a title change, sparking a reflection on the power of words and their impact on conveying a message.
With an engaging mix of personal anecdotes, humor, and insightful commentary, I introduce a boxing metaphor to illustrate the essential components of success in any endeavor – knowledge of theory, effective training, and execution. Drawing parallels between the world of boxing and the realms of philosophy, art, and life, I emphasize the importance of following one's instincts in communication and decision-making. The narrative unfolds to reveal my journey from art to philosophy, driven by a profound realization that philosophy precedes art, which, in turn, precedes action.
Through thought-provoking analogies and reflections on personal experiences, I navigate the complexities of selling art that challenges prevailing norms and the subsequent turn to philosophy as a means of expressing dissenting ideas. The central theme of theory, training, and execution emerges as a guiding principle in understanding human action and the value of rational art in a world dominated by irrational propaganda. The episode concludes with a poignant reminder of the risks and rewards associated with making choices and the intricate balance between getting it wrong and getting it right in life.
In this podcast episode, we delve into the intricate analogies between life decisions and tennis strategies, exploring the profound impact of making the right choices versus the repercussions of getting it wrong. Drawing parallels between serving in tennis and handling life challenges, we emphasize the significance of training and preparation. The discussion extends to the complexities of relationships, highlighting the necessity of discerning between good and bad partners and the importance of investing in understanding potential long-term outcomes.
The narrative delves into examples and anecdotes that illuminate the theme of making informed decisions. From the consequences of choosing the wrong partner to navigating the dating world with discernment, we advocate for a thoughtful and intentional approach to life choices. Through anecdotes from personal experiences and fictional narratives, we underscore the value of looking beyond surface appearances and embracing a deeper understanding of human interactions.
The podcast delves into the nuances of emotional conditioning through art and storytelling, emphasizing the role of narratives in shaping perceptions and guiding behavior. By dissecting scenarios where individuals overlook warning signs or prioritize short-term gratification over long-term consequences, we underscore the importance of self-awareness and introspection in making meaningful connections and decisions. Through engaging discussions and thought-provoking reflections, the episode unfolds a tapestry of insights on human behavior and decision-making processes.
With a blend of personal anecdotes, philosophical musings, and societal observations, the podcast invites listeners to reflect on their own choices and behaviors. By weaving together narratives of missed opportunities, misjudgments, and moments of clarity, we offer a poignant exploration of the complexities of human relationships and the pursuit of happiness. Through storytelling and analysis, the episode encourages listeners to cultivate a deeper understanding of themselves and others, navigating the intricacies of life with wisdom and mindfulness.
The podcast delves deep into the concept of rational art, exploring how art should reveal the truth of consequences, rather than just capture short-term appearances. I reflect on the multidimensional hypocrisy involved in judging people based solely on outward beauty and how this aesthetic cheat can hinder the true essence of art. I discuss the importance of establishing respect and deeper connections with others beyond physical attraction, highlighting how deferring short-term desires can lead to greater fulfillment in the long run.
Through personal anecdotes and societal observations, I emphasize the role of rational art in training individuals for life, contrasting it with propagandistic art that serves to manipulate and control. I discuss the impact of short-term desires on decision-making, drawing parallels between health choices and emotional responses evoked by art. I offer insights into my approach to creating art that challenges conventional norms and seeks to provoke deeper introspection.
Reflecting on criticisms and misconceptions around my art, I share how my philosophy of rational art clashes with prevailing subjectivist and irrational trends in modern art. I touch upon the emotional undercurrents in my new book, "On Truth, The Tyranny of Illusion," which aims to challenge societal norms and provoke thought. I stress the emotional depth and subtlety in my writing, aiming to convey complex ideas with a mix of wisdom, sadness, and hope.
Throughout the podcast, I weave personal experiences with philosophical musings, urging listeners to reevaluate their perceptions of art and societal norms. I grapple with the complexities of emotional expression in art, striving to strike a balance between provocation and reflection. The podcast serves as a window into my creative process and my commitment to producing art that challenges, informs, and inspires.
podcast, rational art, propaganda, aesthetics, theory, boxing metaphor, success essentials, philosophy, dissenting art, rationality
[0:00] All right, let's get down to it, my mega-babies. It is the 29th, I think, of July 2007.
We're talking, I guess, around 11.30.
And thank you so much to Monsieur Le Tudela, who suggested that I do podcast numero duo on rational art, because we already talked about the aesthetics aspect of propaganda.
Propaganda, so I think that it's well worth us taking a quick tour through my endlessly developed and hopefully vaguely complete theory regarding rational art.
And of course, I could cite examples from my own novels, which will force you to buy them, and from my new book, On Truth, The Tyranny of Illusion.
And the gentleman, Tuttle, actually, who suggested that I change the title to say, like, On Health, The Etymology of Sickness.
Well, On Truth, The Tyranny of Illusion, I kind of like because it sort of does indicate that the truth is that illusions are tyrannical.
So it's a kind of switch route that I think has some coolness to it.
Well, using the word coolness in a very, very loose manner.
[1:09] So let's go on to it. And, of course, naturally, we're going to put on the Extendo Metaphor EP to work with a central metaphor.
Not tennis this time, and not penis eels, but, in fact, boxing.
Boxing, because, again, I like to become macho through Hemingway-esque imagery rather than actually being macho, which is a little bit beyond me.
I was too funny the other day, right?
While I remember, since it's just between us gold plus girls, the anarchy in the UK, the gentleman whose girlfriend thought he called her evil and so on, it was kind of funny.
He felt that I was being too harsh, and he also said that I was vaguely effeminate.
I don't mind the vaguely effeminate thing. Of course, I think it's pretty funny, but it is kind of funny to me that somebody says that somebody who's vaguely effeminate is also too harsh.
I'm not sure where that would put him on the spectrum, but I certainly think it's wonderful that he's able to have this breakthrough conversation with his girlfriend.
And, you know, for me, whatever gets the pill down, I'm happy with, right?
As long as it's nothing to do with violating the NAP or being abusive, Whatever gets the person to take the pill is good.
And this is, I think, an important example of how you've just got to follow your gut.
Everybody is different and everybody responds in different ways.
[2:28] And so I felt that a little harshness would be what would, if he called it, I thought it was more just firmness.
But it's a good example, I think, of following your instincts when it comes to communicating with people.
[2:41] Because everybody's going to react and respond in different ways.
And your unconscious is going to know a whole lot more about it than your conscious mind. So I hope that that was a helpful example.
[2:51] All right. So let's have a look at this ye olde da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-boxing metaphor.
All right. So if you are a boxer and you want to win the title, whatever that title is, bantamweight or whatever, right?
Then there are three major components, which, of course, I'm going to correlate to the question of rational art. But the first thing that you need is a knowledge of theory, right?
And a knowledge of theory is something like a knowledge of the rules of boxing.
[3:32] That footwork is important. You know, keep your guard up is important.
How to roll with the punches, right? You don't just take somebody who wants to be a boxer, throw him in a ring, and pound the hell out of him.
I mean, I guess you could. But the first thing that you need to know is the rules of boxing.
No kicking, no biting, no eye gouging, no money shots, or no shots to the nutsack, no hammers to the nads, and all of those kinds of things, right?
That's sort of the theory that you need to get a hold of, right? right?
You need that for sure. I mean, if you don't have that, you just know how to have bar fights, then you're not going to be a boxer, right?
You're going to get disqualified very, very quickly as you get into the rink.
So you need a knowledge of the rules and of the environment and of the theory about how best to train, right?
Because you don't want to train to be a boxer by lifting weights only with the little finger on your right hand, or you may end up with a very very strong little finger, although, of course, actually, there's no muscles in your fingers.
It's all tendons in the forearm.
End up with a very strong forearm related to your little finger.
You don't want to just do sit-ups to train.
So you need to know the rules of boxing. You need to know the theory behind the training in order to train effectively and efficiently.
You need to know nutrition. You need to know what is training, what is overtraining.
[4:57] And, you know, the jumping rope and the fast footwork and so on that you need to increase your reflexes, you need to learn how to roll with the punches, and so on.
All of these things are necessary before you move a muscle.
[5:11] Now, once you have the theory down of how to train, then you can actually start to train.
And what you do, again, assuming we're taking some 16-year-old skinny kid, not 15 because I think you're only supposed to start working out when you're 16.
So you go over the rules, you go over the theory, you go over the nutrition, you go over the training plan, you go over the whys of the training, of the hows, and the this and that.
And then what happens is you don't put the kid into the ring.
You put the kid, and I know this metaphor is going on fairly long, but it will actually pay off, I think.
So you will start, you put the kid to skipping rope, to lifting weights, to practicing with the wada-wada-wada ball, and the big heavy ball that they always use in science fiction movies to show how tough the chicks are.
[6:06] And that's what you get into with that kind of situation. it.
And then you put the sparring partner in, and they've got the head guards and so on.
And all of these sorts of things go on in escalating progression until you actually get in the ring.
Until you actually get in the ring for your title fight, right?
And so there's an enormous amount of preparation that goes on before the actual title fight.
And assuming all other things being equal, whoever does the most preparation will win.
[6:37] It's the same thing in the military. it's the same thing in every other sport where there's any kind of rules unlike Australian rules rugby which basically means no rules smackdown but all of these sorts of things you will go through so the idea that there is theory and then training and training subsumes practice we'll just make it a nice simple threesome you have theory you have training and then you have execution the actual fight itself.
[7:07] So in the realm of philosophy and art and so on, life, philosophy is the theory, art is the training, life is the execution, life is the match.
And of course, I know this, having learned it painfully for 20 years, because I tried to sell art in the opposition of theory. theory, right?
This is why I became a philosopher, because I wanted to be an artist, but I couldn't be an artist, because the art I was selling was in contradistinction or in contradiction to the prevailing theories.
I wanted to become a teacher or a professor or an artist, actually an actor too, originally, but I could not become these things because I was so roundly and eternally rejected in these realms.
And of course, people would say, well, it's because your work lacks quality.
But then I'd read my work, and I'd say, well, I mean, I'm not trying to be vain or anything here, but there's just no question that this is good stuff. I mean.
[8:12] There's just no, it's like me, somebody saying to me, I don't like your mohawk, your mohawk lacks quality.
But I don't have a mohawk, like you're wrong about something here, because I don't have a mohawk, can't have a mohawk, other than a very little one in my armpit.
Anyway, so what, when I, so the reason that I had to sort of work out this theory is because I was faced with this baffling dilemma, right?
And of course, as I've mentioned before, my continual experience with writing was that I would write, everybody would say, this is amazing stuff.
And then they'd sort of say, get thee to a publishery, and I'd get an agent and I'd get publishers to review it.
And nobody, I'd either get something back, which was like, you're not a writer, which is, you know, there was open hostility.
Or there was like just no response at all.
[9:01] So, there was definitely an aversion going on to my work, right, that was recognized to be a very high quality.
And then they'd say, basically, people would say, well, you need to write more like this, right?
And then they'd give me something like one of the publishers I submitted to go to, the agent gave me The Lives of the Saints, which was a book that almost literally put me into a diabetic coma with boredom. Actually, just a coma. It wasn't even sweet.
Just a really, really boring and weird and depressing book.
So I said, okay, well, I need to be more like that, really, because that doesn't look very happy or very good for the world.
So I sort of had to work out, I had to try and figure this out, right, in my 30s.
I guess late 20s and 30s, I already began to work on it and say, well, how is it possible that I have this great art or good art, and everybody tells me it's remarkable and great and nobody wants to publish it.
It's a real mystery. How is it that I love philosophy and nobody wants to be my thesis advisor?
[10:05] All the stuff that I worked through in The God of Atheists, as part of that book was working through this whole process.
That's why the Babelfish's advice to Gordon or illumination to Gordon is so important.
And that was the realization that I came to after this process. says.
So philosophy precedes art. Art precedes action.
Philosophy is the theory. Art is the training. Life is the action.
Philosophy is the theory of boxing, the rules of boxing, the theory of practice, nutrition, and so on, and training.
Art is the training and the sparring and in the ring and so on, and then each match is life itself.
[10:44] So when I was trying to sell Well, art that came from an opposite philosophical base than what was considered to be normal, everybody recognized the quality but could not process the content.
[10:58] It's really great tasting wine, but it's bright blue, so we'll never be able to sell it.
That, I think, was the basic issue that people had with regards to my art.
And that's why I turned to philosophy.
Because I recognized that if everyone thinks that fat is healthy, There's no point in me putting out a diet book that says, here's how to slim down, right?
Any more than right now, there'd be any point putting out a diet book that says, here's how to get morbidly obese.
People would say, well, this diet book is really well written, but, you know, I don't even know what to say, right?
So that's why I had to switch to philosophy.
And I guess it's a good thing that I did, right? I think I'm doing more good in the realm of philosophy than I am in the realm of novel writing.
Or playwriting or whatever.
So, that's sort of the issue. So, in the medical realm, you have the same sort of thing, right?
So, you have theories as to what will make people healthier, which is philosophy.
You have clinical trials and tests on animals and tests on people and so on, which is art.
And then you have diagnosis, prescription, or treatment, and the resulting health.
That is the boxing match. That is life.
[12:19] So, theory, training, execution. Those are the three sort of major divisions in human action, right? We're purposeful creatures.
So, we've got to know what it is we need to do, we've got to practice doing it, and then we've got to do it. it.
So, rational art, in my view, follows this kind of continuum, and this continuum applies equally well to the conversation that we had last time on propaganda, on aesthetics.
But rational art just gets it right, right?
Irrational art or propaganda says that being fat is healthy and here's how to get there.
And it's always wrong in its philosophy, philosophy in its definitions, in its philosophy, right?
So rational art like military propaganda says being a soldier is noble and heroic, and here's how to kill your soul to become this kind of hero.
So propaganda almost never gets the training wrong. It doesn't last then.
And the execution inevitably follows from the philosophy and the training, from the theory and the practice, is, so to speak, practicing.
[13:24] And so the propaganda around democracy is, you know, democracy is the finest conceivable human institution and participation, you get to choose your own government and this and that.
[13:34] It's all nonsense theory, but then the practice is all the propaganda that goes on around this and the execution is the nonsense of voting.
It's like saying to your slaves, freedom is the ability to do the happy dance for five minutes once every four years.
[13:51] It's like, well, if the happy dance is good, why can't I do it all the time?
No, no, once every four years, that's freedom. But if the happy dance is good, why can't I do it all the time?
If choosing who rules me is good, then why can't I do it continuously?
No, no, no, once every four years, that's freedom.
[14:08] So we are drawn to art just from a sort of cost-benefit standpoint, because the costs of getting things wrong, And let's pretend that it's a good, sensible, philosophical, reasonable, rational world.
Just for the moment, let's go to our happy place called the future.
Hi, future. Hope you're doing well. Hope we helped.
[14:30] We who stare up into the future like a man stands at the bottom of a well and sees a little white sky disk.
But if we imagine that we're in that world, then why is it that it's worth spending all this time reading art and practicing and so on?
Well, because mistakes that you make can be really bad. Like, really bad.
And the rewards can be exquisite. So why does the boxer spend years training for the title fight?
Because if he wins the title fight, he makes $5 million or something.
So the rewards are great.
And the risks, of course, in boxing are great.
If you get something wrong, you catch a fight wrong, suddenly you're that Hillary Swank in that boxing movie, right?
You're, you know, dribbling on yourself and unable to control your bowel movements.
Million Dollar Baby. Stupid title. And so, the rewards of bad errors in terms of life, the risks of bad errors, the risks of the consequences of bad errors are very, very great.
What a bad sentence, I'm sorry. The negative consequences of mistakes are very high.
And the positive consequences of getting it right are enormous. us.
And there are an infinity of ways to get it wrong and only a couple of ways to get it right.
[15:52] So to resurrect our tennis metaphor, there are a million ways to serve badly and a million shots that go out and only a few shots that go in just where you want and win the point or the match.
Just as there are a million things that you can do that aren't going to affect the progress of cancer if you have it, other than negatively or refusing to retard its growth.
And there are only a couple of things that you can do to make yourself better. better.
So, from that standpoint, right, the problems that arise, or the problems that accrue to you if you get things wrong in life, are enormous. Enormous.
And the rewards of getting it right, which is, you know, like shooting a hoop from another city, are enormous too, right?
So, risks of negatives far outweigh, numerically, the rewards of positives.
In fact, you're more likely to get things wrong if you do things randomly than you are to get things right.
[16:47] So, it's a difference, perhaps one bad punch is the difference between ending up like Muhammad Ali versus George Foreman.
And so, that's why training is so important.
Just to take a simple example that has happened to all too many people, including my own father, is get the wrong woman pregnant. magnet.
Oops, there goes the next 25 years of my life, right?
Hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of dollars, thousands upon thousands of hours.
There's an example of that you need training, right?
Need training, must figure out bad women before they become banged and knocked up, right?
So, of course, a lot of art is to do with romance, right? And figuring out a good partner from a bad partner.
So, and again, I'm not in a perfect world, right, or in a world that was more rational than it is now, which would not be hard.
There would be this sort of Emily's Reasons Why Not kind of guidebook in art to figuring out bad people and what not to date them, right?
So, if I sort of give an example here that's sort of cliched, but let's just stick with stuff that's visceral because it's a complicated topic.
[18:02] If everyone who smoked on a first date would turn out to be a terrible partner, right?
You could either figure that out ex post facto, like you could date a whole bunch of people with a whole bunch of variables.
One was tall, one was brunette, one was short, one was thin, one was fat, one was black, one was white, one was Chinese, whatever, right?
Some were good, some were bad, right? Figuring out all this complexity after the fact will cost you a hell of a lot of time.
It's like training randomly and eating randomly and then trying to figure out which one of those variables got you to fight better than the other or whatever, right?
So you don't want to, and we don't have in life time to try everything out empirically, right?
And certainly, some stuff's a real one-way street, right?
So, if you're trying to figure out who's going to be a good mother to your kids, you can't just have kids with, I'm assuming you're not the Shah, you can't have kids with a whole bunch of women and figure out which one is the best mom and then just stay with her, right? That's not really possible.
So, the investment that we make in practicing pays off in the match.
[19:08] So, the investment that we make in trying to figure out who is going to be a good partner and mother for our children and so on ahead of time is going to be less costly in terms of time, money, resources, energy, happiness, and so on, than just having sex with women and seeing who's the best mom. It's too late, then you're doomed.
We get it wrong. So, if every woman who smokes turns out to be a terrible mother and partner, and art reinforces this, right, then basically what you're getting is you're getting aversion therapy to smokers.
Or, yeah, so you're, sorry, I'll get to that.
So you're getting aversion therapy to smokers. So what you're getting is you're getting art that negatively associates smoking with attractiveness.
And of course, rational art would only do this for the stuff that seems, right?
You don't need art to tell you that whatever your physical type is for sexual attraction, attraction that that person is attractive, right?
That's already happening.
What you need art for is to show the non-obvious, right?
If chocolate was great for you and broccoli was bad for you, you wouldn't need a science of nutrition, right?
You need a science of nutrition just as you need a science of philosophy and a science of science because the truths are non-intuitive. The most important truths are non-intuitive.
[20:25] So what I try to do is to talk about, like in The God of Atheists, for instance, Justin is a kid, he's good-looking, he's talented, he comes from a rich family, he seems to have it all, and he's miserable.
[20:42] Alder is a professor, he's got months off in the summer, he gets to take sabbaticals and so on, right?
And he appears to be passionate about ideas, but he's miserable. miserable.
And Joanne just wants a baby and grabs basically the closest compliant guy and likes the fact that he's compliant and easy to manage, so to speak.
And, you know, he's successful, he's got a job, he's, you know, and he's easy to manage for her as a wife.
But she loses respect for him because he has no identity, right?
So she chooses him because he lacks identity.
And I make that very clear at the beginning of the book that she chooses him because he he lacks identity.
She chooses him in order to have a baby, and then she realizes that she's had a baby, a child, with somebody who lacks identity, which is causing that child to be miserable.
And I could go on and on about the god of atheists, or about revolutions, or about almost, or about just poor, but what I'm really trying to do is to go beyond the surface.
[21:44] So, just poor is centered around a metaphor of Lord Lawrence Carvey, who is an agricultural cultural reformer who's trying to bring all this wealth and prosperity to his lands, to his serfs, and he seems like a great guy, right?
He's rich, he's well-meaning, he's well-intentioned, wants to raise up his people, and it takes some time to get to the narcissistic vanity that's the bottom of that.
So where appearances are the opposite of reality, or where long-term effects are the opposite of short-term motivation, right?
Too much chocolate while tasting good at the moment will give you diabetes or make you overweight, rot your teeth or whatever.
So you have to provide the long-term effects of the short-term motivations where those are opposite, and that's what art can do.
Art is an attempt to move the long-term effects into the short-term motivations through emotional conditioning.
[22:39] And this doesn't mean that's bad. It's not manipulation.
Right, so let's say that we'll take something less controversial than smoking and something that's probably a little bit more accurate.
If we say that women with lots of piercings, are more often than not, if not perpetually, confused and unstable and volatile, and aggressive and so on, right?
[23:08] Then we can help people avoid these kinds of situations, right?
So then if you go on a blind date and the woman shows up like she, as P.G. O'Rourke has it, I think, fell down a flight of stairs carrying a tackle box, then you cannot particularly see this. This was a lot to do with what went on for me in therapy.
It was learning to read the signs from the beginning, right?
So I went on a date with a a woman and we had a fine time and she was great, a great sense of humor and so on.
And then she said to me towards the end of the evening, she said, yeah, you know, my last relationship, it was sort of long distance.
He lived in London or whatever, like London, not London, England, but London, Canada.
And yeah, we got along great. And we would see each other on the weekends or every other weekend and so on.
And then like one day he just stopped returning my phone calls.
I never saw him again. I never knew what happened to him. I never had any idea why we stopped going out, and it was really painful.
[24:07] Well, that tells me a lot, right? It doesn't, I mean, it tells me something that this woman went out with a guy for a long time, and then the relationship just mysteriously ended, and she had no idea why.
I mean, that could happen, I guess, even to an introspective person.
But what I definitely got from her story was she didn't say, and man oh man I spent forever trying to figure out what happened how I was responsible what the warning signs were so that I could avoid such a situation again but all she said was yeah he just I never ever knew what happened right puts all the onus on him it's a complete mystery she's taken no steps to figure out what went on and how she ended up in this situation how she didn't see the signs what the signs might be in the future right learned nothing.
[24:53] Nothing from the interaction, right? So clearly, this is a person who's not going to take responsibility.
And of course, in that conversation, I probed to sort of figure out, well, were there any signs beforehand? Or what was he like? Oh, he was great. There were no signs whatsoever.
So this is a person who is perfectly content, in a sense, with completely random behavior and just blaming other people when something goes wrong and not taking any ownership or trying to figure out any patterns, right?
So for sure, I mean, that's not going to work out, right? With me, I need to see the patterns, right?
I need to understand so I can prevent and have some control over my destiny.
I know there's random people that come in and out of my life.
I have no idea why or what goes on.
I never spend a moment, other than blaming the person, I never spend a moment trying to figure it out. Blaming them isn't figuring it out.
This is an example. Another example, one I've mentioned before, but I might as well resurrect for this.
I try to come up with innocuous examples because, you know, she was screaming drunk on Jagermeister, isn't that something that you need need a whole lot of philosophy to figure out that there may be something wrong with the person, right?
But another girl, I was interested in my yoga class and we were chatting and we were sort of hanging out and hadn't progressed to the dating stage yet, but I was sort of getting to know her.
And I said to her, one day we met at the gym and I was meeting some friends to go and see a movie.
And I said, well, would you like to come and see the movie with me?
And she says, yes. And this was like at nine o'clock.
And I said, I'm meeting my friends at 9.30.
[26:19] So if you could I mean I don't mean to rush you and this is sort of off the cuff right so it's fine if you can't but if you could meet me at 9.15 in the lobby of the gym, that would be great right because I need to sort of meet my friends at 9.30 in front of the theater and it's 15 minutes away or whatever and she's like sure right so I'm waiting and I'm waiting finally at 9.30 I have to, sprint and meet my friends barely made them as they were heading their way in and I didn't know what happened to her right.
[26:45] And then she she showed up at like 10 minutes or 15 minutes into the movie, and she'd brought a friend, right?
So I don't know, she'd phoned and said, oh, I'm going with this guy, I don't know if he's sane or not, right?
No particular sense of, oh, I'm sorry, but like, hey, I'm here, right? And so, of course, I'm talking it over with my therapist, and she said, well, one of two possibilities.
Oh, I said, I said, well, there's only really two possibilities.
Either she forgot that she had 15 minutes to meet me, or she didn't, right?
So if she forgot, that's kind of alarming, right?
And my therapist said, and if she didn't forget, that's even more alarming.
And that's very true, right? So I didn't go out with her either.
Of course, both these women were completely bewildered, but you can't have those conversations with people, right? You can't become somebody's therapist when they're putting off warning signs.
And the very fact that they're putting off warning signs unconsciously is an indication that they're not going to get the conversation.
[27:41] And this comes to the whole question, which we'll talk about another time, about to what degree do you repair the wounded in order to get some dates.
It's another question we can talk about another time.
Right, so art would be that which plays out the long-term effects so that you can counter your instincts in the short run.
If you think of the movie Shallow Hell, in a sense, the movie is sort of about judging someone by their insides and not by their outsides.
How many times have I had to learn this lesson?
[28:20] That I was gravitated towards the hotties.
Occasionally I'd get them, most times I wouldn't, but I would try and gravitate towards the uber hotties.
Yoga, gym, all these kinds of places. right?
And God, God, oh, God, oh, God, just how ridiculous and shallow was it?
Well, it was very ridiculous and shallow. Right, again, this is resurrecting an old topic. I'll just touch on it briefly.
But the fundamental paradox, of course, is that the women often wouldn't want to go out with me, or they'd like to chat with me because I'm sort of charming and fun to chat to, but they wouldn't want to go out with me because, relative to them, I guess they thought I was fugly, right?
And so, of course, I'd be upset and frustrated, right?
Because I'd say, well, man, why is it that these women are judging me just by my appearance, right?
So, I'm not some six foot four underwear model, right?
Why is it that these women are judging me by appearance? How shallow is that?
And, you know, they should get to know me and this and that, right?
Oh, how ridiculous, in hindsight, right? How utterly, utterly ridiculous. Ridiculous.
So... Oh man, it's so embarrassing.
[29:29] So fundamentally, of course, I was judging them solely by appearance, but then got upset when they judged me solely by appearance.
Indicated that they weren't interested in the quality of an individual, but rather just their appearance, which, of course, is exactly the premise that I was acting on in trying to get these hotties to go out with me.
[29:50] I would say, well, you know, they should really get to know me on the inside and not judge me by their exterior, when they were completely exposing that they only judge people based on the exterior, which is exactly what I was doing, and so getting to know them on the inside, which I was doing and which was unpleasant, was something that I didn't like them for a friend to do with me.
Sorry, that's really convoluted, but I think you get the, there's so many, it's a multidimensional ecosystem of hypocrisy that was going on.
And so art, of course, is that which shows the ugliness, right?
I mean, this is the aesthetic cheats that I really dislike in art.
And, you know, God love Ayn Rand, but man, oh man, did she ever cheat this way, right?
So, oh, the women were all beautiful and the men were all slender.
Like, why couldn't Howard Rock be 20 pounds overweight because he was such a workaholic?
No, he's got to be lean and slender like Hank Ridden, John Galt, and all these sorts of people, right?
Why can't they have stringy, wispy, patchy hair, right?
Why can't they maybe be like me, but look like I've got a squirrel's tail stapled to the back of my head?
No, no, no, we can't do that, right?
Because that's the aesthetic cheat, and I've tried to avoid that in my books, right?
So the most beautiful people can be the most tortured, right?
So if beauty, physical beauty, becomes a warning sign rather than – because the short-term allure of it is totally clear.
We don't have any problems. We have no problems being attracted to an attractive person. That's the definition of attractive, right?
[31:15] The danger, right? So, here, for instance, is another thing which used to be much more common, commonly understood, and is much less understood now.
I tell you, this is an absolutely empirical fact from my own life, right?
[31:25] That women who put out quickly don't keep putting out in the long run, right?
So, if you can sort of have sex with someone on the second date or the third date, then, yeah, you'll get some sex up front, but it's not going to last, right?
Whereas women that you don't have sex with early on and wait a couple of months to get to know them, then the sex is continuous, right?
Because you've established a respect and a love for the other person, or at least a strong affection for the other person, which isn't just around sex, right?
So, right, that's another thing, right? Because most guys, myself included, particularly when I was younger, would choose sex now rather than sex in the future.
But if you sort of say, well, if you defer sex now, you get more of it in the future, right?
Then, right, the same way if you defer the good feeling of chocolate now, you'll get better feelings of health in the future, or at least avoid the bad feelings of diabetes or being overweight or whatever, bad teeth, right?
So this is sort of what art is designed to do.
This is the art that is the training for life.
[32:21] And rational art is just that art which gets that training right and which opposes the instincts.
And I'm not sort of trying to say we should be at war with ourselves, but we need to have some conscious understanding of the effects of our short-term desires, right?
I mean, it's sort of interesting. thing, I haven't gone to the gym for two weeks, because I've been waiting for my... I pulled a muscle in my chest.
I really needed it to heal.
I've been taking walks and bike rides and so on. I went bowling, because it was right in my chest, on my right side.
I'm left-handed. But it's kind of weird. It's been kind of nice to not have to go to the gym.
I have 20 years, with the exception of two years when I was working night and day, I've been going to the gym.
That's kind of nice. It's going to be a little tough to go back to it.
I'll get into it and I'll enjoy it again, but...
[33:09] I go to the gym even when I don't want to because I know that I'll feel great and, you know, and so on and be happier if I do.
So our short term is to, like, eat sweets and be a nerd, right?
I mean, that's our sort of short-term desires and chase the pretty young things. B-Y-T.
[33:24] And those are bad ideas, right? Because when you have a child with someone, what you need, as Margaret Atwood said, is a good woman with a strong back.
I mean, just put it ridiculously, right? right?
But I mean, if you want to run a farm, right, having some Melanie supermodel is not going to do you that much good.
She ain't going to be able to rope no cattle, ain't going to be able to wrestle no pigs.
So to take a sort of silly example, right? I mean, but a woman who's shallow and vain and obsessed with her appearance is not going to be a good mother, right?
So the short-term reproductive strategies of spray and pray kick in, which unfortunately are completely inappropriate to the modern world because you don't get to spray, pray, and dash, right?
What What happens is you get the woman pregnant, or you get married or whatever, and you're stuck, man, for the next 20, 25 years.
So rational art is just art that trains you in a proper way for life.
[34:16] Propaganda trains you to have negative emotional associations with things like freedom, thought, and independence, virtue, rationality, and integrity. integrity, right?
Propagandistic art is that which trains you to obey and to give up your resources and to associate serving your masters with virtue and, right, it programs you in a bad way, trains you in a bad way, right?
So, if you have, well, of course, while training the masters in the completely opposite way, right?
So, if you have a coach who says, you know, don't skip any rope, the best thing to do is sit on the couch and eat Fritos to get ready for the big fight.
Then when you jump in up against Mike Tyson, it's not going to be a very pretty or long fight.
[35:05] And we can even see this with the last dream analysis, a lot of the stuff that happens between children and parents, right?
The parents impose or spray or buckle down or crush their children under the weight of all of this propagandistic conformity.
But then the moment that the children get a competing belief and try and impose it on their parents, the parents roll their eyes. Oh, here's that libertarian stuff again.
Or, oh, God, you're just obsessed with Ayn Rand or staff or whatever.
I mean, God, can you listen to anything else? Right? They dislike propaganda. propaganda.
They inflict propaganda for many years, but they then hate it if anyone tries to inflict it on them, right?
So this is the coach who says to one guy, just sit on the couch and eat Fritos, and the other guy, skip rope and drink raw eggs and watch Rocky and run up and down steps and get Bill Conti to write the soundtrack to your life and all this and that, right?
And then the two get in the ring, it's like, ooh, that's not pretty.
What's that brown smudge on the end of my boxing glove?
[35:58] So, I mean, that's sort of the hypocrisy that goes on, right?
That sort sort of propagandistic art?
That propaganda must only flow one way, that serving is important, but of course the masters only pretend to serve, right? Your government is there to serve you, right?
Serve you your nuts up on a platter, more like. The police are there to protect and serve, not you, really, more the masters.
But that's, of course, bad art, right?
Hypocritical art and bad art and so on. But rational art and good art is where the short-term appearance of things is associated with the long-term reality of those consequences.
So as I said before, good nutrition gets you to understand that...
[36:43] Chocolate will make you sick. Too much chocolate will make you sick, right? Despite the fact that it tastes good in the moment. Drunk food or whatever, right?
Good art, it puts that emotional stuff together, right? So think of the movie.
It was a really ugly movie and I didn't see it all the way through, but Casino.
Sharon Stone plays this woman who's like beautiful and statuesque and socially poised and so on and moving graciously between this, that, and the other, right?
But then she turns into this raving lunatic, right? sort of in the model of my mom, so to speak, as often is the case with really beautiful women.
Or if you sort of look at the later Greta Garbo, I want to be alone kind of situation, right?
That's also something that's pretty unpleasant and hard to see and kind of gross.
Or if you look at, there was this great Seinfeld where the Master of My Domain episode where Elaine ends up doing aerobics behind John F. Kennedy Jr., right?
[37:38] And she's, you know, the hottest of the Camelot brood and so on.
And she's all hot and bothered by doing this because he's physically attractive and statuesque and rich and so on, right?
But if you see a picture, and I saw it once and I've never seen it again.
If you know where it is, let me know.
There's a picture of him with his fiancée and he's screaming at her at the top of his lungs, right?
And they're in the park and they're having some, like the veins are bulging out.
I mean, just a dominant, bratty, vicious, scary asshole, asshole, right?
That's the reality, right? So yes, he's thin and nice hair and attractive and this and that, right?
Or like the entourage worlds, right? Where the movie star guy, oh, he gets all the women and he's got all the money and he lays around, he smokes drugs and, right?
Well, what happens in the longer run to these people, right?
That's kind of what you need to see because in the short run, but that looks pretty great, right?
But what is it that happens in the long run? Well, Well, that's what rational art is supposed to show you, what happens in the longer run.
So if you look at Dave, the way that Terry sees him when they first meet, right?
[38:43] And I put signs in there particularly, right? That there's a sense of impermanence, right?
That they're sitting in Starbucks, but Dave has a takeout cup, right?
He's always ready to roll. He's always ready to bolt. Can't even commit to a mug in Starbucks.
Has to have a takeout cup, even though he's sitting there for half an hour, right?
These are all sort of little warning signs, things that we're supposed to pick up on, right? Just stuff you're supposed to be aware of.
[39:12] And the fact that Dave doesn't ask to see any of Terry's credentials and doesn't put him through any tests and doesn't give him any supervision.
And all of these things are warning signs, right? So that you go through the whole journey with Terry, and you're supposed to see what happens.
[39:29] It's like the difference between the guy who promoted the camel cigarettes, the blonde guy.
It's the difference between seeing him doing cool things like rafting down the Amazon and stuff like that, or a documentary that follows him in he died very young, relatively young, of lung cancer from smoking.
And regretted everything that he'd done with regards to promoting smoking.
Right, so bad art is the commercial for smoking.
Rational art, or good art, is following the lung cancer death of the guy who's selling the cigarettes.
[40:02] So that is the way that I sort of view this. It certainly makes some sense to me, makes a lot of sense to me, as to why art that I wrote or art that I created that I think is good was universally praised, scorned, rejected, and treated with massive indifference and or contempt. contempt.
One day, I'll put out all the letters. I think I still have most of them that I got about my art.
I mean, just horrendous, like savage, really.
Why? Is it because the art is bad? No, of course not. But it's exactly the same as if I'd been writing to the Lung Cancer Society or writing to the Lung Association saying, I want to write a book praising the health benefits of smoking.
I don't care how well this book is written. I'm never going to have anything to to do with it, right?
That's because the philosophy that is currently undermining, or is currently at the root of modern art is the exact opposite of my philosophy.
It's subjectivist, it's relativistic, it's irrational, it's depressed, it's helpless, it's all this sorts of stuff.
[41:04] So naturally, of course, when vital art that speaks the truth comes along, people hate it.
But they don't want to really get into why they hate it, which is why I never got much of an in-depth analysis of what exactly was wrong. People say, this is bad.
I say, They went, what's bad about it? Well, I just, you know, I don't like it. It's inconsistent.
They just come up with generalized stuff, right? Because they don't want to get as to why they dislike it.
[41:25] That would reveal too much to them about themselves. So, I hope that this helps this division into theory, practice, and execution, or theory and training and execution.
I hope that this helps in terms of understanding how, at least, I try to approach rational art and what it is that I'm trying to do in my art.
And so, I hope that, and of course, this has a lot to do with the style of my new book.
I can never write, nobody can ever write precisely as themselves, even if I can have a podcast precisely as myself.
I am as authentic as possible in these podcasts, but there is always the translation to language, which is a great way to cross the chasm, but it's still only one bridge across the chasm.
[42:11] So there's a character that I speak from in On Truth, The Tyranny of Illusion.
[42:17] And it is a character that is, I mean, there's not, I think there's one joke in there, or at least one funny thing about pixies on treadmills.
But I'm not flippant. I'm not making jokes. I'm not putting on funny voices, so to speak. I'm not, there are no tangents, really.
And I try to sort of be persistent and wise and a little sweet and a little sad.
And there's an emotional content to the book that I think is trying to be sad but strong and wise and persistent and grieving and hopeful and all these kinds of things.
And that is because the content of the thoughts in that book will be so radical to so many people.
And they'll even be radical to some of you who've listened all the way through.
There's some real new stuff in there.
And so that's the content. Oh, Oh, gee, do I have a bug in my foot?
I once got stung by a bee that came through my sandal. It gave me like a swollen clubfoot for quite some time. So I just want to make sure that doesn't happen.
But even in this book, there's a form of art in the writing of philosophy. At least there is for me.
[43:27] And so trying to put across an emotional tenor to the discussions that are in On Truth.
If you look for it, there is some stuff. Like where I say, I mean, just some for instance.
No spoilers here. But where I say, let us save the lifeboat scenarios for a future happier time.
[43:45] That is a very dense way of saying that I know what happiness is, I am happy, the world is not happy, and if you listen to me or if we talk to each other in this way, then the world can become happier.
There's an acceptance of where things are, there's a resistance to where things are, there's a whole lot of stuff that's contained in that sentence.
And if you look carefully in the book, you will see lots of sentences like that, that communicate an enormous amount in the form, but not just in the content.
And sometimes I can sort of mix the two together.
So I hope that, and of course there is, I use the word contemptible, and I use the word corrupt, and I even use the word evil.
But I don't do it in a way, I do it in a way that is more framed in sadness than in anger.
And it's not that evil never makes me angry. It's just that when you're communicating to people, especially people for the first time, and I'm very conscious that this book is going to be many people's first introduction to free domain radio, if it sort of bought its gifts and handed out, that there is a sadness in seeing the evil of the world.
[44:55] And so that whole emotional tenor that is at the core of the book, which was actually the harder part, to make sure that it was not self-conscious, but sort of wisely irresistible and sweet and knowledgeable and sad and yet firm and, I guess, firm without being looking judgmental or hysterical and so on.
All of that is really tricky to achieve.
And I think that that's one of the main reasons that Ayn Rand failed in her goal, right, was that the emotional tenor of her books is kind of strident or kind of hysterical a little little bit and kind of, I think, over-aggressive or just aggressive.
So I hope that that makes some sense. Thank you so much for listening and I look forward to your feedback. I'll talk to you soon. Well, thank you.
Support the show, using a variety of donation methods
Support the show
Recent Comments