Pontificating, Teaching, Subverting or just Whacking Off?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I have not commented much on the BIP because I determined to read it from Cover to Cover (which involved a lot of paging about since its in flyer format). However, now that I've finished it (and reread it) I had a couple observations.

First, I suppose I would need to understand the spirit in which it was written, particularly the goals of its writers. Based on other comments hereabout, I was under the assumption that perhaps the BIP was seen as a way of pushing forward some of the popular philosophies held by many Discordians. However, what I read was more of a political/social rant which doesn't look much different from many blogs these days. Should I be looking at BIP as rants, or as propaganda? (Is the audience existing Discordians/Anarchists or Pinks/Cabbages/Thuddites that you wish to thwack open?)

Second, the format feels very ordered. While I don't think that there's a need to do cut-up method for all Discordian works, the overall feel was of a single linear series of rants, preached at an individual, rather than a discourse of philosophy, discussion of models/ideas or anything like that.

Third, there may be some value in examining the perspective... there appear lots of "I think", "I know", "You are" sort of statements, which make the overall feel of the document preachy. Maybe that will work... in my experience though it tends to fall flat.

Observation: In the 1960's when Omar and Mal were working on the PD, the written word was the best form of communication (for the sort of communication they were forming). They used guerrilla publishing and distribution to push their ideas out. In such, they utilized Burroughs's Cut Up method to make their writing very different than the normal writing (for comparison, check out some of the pamphlets being pushed by Chomsky and others during that time). This, I think, was very important. In several of Bob's books and the PD (and a lot of other stuff written by the early proto-discordians), the writing style intentionally breaks from the 'normal' writing style. This makes the read more 'discordant', it makes the read more memorable (I will never forget the telegram to Jehova) and (most important in my opinion), the cut up method plays tricks in the synapses. When the brain doesn't get what it expects, it gets surprised. Surprise information tends to stick in the brain more effectively than expected information. Further, assuming that Leary's theories were, in any way, shocks can also induce meta-programming opportunities. This seems to have been the goal of Mal, Omar and the gang and I've found that it does seem to work (in some sense) in many cases.

However, when reading BIP, it felt just like a Noam Chomsky, Libertarian or similar pamphlet. It had good information, but there was no style, no panache, no finesse.... Good points for the content, but low marks on presentation and use of today's secret ingredient. Remember, any written work can tell someone where to go, but a good one can tell someone where to go and make them look forward to it.

The very first time I read the PD, I had moments of shocking awareness. This wasn't due to the Illumination within the PD, but rather the PD's interaction with my brain... it didn't teach me something new, it just flashed something I should have realized in front of my face and then went on its merry way. Moments later, my brain caught up and said "OH!". The PD is manipulative in its writing, not willing to just lay out the data, but it hides the data in chocolate so you'll eat it before you know what's good for you.

We no longer live in the era of the printed page. We live in a time when data is interactively processed by individuals, nearly simultaneously, complete with multimedia support and LULZ. Maybe a modern revisitation to the PD would be better processed in a new and different format (Maybe weekly YouTube posts or something of that nature). If you want to stick to written work, then I think you may want to find a format that appeals to the modern reader which I'm not sure you've done yet.

I'm sure I'll have more thoughts, but I felt that getting the overall intention would probably be the best first step... so is BIP intended to be more:

Pontificating, Teaching, Subverting or just good ol' Whacking Off?


Ratatosk, Squirrel of Discord
Muncher of The ChaoAcorn
Chatterer of the Words of Eris
POEE of The Great Googlie Mooglie Cabal

[Darth Cupcake]

Hey Rat, I am behind in my work, so I don't have time enough to give what you've written a thorough reading. I will do that tonight at home.

So far, I feel like you are very spot-on with a lot of things that I feel similarly about. Like I said, I will respond and try to actually engage in this when I get home.

Prof Cram wrote a really good "book report" on the BIP. I recommend doing a little thread archaeology for it, unless he happens to show up and provide a link, or if I do it when I get home. I think, based on the bit of what you've written so far, you shared some similar thoughts.

That said, it's really awesome of you to provide feedback. It's something I haven't yet taken the time/balls to do, but it's always good for anything to get feedback to keep giving it momentum. So awesome.

[Cramulus]

GREAT critique, Ratatosk.

Yea, my book report is here:
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=11440.0

that was my 50th post. =) A lot of new posters have made basically the same comments - some good stuff in there, but it lacks the proper packaging to be effective.

We had a several week long discussion about whether or not 'Black Iron Prison' is the correct metaphor. Eventually we got tired of talking about it. The same thing is happening with the "age of aftermath" magazine project - there's a lot of good thought, but we seem to lack the leadership and momentum to push it into what we want it to be.


The BIP pamphlet was written before I was here, but I get the impression that it was basically a collection of rants and sermons written around the same time period. That's why there's no unified direction. At the time there was a lot of energy towards writing another edition of the Principia, but the motion swung towards exploring the black iron prison metaphor. A lot of the "core discordian" stuff fell out of the project's scope (anyone who was around at the time - please clarify / correct me).

I'm still in favor of working towards a BIP 2.0 pamphlet - one in which we take what's good about this one and whittle it into something akin to the PD. I also feel it could use some cutup art and humor.

I encourage you to get an account on the blackironprison.com wiki (a number of people here can hook you up with one) and propose some changes to the articles you think could use some work. The most effective way to see progress seems to be to throw a snowball and hope it turns into an avalanche.

[Darth Cupcake]

I have not commented much on the BIP because I determined to read it from Cover to Cover (which involved a lot of paging about since its in flyer format). However, now that I've finished it (and reread it) I had a couple observations.

First, I suppose I would need to understand the spirit in which it was written, particularly the goals of its writers. Based on other comments hereabout, I was under the assumption that perhaps the BIP was seen as a way of pushing forward some of the popular philosophies held by many Discordians. However, what I read was more of a political/social rant which doesn't look much different from many blogs these days. Should I be looking at BIP as rants, or as propaganda? (Is the audience existing Discordians/Anarchists or Pinks/Cabbages/Thuddites that you wish to thwack open?)

So before I begin, I should preface this by saying that I am not part of the BIP project. I joined on here after being shown the BIP project by Prof Cram, but I haven't actually taken part in it myself, so this is all just expressions of my opinion, as opposed to anything with any sort of "authority" on the BIP.

That said--I feel like it's a combination of rants and propaganda. The idea, the feeling that I got from it, was the notion of grabbing someone by the shoulders and shaking them aggressively until they got it.

Second, the format feels very ordered. While I don't think that there's a need to do cut-up method for all Discordian works, the overall feel was of a single linear series of rants, preached at an individual, rather than a discourse of philosophy, discussion of models/ideas or anything like that.

I think you make a really, really good point here. Part of the fun of the original PD is how bizarre and all over the place it is, and fun makes people more receptive. It is fairly linear. I don't think this is necessarily bad, but I feel like the rants don't necessarily... join as well as they could. Does that make sense? The linear would work, except I feel like this is more walking from room to room on a hallway. We have to keep moving back out into the hallway before we can step into the next room, rather than having a fluid progression. This sensation of disjointedness, while still in a linear array, makes it harder to really "get into" or "sink into" the experience of reading the BIP, I think. It doesn't feel like a polished, finished product (which, when you have a polished, finished product, you won't feel anything--you'll just be paying attention to the content or what have you). This is partially I'm sure because it ISN'T a polished, finished product. But nonetheless, yes, the format could use some work.

Third, there may be some value in examining the perspective... there appear lots of "I think", "I know", "You are" sort of statements, which make the overall feel of the document preachy. Maybe that will work... in my experience though it tends to fall flat.

YES YES YES.

AND YES.

At the risk of offending some people here who have written some really excellent stuff for the BIP, the two things that really turned me off were the air of smug superiority of the authors and the feeling like, well, I could've been talking to some Hot Topic kids at times. A lot of the BIP material is really good, once you step past the preaching tones. There's also some, though, that feels very formulaic, and that made it harder for me to accept the preachy stuff when I got to it.

There's a lot of really good material in the BIP project right now. But a lot of it is a very aggressive, combative tone. If that's okay with the target audience then SUPER. Mission beginning to be accomplished. But I feel like the people that we're going after, the cabbages as it were, are not going to be receptive to that kind of antagonistic approach. Smug superiority and preachy tones will only turn them off.

Observation: In the 1960's when Omar and Mal were working on the PD, the written word was the best form of communication (for the sort of communication they were forming). They used guerrilla publishing and distribution to push their ideas out. In such, they utilized Burroughs's Cut Up method to make their writing very different than the normal writing (for comparison, check out some of the pamphlets being pushed by Chomsky and others during that time). This, I think, was very important. In several of Bob's books and the PD (and a lot of other stuff written by the early proto-discordians), the writing style intentionally breaks from the 'normal' writing style. This makes the read more 'discordant', it makes the read more memorable (I will never forget the telegram to Jehova) and (most important in my opinion), the cut up method plays tricks in the synapses. When the brain doesn't get what it expects, it gets surprised. Surprise information tends to stick in the brain more effectively than expected information. Further, assuming that Leary's theories were, in any way, shocks can also induce meta-programming opportunities. This seems to have been the goal of Mal, Omar and the gang and I've found that it does seem to work (in some sense) in many cases.

However, when reading BIP, it felt just like a Noam Chomsky, Libertarian or similar pamphlet. It had good information, but there was no style, no panache, no finesse.... Good points for the content, but low marks on presentation and use of today's secret ingredient. Remember, any written work can tell someone where to go, but a good one can tell someone where to go and make them look forward to it.

The very first time I read the PD, I had moments of shocking awareness. This wasn't due to the Illumination within the PD, but rather the PD's interaction with my brain... it didn't teach me something new, it just flashed something I should have realized in front of my face and then went on its merry way. Moments later, my brain caught up and said "OH!". The PD is manipulative in its writing, not willing to just lay out the data, but it hides the data in chocolate so you'll eat it before you know what's good for you.

These paragraphs are so chock full of good!

I am a graduate of an undergrad literature program and I'm researching literature graduate programs. So I am biased when I say that written word and text will never be outdated, dammit! If nothing else, I think it's only gotten better--there's something SPECIAL about holding a hardcopy of something in my hands. I get that feeling that this is something that is beyond just an internet meme--this is something solid, tangible, lasting. I will be the first to admit, however, that it is highly likely that I'm the only one who feels that way. I think there's a lot of potential for a hardcopy of the BIP, though. I was looking at some of the one-sentence meme bombs, and the 5160-label sets, and thinking how much potential those represent for mixing in with BIP material. There's so many ways to update this stuff.

You mention the telegram--well, what have we got now? Print-out an inter-office memo, or a "while you were out" slip or even just an email. There's a lot of room for updating without copying, but maintaining the fun spirit of the original PD. I think there's nothing wrong with the idea appearing very clearly as an offspring of the PD, in fact, I think that might even be a positive. As a lit nerd, I'd hate to see us step away from hardcopy, because I feel that there really is a lot of potential there.

We no longer live in the era of the printed page. We live in a time when data is interactively processed by individuals, nearly simultaneously, complete with multimedia support and LULZ. Maybe a modern revisitation to the PD would be better processed in a new and different format (Maybe weekly YouTube posts or something of that nature). If you want to stick to written work, then I think you may want to find a format that appeals to the modern reader which I'm not sure you've done yet.

I've given my spooge for literature up above. I'll let that lie.

That said, I think the idea of YouTube posts is GREAT. Although I fully endorse the idea of maintaining a hardcopy presence, I think expanding and diversifying the way things are done is brilliant. Just look at Cram's 5160 stickers, the pamphlets people hand out, etc. We're already moving that way. It's just a matter of getting something a little more assembled, if you will.

I think the magazine project is a really great idea. I desperately need to go plug in my poor laputater because the battery is dying (old old lappy is sadface) and then I think I'm going to revisit that thread. I think everything you've had to say is really great, and it's really good to be continually revisiting and reassessing things, particularly like the BIP project. So applause for a fantastic post, and thanks for the food for thought!

[LMNO]

I agree with the above.

Let me be honest:  The BIP metaphor was flashed on, people started writing, I tossed some of the better rants into Word, Syn came up with the cover, and it ended up in PDF.

Whole thing took about a week.  And it shows.

Basically, I was sick of the "we shoulds" and I just went ahead and did it during my lunch break.

That is to say:  There was no effort to edit, streamline, chop up, or even approach a decent layout.  I figured my half-assed attempt would prod other people into going further with it.  No one did.

I'll totally go along with doing a revised second edition, to include more from the wiki, to add graphics, meme bombs, even jokes.

But someone has to be willing to take control and just do the fucking thing.  We have a list of Kopyleft authors.  They won't mind if you use their stuff.

Also, as far as the YouTube thing goes, I've been saying for months that if anyobe with video graphic knowledge wants to make something to attach to any of the POEEcasts that I've done, DO IT.

[Darth Cupcake]

But someone has to be willing to take control and just do the fucking thing.  We have a list of Kopyleft authors.  They won't mind if you use their stuff.

I was trying to lay low because if too many people get involved it will stagnate and die in discussion.

But I am working on exactly that.

This is all I am releasing in the way of information for the time being. The rest is as classified as HIMEOBS.

I personally think that the fact that the BIP ever got as put together as it did is an indication of what an awesome group of people are milling around this board. There are only one or two other groups that I've seen (while admittedly I have not seen much) who can put together something like that, and they had MUCH more solid and defined "leadership" and "administration" and the suchlike. PD has none of that, yet something as cohesive as the BIP was assembled. However, despite all this awesome, I am A) very picky and demanding and B) a former editor, and once you get that in your blood, it doesn't go away easily! So I nitpick. But I think it's beyond awesome that there's something there for me to nitpick in the first place.

I have no skills in the YouTube department or I'd hop on that bandwagon. Prof Cram keeps saying he's going to buy a videocam, but then he had some unexpected expenses, so that's on hold last I heard. We had one or two amusing video ideas should that ever come to pass, though, so hopefully we'll be providing some roflcopters for all you fine PD.com folk soon.

[AFK]

I don't have much more to add.  Other than to say I think at the point in time this was put together a lot of us were "in a mood" at the time.  It was a time when everyone was bringing the rantage and it wasn't just TGRR carrying the water.  I think that is another factor in how all of the writings seem to be circling the wagons around the same ideas.  

We already have more then enough material floating around for another pamphlet.  It's just a matter of recalling it, putting it into a format, and then PDFying it.  But like L says, someone's just got to do it.  

[LMNO]

Feel free to pick as many nits as you see fit, D Cup.

If you want a second opinion, I can PM you my contact info.

[AFK]

Also, I am taking some time off the first week of July, and I have some past editing experience as well.  I'd be glad to pitch in and help out. 

[LMNO]

Also, this is what my "cool shit from back in the day" thread was about; trying to tighten up meandering threads.  It could use even more editing.  I'll bump it.

[Darth Cupcake]

Thank you

What I'm currently working on is some archaeology. Since I've only been posting here for about a month and lurking for about a month longer, I have a very limited scope of what I can think of to dig up for this. I think I've got some really good ideas for how I'm going to put it together and things that I'm making up to put into it. I've plucked out some of my favorite stuff from when I've been here, along with a few things from the BIP pamphlet, but I could definitely use more range in what's been written. As I said, there's lots of really good stuff going on here, and I've barely gotten my toes wet in the grand pool (or sewer ) of PD.com.

[LMNO]

Oh, and the Machine,Ñ¢ pamphlet was done the same way, so that could probably be tightened up, too.

[AFK]

Well, if you are thinking about assembling a pamphlet or some other type of publication, and are looking for material, a way to go might be to ask they kopyleft authors to either bump or forward to you links to things they've written that they think are publishing worthy.  It would save you some time and effort from thread diving. 

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Thanks for the feedback! I think I was incorrectly expecting something finished, rather than a draft.

In that case, maybe we could create several 4-6 page pamphlets and circulate those over a period of time (one pamphlet a month/week/biweekly?
). Then we take from the best of those with new material and existing Kopyleft material and have that be BIP 2.0 or whatever...

Thoughts?

Also, has anyone seen the "Float, Don't Float" pamphlets or was that only some local scoundrel?

[LMNO]

Rat, it has become obvious that if you want anything to happen, to do it yourself, with little expectation of help from others.


Also, a list of Kopyleft Authors:
Cain
SillyCubin
Littlest Ubermench
DJ Rubberducky
LHX
Vexati0n
LMNO
RWHN
Mangrove
Hunter S Durden
Cram
Mourning Star
Kaou Suu
000
The Other Anonymous
That One Guy
Hawk