Wednesday, June 8, 2016

More talk. The work not the worker, the art not the artist. Future shocking. Political candidates and political platforms.

THE work, not the worker; the art, not the artist. I was once chastised why the dafuq I entertain myself with work by people whose personal views supposedly run counter with mine? Immediate examples that come to mind: Clint Eastwood, a devout conservative GOP; and Lynyrd Skynyrd, Southern rockers that spout the same rightist views; and my so-called trailer park homeys with so-called “redneck” demeanor.


          My response: “Mr Eastwood is an actor and filmmaker, and I like his work; appreciation of work is always subjective. The Skynyrds' music are a lot more enjoyable than most leftist blues rockers, but that's just my opinion. My redneck homeys are people, we don't debate confederate army stuff, we just laugh together and we treat ourselves as friends, with or without apps—they are around when I need them, and vice versa.” There are many “idols” whose work are immensely adored timelessly and glorified in august halls yet their personal lives (or some chapters of their life's journey) don't seem to conjure positive vibes... Ernest Hemingway was a known alcoholic and hothead; and does anybody know that Mohandas K. Gandhi kept a harem of young village ladies; or when JFK exuded leadership strength, he was also swimming in shady sexual dalliances; or genius mathematician John Nash was a schizophrenic etc etc.


         Who cares about shit, as long as they don't break laws—that's fine with me. A Tea Party damsel or a Dem zealot are as “good” as a Christian or Buddhist to me. Political views, right or left, don't make people evil. Alcoholism and bad-tempers and “womanizing” are personal demons that people struggle with; it's their shit... Some are “sick” when the camera isn't rolling but we all have “madnesses.” We all wrestle with private Armageddons—clinical, genetic, acquired or “experimented.” No matter how weird or “sick” some individuals may seem to some people—we just look at them on the basis of what they do beyond, they are not gods. We all work around our nagging imperfections, squeezing mightily out of our darknesses... Some may think I am a cool guy because of what I ramble and rant here: I am not, actually. I am a narcissistic jerk with a passion and intensity that match a wayward buffalo. At least, I do some cool shit—like cook awesome soups and give real hot foot massage.

WHY is it—it seems so hard to connect the past to the present, these days? It is because the world—and life and living—has changed so much and so fast. In his book “Future Shock,” published in 1970, Alvin Toffler defined a future where there is too much change in too short a period of time, that humanity's psychological state may not be able to cope up... Actually, we can—if we try to at least, go back to the past. Yet it has become so difficult or painstaking to explain these to the young whose truths gained ground at a time when information/computer technology flourished and moved the universe in quicksilver overload. But those who lived the past have concrete basis of comparison; those who worked around typewriters and one phone for 2,000 people and widespread public transports etc etc. These were the tools that moved families, communities and societies...


          I have 5,000 friends on Facebook (I don't Tweet) but a mere chunk of that ocean of “humans” actually know me or have met me in person. I try to meet some--by offering good stuff like food/cooking, free shows etc that were traditionally offered in friendship long time ago—but it is never easy as it was. There are a number of people here that I consistently “chat” with but I don't even know their real name, why is that? We don't even necessarily see real faces or photos in the current time.
         Back in the days, as writers and artists, we knew each other--even if we carry pseudonyms in our bylines (we reveal our identities to editors and friends). When we say "friends," that means a real name ("The name is Bond, James Bond"). Before, when you say "meeting," we don't repeat the invite many times, only once will do—and people show up. These days we post the invite 100 times a month amidst all the traffic of infos that flood the laptop screen or Smartphone viewer... So instead of remembering, we forget. We forget because there are so many to remember, or filter.

          Yes, there are many infos here that we could probably find good use for, but the problem is—which are the ones that are credible, “true” facts or just sent by some wacko blogger or a nerd 14-year old trying to amuse himself in the confines of his warm shell? We may even photoshop a photo and it will look like it was the real deal. It's dangerous, it's distant, it's suspicious. That is why I insist that the only way to do this is--maximize the outside world, go back to the past, and let the internet galaxy just be a complement, a one-click, short attention distraction, entertainment. As what Mr Toffler inferred or suggested (same with Orwell, Atwood, Vonnegut etc and movies like The Matrix, Transformers etc), if we don't control the machine, the machine will control us. The machine "controls" us these days by continually feeding us a crisscrossing onslaught of fancy and awesome stuff and things online. One second, gone. Next distraction coming up... The kick: Business rules the internet; hence, “controls” us. How do we cushion the punch? Go out.

SAD. When people say or infer, what is the point of looking at (or analyzing) political platforms of political candidates when these don't work anyway or these are lies anyhow. Where do we go from here? So what we do is justify the bickerings and negativity in the internet in regards all these prospective leaders? Are we saying these because we actually don't care whoever wins because it's all sham and bullshit anyway? This defeatism and resignation is more than apathy and insensitivity. It means we don't mind who sits there as long as we have roof over our heads and the other one doesn't? Is this what we call relevant activism? Who is winning here? That is scary? The one winning is the One Percent who actually/maybe implanted that in our psyche--so they can continue to frolic while we are looking the other way.


          In the 90s, back home in the Philippines, I sat with a respected team of political/economic thinkers to help (the late) Sen. Roco's first presidential campaign. The country wasn't as bad as the last years of the Marcos regime that time. There were good stuff--we just have to carry on “rebuilding” and believing. I believed my candidate was the best among those who ran. Yet Joseph “Erap” Estrada, who was later on disgraced out of power, lopsidedly won. In time, after I left the country, I realized why we lost. Elections aren't about the best person--it is about winning. It is about slogans and one-liner blurbs and speeches that instigate applause. Yet that was only the surface of leader/people nation-building. Next and the most important is how the people work to make sure that what we were promised are delivered. A leader meanwhile had to work around powerful variables while seated--especially how to work around a usually divided Congress and the influence of the corporate One Percent. It's either they give in or they don't. That is a historical fact.
          But if our stand say, “What dafuq? They are all assholes anyway! Let me just enjoy my basketball game and tinapa,” we aren't going anywhere. Deadend. Sadly, that is also the thinking in America. People gravitate to Trump because of utter disgust and resignation. So they are willing to “install” a leader on the virtue of a “battlecry” without really looking at what he's gonna do when he's finally in the Oval Office. Is this just social media or this is actually happening? If so, the more that I want to go old-school and feel the pulse of the people out there. Those whose houses are blown away by typhoons and subsist on whatever that they can scrounge and yes no internet privilege. Sometimes I think we have become so comfortable that our only response to misery out there is induced numbness. We don't care because we are alright. There is no Great Depression and there is no Martial Law-level grief. We got cellphones and wi-fi and cable TV and food on the table. So let's continue making fun of all these leaders online while the One Percent watch happy as hell. 

No comments:

Post a Comment