Your insight on the life-shaping resistance of real things vs.the blobifying resistance-lessness of digital “swipe culture” is keen.
Perhaps, the cold civil war currently consuming all of western civilization is only the natural outcome of a learned habit of swiping away anything we find mildly discomforting. If I can swipe away an ad, why can’t I swipe away my wrongthinking neighbor too?
Vive le resistance; for life is found in the reckoning with difficult tasks, difficult ideas, and yes even difficult people.
Although I haven’t seen Wall-E, is it maybe only half-right? Does a resistanceless existence of screens and lunch in a cup only make men and women useless, or does it also make them casually evil, by atrophying internal resistance to moral transgression?
This is interesting. I think that if we follow St Augustine what you are saying is especially true. Meaning that evil is an absence of the good. The blobified existence is a clear rejection of the good and therefore by definition an evil.
Excellent article, thank you. There's a beauty and history to many things of the real world: a well-made saddle, for instance, whose construction doesn't change much. Even the smell of the saddle soap, the companies have been the same for ages too.
And share your appreciation of Wall-E, greatest (and most surprising) of Disney movies.
Jodi- Thanks again for being such an involved reader. I remember many years ago. I went with my sisters' family (before I had my own kids) to Disney World right when Wall-E was released. I remember vividly receiving my complementary Big Gulp cup. I also marveled at all of the motorized scooters (and the corpulent occupants) and screens. It was funny to me that Disney released a movie that goofed on the very culture it was part of creating. My first thought was that Disney was so interested in making money it did not care that it came from self-satire or that Pixar still had some independence as this was only 2 years after Disney purchased Pixar and the Disney execs don't have much self-reflection to know that their own employees were making fun of them. Not sure.
On Wall-E, I dunno either. It somehow slipped past them, the apotheosis of Pixar films, a small, sturdy flower blooming from a crack in the pavement. Still cry every time I see it.
Not to be crass and all that, but I just launched a page here with a post entitled To Begin that takes off from a similar point and also touches on Han. You say it much better, though.
I'm not arguing for anything, i'm ambiguous as to what happens to us at this point.
But more than that, it's pointless to advocate any approach for humanity as a mass. We are not in control of where we're headed beyond the individual level (and only so much control there), there is no one driving the bus. What i'm suggesting in recognition of our current trajectory is that it is difficult for me to imagine any but perhaps a small number of elites drivng any motor vehicle in 50 years. Assuming there is any access to fuel by then.
A steam car even in some dystopian future would probably be the easiest car to fix out of anything from the last 100 years I imagine. But I imagine the value of mules would skyrocket in that case too.
Thank you. It's odd how easily we all slid into less and less real, tactile surroundings. I did graphic design for some years, but almost all my work was on the computer (some sketching); and I never needed to handle metal type, or cut up photographs and do a real, physical composition. Instead I spent my day physically in contact with a plastic keys and mouse (never got into the tablet thing). But then, oddly, I would often design these flat patterns of pixels to look like a real object: adding bevels, shadows, or even very detailed skeomorphic details. It's funny how people want to relate to those things, even if they're not really there. Sad that they're not.
There is something really interesting there. The idea that modern age is marked by a desire for simulacrum and a rejection of the real. Simulated sports in video games, simulated sex in porn. I suppose that in some way it democratizes access to certain experiences but then makes it impossible to experience the real.
Yes, and the simulacrum is always easier in some way; frictionless. You get to decide what your virtual sports team is; who your AI "waifu" is; what skills your character has in the RPG. There's no real challenge, no real obstacle, but you get the little dopamine hit anyway. But it has to be convincing enough to work. And the only way to be convincing is to look at least a bit real.
Your insight on the life-shaping resistance of real things vs.the blobifying resistance-lessness of digital “swipe culture” is keen.
Perhaps, the cold civil war currently consuming all of western civilization is only the natural outcome of a learned habit of swiping away anything we find mildly discomforting. If I can swipe away an ad, why can’t I swipe away my wrongthinking neighbor too?
Vive le resistance; for life is found in the reckoning with difficult tasks, difficult ideas, and yes even difficult people.
Although I haven’t seen Wall-E, is it maybe only half-right? Does a resistanceless existence of screens and lunch in a cup only make men and women useless, or does it also make them casually evil, by atrophying internal resistance to moral transgression?
This is interesting. I think that if we follow St Augustine what you are saying is especially true. Meaning that evil is an absence of the good. The blobified existence is a clear rejection of the good and therefore by definition an evil.
Excellent article, thank you. There's a beauty and history to many things of the real world: a well-made saddle, for instance, whose construction doesn't change much. Even the smell of the saddle soap, the companies have been the same for ages too.
And share your appreciation of Wall-E, greatest (and most surprising) of Disney movies.
Jodi- Thanks again for being such an involved reader. I remember many years ago. I went with my sisters' family (before I had my own kids) to Disney World right when Wall-E was released. I remember vividly receiving my complementary Big Gulp cup. I also marveled at all of the motorized scooters (and the corpulent occupants) and screens. It was funny to me that Disney released a movie that goofed on the very culture it was part of creating. My first thought was that Disney was so interested in making money it did not care that it came from self-satire or that Pixar still had some independence as this was only 2 years after Disney purchased Pixar and the Disney execs don't have much self-reflection to know that their own employees were making fun of them. Not sure.
My pleasure: thanks for the well-wrought pieces!
On Wall-E, I dunno either. It somehow slipped past them, the apotheosis of Pixar films, a small, sturdy flower blooming from a crack in the pavement. Still cry every time I see it.
Thank you so much for reading. I love the picture of an old saddle. Truly "stuff that works."
I need to actually watch or rewatch the entire movie but I was pleasantly surprised to say the least. Thanks for the comment and support!
so. good. thank you.
Isn't Brandon a cool dude?
Very well stated. Thanks!
Not to be crass and all that, but I just launched a page here with a post entitled To Begin that takes off from a similar point and also touches on Han. You say it much better, though.
Jay----can you share a link to the post? Would love to read it
https://substack.com/home/post/p-148054011?source=queue
Grant,
Here you are. It is sort of feeble, but well-intentioned.
Jay
Leno's wildly optimistic. If he's lucky in 50 years there will be a mule.
Explain a bit more. Are you arguing for a future reversion to a more pre-modern condition? I want to understand this comment a bit better.
I'm not arguing for anything, i'm ambiguous as to what happens to us at this point.
But more than that, it's pointless to advocate any approach for humanity as a mass. We are not in control of where we're headed beyond the individual level (and only so much control there), there is no one driving the bus. What i'm suggesting in recognition of our current trajectory is that it is difficult for me to imagine any but perhaps a small number of elites drivng any motor vehicle in 50 years. Assuming there is any access to fuel by then.
A steam car even in some dystopian future would probably be the easiest car to fix out of anything from the last 100 years I imagine. But I imagine the value of mules would skyrocket in that case too.
We're living a dystopian future right now.
“The modern world shall not be punished:
It is the punishment.”
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Thank you. It's odd how easily we all slid into less and less real, tactile surroundings. I did graphic design for some years, but almost all my work was on the computer (some sketching); and I never needed to handle metal type, or cut up photographs and do a real, physical composition. Instead I spent my day physically in contact with a plastic keys and mouse (never got into the tablet thing). But then, oddly, I would often design these flat patterns of pixels to look like a real object: adding bevels, shadows, or even very detailed skeomorphic details. It's funny how people want to relate to those things, even if they're not really there. Sad that they're not.
There is something really interesting there. The idea that modern age is marked by a desire for simulacrum and a rejection of the real. Simulated sports in video games, simulated sex in porn. I suppose that in some way it democratizes access to certain experiences but then makes it impossible to experience the real.
Yes, and the simulacrum is always easier in some way; frictionless. You get to decide what your virtual sports team is; who your AI "waifu" is; what skills your character has in the RPG. There's no real challenge, no real obstacle, but you get the little dopamine hit anyway. But it has to be convincing enough to work. And the only way to be convincing is to look at least a bit real.