Style and the lie
I’ve been wondering about Costi’s excellent writing at the LL. My conclusion is that he follows the idea that being good, honest and true will create style almost automatically. I think this idea fits Costi and his nature well, and I think he is right, when it comes to him. But, there is another style, which values enchantment and magnetism. This style is not bounded by truth but the effect. The latter style is willing to edit truth, if the editing creates believing. Frankly, this latter style seems to be the most widespread style. Few try to tell who they are through style, consciously or unconsciously they rather try to make people believe in an image, which is not about who they are, but dreams.
The latter style could sound bad, but is it? Art is very much intelligent lying, or, as Marlon Brando said, “If you can lie, you can act”.
The latter style could sound bad, but is it? Art is very much intelligent lying, or, as Marlon Brando said, “If you can lie, you can act”.
Being either "good" "true" or "honest" is irrelevant to the discussion of Style which is a completely amoral phenomenon. And true only comes into play as a fundamental of Style if the meaning is that which communicates "real" as opposed to the false or put on.
However, if I understand your argument correctly a style endowed individual is actually a split-personality living the lives of two persona: who they truly are and who they aspire or dream to be. I think, once again, you have tapped into the very nerve of what we all recognize as “affectation” in people.
Now there are surely trained actors, confidence men, people suffering from multiple personality disorders, and serial killers who can create characters that are utterly believable. But the average man is quickly smelt out because affectation does smell poorly. He should quickly learn, if such a thing can be learned, to content himself with himself. That will solve the affectation pathology. But it will not lead him to Style until he begins to rejoice in himself and that normally begins by either believing in himself, the ponderous route, or by instinctively knowing that he is not to be believed or disbelieved but merely to be.
Cheers
PS: "Ted Bundy" Style, anyone?
However, if I understand your argument correctly a style endowed individual is actually a split-personality living the lives of two persona: who they truly are and who they aspire or dream to be. I think, once again, you have tapped into the very nerve of what we all recognize as “affectation” in people.
Now there are surely trained actors, confidence men, people suffering from multiple personality disorders, and serial killers who can create characters that are utterly believable. But the average man is quickly smelt out because affectation does smell poorly. He should quickly learn, if such a thing can be learned, to content himself with himself. That will solve the affectation pathology. But it will not lead him to Style until he begins to rejoice in himself and that normally begins by either believing in himself, the ponderous route, or by instinctively knowing that he is not to be believed or disbelieved but merely to be.
Cheers
PS: "Ted Bundy" Style, anyone?
I can only agree with that. However, we've had many remarks in this section connecting style with moral values.alden wrote:Being either "good" "true" or "honest" is irrelevant to the discussion of Style which is a completely amoral phenomenon.
Yes, partly, style is a creation, which include becoming a higher or refined version of yourself. However, most people will fail here. They stay the same person, now in a lot of expensive handmade clothing. You may call the latter result affectation.alden wrote: However, if I understand your argument correctly a style endowed individual is actually a split-personality living the lives of two persona: who they truly are and who they aspire or dream to be. I think, once again, you have tapped into the very nerve of what we all recognize as “affectation” in people.
Being yourself comes through creation, not sleeping in the hamaca (Well, in fact idleness can nourish creation). Style is "an ongoing becoming" ...alden wrote: Now there are surely trained actors, confidence men, people suffering from multiple personality disorders, and serial killers who can create characters that are utterly believable. But the average man is quickly smelt out because affectation does smell poorly. He should quickly learn, if such a thing can be learned, to content himself with himself. That will solve the affectation pathology. But it will not lead him to Style until he begins to rejoice in himself and that normally begins by either believing in himself, the ponderous route, or by instinctively knowing that he is not to be believed or disbelieved but merely to be.
I didn't know this guy, before I Googled him. I see no style.alden wrote: PS: "Ted Bundy" Style, anyone?
Are you for real, Gruto?Gruto wrote:alden wrote:I didn't know this guy, before I Googled him. I see no style.alden wrote: PS: "Ted Bundy" Style, anyone?
NJS
This reminds me of a friend of mine who supported himself through a post-graduate degree by working in a clerical job. One of his colleagues there later turned out to be a mass murderer and I recall my friend telling me that the most frightening thing about this fellow was that he had seemed ''so damned ordinary!''.Gruto wrote:Yes, but Charles Manson, I've heard about him!
NJS
The very few people who are born with human magnetism and presence, which is the subject of this forum, are not becoming, creating, lying, mythologizing or dreaming it. They have it. If you walked up to James Cagney and asked him if he was experiencing "an ongoing becoming" he would undoubtedly give you a swift kick in the groin and tell you to be fresh with someone else. And he would not be able to explain to you how it came to be that he possess the power. And most likely the thought never occurred to him.Being yourself comes through creation, not sleeping in the hamaca (Well, in fact idleness can nourish creation). Style is "an ongoing becoming" ...
And yes, people who are magnetic are not idle, they have dreams, they may like to create, and they may tell lies, but they do not have to try, dream, create, become or lie to make themselves felt by others. They just somehow do it. And that mysterious power is what we are trying to understand.
We normal mortals probably imagine that we can pretend, pose, become, create, lie our way to attraction. But the end result is invariably the contrary, repulsive Affectation that is the arch enemy of true Style.
Well Ted Bundy was, according to reports, an extremely charming and handsome man, well dressed, and awfully normal. But he had a few personalities going on inside his head. He even charmed the judge who when reading him the death sentence remarked "it was a great shame that Bundy had chosen the wrong road in life because he would have made a fine attorney." I suppose the judge could have been reading a severe verdict on his own profession as well.One of his colleagues there later turned out to be a mass murderer and I recall my friend telling me that the most frightening thing about this fellow was that he had seemed ''so damned ordinary!''.
I remember a biopic which presented him like that. He must have been quite mad.alden wrote:Well Ted Bundy was, according to reports, an extremely charming and handsome man, well dressed, and awfully normal. But he had a few personalities going on inside his head. He even charmed the judge who when reading him the death sentence remarked "it was a great shame that Bundy had chosen the wrong road in life because he would have made a fine attorney." I suppose the judge could have been reading a severe verdict on his own profession as well.One of his colleagues there later turned out to be a mass murderer and I recall my friend telling me that the most frightening thing about this fellow was that he had seemed ''so damned ordinary!''.
NJS
God is dead. Don't reinstall him in selected human beingsalden wrote:And yes, people who are magnetic are not idle, they have dreams, they may like to create, and they may tell lies, but they do not have to try, dream, create, become or lie to make themselves felt by others. They just somehow do it. And that mysterious power is what we are trying to understand.Being yourself comes through creation, not sleeping in the hamaca (Well, in fact idleness can nourish creation). Style is "an ongoing becoming" ...
"That mysterious power", I don't know, but it sounds very existentialistic like Schopenhauer's "the world as will and representation" or Nietzsche's "will to power". In that case, Style is more a product of self-creation, of "ongoing becoming" than a glimpse of godliness.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Gruto, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."That mysterious power", I don't know, but it sounds very existentialistic like Schopenhauer's "the world as will and representation" or Nietzsche's "will to power". In that case, Style is more a product of self-creation, of "ongoing becoming" than a glimpse of godliness.
I do not crush the crown of wonders of the World and do not
use the mind to waste the puzzles I encounter
in flowers, eyes, on lips or tombs.
The light of others
chokes off the impenetrable magic
In depths of darkness hidden,
but I,
I with my light enhance the magic of the World -
and as the Moon's white rays
belittle not, but shimmeringly add
to the enchantment of the night,
so I enrich the hazy ken
and all that is beyond my comprehension
turns in my eyes to greater lack of comprehension -
for I do love
both eyes and flowers, lips and tombs.
(Lucian Blaga)
use the mind to waste the puzzles I encounter
in flowers, eyes, on lips or tombs.
The light of others
chokes off the impenetrable magic
In depths of darkness hidden,
but I,
I with my light enhance the magic of the World -
and as the Moon's white rays
belittle not, but shimmeringly add
to the enchantment of the night,
so I enrich the hazy ken
and all that is beyond my comprehension
turns in my eyes to greater lack of comprehension -
for I do love
both eyes and flowers, lips and tombs.
(Lucian Blaga)
I asked our scientist friend when he was out here what he considered, in the known universe, to be the most wonderful scientific phenomenon. He immediately said that it was right here on earth in certain subatomic particles, which seem to exist in two places instantaneously; which means, apparently, that they have more than three dimensions. He also mentioned that the square root of -1 does not really exist but a symbol is used to denote it to make certain calculations work and they do work.
What bothers me most is that there is a proposition in this thread that 'art is about intelligent lying'. I would have thought that most artists, in most media, are aiming to discover, or to demonstrate, a truth; even if they do it in an unusual way. After all what are lies worth at any time? Being a liar and a cheat are about the worst social sins that there are.
NJS
What bothers me most is that there is a proposition in this thread that 'art is about intelligent lying'. I would have thought that most artists, in most media, are aiming to discover, or to demonstrate, a truth; even if they do it in an unusual way. After all what are lies worth at any time? Being a liar and a cheat are about the worst social sins that there are.
NJS
"We are not at all free with regard to the work of art, we do not create at as we please, instead - since it pre-exists inside us, we must, since it is necessary and at the same time veiled, discover it as we would do with a law of nature"
(Marcel Proust)
(Marcel Proust)
The laws of physics are demonstrations of the ultimate material truth, as we know it and are, probably, the most elegant things that we have.Costi wrote: "We are not at all free with regard to the work of art, we do not create at as we please, instead - since it pre-exists inside us, we must, since it is necessary and at the same time veiled, discover it as we would do with a law of nature"
(Marcel Proust)
NJS
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests