Overcoming The Modern Mental Staleness

In my own personal view of myself, I regard myself as the student of about three or four quite significant and at one time world-famous individuals, although they are mostly not that much remembered anymore. Professor Munro Leaf from Harvard was a tutor of mine for a short while – he created the story behind the first Disney fullscreen colour cartoon: Ferdinand the bull. I got engineering lessons from some people I won't name although one was trained in Nazi-occupied Holland and I'd have to say, gave the impression to me that he was of two minds about what Nazism meant to him.

As far as psychology is concerned I am very proud to say I was something of a disciple of the late architect, psychologist, and polymath Paul Ritter, the man who laid the foundation stones of the original World Trade Center towers.

The one thing that I can distil from having known all of these people is a clear impression – as a result - that today's world possesses a kind of a 'spirit of deliberate mental staleness' and the consequences of this are bound to reflect in its buildings, architecture, social patterns and ultimately in the inevitability of widespread political, economic and social failure.

To build things worthy of the appellation of 'greatness,' is a lot lot harder than the government of Beijing knows, for instance, and it's not about 'doing more big buildings,' and takes a considerable amount of substance more than just the facile supplying of money which can of course be easily accomplished by drug cartels operating in Miami, as much as it can by the central planning committees typical of most contemporary governments.

To be great you have to know how to transgress the protective and self-defensive psychological umbra of other people, be able to get under their skin in a nice way, and make them much more human, rather than simply more 'televisual...' And really, beyond 'more human,' you also have to progress things and propel people into the future. You have to be avant garde.

One of the problems about blandness and intellectual staleness prevalent everywhere today is in the expression of the style and substance of today's woman. I agree, for example, with a few other bloggers about the recent interpretation of 'Irene Adler,' played by Lara Pulver, in the popular new television series 'Sherlock.' At first it seems she's clever – maybe cleverer than Sherlock himself - independent, sexual, and very bad, only for the whole thing to disappear under the idea that she is a puppet of Sherlock's nemesis, Moriarty.

A lot of what is passed off today as interesting, exotic, erotic, and attractive – is simply trite.

And following on from the last post I wrote about the Heineken beer commercial, why the superficiality when they could have extracted so much more from a legitimate mondo-ethnic source like: Bowyer-Yin's “Meet The Tiger.” Playing on the presumed superficiality of contemporary people is a mistake; yes the ad works, but it could have worked so much more. What are they all afraid of, these drips who have been hogging the commercial world for so long? And that includes Rupert Murdoch, who is an old fool. And all the politicians who kow-towed to him for so long are going to have to deal with people like me and the blogs that will go down into history standing in stark contrast to the self-important nonsense that has been written up till now about reactionaries like Reagan and Thatcher and Harry Lee – the nonsense that was mostly put up by themselves and their appointees funded by them to create the propaganda. Lee, for instance, purports in the Wikepedia entry about himself, that he was an interpreter for the Japanese, and no one says a word about it. Well, of course, you won't hear any complaints from the 50,000 ethnic Chinese (at least) who were genocidally massacred by bayonet and knife by the Japanese when they first entered Singapore. So much for the bullshit from Mr. Lee about how he was a great torch-bearer for ethnic Chinese interests.

Calvin J. Bear

Heineken's Froth And Bubble

Decadence. The importance of this idea – especially today – should not be lost to you under the noise of the news media screaming at you about Greek debt and 'part default' and 'austerity.'

After the zenith of an age, there remains the overgrown and the overbuilt – unfunctional and existing only because of the wastefulness of the supreme owners of the money and the power that was construed at the height.

Are you familiar with that current filmic commercial advertisement for Heineken beer? You know, the one with the magician and the appearing rabbit, the guy, the girl, and the Chinese waiter and the curly-haired singer in the tuxedo... It's called 'The Date.' The Art Director was Alvaro Sotomayor.

This ad was not dreamed up in fifteen minutes, if you know what I mean. I know people, or at least once upon a time I did - at board level at Heineken. They are very much the kind who believe in a cosmopolitan ideal and a modern cosmopolitan world and lifestyle. And in that vision, Asia has long been a significant market for Heineken even though they are also totally a global brand.

It's a great ad. But it is also the very essence of the meaning of decadence: referring to everything yet tied to nothing, lacking in intellectual depth, pointless, meaningless, and possessing no moral values. Believe me I am the very last person to preach to anyone about moral values(!) however it is decadent; it expresses a decayed intellect and a nondescript salad-mix world. Okay today's kids will love it and care less about what it is being lost in the process. And okay it will sell beer. And that's the problem with decadence, it happens when the money no longer cares or needs to care about anything other than serving itself and devising rationales for its own careless behaviour.

The art deco world and the modernistic industrial gothic world were thought of as examples of decadence. They are not. Human beings used the overhangs of that overbuilt past wealth and there and we got a slightly positive image of 'decadence' as a result. No one is going to use anything from the imagery or the ideas or the economics reflected in this ad 'The Date.' They are all perfectly useless and meaningless. The argument will of course be raised that multi-ethnic, multi-cultural egalitarianism is the point. It's not the point; selling product is the point. And that's because a totally mindless lack of regard for any of the cultural motifs used in the ad is shown by the producers. It is all facile and fatuous. Cultures are cultures because they have depth and meaning. 'Fun' is not an excuse for terminal shallowness. When you have money, and you have the sense of humour to sponsor and project 'having fun' on a global media platform, you also have the cultural responsibility to demonstrate that you care about something too. Ultimately, this ad shows absolutely no respect for the past, and for the real people of the past, and for culture and no matter how many times these monied upstarts assert they are respecting the egalitarianism of modern 'mondo-cultural' youth, you really have to wonder whether it is all because they have no clue and are fatuous, rather than that they are just being 'carefree.'

Because they are forever just being superficial. And there is never any depth coming from them at all. And the froth and bubbles are starting to look a bit thin, more like scum, in fact, than froth. And that is what I think of the leaders of the Euro-zone, too. Everybody looks upon the guy with the date in the ad as if he is a superstar worthy of greater respect and admiration ahead of everyone else... Certainly this is the vision the Euro-zone leaders have of themselves, and certainly the way ratings agencies, most banks, and the Murdoch media, look at themselves.

It's a fatuous fantasy. Sort of forgiveable in a commercial about beer.

Calvin J. Bear

Lantern Festival

I have always been doubtful of the criticism about synchretism. Well, not only did I grow up in a highly multi-ethnic, multi-cultural society – there were two people within the household who, originally orphaned after World War II, grew to their teens not knowing that they were in fact full siblings, yet having originally been raised one by a Chinese family, and the other by an Indian family... One spoke only haka, the other mostly only tamil and a little english.

And it was virtually a complete accident that they were employed within the same household too, with my father and mother going through birth and immunisation records with a schooling register that was being formed post-war, from memory I think just to work out what real ages students were, and discovering the facts of the situation when they realised who the actual individuals were these particular details referred to. I won't go into how the matter was eventually revealed to all the people involved, suffice to say it all went extremely well indeed.

The internet is doing one thing very well and that is to underscore that the world of human beings is actually only one world. People today can and do rapidly access information and cultural ideas and aspects from across the entire globe and there will be an inevitable social, cultural, conclusion to that in the future.

Fifteen days after the beginning of the Chinese Lunar New Year, is the lantern festival. I understand this as a Taoist tradition – because that was the predominant Chinese ethnic cultural group dwelling in that part of the world where was raised. I do think in fact, that it is indeed a Taoist tradition fullstop, but of course it has been changed around in varying parts until today, say for example in Singapore, it is quite a bizarre, commercialised, spurious portrayal of something, I'm not sure what, but certainly something the Singapore government feels will appeal to the tourist dollar. Singapore is the very 'least Taoist' place in the world that I can think of!

Synchretism is one thing, but then there is such a thing as simply a bad human, and there is such a thing as a bad type of government or system, or a malicious tyrannical dictatorship- these things are not about differences of philosophy; they are about evil motivations and corrupt and evil motives. Whether they are disguised or rationalised spuriously, or whether they are open and obvious, it is possible to detect the difference between what are merely distant philosophies, and otherwise simply narrow-minded, single-minded, self-aggrandizing and self-important attitudes.

However, just for the moment, I shall focus only on the Lantern Festival, its beauty and its subtletly, and its myserious aspect, which is typical of all things Taoist. On the lanterns, there are meant to be puzzles of various kinds, that you can contemplate and try to solve, as the light breezes touch the swinging brightly-coloured candle-holders... as they slowly sway on long strings in the warm evenings...

Best,
Calvin J. Bear

Fantasy, Gambling, And Fast Money

Listen, the only kind of money you want to concentrate on going after is fast money.

I can't be sure of what type of person reads this but I've made myself a rule not to compromise on my own style and expressing what my innermost thinking is based on what experience has taught me. The fact is I known that many people carry preconceived positions on many things and worse still, there is individual brain psychology going on that manhandles whatever anyone says, not just what I might say.

Jesus Christ said this: the love of money is the root of evil; do not rely on material riches because when they fail you, what will you then do?

Money, you see, in the form of something captured, or kept, or held to you, is static. Meanwhile everything around you moves. Money, and even the value of it, while you're still holding it, can seem to evaporate into thin air because of the scale and rate of external change. If you have a real lot of it (money), do you know that if you stack it, the notes on the bottom can actually wear away over time? There are banks that I have seen in Switzerland and Germany, with special stacking machines made typically in those countries – machines that all they do is stack and re-stack notes to slow down this wearing away process.

Today, you see the mainstream media carrying on about how the IMF(!) is the reason that countries (for instance such as those countries under pressure in the Euro zone right now) can have a viable and valid currency. And that is absolute rubbish.

The only reason you can have a viable and valid currency is that people have a belief in it.

Nobody believes in the IMF except those inside its closed circle of power and who want to preserve its power and position of political influence and I would add, interference.

Consequence: money is evaporating under everybody's nose because the IMF is not imaginative enough to engage people's genuine belief which is starting to move away very fast.

So we have this set of socially common misconceptions about valuable things which includes an aversion to gambling, fast money, and fantasy.

Nonetheless, if Mrs. Georg Philipp Telemann never gambled, and her husband not have felt an obligation to pay her debts, her husband would have written far fewer baroque pieces of music for us to enjoy today. If fantasy were not so powerful, we would not be able to anticipate the sci-fi movie spectacular coming out this year John Carter of Mars, originally written by Edgar Rice Borroughs of Tarzan fame. Fantasy makes Hollywood movies! And lots of money!

Lynn Collins in the new John Carter Of Mars movie

In the search for the real and the substantial, the usual default human position is risk-aversion and what appears to be prudence and restraint. This default position arises from a mental laziness, and a fear, and a group delusion about safety and security. Now my meaning here is that in order to attempt anything with a chance to succeed that involves risk, imagination, unique action, and daring – you have to accept that to possess the skills required and to train for them to function successfully is more elevated a thing than even is in the hands of the people in the IMF right now... So I don't really look down on what I have been calling mental laziness and the fear of failure – that fear is real and a sensible feeling. Jesus Christ, in my own view, did not come to speak to everyone and what he really was saying was directed at the human in its peak potential state. In that state, magical thinking, is both realistic and capable of affecting the external material world. But all that stuff, is not for ordinary people, but extraordinary people.

Best,
Calvin J. Bear

Lace Masks And Ethics

People can get lost in their own sophistication. Have you ever noticed that there are people who will launch themselves into a dissertation on mathematics, or god in relation to mathematics(!), or advanced physics, or some other thing full of special obscure terms and terminologies that no one else in particular really has much firm grasp of – if indeed anyone does at all...

And they do so with verve, mainly because they feel the thrill of having discovered that they have what passes for them as intelligence. And of course intelligence has had such a great reputation in the past in society generally so it's no wonder they feel a thrill.

I suppose intelligence for these people must seem like some kind of a new toy.

I intend to bring the word 'ethical' - believe it or not - into my argument here. The governing spirit of things that are done – the ethos – in our modern times, could easily be simply erraticism. And so, those entangled in their own webs of complicated ideas and who really are simpletons on every other level – can't tie their own shoelaces and so on – may be acting quite ethically, in laying claim to the present-day high ground of the human intellect. : ) They are presenting a true depiction of their ethos!

From where I stand, today there's just too much – too many foolish and thoughtless iterations of someone else's original ideas or innovations – and none of it shows the formal consistency that a genuine form of ethics would donate to a validly intelligent human endeavour.

But one has to be careful to distinguish between outward style as deliberate studied design of a human facade or mask, as opposed to the purely opto-graphical capturing of human form as an aesthetical appreciation. This is the difference between the work of Helmut Newton and say – Ellen von Unwerth (who created the photograph to the right). I don't personally believe Newton wanted to show an appreciation of the human form, as much as he desired to explore an intellectual juxtapositioning of human things but involving the human form and this of course comes across almost always as erotic and sexual style. Von Unwerth, on the other hand, I would say explores a simple direct aesthetic appreciation of the human form as her main photographical subject matter without too much extra symbolic meaning. Her work often appears decadent but why this should be so in the sense of style escapes me. Maybe the human form is decadent!

People who know me know I have a great interest in design – industrial design, commercial design, also design in personal style as typified by the well-known stylists: Panté, Lagerfeld, Armani, and so on.

The intellectual ethics of style – once you disregard the current ADHD-afflicted, erratic mindset – goes like this:

A theme must be consistently carried through across the whole of the subject matter. The lace face-mask is mirrored by the lace-covered high-heeled shoes. This implied intellectual vision of style shows the fabric (lace) as translucent, confidential, ornate yet honest. It reminds us also of the Tao – black and obscure or impenetrable in part and clear and penetrable in another part. The surface and the internal. The front and the rear. Et cetera. It recalls to us the Hermetic Code: 'As above so below.' What we cannot see will be as one with what we can see.

Beneath the skirt we will expect the underwear to be black Chantilly lace, oui? And so too must the wearer themselves also be translucent, confidential, ornate yet honest. This is the meaning of personal ethics in relationships. Of course this is just one example of something where style is consistently expressed. I am not sure that people today quite so deliberately intend to express themselves as definitely as the image example I have just suggested, but the effect is that a personal inner haphazardness still comes across. We cannot escape the meaning of what we look like. Whether we like it or not. Some people think they are being very clever by employing complex facades and calling it style – but old hands see through them very easily.