3.28.18: Read about/listen more to Jungian archetypes and consider the idea of intelligence (true intelligence) as a reflection of one’s “emotional intelligence”.
For humor: how the culture wars are a battle over who controls/defines the Jungian archetypes, thereby shaping our conscious (e.g. Anima and Animus).
Emerson: “In the minds of geniuses we find – once more – our own neglected thoughts.”
Bukowski: “Genius might be the ability to say a profound thing in a simple way.”
Perhaps intelligence is less about IQ than going deeper than normal into a problem and coming out of it with novel ideas or solutions – that problem being the self or existence or being or some scientific problem.
It’s argued by some that the more “emotionally intelligent” (just more in tune with their own totality – both good and bad) are more apt to find friendship/connection in art than in people…..in art where honest explorations of self and the world are accepted. There’s the counter argument that in a world of heightened connectivity, there may be less a place/need for such art as we find expression of and for ourselves through things like social media, which certainly attracts an audience. How many people watch a Logan Paul video than pick up Dostoevsky daily, after all?
Bukowski gets shit on for being a bad writer but it seems he found his place, especially later in life, with his cats and wine and the racetrack and his typewriter. Did he come to know himself well enough to be able to happily (mostly) accept that that’s who and what he was? And perhaps he wasn’t trying to impress anyone with the writing. Maybe the writing to him was what crossword puzzles are to somebody else. A way to kill the time without going insane. Well, he had a streak for characterizing and romanticizing himself too so who knows.
But how much of art has become corrupted? Much seems politically and ideologically driven than interested, like pure science, at getting to the heart of a matter. Art where increasing desired outcomes predominate.
But the YouTube personalities especially seem to provide a haven for confirmation of shared (not new or novel or even very interesting) ideas that are presented either ironically or bombastically or more temperamentally, depending on the taste of the audience. But little if anything new or novel seems to be presented. It seems to be an act, primarily, of reciprocal narcissism between creator and viewer. A positive feedback loop of narcissism? Narcissism is probably too harsh. A “safe space” of shared ideas where said ideas are confirmed rather than challenged. A comfortable place where what you think you are is confirmed. Where, perhaps, by subscribing to a YouTuber who has millions of viewers – most of whose ideas coalesce rather nicely (of course, not perfectly) – making that viewer a part of a community, not some lone entity. His ideas and thoughts and emotion have traction among someone else’s audience of millions. Fuck if I know. This is what caffeine does.
I seem to be falling prey to it and that doesn’t seem good.
Everyday: I shit. I work. I sleep.