1.    Sexuality in the post-atomic world would be - as to some extent it already is in the transitional world ... of bourgeois/proletarian civilization - free from emotional ties and consequently elevated above atomic constraints.  No-one would think of affirming 'What God has joined together let no man pull asunder', for the simple reason that God, in that Creator-oriented alpha-bound sense, would have been transcended - the city having supplanted nature and considerably weakened, through its artificial constitution, man's ability or inclination to form long-lasting emotional ties.  Marriage would become a thing of the past - as, to a limited extent, it already is, in practice if not always in theory!


2.    Post-dualistic sexuality is both sublimated and positively unisexual, positively unisexual even when women are involved ... to the extent that, if liberated, they effectively function as Supermen, or quasi-electron equivalents, rather than strictly as women, or proton equivalents.  By contrast, pre-atomic sexuality was largely concrete and negatively unisexual, to the extent that men effectively functioned as pseudo-proton equivalents - unable to equal women in sensual capacity or pleasure.  With atomic sexuality, however, men entered into a more equal social relationship with women, functioning as bound-electron equivalents, the family becoming more patriarchal than matriarchal.  By 'equal' I don't of course mean that they acquired a greater capacity for sensual pleasure ... so much as a distinct character as men, not yet superior to women but in no way inferior to them either.


3.    The main sartorial distinction in atomic sexual relationships is between skirt and trousers - the relationships in question being dualistic and therefore properly heterosexual.  No such sartorial distinction existed, however, in pre-atomic sexual relationships.  For both men and women wore dresses or gowns, as befitting the predominantly negative character of pre-atomic times, the length of this feminine attire often varying according to one's status ... as either a genuine woman or an effective woman, so that, as a rule, the former wore longer dresses, tunics, or whatever than the latter.  For feminine attire symbolizes the vagina, a dress or skirt forming a kind of tunnel, its length symbolizing the depth of the wearer's vagina.  Men, lacking a vagina, were obviously at a sexual disadvantage to women in pre-atomic times.  However, with the advent of a post-atomic age, the situation is reversed, so that trousers become the standard clothing for both men and women alike, the latter now functioning as quasi-Supermen and being at a sexual disadvantage to the former to the extent that their trousers, jeans, etc., could not intimate of or symbolize the length of the wearer's penis so convincingly or credibly as with a (genuine) man, or Superman.  For trousers do, after all, refer back to the penis through their emphasis, in clinging to the outlines of a man's legs, on the phallic rather than, as with a skirt, the vaginal - a distinction, one might argue, between the cylindrical (considered as a solid) and the tubular.


4.    Because women are effectively regarded as quasi-Supermen in a post-atomic age, it is fitting for them to adopt masculine attire and thus conform to the positively unisexual nature of that age.  Bourgeois women, on the other hand, tend, in their open-society contexts, to wear skirts or dress rather than trousers, and usually the more bourgeois or aristocratic the woman, the longer the skirt or dress she wears.  This is because such women are not ashamed to emphasize their basic femininity in conformity with heterosexual criteria.  Neither, up to a point, are petty-bourgeois women, who tend to reflect a transitional development between skirts and trousers, and may as often be seen in the latter as in the former.  With modern proletarian women, however, trousers, whether as cotton slacks, jeans, tights, or whatever, tend to predominate over skirts, thereby presaging an age when skirts will be entirely superseded by trousers or, at any rate, trouser-like attire ... as post-atomic criteria become more comprehensively established - a thing which is unlikely to happen much before the advent of a transcendental civilization.  Even within the confines of contemporary bourgeois civilization, proletarian women display a marked preference for jeans over skirts, though when skirts are worn they are more likely to be short than long.


5.    Unlike a long skirt, a short skirt, or mini, symbolizes vaginal shallowness, the tunnel it forms around the legs being relatively modest.  A mini thus reduces feminine sexuality, contracts it as a preparatory step towards transcending it through the masculine attire of trousers, which, by contrast, affirm a phallic bias.  As a rule, bourgeois women do not wear miniskirts, because they have no desire to contract their sexuality in conformity with quasi-unisexual criteria.  The mini is really more of a petty-bourgeois than either a bourgeois or a proletarian mode of attire; for while it plays down feminine sexuality - and this contrary to superficial appearances and notions to the contrary! - it yet retains a heterosexual dimension.  The proletarian quasi-Superman of tomorrow would, one imagines, consistently adopt masculine attire, unlike her contemporary counterpart who, in the West, exists within the confines of bourgeois/proletarian civilization, and is to some extent exposed to the socio-sexual influences of the ruling, i.e. bourgeois, class.


6.    As to the sublimated aspect of post-atomic sexuality, there is plentiful evidence of that in contemporary Western civilization where, whether in books, magazines, videos, or films, pornography continues to flourish as an alternative to, and possible substitute for, concrete sexuality.  A bourgeois will regard pornography as a mode of perversion because he tends to look upon it from a naturalistic standpoint, which, erroneously, he considers to be the only legitimate standpoint.  Unbeknown to himself, however, progress must be made, and in sexual matters no less than all others!  Considered from an evolutionary standpoint, pornography - and I use the term in the broadest possible erotic sense - may be seen as a means of 'spiritualizing' sex, of breaking down man's dependence on the concrete and leading him further into abstract modes of sexual indulgence.  Sex 'in the head' is a higher evolutionary development than bodily sex, and it will undoubtedly be recognized as such in the post-atomic civilization, when life becomes increasingly transcendental ... as man draws nearer to his self-overcoming in the post-human life forms of the ensuing Millennium.  No doubt, a certain amount of concrete sex, both literally and symbolically unisexual, will continue to prevail in that more evolved age.  But it would be illogical if pornography were to be looked upon as a mode of perversion.


7.    Just as, in pre-atomic unisexual times, men tended to dress in a feminine fashion and to wear their hair long, so, in the post-atomic unisexual age of the future, women will dress in a masculine fashion and wear their hair short - as, indeed, many of them do at present.  When humans are close to nature at a lower stage of evolutionary development, they allow what grows naturally, as hair, nails, beard, etc., to grow long.  When, however, they approximate more to the supernatural at a higher stage of evolution, they cut back what grows naturally and thus wear their hair short, keep their nails trimmed, and regularly shave.  It would not become them to cultivate the natural when they are struggling towards the supernatural in increasingly artificial contexts.  A bourgeois society, arising between pagan and transcendental extremes, will of course allow women to grow their hair long, and many women do in fact wear long hair in the open societies of the contemporary West.  But no such concession to nature could be encouraged in a transcendental society, where, by contrast, all women would be encouraged to wear their hair short, clip their nails, etc., in conformity with post-atomic criteria.  Likewise, men would be encouraged to shave off all facial hair.


8.    Many people in an open society, particularly when bourgeois, would be inclined to regard what I have suggested above as an encroachment upon human liberty - in short, as an attack upon freedom.  They tend to equate freedom too closely with individual interests and preferences rather than to see it in terms of spiritual progress towards the ultimate freedom (from protons and neutrons) of transcendent spirit in a supra-atomic Beyond.  Thus what is in fact a reflection of enslavement, in varying degrees, to nature and the diabolic roots of life in the stars, particularly the sun, is misinterpreted by them as freedom!  And some of them might even argue in favour of the 'freedom' to remain enslaved to such alpha phenomena!  But evolutionary progress cannot tolerate mistaken notions of freedom or sensualist/naturalist reaction for ever!  Sooner or later, such people will have to learn to respect a higher and more objective concept of freedom, such as tallies with supernatural strivings.


9.    And this higher concept of freedom will indicate, quite plainly, that love, in the old emotional sense, is just one more aspect of enslavement to nature, an aspect which must be guarded against and avoided as much as possible.  We see, in the present century, that such love is losing ground among people, particularly the proletariat, who are freer than earlier generations from emotional enslavement and more able, in consequence, to regularly exchange partners and experiment with various types of post-atomic sexuality.  The days of the married couple are numbered, like the distinction between skirts and trousers, which appertains to a heterosexual phase of human evolution.  Supermen may well live with quasi-Supermen in the future, but as free-electron equivalents vis-à-vis quasi-electron equivalents in a unisexual context of post-atomic freedom.  One cannot marry a quasi-Superman, but only a woman, and, like men, women are destined to become a thing of the past, relative to a bourgeois phase of evolutionary development.  This is already more than half the case now in the contemporary West.  It will become wholly the case in the transcendental future!





1.    Most people do not distinguish between themselves and their selves.  They live predominantly in the phenomenal self of the individual, the body, and consequently fail to perceive that there are in fact two selves, of diametrically antithetical constitution.  Their 'I' is always personal, pertaining to the body and its psychic master and ally, the soul.  They do not refer to the spirit when using the first person and, consequently, they are unaware that the word 'I' can be used in different contexts, and that two minds can make use of the same term to define different objectives.  Take these two statements: "I am going to eat" and "I am going to meditate".  Are not two distinct minds being referred to here - the first 'I' of the soul (subconscious) in relation to the body, and the second 'I' of the spirit (superconscious) in relation to itself?  For how can the spirit wish to eat or the soul to meditate?  Clearly, a distinction exists between sensual and spiritual commitments, and no one 'I' could possibly wish to concern itself with both!


2.    Being conscious of the distinction between the 'I's' is a mark of psychic development, which will not occur to a person who doesn't live predominantly in his superconscious, or spirit.  A man who regularly lives in his higher self will occasionally find himself referring to the body or body's desires in the second person, distinguishing between his self and 'the other', as when he thinks: "You want to eat".  It is as though the thought expressed in this context came from the superconscious rather than the subconscious, from an 'I' biased in favour of the self.  In actual fact, thought comes from the subconscious being activated, through the ego, by the superconscious.  Thought is spirit informing soul, like someone striking sparks from an anvil.  The more spirit (up to a point) a man has, the higher the quality and the greater the quantity of thoughts he will extract from the subconscious.


3.    But spirit can also turn away from soul, as when a man chooses to meditate and avoid using his spirit to extract troublesome thoughts from the psyche's verbal storehouse in the subconscious.  Spirit existing for its own sake rather than as the slave of soul - such is the principle of meditation ... as spirit strives to become more fully conscious of itself and to escape from atomic friction in pursuit of post-atomic (electron) freedom.  Also to escape from emotions and dreams which, unlike thoughts, exist independently of the spirit, since specifically appertaining to the subconscious.  For emotions, particularly when strong and negative, can trouble spirit, causing it to turn back towards the soul and evoke verbal comment in response to the emotional stimulus.  The thought follows the emotion, and spirit is once again enslaved to soul!


4.    The superconscious stands to the subconscious as the heart to the sex organs, that is to say, as a superior tribunal obliged to pass judgement on the stimuli from beneath.  Although not itself an organ of thought, the superconscious will elicit thoughts from the subconscious appropriate (as a rule) to the emotions it has succumbed to, these in turn being dependent, to a significant extent, on the organs of sense.  We feel disgruntled or disgusted by a certain spectacle and that feeling obliges the superconscious to turn towards the subconscious and evoke thoughts appropriate to the situation.  Feelings-proper are mental, unlike emotions, which pertain to the heart and, being bodily, are much stronger and, as a corollary of this, longer-lasting.  Happiness and sadness are respectively feelings which come and go with the occasion, but love and hate are emotions (at times so powerful as to become passions) which are not transient but lasting, if on a temporary rather than a permanent basis.  And this is because they pertain to the body (heart), which is more deeply sensual than the psyche (subconscious/superconscious) and disposed, in consequence, to stronger feelings.  Sensations, on the other hand, are purely external, as affecting the skin, and, when positive, are the shallowest of all feelings.  Emotions, being internal, are the deepest, and may be evoked in response to either sensual or sexual stimuli, though especially the latter - as when the sensation of pleasure leads to love.


5.    But negative sensations like pain far outweigh their positive counterparts and can cause much deeper suffering than, say, the negative emotion of hate.  Schopenhauer was certainly correct to maintain that pain is a far stronger sensation than pleasure.  This is because pain runs with the grain, as it were, of the flesh, and thus activates its proton-dominated constitution, from the relatively moderate degree of transient negative sensation to the absolutely extreme degree of destructive negative sensation, as when the flesh is assaulted by flame and burns in response to the proton-proton reactions impinging upon it.  Anything biased towards protons will respond to flame in a subatomic way and so become flame itself - the flesh being no exception.  Such terrible pain as people who suffer burns have experienced is the maximum of negative sensation the flesh can experience - a diabolically destructive sensation far outweighing the maximum of positive sensation obtainable, as pleasure, through sex.


6.    The reason wood burns so well is that it is even more dominated by protons than the flesh, and is therefore more susceptible to a subatomic response to proton-proton reactions impinging upon it from without.  Coal, as wood that has decayed into mineral formation, is even more susceptible to a subatomic response to proton-proton aggression than wood, since its physical constitution is still more radically dominated by protons.  Thus the proton-biased atomic integrity of coal can easily be broken down by proton-proton aggression and transformed into the subatomic absolute of flame, or pure soul, which corresponds to the Diabolic Alpha.  By comparison to this pure soul, the human soul (of the subconscious) is impure, that is to say, dependent upon matter and functioning within the physiological context of the old brain.  The spirit (of the superconscious) is likewise impure, because dependent upon the new brain for physiological support and therefore subject to a degree of proton constraint.  What flame is to proton-dominated matter, hypermeditation will be to the electron-biased matter of the new brain, the principle, in other words, undermining atomic integrities and aspiring, either manifestly or potentially, towards the absolute - in this case, towards the supra-atomic absolute ... of electron-electron attractions in the future heavenly Beyond.


7.    Thus while the psychic aspect of the old brain (a proton-dominated realm of the entire brain) is impure soul, as manifested in feelings, the psychic aspect of the new brain (an electron-biased realm of the entire brain) is impure spirit, as manifesting in awareness.  Likewise, while the 'psychic' aspect of the heart (a more deeply proton-dominated realm of the body) is impure soul, as manifested in emotions, the 'psychic' aspect of the flesh, particularly the sex organs, is impure soul, as manifesting in sensations, which are evoked directly from the flesh.  Soul extends, in varying degrees, from the sex organs to the old brain, and so extends on both a positive and a negative basis, though never more strongly than when negative.  Spirit, by contrast, is mostly confined to the new brain, from the lower psychic regions of which it may analytically impinge upon the old brain and evoke thoughts from the subconscious.  It may do this as the slave of feelings or, as in philosophy, independently of them and primarily in the interests of truth.  This latter policy will be transitional between spirit being used in the service of soul and spirit becoming completely independent of soul in an orientation which favours the Divine Omega, or the future attainment of impure spirit to the absolute purity of electron-electron attractions.


8.    Man, as we all know, is a talker, which is to say, a creature who often conveys thoughts through the flesh (tongue) for the benefit of communication with his fellow man.  Spoken word is thought made audible, thought manifested in the voice.  Before the evolution of language, however, man's prehistoric ancestors were dependent on the flesh for communication.  The caveman relied, for the most part, on facial or bodily gestures to transmit information of a largely practical nature from group to group.  This sign language, or language of the body, preceded the human compromise between signs and thoughts which we recognize as speech and which, even these days, isn't entirely free, with many human beings, from the accompaniment of what, in the guise of gestural confirmation or explanation, might be termed sublimated sign language.  The man who gestures as he speaks betrays, if unconsciously and rather tenuously, an ancestral connection with the pure sign language of the caveman.  However, while speech marks an evolutionary progression over purely apparent sign language, it is by no means the highest mode of communication between sentient beings, but merely a mode coming in-between two extremes, viz. the pre-human and the post-human, appertaining to man alone.  With the probable future termination of the human stage of evolution in the millennial Beyond, when human brains become artificially supported and sustained in communal contexts, we can anticipate that telepathic communication will prevail between the ensuing Supermen, and thereby signify the climax of communication in maximum essence, completely independent of the flesh (tongue) and thus elevated beyond the apparent.  Probably a minority of human beings will be capable of telepathy even before the post-Human Millennium - as, to a limited extent, are an extremely small number already.


9.    The long-standing controversy concerning the mind/body dichotomy can at last be set aside, and on these terms: that there is indeed a dichotomy between mind and body when the former pertains solely to the superconscious (spirit), as the upper part of the conscious mind situated in the new brain, but that such a dichotomy doesn't exist, at least not in opposition, between the subconscious (soul), as the lower part of the conscious mind situated in the old brain, and the body generally, including lower manifestations of soul in emotions and sensations, as pertaining to the 'psychic' aspects of the heart and the sex organs respectively.  There is therefore a dichotomy in the one context but not in the other!  The spirit is not of the body (though it has been traditionally enslaved by and subordinated to the body), so confirms a mind/body dichotomy.  By contrast, the soul is of the body and exists, in varying degrees, with the body in a mind-body reciprocity of interconnected feelings and sensations, from the weak to the very strong and even, in unfortunate instances, to the absolute level of maximum pain, as evoked by fire.


10.   We have returned, it would seem, to the distinction alluded to, several aphorisms ago, concerning the two minds or selves, viz. the lesser or bodily self, and the greater or spiritual self.  In the one case, we use the term 'myself', in the other ... 'my self'.  The first can refer either to the body or the soul, in whichever manifestations, and embraces the subconscious as the repository of thought.  The spiritual self does not think, however, so that even this recorded thought isn't of the higher self but of the subconscious being activated by a part of it, according to the strictest analytical principles of philosophical endeavour.  Were I to become indisposed to philosophical activity in the interests, amongst other things, of evolutionary progress, my true self could be more profitably employed on its own account and in relative freedom from the subconscious and, for that matter, soulful life generally.  I have known such freedom but, quite frankly, I don't wish to indulge it at the expense of everything else.  Literal transcendence is, in any case, too far into the future for me to have any radical ambitions concerning my spiritual life!  Of course, the successful practice of meditation is its own reward; but I am not one to 'go over' to the Eastern camp entirely at the expense of the West.  Rather, I endorse a synthesis between East and West (as between mysticism and technology) which, stemming wholly from neither, transcends both and thus brings the world closer to ultimate unity.  I will continue to respect 'myself' as well as 'my self'.  But 'myself' in the interests of 'my self'.





1.    It is easy to confound anti-tribalism with racism and to treat them as synonymous - indeed, not to perceive a distinction between the two because one has no idea of what anti-tribalism implies.  But one can be anti-tribal, e.g. anti-Semitic, without being racist, which is to discriminate against others on the basis of racial origin irrespective of to what evolutionary integrity the person discriminated against may profess.  A transcendental ideologue in, say, Nazi Germany may have been logically justified in discriminating against people who clung to tribal identification, e.g. Jews and Gypsies, because such pre-atomic identifications are arguably incompatible with a post-atomic integrity.  But he wouldn't have been logically justified in discriminating against, say, blacks who regarded themselves less in tribal than in national terms - as citizens of a particular country.  He might have been justified in expelling all alien nationals from his ideologically radical state, but he couldn't have sanctioned their imprisonment or liquidation on grounds that they were black, since such a policy would be racist, and racism is strictly incompatible with ideological transcendentalism!


2.    Racism pertains to atomic states that have a minority of colonists in positions of power over an indigenous majority whom they are anxious to discriminate against in their own political, social, and economic interests.  Its most blatant manifestation takes the form of apartheid.  But racism doesn't have to involve colour differences.  People of, say, Irish nationality may be discriminated against by British imperialists, as happened in Southern Ireland during the greater part of British rule there, and thus suffer the humiliating consequences of racism.  A limited degree of racism may also accrue to the converse situation of minority rule, as when an imperialist country opens its doors to immigrants from the colonies, or former colonies, and rules over them from a majority standpoint.  Such immigrants may technically live in an anti-racist or equalitarian society, but, in practice, some degree of racism is almost certain to prevail, since an atomic society cannot treat everyone as equals, having ruling-class interests to protect.  When a predatory people can no longer profit from racism in the colonies ... they will tighten their belts, so to speak, and resign themselves to drawing what profits they can from it in their own country, compliments of the immigrants.


3.    My own position as an advocate of Transcendentalism leads me to deny racism but to affirm, at least in theory, anti-tribalism, whether applying to Jews, Gypsies, Celts, or anything else.  Thus I would regard myself as a theoretical anti-tribalist, since it would be illogical to uphold ideological transcendentalism and remain complacent about tribalists at the same time!  Of course, this theoretical anti-tribalism has no bearing, through anti-Semitism, on my attitude to Israel, which is unequivocally affirmative.  An Israeli is not tribal but national, and to my mind a Jew becomes an Israeli the moment he sets foot in Israel.  The more Jews Israel can absorb, the fewer tribalists there will be in the Diaspora and the less excuse for anti-Semitism from ideological idealists.  Such anti-Semitism could not, however, apply to European or to American nationals of Jewish descent, i.e. to 'Jews' who had converted to Christianity, but only to those who continued, on religious grounds, to regard themselves first and foremost as Jews (Judaic), yet had no intention of returning to Israel, either because they were too deeply into capitalism (a moral failing) or too stupid to recognize the moral obligation upon Jews to do so, or for some other associated reason.


4.    The smartest Jews, it seems to me, were the early Zionists, who must have sensed, with the approaching termination of the Christian civilization, that the moral climate in Europe was no longer congenial to Jews, and that a new age was dawning in which transcendental values would prevail, an age in which the Jews would find salvation in Palestine if they were smart or brave enough to return there, but possible damnation in Europe if they were stupid or timid enough to remain in the Diaspora.  Those early Zionists were as intelligent, in my opinion, as the early anti-Semites - people like Wagner and Leuger who were also reading the changing times, if from a contrary point of view.  Evolution was tending away from tolerance of the mundane tribal root, inherent to atomic civilization, towards a transcendentalism in which only ideological values would apply.  Needless to say, some European countries were more qualified to divine this change than others, being better suited, by historical circumstances, to further and act upon it.  Germany was one such country, and it was from there that a fully-fledged anti-Semitism eventually arose, following the rise to power of the Nazis - upholders of an ideological radicalism in opposition to traditional atomic values.


5.    Approximately six million Jews perished in the Nazi holocaust, some of them illogically, because long-standing convertees to Christianity, but most of them effectively as tribalists who hadn't had the good fortune or sense or courage or whatever to immigrate to Palestine and work for a national identity.  Undoubtedly their sacrifice precipitated the transformation, in 1947, of Palestine into the State of Israel, though the British, who held a mandate on the territory, must bear some responsibility for obstructing the entry of Jews into Palestine (ostensibly in consideration of Arab feelings) during the Nazi era, and thus for indirectly contributing to the Final Solution as adopted by the Nazis as a last resort, other solutions having failed or been proven inadequate for the vast numbers involved.  Nevertheless, had it not been for the holocaust, Jews might even now be deprived of a literal homeland and be dependent on Arab, i.e. Palestinian, hospitality for their future salvation!  Indeed, as Jews in Palestine, they would be deprived of a national identification anyway, the very thing they require in order to escape the curse of the Diaspora, with its anachronistic tribal allegiance.  The creation of the State of Israel made a national identification possible, and thereby established the basis for subsequent religious salvation ... in Transcendentalism.


6.    Clearly, the destruction of the State of Israel for the sake of a return to the Arab status quo would be deeply illogical, because contrary to the historical justification for such a state, which is to enable Jews to escape their traditional tribal identification in and through Israeli nationality.  Having earned the right to an Israeli State through the six million sacrifices the Jews were obliged to make on the altar of Nazi persecution, it would be monstrously unjust for such a state ever to be taken away from them in the future, particularly in a world which may require that a sanctuary be found for Jews in Israel, assuming that Israel was willing to take-in such late-comers and had enough room, territorially speaking, to house them all - something which is not guaranteed at present!  Certainly the State of Israel is very small, considering the number of Jews in the world, and it won't get any larger if obliged to make swingeing compromises with the Arabs to the detriment of its national security!  Whatever the fate of diaspora Jews in the future, I can't help thinking that the really good Jews, the cream of their people, were the ones who migrated to Palestine in the early days of Zionism and bore the brunt of Arab opposition to their Zionist ideals.  They and their offspring have made what is now Israel a state worthy of lasting respect!


7.    It isn't surprising that, of all European nations, it is from Russia that most of the Jews emigrating to Israel come these days [early 1980s], and not simply because there are more Jews there than anywhere else but, more significantly, because, under Soviet Communism, Russia has tended to make life harder for tribalists than would a Western atomic state, in spite of the fact that the ideology it professed to - and in some degree still upholds - is materialistic rather than pseudo-spiritual, and therefore more disposed it to an indirect opposition to Jews than to a directly anti-Semitic opposition - in other words, one availing itself, contrary to Nazism, of some Marxist pretext for finding fault with certain categories of Jew, Zionists and religious fundamentalists not excepted!  Yet this served to cloak a basic antagonism towards Jews in general that bordered on anti-Semitism but which, for ideological reasons, could never be proclaimed as such.  Paradoxically, however, the Soviet Union was inclined, despite its ideological opposition towards nationalism, to uphold the right of Jews to a homeland, and therefore it tended to allow Jews to migrate to Israel if they really wanted.  Naturally, it didn't encourage Jews to emigrate, since too many people leaving for some other country would have reflected poorly upon the Soviet system, and, besides, not all Jews who left Russia went to Israel.  Some went to America or to Western Europe which, from the Soviet standpoint, was worse again, like losing people to the enemy camp.  But although emigration controls were usually pretty tight, many Jews now in Israel came from the Soviet Union, and doubtless this owes something, though not everything, to the fact that life in an ideologically transcendental state is far from being a bed of roses for tribalists.





1.    Strictly speaking, religion is concerned with absolutes, whether diabolic or divine.  There is a relative phase of religious development, as in Christianity, but the anthropomorphic god, viz. Christ, is endowed with divine attributes, becomes transcendent in His alleged conquest of death.  Christians don't simply worship a man but a man who became divine through His Ascension into Heaven, that is to say, through attainment of the supra-atomic plane in pure spirit.  This is perhaps a Protestant bias on Christ, whereas a Catholic bias will often lay greater emphasis, by contrast, on His stemming from the Father and, hence, link with the Mother.  Either way, whether the stress be on alpha or omega, the relative is endowed with absolute significance.  But, for all that, the Christian stage of religious evolution essentially corresponds to the relative, and we may take it that both aspects of Christ's theological integrity have been equally stressed whenever an evolutionary balance has obtained between the Father and the Holy Spirit, but that this has not precluded a simultaneous worship of the Father.


2.    In religious affairs, we may distinguish between worship of the Father and/or Christ and self-realization, as to some extent taught by Christ but necessitating, at some point in evolutionary time, a denial of the Father and wholly transcendental orientation rooted in the impersonal cultivation of spirit for beatific ends, whether or not such ends are formally acknowledged.  Thus in an extreme stage of human evolution, worship and self-realization become mutually exclusive.  The breaking of the link with the Father presupposes a simultaneous denial, in a manner of speaking, of the Son, since He is rooted in the alpha and thereby entitled to worship.  However, that is precisely what a transcendental stage of religious evolution can have no truck with.... I concede, though, that worship can imply more than service.  Christ has been worshipped for his divine attributes, as, from a Christian standpoint, the first 'man' to attain to transcendence.  Thus the positive attitude to worship presupposes homage, or admiration for a quality or achievement beyond one's own powers.  And yet even this style of worship would be irrelevant to a society which had made self-realization the foundation of its religious integrity, since worship (as implying prayer, adulation, or devotion to an image, a book, hymn, etc.) can impede self-realization to the extent that awareness is directed at something - namely, the object of worship - outside itself, and so functions as will, which is precisely what must be overcome if self-awareness is to be cultivated to any significant spiritual extent.


3.    If religion is primarily concerned with absolutes, either in terms of worship of the alpha or, in its highest manifestation, an aspiration towards the omega, we cannot discount the fact that it is possible to worship, in a quasi-religious context, manifestations of life which stem from the subatomic absolute in varying degrees of materialism.  Thus it is possible to worship - as at various times men have in fact done - nature, animals, women, and (last but not least), men or, at any rate, certain categories of men, including avatars.  Now my fundamental contention here is that the lower the stage of human evolution the more likely it is that men will worship the subatomic in one form or another, whereas as human evolution attains to higher stages of advancement, so the focal-points of worship correspondingly change, in consequence of which first nature, then animals, then women, etc., become the principal focal-points of human worship.  Of course, they don't have to change in a strictly logical order or within the compass of any given civilization.  There are civilizations that specialize in one or other of these focal-points of quasi-worship - the ancient Egyptian in animals, the ancient Greek in nature, the Roman Catholic civilization of medieval Europe in women (the Blessed Virgin), with the possibility of a shift from one level to another or, indeed, the simultaneous combination, in varying degrees, of more than one of these natural objects of worship, as in the case of the ancient Roman, with its compromise between nature, animals, and women.


4.    I do not wish to over-simplify, but there are many people alive today, within the confines of the bourgeois/proletarian West, who are essentially worshippers of nature, animals, and women, though their mode of worship may be less sacramental and correspondingly more unconscious than were the parallel modes of the ancients, with their pagan bias.  Of the three focal-points listed above, I would argue that the third is the most popular, because the least natural, and I am prepared to see in coitus a sacrificial confirmation of a quasi-religious attitude towards women.  After all, a man doesn't make love to a woman unless he finds something to admire in her!  More usually this something is physical.  Admittedly, it is possible for a woman to worship a man, but more often than not a woman, as a creature capable of self-consciousness, will worship herself - the attention she lavishes on make-up, clothing, and hair being the visible embodiments of this self-worship.


5.    Of all modes of natural worship, the highest is for man, who is the least natural of nature's phenomena.  The motivations for worship may vary considerably with the individual concerned, but most worship of men will have transcendent motivations, as when someone is admired because he is clever or can box well or has just scaled a high mountain, etc.  Institutionalized worship of a religious figure, like Christ, signifies the apotheosis of male hero-worship, beyond which it is impossible to go.  Of all the Christian faiths, it is Protestantism that best illustrates institutionalized worship of man as God ... in the person of Christ.  Roman Catholicism is more given, as already noted, to upholding worship of the Virgin, a fact which accords with its semi-pagan, grand-bourgeois, alpha-stemming integrity in sensation.  Probably Eastern Orthodoxy is more biased, in its relative fundamentalism, towards the Father.


6.    Thus in this ultimate form of natural worship it is homage rather than service that constitutes the basis, indeed the essence, of worship.  It is of course possible to pay homage to beauty, and hence to women.  Yet the actual worship of women usually takes the form of service, as manifesting in propagation and the material support, by a husband, for his wife and offspring.  Similarly, animals are more usually served than paid homage to.  But man, except when service of a tyrant is at stake, is more usually the focal-point of homage worship, and primarily on account of what he signifies, what he has achieved or is capable of achieving.  Higher still than the homage paid to a particular man for his achievements ... is the homage paid to the achievements themselves, whatever their nature, and here worship becomes artificial.


7.    The highest mode of artificial worship is the homage paid to great art, and this whether the art in question be pictorial, literary, musical, or sculptural, though a sort of hierarchical distinction will obtain between each mode of fine art in a descending order, so I contend, from painting to sculpture via music and literature.  Also significant in our assessment of artistic hierarchies will be the historical or epochal integrity of any given mode of art, so that worship, say, of twentieth-century abstract painting will rank higher than the corresponding worship of nineteenth-century romantic or eighteenth-century classical or seventeenth-century baroque art.  Nevertheless, when all's said and done, one cannot go beyond the worship of fine art on worshipful terms; for homage paid to the creative achievements of man is the ultimate homage, the raison d'être of our commitment to and interest in art.  Art doesn't fulfil itself for us until we desire to pay it homage, having come to perceive its creative or symbolic value.  I don't regularly listen to music I dislike, either because I cannot understand it or because I consider it of inferior quality.  I have to like the music and, in regularly listening to it, I pay homage to its excellence, since it represents an achievement worthy of admiration.


8.    Thus regularly listening to certain kinds of music or contemplating certain paintings or reading certain books or stroking certain sculptures ... constitutes a quasi-religion, the essence of which is worship of a remarkable artificial achievement.  Such worship, manifesting in homage, corresponds to the ultimate form of worship and constitutes the final stage of worship-centred religious development, a stage superior to each of the preceding naturalistic stages ... from absolute service-worship of the Father (or some theocratic equivalent thereof) to relative homage-worship of a particular man or group of men for his/their sporting, creative, educational, or other achievements.  I would say that, in the case of worship of a particular football team, the homage paid in this relative context is divisible between the individuals and their achievements, in consequence of which a degree of service of the individuals, manifesting in the turnstile fee, enters into one's worship.  By contrast, the ultimate stage of worship, as applying to fine art, implies the attainment to a kind of homage absolutism which embraces only the achievement, without simultaneous or accompanying reference to its creator.  We are at leisure, in an admission-free public gallery, to contemplate many fine paintings without having to pay anything to their creators (or trustees) or, indeed, even think about them.  So we can take it as a general rule that the purer the worship of fine art, the less the artist, as an individual, will enter into account.  Worship thereupon becomes predominantly absolute, albeit on grounds diametrically antithetical to its earliest manifestation in service of the Father.


9.    Needless to say, not everyone is given to this highest mode or worship, a mode which appeals, as a rule, only to a small percentage of humanity, and to them in varying degrees.  The majority of people are given to the service/homage relativity of worship of a football team or pop stars or film stars or sportsmen generally.  The worship of women cannot be excluded from a reckoning of majority habits, though women are gradually losing ground to the above-listed focal-points of popular worship.  Beneath them, however, comes the worship, mainly from a service angle, of animals and nature, which nowadays appeals only to a minority of people, albeit a minority at the opposite remove from the admirers of fine art - a grand-bourgeois as opposed to a petty-bourgeois minority who, from the evolutionary standpoint, constitute a backward and generally primitive class of people.  Yet not so backward or primitive, for all that, as the even smaller minority who could be described as genuine Father-worshippers, like Christian fundamentalists.


10.   Considered from a class-evolutionary standpoint, the evolution of worship from absolute to extreme relative stages may be said to extend from aristocratic absolutism in Father-worship through various relativistic bourgeois stages, beginning with an earlier and a later grand-bourgeois phase (the earlier implying nature-worship and the later animal-worship), progressing to a bourgeois stage-proper (as implying the worship of women), and culminating in a petty-bourgeois stage also divisible into an earlier and a later phase (as implying some kind of hero-worship in the earlier phase and, by contrast, an almost absolute worship of fine art in the later phase).  The present century being, despite its bourgeois/proletarian status, a largely petty-bourgeois age, it is hardly surprising that worship has entered into extreme relativities of human achievement, the earlier relativity biased towards the achievements of various people without, however, allowing the individuals concerned to be eclipsed by them, the later relativity more radically biased towards the achievements of various, in the main, artists, who are largely, though not exclusively, eclipsed by their works.  It is here, with the later petty-bourgeois relativity, that civilized worship ends.  However, with the future development of proletarian civilization, only self-realization will be upheld, as a return is made, though on completely antithetical terms, to a religious absolutism - the absolutism, one might say, of a direct aspiration towards omega divinity.





1.    There are only two genres which are absolute, and these are the aphorism and the lyric poem, as pertaining to philosophy-proper and to poetry-proper respectively.  The more absolute the philosopher, the more he will adhere to aphorisms or maxims, as in the cases of La Rochefoucauld and La Bruyère.  This is par excellence an idealistic, not to say an aristocratic, mode of philosophy, and thus its employment in a materialist age will be the exception to the rule, increasingly so as relative civilization becomes extremist, in deference to petty-bourgeois criteria of literary progress.  Anyone who submits a volume of aphorisms or maxims (the two are approximately the same, though I tend to treat aphorisms as being longer than maxims but shorter than essays/essayettes) to a publisher these days is either a fool or a saint, since even petty-bourgeois philosophers, not to mention their bourgeois predecessors, steer clear of such flagrant concessions to philosophical absolutism.  How is it, then, that one of the best-known and most widely discussed works of twentieth-century philosophy happens to be aphoristic?  (I am, of course, alluding to Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-philosophicus.)  I think any cogent answer to this question would have to take account of the fact that the milieu from which it arose, namely Habsburg Vienna, happened to be a very aristocratic one, and that Wittgenstein amply reflected this in his choice of, from the modern standpoint, an obsolescent or overly idealistic genre.


2.    Between what might be called the aphoristic and poetic absolutes ... there exists a series of literary relativities: some, like essayettes and essays, stemming from the aphoristic absolute; others, like short prose and novels, aspiring towards the poetic absolute; one genre, the dialogue, approximately balanced between the two tendencies in a quintessentially bourgeois relativity.  For thinking in class-evolutionary terms, one may define those genres which stem from the aphoristic absolute as grand bourgeois, and those, by contrast, which aspire towards the poetic absolute as petty bourgeois.  And yet, the individual treatment of any particular relative genre will depend on whether it is in the hands of a philosopher or an artist; for it sometimes happens that the essayette and the essay are treated in a poetical way, short prose and the novel, by contrast, in a philosophical way.  But, by and large, each of these genres either side of the dialogue is treated in a manner appropriate to its station.  In the case of petty-bourgeois philosophy, however, it is usually short prose and the novelette that serve as vehicles for philosophical expression, the essayette and essay being more relevant to a grand-bourgeois epoch.  As to the dialogue, it, too, can be written, despite its balanced chronological status, from either a philosophical or a poetical angle, depending on the type of author in question. (Schopenhauer wrote from a philosophical angle, Wilde from a poetical one.)  But, like the essayette and essay, it has less applicability to a petty-bourgeois age than short prose or a novel.


3.    If a petty-bourgeois philosopher can write philosophy, relative to the age, in short-prose and/or novelistic guise, could one assume, in jumping ahead, that a proletarian philosopher should write philosophy, relative to the proletariat, in poetic guise, since poetry corresponds to an absolute, and proletarian writing, like proletarian society, could not be other than absolutist in its definitive form?  No, I shall assume no such thing, because the treatment of an absolute poetic genre in a philosophical way would amount to a contradiction in terms, unworthy of serious consideration.  Poetry, especially when proletarian, could only be written poetically, in deference to poetic absolutism, not be bastardized through philosophical expression.  That poetry has been bastardized, in this manner in the past, isn't altogether surprising, since whenever philosophical criteria have predominated, as in the grand-bourgeois and even bourgeois epochs of creative evolution, philosophy has overflowed its bounds, so to speak, and invaded the realm of poetry, or a poetry susceptible to philosophical intrusion by dint of its own relative backwardness, as intelligible within a grand-bourgeois or bourgeois epoch, and consequent adhesion to appearance, manifesting in regular rhythmic and rhyming devices.


4.    True poetic writing only becomes possible in a proletarian epoch, when poetry transcends appearance in a context of maximum essence, achieved through abstract rhythm- and rhyme-defying arrangements designed to free words from all forms of grammatical constraint and, by implication, to elevate poetry from a relatively atomic to an absolutely post-atomic (free-electron) level of impression.  Where poetry, enslaved to appearance, had formerly expressed some quasi-philosophical meaning or described some apparent phenomenon, its absolutist manifestation would free it from such expression and elevate it to a kind of 'thing-in-itself' abstraction only capable of impressing upon the reader some notion of the transcendent.  It will become, in its absolute commitment to essence, fully poeticized.


5.    Although I alluded to the possibility of a proletarian philosopher a short while ago, in reality there can be no such person; for philosophy, dedicated when most closely itself, to the classification and elucidation of the apparent, i.e. the world, cannot outlive a relative epoch or civilization, since it stems from the apparent absolute and can fulfil no useful purpose in an epoch or civilization exclusively aspiring towards the essential absolute.  If, however, the philosopher must be buried along with relative civilization, then the philosophical theosophist, who may in some sense be regarded as his successor, stands as the root universal influence for an absolute civilization, which cannot come into being without his guidance, since he expresses the theories and beliefs by which it will live.  In transcending all relative genres, including literary ones, he transcends the category of philosopher, which is rooted in the aphorism and inclined to the production of successive volumes of individualistic philosophy.  One could describe this transcendence as signifying a convergence to omega on the level of philosophy, but that would entail the notion that the Transcendentalist, far from being the universalizing influence at the root of a future absolute civilization, was the climax to philosophical endeavour, and thus the ultimate philosopher.  However, such a notion would hardly do justice to the fact that the Transcendentalist's theories are incapable of being assimilated into relative civilization, but are very often diametrically opposed to what philosophical tradition has upheld.  Because the progression from bourgeois/proletarian civilization to transcendental civilization presupposes revolutionary upheaval, the philosophical theosophist cannot stand at the climax of a relative tradition, as the ultimate philosopher, but appertains to the spiritual inception of a new civilization, antithetical in constitution to everything that preceded it.


6.    By comparison with the philosophical tradition, the Transcendentalist's work marks a more radical development of philosophical thought towards essence.  In its earliest stages philosophy was predominantly apparent, that is to say, concerned with a classification and description of the phenomenal world.  Metaphysics, as an attempt to understand and elucidate a world beyond appearances, only entered philosophy at a later date, and then very gradually, wherever civilization had attained to a fairly extensive degree of urbanization and acquired, in consequence, a metaphysical dimension.  There were, in the Christian West, different stages of metaphysical development, corresponding to class-evolutionary progress from grand-bourgeois Catholicism to petty-bourgeois mysticism via bourgeois Protestantism, and, not surprisingly, philosophy mirrored and to some extent anticipated this development, becoming, in due course, more essential, that is to say, less concerned with the phenomenal world and correspondingly more concerned with a noumenal one.  However, in the mid-to-late nineteenth century, there issued a materialist reaction against petty-bourgeois metaphysics, which took the double form of a Marxist reaction against Hegel and of a Nietzschean reaction against Schopenhauer - the one leading, with the twentieth century, to Communism, the other ... to Fascism.  A similar reaction of Wittgenstein against Kierkegaard, though subordinate in consequence to each of the other two, confirms the anti-metaphysical bias of late-nineteenth and early-twentieth-century philosophy, a bias that went on to develop, via Jaspers and Heidegger, into Sartrian existentialism, which is still, to all appearances, the leading tone of contemporary petty-bourgeois materialist philosophy.


7.    The Philosophes of the Enlightenment signify a bourgeois reaction against bourgeois Protestant and grand-bourgeois Counter Reformation metaphysics, as do Voltaire and Rousseau, the two outstanding materialist philosophers of the eighteenth century.  Descartes, Pascal, Berkeley, Hobbes, Hume, Leibniz, Spinoza, and other such metaphysicians all came under attack, much as their grand-bourgeois predecessors had not escaped the scathing criticism of Bacon, Montaigne, Machiavelli, and other such sixteenth-century materialists.  But the Enlightenment led on, in due course, to the metaphysics of Kant and Schopenhauer, Fichte and Hegel, Emerson and Carlyle, as well it might, since evolutionary progress within relative civilization passes from one class-stage to another, and petty-bourgeois metaphysics had no less of a right to exist, for a given period of time, than its bourgeois and grand-bourgeois precursors.  The contemporary materialist opposition to such metaphysics, however, will be superseded by the acceptance of proletarian metaphysics, which is what, in transcendental terms, the greater part of my work is essentially all about.  Thus does philosophy progress, in a kind of zigzagging fashion, towards its culmination in an anti-metaphysical petty-bourgeois guise and subsequent (metaphysical) transformation into philosophical theosophy - the most essential of all philosophical developments!


8.    Oriental philosophy, unlike its Western counterpart, is still metaphysical, and on approximately petty-bourgeois terms.  The essence of oriental philosophy, now as before, is denial of the will in a Buddha-like quiescence stressing awareness as the only good worth pursuing.  This is not, of course, an erroneous assessment of the good life, but it has the disadvantage of being shackled with traditional adherence to naturalistic criteria, including a more or less complacent acknowledgement of the 'divine Ground', the oriental equivalent of the Christian Father, the Judaic Jehovah, and the Islamic Allah.  Nor is Buddhism absolved from the contradictions arising from a confounding of this 'divine Ground' with the 'Clear Light of the Void' or vice versa, so that alpha and omega, no less than in certain other world religions, are all-too-predictably exposed, within the relativity of human life, to the possibility of periodic interchange and/or substitution.  So, despite the appearance of absolutism, Buddhism, like Hinduism and Shintoism, retains a relative integrity rooted in nature, which precludes its evolving towards a proletarian absolutism and thereby embracing extensively artificial criteria, relevant to the technological aspect of long-term religious evolution.  Although yoga, meditation, Buddhism, and other forms of oriental philosophy are in some ways preferable to the anti-metaphysical bias of contemporary occidental philosophy, the fact that no such anti-metaphysical philosophy has arisen in the East to challenge and discredit the traditional metaphysical integrity of oriental philosophy (Marxism being a Western import) precludes the possibility of a higher metaphysics eventually arising to replace both traditional metaphysical and anti-metaphysical philosophy alike.  Paradoxically, the Western attack on petty-bourgeois metaphysics to some extent served me as an incentive to work out a proletarian metaphysics for the future absolutist civilization.


9.    The fact that, hitherto, poetry has been written under the domination of literature in relative civilization means that it has been confined to either philosophical or pseudo-poetical guise, depending on the epoch in question and the temperament or proclivities of the individual poet.  As philosophy evolved from its root aphoristic absolutism in a predominantly descriptive, analytical, interpretative relationship to the phenomenal world ... through successive bourgeois stages to its culmination in the novel, with a corresponding shift of emphasis away from the phenomenal towards the noumenal (though subject, as already noted, to periodic materialist reactions), so poetry evolved from a predominantly descriptive stance in nature to an increasingly instructive, expositional stance in the metaphysical, that is to say, from the apparent to the quasi-essential, from hymns to beauty to intimations of truth ... considered as the divine goal of evolutionary striving.  This latter development, however, is still inadequate from a purely poetic standpoint, but may be described, if somewhat colloquially, as 'the best of a bad job', since the use of appearance, i.e. grammatical constructs of an expositional nature, to intimate of essence marks, despite its inherent contradiction, a significant evolutionary improvement on the use of a more radical appearance, employing (besides the aforementioned ingredient) regular rhymes, metres, stanza divisions, and other such traditional devices, to glorify the apparent, i.e. nature and natural beauty in general.  So while, during the later stages of relative civilization, poetry has become more essential, and therefore superior to what it formerly was, it is still short of being genuinely poetical, by dint of the fact that such a status presupposes a complete severance from the apparent in maximized essence, which is to say, total abstraction.  For not until poetry becomes abstract, in an absolutist age, will it have come into its own, and on terms diametrically antithetical to the absolutist inception of definitive philosophy as maxim or aphorism concerned not with essence but with appearance, as pertaining to the description and analysis of the phenomenal world.  By contrast, genuine absolutist poetry will provide, through impression, an intimation of the noumenal world to come.


10.   Although I referred, a short while ago, to the materialist reaction against metaphysical philosophy, I do not wish to leave the reader with the impression that petty-bourgeois philosophy ceased to be written, in the twentieth century, along metaphysical lines; for that would be very far from the truth!  On the contrary, from being essayistic such philosophy became largely novelistic, as is only to be expected with the gradual evolution of philosophy away from appearance and further into essence, this requiring, if consistency was to be maintained between form and content, a corresponding advancement from relatively philosophical to relatively literary genres, including works of short prose (the philosophical equivalent of short stories) and the novelette.  Characteristic of petty-bourgeois philosophers with a metaphysical bent are Aldous Huxley, Hermann Hesse, Henry Miller, André Gide, and Jack Kerouac.  There were others, of course, with a non-metaphysical bent, including Sartre, Koestler, Faulkner, D.H. Lawrence, and Camus.  Generally speaking, I would define those who, irrespective of their ideological bias, also wrote essays as belonging to an earlier or lower stage of petty-bourgeois philosophy - one stemming, as it were, from the bourgeoisie.  By contrast, those who only specialized in novels and/or short prose I would define as belonging to a later and higher stage of petty-bourgeois philosophy - one aspiring, as it were, towards the proletariat.  Thus Hesse, Huxley, and Miller would correspond to the earlier stage, Kerouac, Faulkner, and Lawrence to the later one.  I think it only fair to add, however, that each stage is divisible into a spiritualist and a materialist side, corresponding to the metaphysical and the anti-metaphysical, so that while Huxley, Hesse, and Miller may be categorized as appertaining to the spiritualist side of the earlier petty-bourgeois stage, Sartre, Koestler, and Camus, to take but three authors, can be characterized as appertaining to its materialist counterpart.


11.   All these petty-bourgeois philosophers, regardless of whichever side or stage to which they would seem to belong, have taken theoretical speculation further into essence than their bourgeois predecessors, and thus closer to poetry.  They may be defined, with reason, as pseudo-philosophers, since philosophy-proper is concerned not with intimations of or theories about the Divine Omega, conceived as transcendent spirit, but with a catalogue and analysis of the phenomenal world ... as applying, in the main, to nature.  The fact that philosophy gradually evolved away from this root concern and abandoned its absolute form in the process ... is an indisputable fact.  And we may contend that the further away from phenomena it evolved, the more pseudo it became, especially from the bourgeois epoch to the current day.  Yet philosophy-proper still survived on something approximating to its own terms by progressing from a critique of nature through a critique of morals to a critique of language; a progression, in other words, from the natural to the artificial via an ethical compromise.  There was thus a kind of class evolution of philosophy, within the Western context, from grand-bourgeois (Bacon) to petty-bourgeois (Wittgenstein) via bourgeois (Kant) stages.  And it was possible to retain the aphorism throughout this evolution or, at any rate, even with its climax, as Wittgenstein demonstrated.  And yet, even though such a thematic evolution had been possible, indeed inevitable, the critique of language becomes a pseudo-philosophy in relation to the critique of nature, that root concern of philosophical exegesis.  It is only 'genuine' philosophy in relation to the novelistic writings of the pseudo-philosophers, both metaphysical and anti-metaphysical, though particularly with regard to the former.


12.   Unlike philosophy, the evolution of poetry began in the pseudo, as a description of and hymn to the beauty of natural phenomena, particularly nature and woman, and only gradually progressed away from a 'philosophical' bias, under the hegemony of philosophy, towards a poetic one, in which spiritual instruction began to outweigh the descriptive element and, in some cases, to entirely supplant it.  But even with this gradual progression towards essence, poetry remained pseudo, because composed from a relative angle, in accordance with the dictates of a bourgeois age and civilization, and thereby falling short of total abstraction, the criterion of any genuine poetry.  In retaining meaning, poetry was obliged to remain expressive in consequence of its enslavement to appearance, the instructive approach to essence no less than the descriptive approach to appearance.  Only when it becomes impressive, with the development of an absolutist civilization, will poetry be genuine - wholly genuine in total abstraction, not merely the least pseudo of poetic stages.  Mallarmé ten times over, so to speak, with a word sequence that intimates, as no instruction ever can, of the transcendent.  A word structure, in short, that breaks the connection with appearance by depriving words of their meanings.





1.    If literature can be divided into three main branches, viz. philosophical, fictional, and poetical, then the same must hold true of art and music, so that we distinguish between sculptural, painterly, and holographic branches of art on the one hand, but between choreographic, symphonic, and improvisational branches or, roughly, rhythmic, melodic/harmonic, and aleatoric branches of music on the other hand, the latter equivalent to a bias for pitch over rhythm rather than, like the symphony (particularly in its classical manifestation), a compromise, in varying degrees, between the two extremes.  Instead of branches, I would prefer to speak of spectra in the arts, equating each spectrum with a specific class integrity or orientation, subject to modification in the course of time.  Thus, with regard to literature, I shall speak of an aristocratic philosophical spectrum, a bourgeois fictional spectrum, and a proletarian poetical spectrum, the same applying to each of the other arts when evaluated from an evolutionary point-of-view.  If philosophy and poetry are antithetical and, when true to themselves, absolute in character (fictional literature being a compromise or hybrid genre in between the two class-evolutionary extremes), then so are sculpture and holography in art, or ballet and jazz in music, (painterly art no less than symphonic music being a compromise, and, in some degree, cross between the two extremes).


2.    Let us take one art form at a time and analyse the component parts of each of the three spectra (or branches) it entails, beginning with literature.  Here we find philosophical, fictional, and poetical spectra horizontally existing one above the other, as it were, in relation to class-evolutionary stages, the philosophical being the oldest mode of literary writing, a mode centred on appearance as an investigation and comprehension of external phenomena, and stretching from its aristocratic roots in pagan civilization, with particular reference to the ancient Greeks, towards its petty-bourgeois culmination at the tail-end, so to speak, of the Christian civilization, where it takes the form of a critique of language, i.e. an investigation of and attempt at comprehending the logic inherent in an artificial form of appearance, the final subject for philosophy in the strictly academic sense of that discipline.  For after an early-stage petty-bourgeois era, philosophy ceases to be possible or, if still pursued, acquires an anachronistic status.  A late-stage petty-bourgeois era, on the other hand, will be increasingly given to pseudo-philosophy, in which occult and/or metaphysical issues and investigations predominate, the former during its lower phase, the latter as the chief concern of its higher, or absolute, phase when, in effect, philosophical writings are acquiring a quasi-poetic status.


3.    By contrast, fiction begins on relative grand-bourgeois terms in the form of the play - a kind of transitional genre in between philosophy and literature-proper - and comes into its own with the development of the novel, initially a late-stage grand-bourgeois art form of philosophical bias, though one destined, having passed through a bourgeois compromise status, to culminate on early-stage petty-bourgeois terms as it evolves towards poetry, its final form that of the poetic novel and/or novella.  After this, novelistic literature ceases to be possible (though anachronisms do of course continue to appear) and fiction can only be upgraded or made appropriate, if in a rather 'pseudo' fashion, to a late-stage petty-bourgeois age in the guise of short-story writing, a kind of continuation of the fictional tradition in other (usually magazine) terms.  In short, not a new genre but an extension and modification of a traditional genre which will necessarily co-exist with the specifically higher-phase petty-bourgeois/early-stage proletarian art form of film, cinema being the antithetical equivalent of theatre; films, or at any rate those of a narrative import, the primary mode of pseudo-literature, germane to an extreme relativistic age, and divisible, as with rock music, into film classical (adaptations of famous novels), and film originals, the latter properly commensurate with proletarian culture in its early, or filmic, stage.  Pseudo-literature, no less than pseudo-philosophy in relation to philosophy-proper, signifies an evolutionary progression beyond the bounds of genuine literature, entailing a more contemplative mode of literary appreciation, its integrity (certainly in regard to film classical) more poetic in character.


4.    Coming to poetry, we may note that its origins were more or less grand bourgeois in character and thus given to a relativity biased towards appearances, e.g. beauty, expressed in highly rhythmic terms, such as suggest an indebtedness to dance music besides, formally considered, an obvious affinity with sculpture.  Unlike the other branches of the literary spectrum, however, poetry began on 'pseudo' terms and continued along 'pseudo' lines until the advent of a late-stage petty-bourgeois age, when it became genuine, i.e. concerned with essence and hence truth, albeit on terms, necessarily relative to the phase in question, such as led to a distinction between metaphysically expressive poetry and grammatically impressive poetry, the one indirectly intimating of truth through description, the other directly intimating of truth through abstraction; the former materialistic, the latter spiritualistic.  From there the evolution of poetry towards a proletarian climax presupposes the development of anthologies, beginning on fairly descriptive terms and proceeding, with the growth of civilized absolutism, towards the abstraction of pure poetry on computer disc, the ultimate form of literature.  Thus from a materialistic relativity to a spiritualistic absolutism, the overall relativity of an absolutist civilization being successive in time rather than, as with bourgeois/proletarian civilization, simultaneous.


5.    If literature began with philosophy, then art began with sculpture, an art form concerned with form and, hence, the emulation of natural beauty, specifically animal and human, whether combined, as in ancient Egypt, or separate, as in ancient Rome.  Like philosophy, which is chained to aristocratic pagan roots, sculpture cannot evolve beyond an early-stage petty-bourgeois age; for the eclipse of form through abstract or non-representational techniques, as in so much modern sculpture, is no less anti-sculptural than occult philosophy is anti-philosophical and, so I maintain, a stepping-stone to a quasi-poetic metaphysical bias - the higher phase, as it were, of a late-stage petty-bourgeois epoch.  Beyond sculpture there is only pseudo-sculpture, the contemporary mode of abstract work which, in its higher or non-tactile manifestations, intimates of light art, and thus assumes a quasi-luminous status.  By contrast, that which can be touched acquires a status analogous to the short story in literature, signifying a kind of upgrading and transformation of sculpture rather than its complete negation, and this no matter how abstract or synthetic the work(s) in question.  The use of contemporary plastics and/or metals certainly distinguishes this sculpture from its more naturalistic forerunner, but tactility remains, and that is the essence of sculpture.  Again I would say it is a kind of pseudo-sculpture by dint of its abstract and synthetic construction, though not a mainstream mode of pseudo-sculpture, such as could only apply to works employing electric-light bulbs and/or neon tubes in a sculptural way, with regard to volume and the affirmation of a mundane context - usually the ground or floor of an exhibition space.  Such 'light sculptures' hover between sculpture and holography, intimating of the latter while stemming from the former.


6.    Art, properly so-considered, begins on approximately grand-bourgeois terms, as mural and/or cameo, and proceeds to a painterly status on canvas with the development of late-stage grand-bourgeois civilization, its culmination being on early-stage petty-bourgeois terms, as implying frameless or frame-free abstract works of either an expressionistic (materialist) or an impressionistic (spiritualist) constitution.  After this culmination, there can be no more art in the painterly sense, though anachronisms will of course continue to appear, not least of all in the more aesthetically traditional countries, where respect for bourgeois criteria inevitably runs deeper.  As elsewhere, a kind of pseudo-art will prevail in the form of posters, an upgrading and modification of painterly art on terms suitable to a more spiritual age, the poster being equivalent to the magazine short-story in literature and taking second place beside the truly contemporary pseudo-art of photography, that antithetical equivalent of the early-stage grand-bourgeois cameo, with its materially realistic integrity.  Photography, then, is to art what film is to literature - in effect the art of the age, mechanical as opposed to manual, objective as opposed to subjective, impersonal rather than personal, and more proletarian than (higher-phase) petty-bourgeois when concerned not with classical reproductions but with original productions.  After this pseudo-art there can be no further evolution along the middle spectrum, as it were, of art.  For it signifies the culmination of a tradition, as film does in relation to literature.


7.    The third and highest spectrum of art, namely the holographic, begins, like poetry, on approximately grand-bourgeois terms, as stained-glass windows, and proceeds from this pseudo-holographic status, relative to a predominantly sculptural age, to a no-less 'pseudo' but nevertheless comparatively superior manifestation in drawing, as pertaining to a painterly age, which necessarily conditions the form of the extreme arts, the sculptural no less than the holographic.  Thus drawing, as pseudo-holography, remains the idealistic norm throughout the duration of late-stage grand-bourgeois/bourgeois/early-stage petty-bourgeois civilization, until such time as, with the emergence of a late-stage petty-bourgeois/early-stage proletarian age, it is eclipsed and superseded by light art, properly so-considered, as a closer approximation to the truly holographic - indeed, as a kind of quasi-holographic art antithetical, in construction, to early-stage grand-bourgeois 'holographic' art, viz. stained glass in relation to the Christian West and, to a degree, amphora painting in relation to ancient Greece in its more relative, even arguably grand-bourgeois, stage.  However,  if light art signifies, with its translucent tubing, an antithetical equivalent to such art, then the culmination of this third and highest spectrum of the visual arts can only be in terms of holography, which will establish an antithesis (not an antithetical equivalent) with formal sculpture, and proceed from a relatively representational status to an absolutely abstract status in the course of evolutionary time, doing for the visual arts what abstract poetry will do for literature - namely, creating an impression of the spiritual absolute towards which evolution would seem to be tending.


8.    If art begins with sculpture, then music begins with dance, the earliest dance music being the most rhythmic, in accordance with absolute pagan criteria, dance only gradually proceeding, with the development of Western civilization, towards less rigid rhythmical patterns, appropriate to ballet and the waltz.  Modern dance music, particularly in the guise of funk, is more conducive to absolute improvisational dancing than to relative formal dancing, and this is what really distinguishes it from traditional dance music, endowing it with a 'pseudo' status germane to a late-stage petty-bourgeois/early-stage proletarian age.  As with sculpture and philosophy, there is also an aspiration towards its opposite, which takes the form of a fusion between funk and jazz, making for a quasi-jazz status in which pitch, and hence improvisation, assumes an importance hitherto unrelated to dance music.  Thus 'fusion music' is the late-stage petty-bourgeois/early-stage proletarian equivalent of pseudo-sculpture and pseudo-philosophy, the one in the guise of light (bulb and/or tube) sculpture, the other as a commitment to occult and/or metaphysical issues, though especially the latter.  Such funk-jazz, germane to an extreme relativistic civilization, is the final and ultimate kind of dance music, the tail-end of a spectrum originating in pagan antiquity.


9.    The second spectrum in the evolution of music, which lies in between the extremes of rhythm and pitch, is concerned with melody, and we may hold that, as with literature and painting, its origins were approximately grand bourgeois, taking the form of such vocal music - oratorios, cantatas, madrigals, early operas - as would have appealed to people in the European sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and only gradually coming into its own with the development of the symphony, parallel to that of painting and novelistic fiction, which signifies a compromise between rhythm and pitch in terms of harmony (necessarily biased towards rhythm) and melody (necessarily biased towards pitch), the ratio of the one to the other changing quite dramatically in the course of evolutionary time ... as symphonic music progressed from a late-stage grand-bourgeois to an early-stage petty-bourgeois status, becoming, with its culmination, increasingly biased towards pitch, and to a point where even melody is left behind, or very nearly so.  Beyond an early-stage petty-bourgeois epoch symphonic music cannot go without seeming anachronistic, though it can be modified and upgraded, as with fictional literature, to a pseudo-classical status in the guise of programmatic or incidental music in one movement, usually as symphonic poems.  The truly contemporary pseudo-classical music, however, takes the form of rock (beginning with rock classical) which as a late-stage petty-bourgeois/early-stage proletarian art form signifies, in its largely vocal constitution, an antithetical equivalent of pre-symphonic vocal music, including opera, and has a status analogous to that of film vis-à-vis novelistic fiction and of photography vis-à-vis painting, the ultimate development of the middle spectrum in each case.


10.   Finally we come to the third and highest spectrum of music, in which pitch, or the development of pure music, takes precedence, much as impression took precedence in the poetic spectrum and abstraction in the holographic one.  We can term this spectrum the jazz spectrum, though its beginnings, in approximately grand-bourgeois terms, would not have suggested much of a connection with modern jazz, that quintessentially late-stage petty-bourgeois/early-stage proletarian music.  Beginning with chamber ensembles, as a kind of pseudo-jazz, the instrumental music of an essentially operatic age, its gradual evolution embraced the concerto during the era of symphonic music, becoming more biased towards pitch in single-note scales, though never to the point of improvisational freedom.  Like rhyming poetry and representational drawing, it had to toe-the-bourgeois-line of orchestrated melodic/harmonic dualistic integrity, even if the soloist was tied to stipulated notation in essence rather than, like the orchestra, in appearance, the notation memorized instead of actually being read at the time of performance.  A step towards that freedom which every modern jazzman knows when he launches into an improvisational solo to the accompaniment of a deferential rhythm!  So the emergence, following trad jazz, of jazz classical in the higher phase of a late-stage petty-bourgeois era brings modern jazz in its proletarian train, and the jazz soloist is freer to pursue pitch than ever the concerto soloist was - indeed, so free that, at times, his playing may intimate of the pure music of an absolute civilization, in which not a hint of rhythm, whether diluted through melody or harmony or otherwise independent of such a dilution, will apply, music by then becoming a matter for synthesizer programming on a pure pitch basis.  But our jazzman is more a quasi-purist than a pseudo-classicist, and the status of modern jazz, analogous to that of modern poetry and light art, is decidedly quasi-purist.  We must await the pure jazz of the future with no less longing than ... the pure poetry and pure holography it will also surely entail!





1.    Just as light art succeeds avant-garde painting in the evolution of art towards absolute holography, so jazz, and in particular jazz classical, succeeds classical in the evolution of music towards absolute jazz, a pure pitch climax.  This is especially true of the mainstream bourgeois/proletarian civilization of late twentieth-century America, where, like painting, classical music was adopted from European sources and rendered jazzy in the course of time.  In Britain and much of Europe, however, jazz is really more of an outsider's music than a representative national growth, a music adopted from America by Europeans who seem to be playing at being American and who almost invariably stamp a markedly classical imprint upon their 'jazz'.  For classical accords with the European tradition, and if there is a development from classical to anything ... it is not to modern jazz but to rock, that European and, in particular, British equivalent of jazz.  Thus rock, a rhythmically electric music, stems from classical and may be said to stretch from a late stage (albeit higher phase) of petty-bourgeois musical evolution to an early stage of proletarian musical evolution, avant-garde classical having its inception in an earlier stage (albeit higher phase) of petty-bourgeois musical evolution.  Hence from trad jazz and jazz-classical to modern jazz in the American tradition, and from avant-garde classical and rock classical to rock in the European tradition - an evolution from one genre-type to another, a barbarous phase of proletarian rock music (rock 'n' roll) preceding its relatively civilized phase; though it has to be admitted that the European development is inferior to its American counterpart because generally atomic rather than post-atomic - relative, in other words, to a different socio-political tradition.


2.    Rock musicians can extend their musical commitment either down towards the classical or up towards modern jazz.  In the one case they are drawing on classical precedent and transforming a chosen piece of acoustic music into a type of pseudo-rock, electric and, as a rule, highly rhythmic.  They are, in a sense, upgrading the classical, and such a procedure is by no means untypical of European rock musicians.  Indeed, it is probably the most representative trend in instrumental rock, since the extension of rock towards modern jazz, as in the other case, presupposes identification, in one degree of another, with an alien tradition, namely the American, and requires, moreover, a degree of improvisational facility which most European and, in particular, British rock musicians tend to lack.  Nevertheless, hybridization of this nature does in fact occur, and the result, though falling short of modern jazz, is usually preferable to both rock and pseudo-rock.  We can call this hybrid music 'jazz-rock' or, alternatively, 'progressive music' - the European equivalent of modern jazz.


3.    When American jazzmen extend their musical commitment in any direction, it is usually down towards rock - the converse of the European extension of rock up towards jazz - and the result, while being musically inferior to modern jazz, is generally superior to rock, being, in effect, a kind of vocal jazz.  One could claim that they have relapsed from the spiritualistic to the materialistic or, rather, pseudo-spiritualistic, that is to say from a free-electron equivalent to a pseudo-electron equivalent.  The resultant music we can call 'rock-jazz' or, alternatively, 'fusion'.  Sometimes the extension of commitment is even further down than rock, embracing classical music of one kind of another, but the resultant music is still fusion, if on 'pseudo' terms, like rock-classical in Britain.  However, not all fusion music is culturally hybrid; for it can just as easily transpire that the renegade jazzman decides to adapt a piece of American classical music, which, in any case, is usually jazzy and thus a national step down from modern jazz.  Such an adaptation can make for a superior type of fusion music to that availing of rock techniques.  Yet it is not as culturally national as the kind of fusion music suggesting a compromise between modern jazz and trad jazz, seemingly alternating between the one and the other.  Likewise, the fusion musician may decide to go even further down the path of American music, way past the trad to the painful birth of jazz in the blues, and thus incorporate blues techniques or structures into his music - a procedure appealing more, on the whole, to black jazzmen than to their white counterparts, who, at the risk of oversimplification, will incline to the adaptation or incorporation of classical precedent.


4.    Fusion music, like progressive music, is not, as a rule, a fusion of the serious with the popular, the instrumental with the vocal, but a fusion of different types of serious music, whether contemporary or traditional.  American jazzmen do not, as a rule, deign to fuse jazz with soul, that American equivalent of pop, any more than their European counterparts deign to fuse rock with pop.  Generally, soul and pop are left to their proletarian practitioners, since the fusion of civilized with barbarous music is both illogical and incongruous, not liable to make for an aesthetically satisfying result!  Folk music is one thing, fine music quite another, and rarely do the two fields cross-fertilize, even though attempts have been made, in recent years, to cross-fertilize them, with, by and large, unconvincing results.  If the chief criteria of the most civilized late-twentieth-century music are instrumental sophistication and facility combined with an almost Buddhist religious commitment which may or may not seek vocal expression, then it follows that jazzmen will be careful, as a rule, to ensure that their excursions into fusion music do not resemble excursions into popular music, with particular reference, in the American context, to soul.  They will ensure that at least one track on their fusion album is instrumental or, failing which, that certain of the songs will have fairly lengthy instrumental solos and be of a religious rather than simply romantic significance.  An album conceived solely as songs of a romantic nature would be unlikely to pass muster as fusion music!


5.    Hitherto I have not spoken of British and European jazzmen, nor of American rock musicians, but the reader will have gleaned that I regard them as exceptions to the rule and, therefore, as generally unrepresentative of their respective traditions.  In my estimation, European jazzmen are exponents of an American music, even if they play it in a European, i.e. classical, fashion.  Similarly, American rock musicians I regard as exponents of a European music, though their handling of it is more likely to veer in the direction of jazz than classical, sounding somewhat akin to progressive music; just as the European jazzmen tend, willy-nilly, towards a kind of fusion music, with or without vocals.  Probably there are many more American rock musicians than European jazzmen, but this fact wouldn't render their music any the less unrepresentative of primary American trends.  Even if their music is serious, it is of an inferior order of seriousness than the mainstream bourgeois/proletarian achievements of modern jazz, a sort of quasi-European seriousness co-existing, on a lower plane, with America's foremost musical developments.  At the risk of appearing racist, one might define it as white serious music, the Euro dimension in America as opposed to the Afro, and hence black, dimension there, which chiefly manifests itself, these days, in modern jazz.  For jazz, despite the growing influx of whites into its ranks, remains fundamentally a black serious music, owes its origins to the blacks and is still identified, in most people's minds, with black creativity, even though many talented whites have converted to it and contributed something of their own in the course of time, a development which, while not necessarily leading to fusion music, isn't altogether divorced from the possibility of a fresh approach to jazz - one bringing new technical procedures to its largely improvisational nature.  For improvisation is, after all, the essence of jazz, its ticket to musical freedom, and no matter whether whites or blacks or, indeed, a combination of both are playing in a largely improvisational context, the end-result is jazz if high-quality improvisation predominates.


6.    At its best, improvisation is all on the one level, concerned with pitch and therefore disposed to fast-note 'runs', each note being of approximately equal duration and, thus, equal value.  Such improvisation is highly democratic, if by democratic we mean equalitarian.  The introduction of varied duration would entail melody, and melody entails rhythm.  A music that is truly free, functioning as a free-electron equivalent, cannot invoke melody or rhythm.  It needs to keep the pitch as pure as possible, undiluted by rhythm.  Such a procedure is usually upheld with the best improvisation and, as already noted, improvisation is the essence of jazz, the 'modern' no less than the 'trad'.  However, behind and beneath this improvisation one finds the rhythmic accompaniment of drums and/or bass, but this accompaniment is itself often improvisational in nature, functioning on the level of a pseudo-electron equivalent given to the creation of intricate patterns of volatile rhythm which assume a quasi-pitch status deferential to, rather than dominant over, the lead soloist(s).  Such is the norm with modern jazz, and it conforms to the relatively post-atomic integrity of contemporary American civilization.  Since the essence of this jazz is improvisation, it follows that the music is essentially a free-electron equivalent.  But, of course, it cannot be absolutely so, since involving the relative use of a quasi-electron equivalent, namely rhythmic pitch, and this relativity is consonant with the socio-political integrity of mainstream bourgeois/ proletarian civilization.


7.    A music that could be defined as equivalent to an absolutely free-electron status, involving pure pitch and nothing else - neither rhythm, melody, nor harmony - could only pertain to an absolutely post-atomic civilization, a civilization rooted in Social Transcendentalism.  Such music would be conceived/performed on a synthesizer - in other words an instrument which is both highly artificial and electronic, as well as being a kind of composite of earlier instruments which yet transcends them all in its own unique technological integrity.  Thus a kind of omega instrument, akin to the dovetailing of traditional visual arts/entertainments into a medium, viz. television, which yet transcends them or, alternatively, to the dovetailing of all so-called world religions into a True World Religion which is yet distinct from them and uniquely itself.  Just so, the synthesizer, although capable of sounding like a guitar, an organ, a piano, flute, trumpet, sax, or whatever, is also distinct from these traditional instruments and able, in consequence, to produce a truly unique sound.  Such an instrument would be suitable for the production of pure jazz, the successor, we may believe, to modern jazz.  Notes would be played or programmed to play equally, as so many free-electron equivalents floating on air and floating, needless to say, without any rhythmical accompaniment.


8.    This absolutely free-electron music will be the only music of the next and ultimate civilization, since both folk music and traditional civilized music would be irrelevant to an absolutely post-atomic age dedicated to the social wellbeing and moral progress of a truly civilized proletariat.  There could only be one type of music in this transcendental civilization, which would be of a quintessentially religious significance.  Earlier types of music, whether barbarous or civilized, would be discouraged and thereafter consigned to the rubbish heap of history.  The People would soon forget that such music had ever existed, assuming they were in a position to remember!  Their ears would be solely attuned to pure jazz; though it is questionable whether they would spend as much time listening to this music as people of earlier times spent listening to their kinds of music, and for the simple reason that the emphasis in a transcendental civilization would be on still higher things, including meditation.  Pure jazz would serve as an appetizer, so to speak, for the 'main course' ... of contemplation and meditation, rather than as an art form to be listened to for its own sake.  Once again music, together with each of the other fine arts, would become inseparable from religion, functioning as an ingredient in the religio-cultural integrity of the True World Religion, as practised in meditation centres - those future successors to churches, mosques, temples, synagogues, etc.


9.    In the present century, however, music is as often as not secular as well as religious, though the development of a religious dimension to the best modern jazz indicates, plainly enough, that music is on the way back to a religious allegiance - one neither pagan nor Christian but transcendentalist.  Of course, modern jazz is not concerned with Transcendentalism in any absolute sense - since nothing is known of such a True World Religion in contemporary America - but with its petty-bourgeois precursor in what may be termed Buddhist Transcendentalism, as taught by Eastern gurus, whose dedication to transcendental meditation is unconnected with a knowledge of technological requirements to-come (before the attainment of transcendence becomes possible), and who, in any case, tend to a rather complacent acquiescence in certain traditional oriental beliefs and practices more attuned to the occult than to the supernatural.  No, while the best modern jazz has associations with relative transcendentalism, the pure jazz of the future will be exclusively associated with an absolute transcendentalism which, to the extent that it upholds the practice of meditation, will stem from the former while surpassing it in terms of a freedom from occult theology and simultaneous awareness of evolutionary transformations to-come.  What rhythmic pitch is to modern jazz, theological occultism was to its religious inspiration in neo-Buddhism.  Neither ingredient could be encouraged in an absolute civilization!


10.   Having spoken of American jazzmen on the foregoing pages, I should add that, after one or two countries have taken the lead in developing pure jazz, such absolutely free-electron music should become the prerogative of all peoples.  Thus one won't be entitled to define pure jazz as basically an American music, but will regard it as a universal music, played and respected the world over, even if, for a time, it has the appearance of being unique to one country.  Such, in reality, it cannot be; for this music, together with everything else pertaining to an absolute civilization, is intended for global appreciation, being, in essence, something that transcends race and nationality - like, to a certain extent, modern jazz.  If it begins in one country it will end everywhere, the first truly universal music, transcending all previous cultures and, as already remarked, instruments and instrumental combinations.  Not on an electric piano, organ, or guitar, those quintessentially higher bourgeois/proletarian instruments, still less on a sax, flute, or trumpet, the class precursors of the above, but on a synthesizer or combination of synthesizers ... is the most likely way in which the ultimate music will be performed or, more probably, programmed in advance for autonomous performance, since manual manipulation of the keyboard would doubtless prove incompatible with absolute proletarian criteria.





1.    Insight is to the superconscious what intuition is to the subconscious - its 'inferior function', to coin a Jungian term.  Insight is aware feeling, whereby the minority subatomic content of the new brain, viz. instinctual protons/visionary neutrons, responds to its majority subatomic content, viz. aware electrons, in a quasi-spiritual way.  By contrast, intuition is instinctual intelligence, whereby the minority subatomic content of the old brain, viz. aware electrons, responds to its majority subatomic content, viz. instinctual protons/visionary neutrons, in a quasi-instinctual way.  Hence the feeling bias of intuition, as opposed to the spiritual bias of insight.  Generally speaking, women have traditionally had more intuition than men because more biased towards the subconscious or, rather, unconscious, with a more densely proton/neutron-packed old brain.  Men, on the other hand, have developed more insight than women because more biased towards the superconscious, with a more densely electron-packed new brain.  In the first case, such intelligence as existed in the old brain, by dint of an electron content, was conditioned, as intuition, toward feelings.  In the second case, such feeling as existed in the new brain, by dint of a proton/neutron content, was conditioned, as insight, towards awareness.  The 'superior functions' of each part of the psyche are, of course, feeling and awareness respectively.


2.    Thinking, however, is not a function of the subconscious but of the superconscious, the application of electron awareness, as will, to the minority feeling proton/visionary neutron content producing thought (consciousness), since a capacity for conceptual memory resides in the minority subatomic content (protons/neutrons) of the new brain by dint of its being conditioned by the essential bias of the majority subatomic content (electrons) there.  By contrast, dreaming is a function of the subconscious or, more correctly, the unconscious which, unlike thinking, happens naturally and, as it were, spontaneously, because perceptual images are absorbed by and stored in the majority proton/neutron content of the old brain, which therein functions according to its natural inclination (not with concepts) and imposes itself, in dream sequences, upon the minority electron content of the old brain during sleep, which then functions, in contrast to the superconscious, as a subsidiary feeling-biased awareness (subconscious), a spectator of the flow of perceptual images which issue from the majority proton/neutron content of the unconscious-proper.  Thus whereas thinking occurs artificially, subject to conscious control of a minority proton/neutron content functioning, in conceptual terms, against its own apparent grain, dreaming, by contrast, occurs naturally, in an unconscious functioning, on perceptual terms, according to its own apparent grain.


3.    With daydreaming, on the other hand, the superconscious consciously activates perceptual images from the unconscious, and thus directly involves itself with the unconscious in an evocation of artificial dreams, i.e. fantasies.  The psychic contrast to this, however, is when the unconscious naturally imposes itself upon the superconscious mind in the production of visionary experience - consciously perceived visions rather than subconsciously perceived dreams.  With the evolution of the psyche away from unconscious dominion towards greater degrees of superconscious freedom in awareness, visions are, of course, much less frequent occurrences, these days, than in the early days of human evolution, including and up to early Christian times.  But though they may not occur with anything like the same frequency or intensity as before, their occasional occurrence is more likely, I dare say, to be in young women and children than in men, because both of these categories of human life are generally more under the influence of the unconscious than of the superconscious.


4.    As to LSD visions, or artificially-induced visionary experience such as results in static, translucent perceptual images, we may infer that the application of a synthetic catalyst to the minority proton/neutron content of the new brain causes that content, ordinarily accustomed to functioning against its own natural grain in conceptual terms, to function independently of the conditioning of the majority electron content and thus, in appearance, as perceptual images which the electron content is obliged to passively witness in a kind of waking-life dream state.  These images which arise from a minority proton/neutron content freed from the conditioning of the electron majority are not only different from dreams in respect of their colour, rendered translucent by the spiritual bias of the superconscious; they are different in respect of their content which, as a rule, is mythological, exotic, and literary, that is to say, what one would expect from a proton/neutron content that had for so long served to store the conceptual rather than the perceptual, and consequently become civilized, since the use of concepts by man is usually steeped in literary, exotic, and mythological connotations.  Hence the preponderance, in LSD-induced visionary experience, of such concept-weighted images as jewels, sickle moons, fairy palaces, pagan statues, clusters of grapes, star shapes, and what appear to be houses of glass.  These and other such images are rooted in conceptual usage, whereas dream images tend, as a rule, to float free of conceptual reference in a perceptual naturalism.


5.    What, then, can we deduce from all this - that LSD is bad, immoral, dangerous...?  Certainly a minority proton/neutron content that has been set free of electron conditioning behaves in an apparent and therefore regressive way.  Yet we are none of us absolutes, and the veneer of conceptual civilization which electron dominance has imposed upon these minority protons/neutrons cannot be sustained for ever, since the strain would take its toll one way or another, not least of all in terms of the probable eruption of a mental breakdown.  Admittedly, the apparent treatment of the minority subatomic content of the new brain is less good than the essential treatment of its majority subatomic content (electrons) through transcendental meditation, so LSD tripping could never become the ultimate psychic concern.  Its widespread usage will, I believe, be confined to the superhuman phase of the post-Human Millennium, a kind of 'romantic', or quasi-apparent, phase in between two 'classical', or essential, phases of evolution, and should be regarded, if not as a good, then, at any rate, as a tolerable and necessary evil.  For only in transcending appearances, and thus all proton/neutron functioning, will advanced life eventually attain to the goal of evolution in maximum essence, the purity of transcendent spirit, the electron-electron attractions of pure awareness, above both the apparent (perceptual) and the quasi-essential (conceptual) treatment of the minority proton/neutron content of the new brain.


6.    However, what frequent recourse to LSD would do for the superconscious is condition the majority electron content of the new brain to passive contemplation of artificially-induced perceptions, contrary to its traditional role as activator of conceptions from the minority proton/neutron content, and thus break the habit of thinking, thereby preparing the ground, as it were, for the subsequent leap forward when, with the surgical removal of the old brain and elevation of advanced life to a superbeingful stage of millennial evolution, the majority electron content of the new brain contemplates, in maximum passivity, not proton/neutron appearances, but its own essence, in the cultivation of pure awareness through hypermeditation.  Thus by taking psychic development a step backwards from proton/neutron conceptualism to proton/neutron perceptualism, LSD usage in the Superman Millennium may well serve, better than anything else, to enable it to take a radical leap forwards at a later date, when, instead of applying their minds to thought, like men, the new-brain collectivizations of the Superbeings will apply them to the cultivation of pure spirit and ignore, in the process, the proton/neutron content of the new brain altogether.  Who knows, but the passive contemplation of perceptual images may well signify not so much a step backwards ... as a step beyond the activation of conceptual thought?  Certainly, it would be a step forwards from the electron point of view, because signifying a further negation of the will.


7.    In daydreaming, we avenge our subconscious mind upon the dream tyranny of the feeling/apparent unconscious by imposing our superconscious mind on the latter in order to dredge from it such perceptual images as we may desire to witness.  Whereas sleep-dreaming happens naturally to the subsidiary or subconscious mind of the old brain, the superconscious mind of the new brain is applied, in daydreaming, to the feeling/apparent unconscious with a degree of supernatural effort, i.e. through the conscious use of awareness as will.  The converse situation to this, viz. natural intrusion of the feeling/apparent unconscious into waking consciousness, would lead to our witnessing visions, which may alternatively be described as waking dreams.  Fortunately, not many of us are prone to visionary experience these days, but with our more evolved psyche we often live in a world of daydreams, or fantasies, which are both frivolous and innocuous compared with nightmares.


8.    Having referred to both visionary/fantasy and dreaming/thinking antitheses, I may as well continue by pointing out that the artificially-induced perceptual experience of the minority proton/neutron content of the new brain in the 'trip' also has an antithesis in the naturally-induced dulled awareness of the minority electron content of the old brain through various degrees of drunkenness, so that we may speak of a drinking/tripping antithesis.  Nor is this the only one of its kind; for there exists a converse situation, whereby the minority electron content of the old brain can, through the use of certain natural drugs like hashish and cannabis, be brought to a heightened awareness, even though the majority proton/neutron content may be rendered more instinctual and even, in extreme cases, apparent, so that visions arise.  This heightening of the subconscious consciousness through doping forms an antithesis to the heightening of the superconscious consciousness through transcendental meditation, in consequence of which we may speak of a doping/meditating antithesis, the latter being superior to the former, just as, on a lower scale, tripping is superior to drinking.


9.    Indeed, tripping corresponds to a higher form of romanticism, meditating to a higher form of classicism, and we may well define the former as the antithetical equivalent of drunkenness, the latter as the antithetical equivalent of being 'stoned'.  Nor need it surprise us that LSD was a Western invention, since Western civilization has long been partial to psychic romanticism in the consumption of alcohol, and the one inevitably led to the other, just as, in the classical Orient, the traditional consumption of hashish, marijuana, kif, and other such natural drugs inexorably led to the practice of meditation, a superior classicism because appealing not to the minority electron content of the old brain, as does dope, but to the majority electron content of the new brain.  Conversely, whereas alcohol primarily appeals to the majority proton/neutron content of the old brain, LSD appeals, as a higher romanticism, to the minority proton/neutron content of the new brain, which it activates in perceptual terms, neutralizing the traditional active behaviour of the majority electron content in the process, so that conceptual usage of protons/neutrons (as consciousness) is kept to a minimum.  Thus whereas alcohol blunts the subconscious by appealing directly to the feeling/apparent majority proton/neutron content of the old brain (unconscious), LSD, its antithetical equivalent, blunts or neutralizes the superconscious by appealing directly to the feeling/apparent minority proton/neutron content of the new brain.  It signifies the lesser of two evils.


10.   Conversely, whereas hashish, cannabis, etc., heightens the subconscious mind by directly appealing to the aware/essential minority electron content of the old brain, transcendental meditation, its antithetical equivalent, heightens the superconscious mind by directly appealing to the aware/essential majority electron content of the new brain.  It signifies the superior of two goods, the ultimate classicism which, it seems to me, will constitute the focus of spiritual development not only in the global transcendental civilization of the final stage of human evolution but, even more importantly, in the Superbeing Millennium - the final stage of post-human evolution preceding transcendence.  That is to say, for both the Transcendentalists of the highest stage of human development and what may be called the hyper-Transcendentalists, so to speak, of the highest stage of millennial development.  In between will come the LSD-utilizing 'romantic' interlude of the Supermen who, as brain collectivizations, will regularly 'trip' and thus passively contemplate, with their superconscious minds, the perceptual images culled from the minority proton/neutron content of the new brain.  The post-Human Millennium will therefore be Occidental in its first phase but Oriental in its second phase, this latter in turn leading, via transcendence, to the heavenly Beyond ... of pure spirit.


11.   The fact that occidental man has taken so much longer than oriental man to attain to his antithetical equivalent of old-brain somnolence in new-brain LSD tripping can be explained, I believe, by his traditional bias towards alcohol which, in dulling the subconscious, kept the focus of his psychological attention on the old brain, in sensual self-indulgence.  By contrast, oriental man attained to the antithetical equivalent of doping, in transcendental meditation, so much earlier than his Western counterparts did to theirs because his traditional bias towards hashish, cannabis, etc., in heightening the subconscious, pushed the focus of his psychological attention towards the new brain, in the cultivation, through its majority electron content, of spiritual awareness.  Thus whereas majority proton/neutron indulgence didn't automatically lead, via the new brain, to minority proton/neutron indulgence, minority electron indulgence in the old brain certainly did lead, as a matter of course, to majority electron indulgence, to the cultivation, within the new brain, of an enhanced awareness, an awareness purged of sensual dross in fidelity to transcendental purism.  However, now that Western man has attained to an antithetical equivalent of alcohol indulgence, he has progressed, within a romantic proton/neutron-biased framework, from the sensual to the apparent, from drunken stupor to visionary contemplation.  This may, with due respect, be described as 'the best of a bad job'.  By contrast, meditation signifies (in relation to dope-smoking) 'the best of a good job'.  We may look forward to more of the latter in the future, in both its regular and 'hyper' manifestations.


12.   If alcohol tends, in appealing to the majority proton/neutron content of the old brain, to increase its sensuality and drag the subconscious down to a lesser degree of sensual awareness in the process, dope tends, by making the subconscious more aware, to heighten the capacity of the feeling/apparent unconscious for the production of visions, i.e. to appeal primarily to its apparent rather than simply sensual side.  Visionary experience has long been vouchsafed users of hashish, including such Western ones as Baudelaire and de Nerval, though we may contend that the prospect of such experience arising is proportionate to the amount of dope taken and its inherent quality, so that unless a large quantity of, say, good-quality hashish is orally ingested, the prospect of experiencing visions, especially for modern urban man, must be pretty slim.  Formerly, we may be confident that, even with comparatively small amounts of the drug, visions would have been pretty much the norm, and especially must this have been so in the Orient, both near and far, before the evolution of the psyche into new-brain liberation, with the attendant practice of transcendental meditation for if not the majority then, at any rate, the truly civilized minority.  Probably the masses continued to dope and experience visions long after the introduction of meditation had established an antithetical equivalent to doping, and long after the more evolved had lost interest in dope by dint of the fact that, on the one hand, it no longer engendered visions in the old brain and, on the other hand, they had discovered a much greater awareness satisfaction in transcendental meditation.


13.   Dope may be despised by the civilized minority in the Orient, but its widespread use in the Occident, during the past century, suggests an appeal to both civilized and barbarous alike.  Why is this?  Certainly not because the West has discovered in hashish an antithetical equivalent of alcohol, but rather because, in making the subconscious more aware, it signifies a moral improvement on alcohol, with the possibility, in some cases, of visionary experience in addition to increased subconscious awareness.  Yet there is also widespread opposition to hashish, cannabis, marijuana, etc., and for good reason, given that the Western bent is for the romantic, i.e. alcohol, and a switch to the classic on the same evolutionary level, i.e. with regard to old-brain stimulation, does not signify an evolutionary step forward so much as a surrender to oriental classicism on its lowest level, a level long since abandoned in the Orient by those given to transcendental meditation.  From the Western point of view, the use of LSD would signify an evolutionary step forward - indeed, the antithetical equivalent to the use of alcohol, since it accords with the Western bent for proton/neutron indulgence, in this case of the new brain rather than of the old one, and must rank as the occidental counterpart to transcendental meditation.


14.   Yet LSD, no less than the various kinds of dope, is still illegal in the West, and no real distinction is maintained, by the law, between the use of natural and artificial drugs - a fact which seems somewhat strange, to say the least.  There is a moral improvement, from the Western standpoint, in the experience of new-brain visions over the indulgence of old-brain sensuality.  It corresponds to an extension of the romantic bent from sensual feelings to spiritualized appearances.  No such evolutionary improvement could be detected, however, in the use of dope, since its subsidiary appeal is to sensual appearances, as culled from the old brain, whilst its principal appeal is to the subconscious, which (sensual awareness mind) it heightens.  Admittedly, sensual appearances no less than heightened sensual awareness signify an improvement of sorts on sensual feelings, but only, as it were, laterally, not in an evolutionary way, in line with Western proton/neutron predilections.  So the use of dope cannot be encouraged if the role of authority, besides safeguarding law and order, is to encourage evolutionary progress.  The fact that an element of East meeting West enters into the availability and use of dope ... cannot be denied, and doubtless the converse situation of West meeting East in the consumption, illegally or otherwise, of alcohol in the Orient accords with a gradual convergence of the world towards a synthesis in universal civilization, even if, at present, on fundamentally bourgeois and, hence, relative terms.  Nevertheless the dopers are more likely to be barbarous than civilized, yobs than nobs, and must needs suffer the consequences of doping in a civilization partial to romantic values, where the use of LSD - at least among the foremost class of the day - should meet with less disapproval, if not, for a variety of reasons, more encouragement!