Thursday, November 17, 2016
It is befuddlement and wonder, to hear the defining sounds of the Black Mass in stereoscopic sound. The arpeggios and oddly distorted scales did not clatterly and clash, but magically nuanced through crackens and crevices though not in key. Indemnified and windowed until The strains of shattered silence became to loud to bare inside the individuals head, until it became twisted, though no one else could hear it. A stricken individual would writhe in terror as voices began to quake inside their mind, saying things in a language which only they understood, and usually without question. Not only did they hear voices, but the commands which they heard called to them, and commanded, with intent and flourish. Doctors who talked with these patients, for that is how doctors perceived them, came away almost shrugging their shoulders, and, in one form or another, declared them to be mad. But in the minds of these patients, they were communicating with higher powers, which drove the twitching hands to do certain things, nameless things which they were blameless of. It was the power of the voices, in no way connected to the pour sad mess of what seems to them in automate.
For example, take a man who leans beside the keyboard, drenched with sweat - beading in the corners of the eyes – a mass -,a vision – a dread. Take him not as he is, which though drenched in sweat is no worse for wear - and ample it up of those fold where he is pouring sweat from every imaginable context. That is to say, imagine him away he wishes him to be, drenched, pouring, occluded, by every ogle full, to his very veins with the inimitable trace that every man has. Now let it be not imagined but real, as real as he thinks he's, and wishes to become. This is the man's dream made real.
Imagine him pounding on only the black keys, to find some secret vision, a vision that might be, could be, must be real. The black keys throbbing in his inimitable substance, as if it was translucent, and even beyond possibility. This he imagines could be real, but must be illusion. It is the black mass as it wishes it was, but the illusion, hallucination, time site to sound, is not quite real. It is only a simulation, one that haunts him every inimitable night, and wakes his days with ineluctable flight. It binds together all his fears and dreads, because it is himself in a mirror vision that he cannot quite taste.
But there at the keyboard he rants and phase, as if he knows that he will compose this piece when he is done. Call him Scriabin, who hears site and listens to sound, as does Rimsky-Koskav, chanting colors with sounds, along with vociferous noise and ecstatic dynne, next together in translucent grace. It is a howling grace and purring wine that calls him to the keyboard. One might say that only he hears, but this is not true, and the other who can our among the most educated of musical people yet found anywhere. And with every step outwards to to the void comes another step towards that ecstatic rhythm that calls to those few which here it.
To the uninitiated, there are mandibles and particles of fourths and unresolved fifths, gleaming in their room disunity, and unrepentant dissonance. They declare that there is no music in missed noise. But to the initiated, the here the reverse: the more angular the notes become, more there is a sense of unity, not described in the older textbooks. They say he is called with Chopin, and has gone to meet that maker of pianistic measurements that stands behind, and below, the normal rhythm.
This is, of course, rubbish to the uninitiated, including such lights as Sir Adrian Boult, who not only dislike Scriabin's music, but banned it from the airwaves. Another anti-Scriabinist denounce him as “a sad pathological case, erotic and egotistical to point of mania.” It is all in Wikipedia in lurid detail. After this such complements as the greatest of modern composers means very little when issued from a non-name.
But he has friends on the YouTube channel devoted to his works, and stains utterly the pronouncements of a atonality in the establish figures. These people do not care what the establishment says, they only hear the pure strains of a diabolical cleanliness from the man's owned head. But Scriabin cared not for this, obsessed as he was with the stream of music alone. Repeating and inverting lines that made no sense at all, particularly not to the Germanic rivals such as Schoenberg.
He was seeking light.
But the ground that at an early age. This is why his shorter piano sonatas are the most precious things that he composed, because they shine a beacon on his works, that everything else can be compared to, and written aside from. They are the key to his oevre.
The “White Mass” - it opens quietly and with reverence, a prayer to the father below, who accepts the inverted dissidence has his own. Then it becomes more orgiastic, but trails off until it is shining with black light. It still not clear where it is going, and sweeps to a close at four minutes in. a white-hot mass of the kind which only just now they were discovering in the distant reaches of space – that time was greater than they thought it was, and crumbling with white hot light that Newton never imagined it to be, but mines such as Einstein, and Bohr, and Hubble were only now just casting their minds, and imagination, and eyes upon.
It does not seem atonal, but there is no tonal center to point to. Even though it drifts through many keys, but married none. Now comes the repeated keystroke, first here, then there. Until reaches a climax, though which he is not clear. It is a key without a key, reminiscing but not defining. Then it comes slowly, and ever so quietly to a hush. You know whether or not you are hook by whether you run screaming out the door, or mesmerized to play it again. And perhaps again and again, if you are hypnotized by the illusion, if it is indeed an illusion, that calls your name as a sphinx. The Nuages that calls you takes hold if you are of a mind.
Of course the great composer Stravinsky was also on these paths, but continued to hold on to the very gist of tonality, which people could hear if not describe. Obviously Schoenberg was also among them, leading out a path which he called “pantonal” - the mixture of 12 tonalities all played at the same time. He was German, and Jewish, and he wanted all things to be the same.
Oh, how I will consume you, vomit you, and with each memory, as the silent strumming of forgot waste take my course and demand sustenance. For their in the light comes a drowning despair which will eat me as I consume you. It is the white mass, and I will spend to it, but hiding from the day. Oh how I wish for a black son, and black stars to contain its burrowing night and kiss them to sleep, noiselessly to protect them in the unremittingly cold sky.
The bells were chiming, from many different projections, as if to say that all churches were possible and redeemed by their ecstatic vision of the sublime. Each time they chimed the theme, there was an undercurrent of black as black can be. There is a cord that is suspended, accord that comes from Sonata number six, and rings in one's ears. Each time one looks for the bells, they diminish in the place one looks, and grow stronger in some other sphere. A root that contains a synthetic cord, as opposed to major and minor realities at its heart. The ninth Sonata was quite probably named to chase away the sixth Sonata, whose blazing architecture continue to haunt Scriabin.
Also to a home of his own creation ran through his head, “ it is toward the, adored star/ my flight guides me.” I do not know whether in Russian it stands with the compositional work, but in English it is very weak indeed. But it has a residence, which it guides to “ I engulf thee!” as a lusty long for redemption. It is filled with the stars intoxication and a play meeting caprice. It has next of liberation, desire, even voluptuous and crazed. It beckons Scriabin with a distant understanding, that words cannot deny. Unlike Berg, there is no formal sense, no interpretation of the events that took place, merely void which we can tap into our subconscious. Between and whole tones, mixing one to the other, he seems equipoises between two in bridge between horizontal and vertical.
James Bakst proclaimed during sermons and reflections, he love of ritual and an even deeper love of the hunt. But Russia was looking within from the very first when Ivana, called terrible, closed the doors and claimed Orthodox music from Greece, and not the West. It was a time where Russia collapsed inward until the early 19th century. Scriabin therefore was the third generation, and created in a dissimilar way from the West, but with leanings to its predicaments. Thus the West was new and different, but also damaging and despairing. It rose from miniscule provisions, and its arc was not straight, but in a Russian way set of the on its own course. Part but also apart - of Orthodox not Catholic, and certainly not Protestant, even though they might indulge the senses. If one has to trace a beginning than its name is Mikhail Glinka. So instead of a long history, as with literature, it arose from of know where. Glinka, himself, called himself bedecked in other words image, because there was so little in Russia to work with.
But by the time that Scriabin transformed the scene, there were many masters, and wall they might not be rushed in their souls, it came out Russian in practice. The cosmopolitan gave its heart Igor Stravinsky, And regarded Scriabin musically strange, but had a different following. Even here the division between those who speak of Scriabin as atonal, and those speak of him as composing in another key concern crops up. Scriabin's coif head does not offer any clue to what is going on behind the eyes.
But yet there is something there, and no amount of handwaving can deny that, whether atonal, or super total, the organization comes from horizontal to vertical in a straight line.
One clue is that while the sixth and seventh sonatas are close together, Scriabin did not want to play the sixth Sonata, and dubbed the seventh Sonata, “ white mass” and played it nearly continuously. He was punched over perspiring and perplexed, almost to get the sixth Sonata out of his head. In short, the sixth Sonata was the last tonal, in terms of the old hierarchy of keys. And with its complete, he turned and wrote what became the grand vision.
It isn't exactly true that there are no books about Scriabin, it just seems like they are, and, honestly, there is not the cornucopia of selections or the quality that either Debussy, or Berg, will trumpet over there large selections. What one really has is selections of his readings, and from that you can make out, not what he said, nor what he implied, but scribblings and jottings on his way to his next gig. And in between these lines of beauty, there are banalities of dross, leaving you to wonder what he said by the piano, over the lights, and in general at those impromptu discussions which almost never - but not quite ever never- captured on film or in someone else's diary.
One quite honest reason for this, is the rest of his social circle was jejune, and that was at their best. Compare this to the other people, and the result is quite startling, almost mindnumbing. One looks for a quote from Scriabin, and one finds in an enormous selection of dull letters, and that is the best of them. The worst of them will drive you mad when thinking about it. Scriabin, the movie, has no great sublime works to its credit.
But this from a man whose life was enriched with homosexuality, this is, an betrayal - someone who abandon his wife. And yet there is no meaning to abandonment, the way there is with Berg, who left traces of his affairs in his work. If there are any such witticisms left in Scriabin, we have yet to discover them.
So we are left with just his notes, and dreams, and try to imagine what he was saying while talked about something that only he could visualize. Their are only 18 CDs of his music, and really only two genres which are important: symphonies, and more importantly, sonatas. The rest is obscure in plain sight.
Malthus stated the iron law of wages: that wages would fall to subsistence. He was wrong going in both directions. First, even as Malthus was ennunciating it, the long curve of human history was bending: human beings were reaching the point where they would not simply breed to the point of their food capacity. The second is that wages would, and often did, fall below subsistence. The result, as we now understand from Sen's work, is a famine. Famine is a well known condition to mankind, it comes when there is a dearth of food, combined with control capable of apportioning it for profit, or preventing movement. After all, if there truly is no food, people flee, if the can. Core to famine, is power.
In understanding the transfiguration of the relationship of technology and power with relationship to food, it is useful to plot the course of revolt and famine in Ireland from 1649 to Irish independence in the early 20th century. This three and a half century course shows that revolt and famine are not interlinked, but that power and famine are, and that relationship has changed dramatically. The key incidents are three pairs of events: a massive tragedy, followed by another which was ameliorated by the response to it within the social and political context of the time. Each represented the realities of food and conquest in the era before the application of energy directly to food production.
What makes Ireland a uniquely useful example of the Malthusian garden, is that like Sicily it is long prone to good soil and bad government driven by an occupation from abroad. That is, it is particularly like to reach a point where there is a large population emiserated by political effects, which tips over to disaster because the political power is absentee.
The three pairs are the Parliamentary reconquest of 1649-53 and the Williamite War of 1689-1691, the Great Famine of 1640-1641 and the hunger of 1781-83, the an Gorta Mora of 1845-1853, and the hunger of 1879. In each case the desire to assert political and economic control tipped the equilibrium of food, population, and medication into catastrophe, and the second represented a restraint in pursuit of the same end, producing ameliorated disaster.
In 1641, high interest rates, a poor harvest, bad religious war in England, and even worse administration were the fuel for an insurrection by the native Catholic gentry, which attempted forciblu take control of the administration of the country, and they did so largely successfully. The result can be described as a series of putsches against the mechanics of government. Revolt was not new to Ireland under the Anglo-Norman rule, which had flared and eased as successive English regimes had sought to use Ireland as a pressure valve for their own political and social tensions, and as a source for food for England.
The state of affairs, where the Catholic confederates ran the island prevented a large scale famine even in the wake of a bad harvest. However, when Cromwell and his New Model Army had asserted control over England, retaking control over Ireland was the clear next step. The reconquest was filled with all of the brutality of this, the last outpost of the Thirty Years War. It is estimated that 600,000 perished out of an Irish population that numbered only 1.5 million. Since people were then able to flee, many of the higher totals clearly under-estimate emigration, but even the lower figures represent a large, and sustained, slashing of the population. When all was done, Ireland's population was no more than a million, and tens of thousands had been exported as slaves to the new world.
The catastrophic losses were not lost even on a rather brutal age, and when Ireland was again a battle ground for English religious war, the result was a series of sieges and battles which, while attending with broad loss of civilian life, were not a virtual depopulation of large swathes of the country. The restraint of massacre and pillage was, paradoxically the result of control: the armies were under far tighter rein than previously, preventing the wholesale removal of all foodstuffs and goods.
The difference between this war and the next generations was simple. In 1649-1651 the New Model Army was not always able to successfully lay siege to a town, and could not move quickly and easily. Hence both early and late terror tactics were pursued: surrender under terms, or face unlimited pillage was Cromwell's early policy, with thousands massacred. Late the administration of Cromwell's Commonwealth could not rapidly and effectively impose order or put enough boots on the ground, and thus turned to what would later be called “scorched earth” tactics: despoiling everything they could burn or carry away, to deny it to the guerillas still fighting them. By contrast the arms of a generation later were under stricter control, and the objective was to leave Ireland more or less in tact, since the enemy was primarily the dethroned Stuart monarch and his supporters, not the general population.
While some authors have lauded the mechanics of imposing English colonial rule through the common law and legal mechanism on Ireland, the reality is that the conquest of Ireland was not effectuated until 1603, and the apparatus established was overturned in 1641, a generation later, and re-established only with the most brute force possible at the time. In 1641, the Irish rebelled against hunger, and prevented famine, in 1649-51, the English brought famine with them.
Without the ability to apply energy to food production, but with the ability to apply energy – steel and shot – to warfare, the balance of choice between planting and plundering tilted heavily towards plunder.
The early colonial European problems seen elsewhere in the world, both Asia and the Americas, are seen in these two Irish conflicts. The very scarcity of food and energy which prevented the Europeans from effectively conquering, or being able to feed their restored population, also prevented them from fielding armies which could maintain control, or administrations which could execute upon it. However the urgency of population was upon them, Europe's population was rapidly return from the Black Death, and at the same time pressured by the long term climatic reality of the “Little Ice Age.”
The combination then, is the ability to apply energy and organization far more effectively to conquest than to production, and an urgency to conquer. The result was a population catastrophe, which required social restrictions. The capital and social order was powerful enough to cause massive death, as it had generally in the 30 years war across Europe (1610-1648), but not enough to raise production. The resulting wars of life and death could only be restrained by a common understanding of the results.
It is not that English administration of Ireland improved. The combination of good soil and bad government continued, witness the most famous essay of 1729, “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift, who compared what was done in Ireland to cannibalism. He argued, tongue in cheek:
I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout.
I do therefore humbly offer it to public consideration that of the hundred and twenty thousand children already computed, twenty thousand may be reserved for breed, whereof only one-fourth part to be males; which is more than we allow to sheep, black cattle or swine; and my reason is, that these children are seldom the fruits of marriage, a circumstance not much regarded by our savages, therefore one male will be sufficient to serve four females.
The objective of English government was to secure Protestant domination, and the centralization of trade and power in a form which could be commuted to England. While phrased in glossy terms, this essential story is visible in the detailed surveys of Barnard's <i>Cromwellian Ireland English Government and Reform in Ireland, 1649-1660</i>, and in any clear reading of the reduction of Ireland to colonial status under the Navigation Acts, and the banning of exports under the Cattle Acts and Woolen Act which required the Irish to export only raw wool, and only to England.
One reason for the lack of climate context in the crop failures of this period is that weather was uniformly bad, the population of Ireland still had recovered little from the Black Death, and because it had been used primarily as a base for raw materials, there was little prosperity to lead to rapid increases in population. This was about to change, along with the climate.
Europe had been afflicted generally by a cooling called “The Little Ice Age.” If it had not been for the plague, this cooling would be the culprit for far more deaths than it was. By the early 1700's this cooling period was ending, and it was seen as much by more warm years, than by average temperatures rising. The result of a decade of warmer and better harvests in the 1730's, ironically weather muted Swift's criticisms just as he had published his most pointed. When the “Great Frost” of 1739-41 arrived, Europe experienced a general hardship, however, it was, again, in Ireland where it was felt most severely.
Let it be said what everyone knows, we know longer live in the post era, this is a pre-war, not post-war era.
The post era was defined by its postness: Post-World War II, Post Cold War, Post Modernization, and in many respects, Post-Reality. It was also defined by its posts, its missives sent out, by alienated people to other alienated people. We posted jobs, adds, blogs, personals. It was defined by a third kind of posts: the fence post, the post in the ground. The claims that people felt they had on the future, because of something, often ill-defined, by its past. To summarize in a phrase, the era of post, was the management of claims upon privilege conferred by the victory in two long wars of the 20th century, among individuals who lived in a society where the social sector had been pillaged to the benefit of the public and private sectors. It was victory over the Post-Victorian world, a phrase you do not read, because people do not want you to construct it.
<i>You are all doomed. But probably not today.</i>
The doom of that era is at hand, the reckoning of its reality. In a sense, we always knew it would come to this point, and at approximately this time. When was <i>Stand on Zanzibar</i> set? In 2010. Come again.
Let us talk about doom. People do not understand it, because they see doom in the same mode as the sandwich sign carrier "The End is Near." The reason there are always such prophets is because of two irrevocable facts. The first is that the survival rate for life, is 0%. The second is that someone, somewhere is near the end. Cancer, a car accident, old age, disease, starvation. And even if not the end of life, the end of a phase of life: bankruptcy, the end of marriage, of childhood, of broken dreams in broken fields.
Thus people's sense of someone predicting a general doom of an era, is analogized to the only doom they truly feel: their own. But the end of an era, of empire, republic, period in art, is not like the end of an individual life. Two important truths also follow.
Just because Life will go on, does not mean that your life will. Societies that are destined to live a long time grind the bones of millions to make their bread. A few people have died while you are reading this of nothing other than preventable poverty. For want of some Vitamin A, a few calories, a simple surgery, a rivet to hold a bridge in place, a screw to make a machine place. For funds so small that you would not notice them. Consider that 2 billion people live on less than 2 dollars a day. That means that we could increase their income 10 fold, for less than what we will pour into losing the war in Afghanistan.
The second is that just because Life will not go on, doesn't mean that lives will not go on. Only the most horrific of crashes cause a straight majority to die: the Holocaust for the European Jews, the European invasions of the Americas, the collapse of Rome. Even the black death, did not kill half of the world, though it cut a brutal swathe. Most people will live. You might too, or die at approximately the same portion of our life's journey as others. Consider that we think that Elizabeth Edwards died young. But she had more years that Beethoven, Mozart, Henry Vth of England, Abel, Keats, Byron, Shelley, Lawrence of Arabia, Shakespeare. 61 is young, only in a very privileged age.
Thus when a writer predicts doom, it is against the context of these facts, that their writing must be seen. An individual predicting the end of a bull market is predicting doom for people. People will die for the debts, or their crimes. People will have shattered dreams. Pain will lead to the dissolution of marriages, the falling of fortunes, the closing of doors. But most people, perhaps dented of their desires, will live.
That is why when I say that this America is doomed, it does not necessarily mean that the future is gloomier than you expect. Which is worse: to live through collapse, or be a slave in a society that blames you, for its ills? Only men fit to be slaves, would always choose the latter.
The kinds of prophecy of doom are thus the mythological kind, which speaks to each person's fear of death and loss – that is "Your Life Will Not Go On." – the self-unfulfilling prophecy – "Life can go on, or our lives can go on, but not both" – the Cassandra – "Neither life, nor lives, will go on." A class does not confer any particular truth to the prophecy. One can predict doom at the correct hour, for completely the wrong reasons.
The self-unfulfilling prophecy is a warning, phrased with the urgency of the fear of death. The hope of this prophet without honour, is that the very doom predicted, can be avoided. In the 1960's, there was a fear of overpopulation. It is in books such as "The Population Bomb," but also in popular culture: Star Trek Episodes, Harry Harrison's <i>Make Room! Make Room!</I>, and in the aforementioned <i>Stand on Zanzibar</i>. It was rooted in the very real famines and wars that had come before. The Germans invaded Russia for oil, and "living room." It had a Malthusian force to it, because for most of human history, any improvements in technology, had led to people having more children, and reaching again the carrying capacity of their society.
However, that world has not come to pass, largely because of river. Our nile is the river of oil, and with it we grow the food to feed the world. And it is this river that is the root of the end that is coming.
Remember: Just because Life will go on, does not mean your life will. Saving the system will not save you. Just because Life will not go on, does not mean that lives will not go on. There will be people who live in the next era, many of them will be happy, and perhaps after all is said and millions are done, they will be happier than you are. But what shape that future has, is largely up to you, right now.
The Great Complacency, or Great Moderation, is the period of conservative counter-revolution to the liberal-left period. It is a neo- movement, in that it views the present as returning to some previous standard, but with completely altered means which avert problem with the previous regime. A Neo- anything is then an implicit post-, that is post- the intervening period. So a neo-liberal is, implicitly, post what came between his neo-liberalism, and original liberalism, a neo-classical is implicitly someone who is post- whatever un- or anti-classical periods intervened. So Neo- says two things, first it says post, second it says that whatever it is post is so evil, that it dare not even be named.
However this period brought about more “neo-” movements than virtually the rest of history combined. However, for the purposes of the arc of the time period, a few are more consequential than all the others: neo-classicism, neo-liberalism, and neo-conservatism, roughly in that order.
Neo-classicism is a modern movement in its foundations, it is a response to the disruptive nature of modernism, arising from communication speed, reduction in the costs of printing and publishing, reduction in the costs of motorized travel, the increased availability of chemicals – explosives, fertilizers, solvents, alloys such as steel, and so on – and the wide applicability of the motor, both electrical and internal combustion. The modern was explosive: what took thousands of people to do, with difficulty, was possible with far fewer. At the same time, the application of mechanization to transport and farming meant that there were many more people available for labor. The result was part of the collision of forces that made the period between the Boer War and the Korean War possible.
The West is constantly reinventing antiquity. This process has gone on virtually as long as there has been a West at all: the Greeks had revivals of Egyptian styles, the Romans returns to Greek models. By the time the nascent “Catholic” Church had settled itself in Roman, it was enacting what was hardly a new pattern. The late 19th century saw the reinvention of classical models as part of its sense of art and drama, in academicism of painting, and in the turbulent avant-garde of Wagnerian drama. Wagner expressly likened the invention of a religion of art as a means to combine the medieval sense of self, with the Greek sense of citizenship, and removing the serfdom and enslavement that was their economic basis. In between rants about the Jews taking over the world, of course.
The 20th century reinvention of the classical period is rooted, however, in a very specific recurring shift in the view of antiquity, and in the 20th century's case, it was the rerooting of the race paradigm. To explain: a race is a paradigm of the world: that truth comes from limited beginnings, proceeds by a rigorous group of known steps, towards final truth. 20th Century neo-classicism is part of the periodic revival of this idea, and its ascription to the classical past. The Greeks and Romans could, indeed, be spare and simple, but they could also be deeply ornate, occupt, cryptic. The creation of the 20th century of “old Anglo-Saxon words” is an example of open racism attached to race. There are no “short old Anglo-Saxon words” because their language, like most old members of the Teutonic family, is heavily inflected. There were short articles, but almost every other word was conjugated or declined. Eat may be rooted in old English, but they would have recoiled in horror at such a naked word. No, it was the Danes, and later the late Elizabethans who found it useful to shorten words. Many of the words they shortened were not of Teutonic or Germanic origin. Beef isn't. Some were later imports. Dog, for example, is Dutch. Hound, is the Germanicism, and it looks more foreign than “Dog.”
This sense of spareness was linked both with objective means of production: print was cheap, but moving it was not, people needed short, tight, manuals of everything. The distant past was reivented to provide a primitive simplicity, which was also the view of evolution: simple precusors become complex results, even when the evidence is the other way around: languages lose inflections over time.
Neo-classicism was, then, one of a number of modernisms, plural. It was arrayed against many others, and in particular the expansion of sensate ideas of modernism: for example, expressionism and impressionism, as well as Dada. Neo-classicism can be found from the beginnings of modernism, in, for example, Nietzsche's shift to aphorism, and in the 1904 “Elements of Style.” It is in Italian Futurism . Counter movements including the Bloomsbury group's novels, James Joyce, and others who sought a liberation from structural conceits and constraints, without removal of the high standards of the Victorian.
Neo-classicism is rife in the attempts to, between the wars, come to terms with the power of Modernism. The United State's has an official architectural style for Washington DC, and it is neo-classical. The Nazi style of architecture is unabashedly neo-classical, combined with elements of art deco and Germanicism. But no one can see <i>Triumph of the Will</i> and not be hit home with the nature of their aesthetic as being rooted in the same post-Victorian rejection of ornament, and embracing of mass as a virtue in itself to communicate solidity and inevitability.
Post war a diagnosis was come to as to the roots of the conflict.
- Victorian tribalism, Romantic emotionalism, and reactionary traditionalism had been used to motivate people to war. Therefore, these were the enemies of stability.
- Since the mass was essential to the functioning of the mobilization form of the state, and to pay for the capital investment of modernization, universalization of benefits and participation was a good.
- Since science, or perhaps Science, provided the key both to war making needed to defend, forced universalization needed to expand, and communication and transportation needed to defend, Science was to be the epistemological basis for society and art.
- Because of the need to have higher knowledge, a hermeneutics based on science, for the projection of universalization became the end form of government and structure. The few rule the many, for the good of all.
This is the deontology of the pyramid era: a few at the top who decide, supported by middle tiers that gather and process, to both shape and command a widening base of ordinary people who labor. The pyramid replaced the centered grid: a system of highly structured peers with localized power centers and traditions that had to be fit together in essentially Federalized systems.
The post-war consensus was shared across the political spectrum of democratic nations, from marxists such as the high modern Theodor Adorno, to arch-traditionalists. This is because the fundamental agreement was the need for structure to prevent the resurgence of seemingly self-organizing revolutionary systems based on individual appeal.