Learning the philosophy behind what's happening in the world really does help to understand things so much. I'll keep trying to put stuff out there to explain it. It really does help put one's mind at ease to learn that there really is a programme, that everything that looks so mad and destructive isn't just random. People aren't going crazy; they're being led into evil by a designed programme. You'd think it wouldn't be a comforting thought, but I think it puts it into a framework where you can push back against it, and fight back, at least in your own life. It tells us we're not helplessly in the grip of some unstoppable force. If it was done, it can be undone.
Thank you for your explication of this process. I studied music composition in college and am familiar with the parallel history of 20th century music.
The question I have--and it is just a question--is whether there was something unstable there from the beginning. In the tonal system of Western Music, for example, there is inherent instability. Not to go off into the weeds, but Western Music, by its nature, is out of tune with the overtone series. For example, if you sing an in-tune major third and then compare it to the piano, the piano is dissonant and wobbly. There is a kind of seed of atonality present from the beginning. That said, many works of genius were created within the tonal system. Still, I prefer the Benedictine Office, which is prior to it.
Not to be too much of a fatalist, but I think this whole process is just going to play itself out. My guess is that it will collapse under the weight of its own incoherence and need to destroy. The question I have is how do we get through it and what might it look like on the "other side". Of course, it's difficult to know exactly. We can, however, begin living on the far side of this right now. At least as best as we can fathom it.
As a fellow musician, I concur with your comparison and analysis. I would further try to answer your question as to the presence of some "seed of instability" that later germinated into atonality, etc. I would posit that, while the instability in a piano's harmonies comes from the limitations imposed by fixed tuning (as opposed to the extemporaneous tuning of a voice or violin, for example), the real "seed" of atonality is the composer's *free will* to choose whether he will work in accord with created nature or directly oppose it for some ulterior motive (it certainly wouldn't be for beauty!).
And so, ultimately, the seed of destruction of the arts was the money and influence of those who desired to destroy Christendom; these are the ones who made it possible for the artistic rebels to "succeed" at what they did.
Thank you Hilary, very informative. So am I right to conclude: Bolshevism was the revolution that wanted to destroy traditional politics, economics and society whilst its offspring Dadaism proudly sought to destroy culture, art and literature?
Whilst Bolshevism has been discredited as it proved to have real and disastrous consequences for everyone, the influence of Dadaism has lived on, maybe as it really only exists in the rareified atmosphere of the cultural elite, thus not impacting the daily life. Add to this, I suppose, that there is only so much a critic can write about a realist landscape or portrait (and if you can't write much, who willl pay you and how will you distinguish yourself) whereas with an abstract piece there is no end to what a critic can write as no one can prove them wrong or tell them they aren't qualified to comment or don't know what they are talking about. So abstract art is hept alive as it is a bottomless brunch for art crtics who couldn't draw a triangle themselves but can make a living writing tosh about meaningless art.
I would say that if the revolutionary philosophies - that go back all the way to Ockham - are comparable to mycelium, Bolshevism is only one sample of the fruiting body, the mushroom you see after the mycelium has completely infested the soil. If you're fighting a fungal infection in your soil, you don't just pull up the mushrooms. More will always grow back. The underlying philosophy of meaninglessness precedes any of its "real-world" temporal manifestations. Bolshevism didn't pop out of nowhere, and neither did Vatican II or Dadaism.
Hilary, thanks for the further comment. I googled Ockham. Do you mean William of Ockham, the 14th century theologian? If so, is it not a rather large step from him to Bolshevism?
I just read Nihilism by Fr. Seraphim Rose and recommend it! So much I can see in a new light now, that you have also touched upon here.
Learning the philosophy behind what's happening in the world really does help to understand things so much. I'll keep trying to put stuff out there to explain it. It really does help put one's mind at ease to learn that there really is a programme, that everything that looks so mad and destructive isn't just random. People aren't going crazy; they're being led into evil by a designed programme. You'd think it wouldn't be a comforting thought, but I think it puts it into a framework where you can push back against it, and fight back, at least in your own life. It tells us we're not helplessly in the grip of some unstoppable force. If it was done, it can be undone.
"I think it puts it into a framework where you can push back against it, and fight back, at least in your own life. "
Yes, I totally agree! I have given Nihilism to my upper highschool children to read and will share your article with them too!
An excellent book. I second the recommendation.
I'll have to see if there's a kindle edition somewhere.
Miss White-
Thank you for your explication of this process. I studied music composition in college and am familiar with the parallel history of 20th century music.
The question I have--and it is just a question--is whether there was something unstable there from the beginning. In the tonal system of Western Music, for example, there is inherent instability. Not to go off into the weeds, but Western Music, by its nature, is out of tune with the overtone series. For example, if you sing an in-tune major third and then compare it to the piano, the piano is dissonant and wobbly. There is a kind of seed of atonality present from the beginning. That said, many works of genius were created within the tonal system. Still, I prefer the Benedictine Office, which is prior to it.
Not to be too much of a fatalist, but I think this whole process is just going to play itself out. My guess is that it will collapse under the weight of its own incoherence and need to destroy. The question I have is how do we get through it and what might it look like on the "other side". Of course, it's difficult to know exactly. We can, however, begin living on the far side of this right now. At least as best as we can fathom it.
For what it's worth.
-Jack
As a fellow musician, I concur with your comparison and analysis. I would further try to answer your question as to the presence of some "seed of instability" that later germinated into atonality, etc. I would posit that, while the instability in a piano's harmonies comes from the limitations imposed by fixed tuning (as opposed to the extemporaneous tuning of a voice or violin, for example), the real "seed" of atonality is the composer's *free will* to choose whether he will work in accord with created nature or directly oppose it for some ulterior motive (it certainly wouldn't be for beauty!).
And so, ultimately, the seed of destruction of the arts was the money and influence of those who desired to destroy Christendom; these are the ones who made it possible for the artistic rebels to "succeed" at what they did.
It happened exactly the same way and at the same time in every area of our civilisation. There's simply no way that can be coincidental.
Thank you Hilary, very informative. So am I right to conclude: Bolshevism was the revolution that wanted to destroy traditional politics, economics and society whilst its offspring Dadaism proudly sought to destroy culture, art and literature?
Whilst Bolshevism has been discredited as it proved to have real and disastrous consequences for everyone, the influence of Dadaism has lived on, maybe as it really only exists in the rareified atmosphere of the cultural elite, thus not impacting the daily life. Add to this, I suppose, that there is only so much a critic can write about a realist landscape or portrait (and if you can't write much, who willl pay you and how will you distinguish yourself) whereas with an abstract piece there is no end to what a critic can write as no one can prove them wrong or tell them they aren't qualified to comment or don't know what they are talking about. So abstract art is hept alive as it is a bottomless brunch for art crtics who couldn't draw a triangle themselves but can make a living writing tosh about meaningless art.
The Emperor really is wearing no clothes!
I would say that if the revolutionary philosophies - that go back all the way to Ockham - are comparable to mycelium, Bolshevism is only one sample of the fruiting body, the mushroom you see after the mycelium has completely infested the soil. If you're fighting a fungal infection in your soil, you don't just pull up the mushrooms. More will always grow back. The underlying philosophy of meaninglessness precedes any of its "real-world" temporal manifestations. Bolshevism didn't pop out of nowhere, and neither did Vatican II or Dadaism.
Hilary, thanks for the further comment. I googled Ockham. Do you mean William of Ockham, the 14th century theologian? If so, is it not a rather large step from him to Bolshevism?
It's certainly a small step for a single stone to start rolling down hill. The important part is what the avalanche does at the bottom of that hill.
Also, I like "bottomless brunch" and will probably have to steal it.
Please unblock me on Twitter. I apologize for the comment I made about two Decembers ago.
caseybogs.