Showing posts with label borges. Show all posts
Showing posts with label borges. Show all posts

Monday, February 18, 2013

Adventures in Megalomania

I knew nearly nothing about philosophy until I was in my early twenties. Of course I knew of philosophers like Plato and Aristotle, but I hadn’t read their works and was almost completely ignorant of anyone who came after them.
 
When I was nineteen I began writing every day. This was just before I started doing stand-up. Some of the longform thoughts I put down were eventually converted into comedy bits. Anyway, as I was writing, I began to believe I was breaking new ground. It didn't stop there. Little by little, I started to think my writings were dangerous. The public probably couldn't handle them. If these thoughts were discussed in public, parts of society might unravel. And I wasn't sure society would be better off for this unraveling.

I actually spent time wondering whether or not it would be responsible to attempt to have these dangerous thoughts published. Apparently I thought I was Copernicus or something. I even started to think it might be safer to publish posthumously. This is not an exaggeration, nor was I "in denial" (I had not a shred of doubt about the importance of my thoughts, therefore I had nothing to deny).

At age 20 I took a job at a bookstore, and by stocking shelves became aware of someone named Schopenhauer. Once I read a few of his writings, I discovered that not only had Mr. Schopenhauer already chronicled some of the IMPORTANT MIKE PAYNE THOUGHTS I thought were going to set the world on fire; he had done it far more skillfully than I ever could have. It would be difficult to communicate the shock and dislocation that followed. I would even say I grieved a bit. 

Because of this, for the next few years I was ambivalent about whether it was even worth it to keep writing or doing comedy. (Looking back, I'd say it wasn't, but anyway I kept going).
 
Eventually in my late twenties I got over the fact that Schopenhauer (and many other writers I read after him) had beaten me to the punch on some of my penetrating macro insights. But then something new occurred to me: Maybe I could sketch out the political applications/implications of some of these thoughts, with examples from history*. Then I came upon Bill Bonner's Empire of Debt, and was once again hit with a shock; the man had already laid out most of what I thought I was going to say, and had done it so well there was no point in repeating it. This time around it wasn't as gutting. I'd been put in my place enough times by then.
 
I bring this up because not long ago I almost ran into the same thing. In recent years I've been thinking that uncertainty and doubt serve us much better that confidence and conviction. While chewing on this, I thought: But what happens when you doubt a doubt?  Once again I started to wonder if I was onto something. Then I came upon a gentleman named E.M. Cioran, who arrived at it long before I did. This time I just laughed.

As Goethe once wrote: "Everything has been thought of before, but the problem is to think of it again."

Our thoughts and experiences feel particular to us, but they are hand-me-downs. Even being shocked by Schopenhauer into feelings of inferiority is hackneyed; Jorge Luis Borges had a similar experience.
 
 

*The fact that I was still thinking "Oh, I'll just write a book about this" shows I still had traces of delusion. I'm not alone in this: how many times have you heard a recently unemployed person--or just some random blowhard at a party--casually talk about how now they've finally decided to put out a book...like getting your work read, published, and publicized is as simple as starting a new diet. This shows you how widespread delusions of grandeur are.
 

Tuesday, May 1, 2012

Realism Realism

Today I was reading Borges’s A Universal History of Iniquity, and had the same sensation I usually have when reading Borges; lots of great ideas for how a story might be told…used to tell stories that aren’t memorable. Despite all the acclaim, to me he is more of a fiction theoretician than an author you might quote on your tombstone (unless your tombstone is part of some truly final dissertation).
Were it not for the liberal arts racket that has sprawled across college campuses like so many pretentious vines, I wonder whether Borges would have attained the stature he attained. Would the reading public have found as much worth in his experiments?
And now that the modern college structure seems to be sinking, what will become of artists whose output resonates more in the classroom than outside it? Without the Bow-Tie Mafia at your local Student Loan Depot assigning these works, will art theoreticians lose some of their stature? Will artists who were driven to create stories rather than curiosities experience a resurgence?
And without the art theoreticians being assigned year after year to today’s budding writers, might we see an improvement in popular culture? Will we see an end to atonal poetry? Might we pick up a fiction magazine and find a tale that does more than just congratulate itself for being a story within a story within a story within a story? If so, I’m sure someone will find a way to give the credit to Steve Jobs.