You Bet Your Bippy

[Cramulus]

Preamble: This was a difficult review to write. Warring in my head are three points of view,Äî

• The Discordian who wants to Wake Up and to Wake Up everyone around him
• The random guy on the bus who found the pamphlets I left him
• A devil,Äôs advocate that dissects things on principle. Toro! Toro!

These guys disagree on just about everything, so my opinions may not appear fully consistent. I apologize in advance for the length of this post, but I wanted to be thorough as a service to the project.



My Report on the Black Iron Prison Project
by Cramulus, Professor Emeritus, basically some guy

Abstract:
Overall, the BIP pamphlet carries a strong message, which is extremely useful to those trapped in sleepwalker mode. However, it suffers from poor packaging - its ideas are presented in a way which may repel the casual reader or random pedestrian. Overall, I am hopeful that this, and future incarnations of the project will be effective in shaking the public.

In short:
If people could just realize how stupid they are, they,Äôd stop being so stupid!

Article:
I love the Black Iron Prison pamphlet. With the assistance of the OBNOXIOUS JERK CABAL, I've spent years putting together and passing out subversive / enlightening pamphlets, posters, and public performance. I've handed out my own stuff (total crap), and a great deal of stuff that other people have created. (most of it total crap) The BIP pamphlet succeeds where many other Discordian / Illuminating tracts fail - it felt like a slap in the face, even to someone who thinks he's got a toehold on figuring out this fractillian merry-go-round. And I thought I WAS awake!

But I think the BIP suffers from poor packaging. The format in which these ideas are presented, unfortunately, make them less palatable. I understand that you're trying to be really open and translucent about what the motivation of the pamphlet is. I can smell the lack of manipulation, and it smells good - the intent seems to be to give people the tools and let them figure out reality on their own. That rocks. But the tone is often condescending, intentionally offensive, cynical, and in many places shows contempt for the reader. There are likely people who were digging the pamphlet, or were on the border of getting the "point", until it got really Righteous. At that point, it's easy to classify it as the same sort of propaganda Jehovah,Äôs Witnesses hand out. Citation?

• Page 16-17 sets up the same "us" versus "them" mentality that mainstream religions and cults use to foster an in-group mentality. Midway down page 17, the author refers to "them" as "these beings"... Personally I react very negatively to dehumanizing the opposition. It's very Holier-Than-Thou and it stinks. More Us v Them on page 26. Are "they" the enemy or the people you're trying to "wake up"?


• page 21-22 is a lot of seething contempt for the general public, which presumably includes the reader and friends ("What is it with you people?"). I understand that this particular passage is trying to shake people into making their own decisions about pop culture et al, but if the target audience is people who do like QPCs and American Idol (the sleepers), you,Äôre not going to crack the ice by shouting the word sheep at them over and over again.


• Page 5 suffers from the same problem. It,Äôs like ,ÄúYou people, OR SHALL I SAY SHEEPLE might learn a thing or two if you listen to me. Stop being such comatose slugs!,Äù The implication is that the writers have it all figured out (even if they later say that they don,Äôt). If the reader agrees with the writers and does what they tell him, he,Äôll become a higher class of being too. Evangelical? Perhaps. Does this read like goth poetry? At times.

Certain parts of the pamphlet are pure gold. Among them:

The anecdote on page 3-4 reminds me of (sorry) a Hagbard Celine quote  "You're still trapped in thinking of it as left versus right. We're up versus down!" Hell yeah! (Unfortunately this point is almost sacrificed by appealing to liberals against conservatives on p25)

Page 7 is also really well written. It explains WHY you,Äôd want to see the BIP. The 7th-8th paragraphs are the real meat here. ,Äú,Ķthe more people are able to think for themselves, the less willing they become to exhaust themselves at someone else,Äôs command,Ķ,Äù Its either rare or well done, depending on how you like your meat.

Page 9 says ,ÄúThe time has come for you to start thinking for yourself.,Äù That,Äôs kallisti-gold on the page and couldn,Äôt be printed bold enough.

The description of the nature of The Machine,Ñ¢ on page 10 makes me want to stand up and shout HELL YEAH. I showed this to a Discordian friend while stinking drunk, and days later, this is the only paragraph he could remember about it. Particularly the part about focusing on the component parts rather than the whole picture.

Page 12 has a line: ,ÄúThe notion that some nebulous group is out there subverting people with imagery and printed words designed to alter moods and behaviors is simply science fiction of the wildest, most escapist variety.,Äù This is some delicious self-reference.

As I read, I wondered,Ķ If it,Äôs worth it to be self-liberated and self-aware, why do the writers sound so pissed off and frustrated? I mean, you,Äôre trying to sell us freedom, but the tone of the pamphlet sounds like the authors are a bunch of brooding, bitter, cigarette smoking, echoes of Tyler Durden. Is that the reality I want? Well the longer paragraph at the bottom page 15 addresses the question Why Bother. That Why Bother is a big selling point and shouldn,Äôt be ignored.

The way page 16 ends in a couplet (,ÄúWe call it pollution, toxicity. It takes many forms and it,Äôs increasing rapidly,Äù) is really tight. It has a sort of lyrical quality to it which resonates well with me.


Page 19 ends with ,ÄúIf you accept that as truth, I wonder what you will believe when you are eventually convinced that it is a lie.,Äù BaBAM, kickass finishing move. I think p 18-19 is a really great spread.

The Herman Hesse quote on 23 is seriously hot shit. I think it,Äôs the most important part of the whole pamphlet. p23-24 is pure poetry. I especially like the line ,ÄúPissing all over someone else for doing something you don,Äôt personally approve of is MORE pointless than how pointless you think what they,Äôre doing is!,Äù

Page 25-26 is really tight. It,Äôs really nice to see a concrete example to support all the metaphor.

Inconsistent Audience:

I had trouble figuring out who this pamphlet is addressed to. If it,Äôs addressed to random people on the street who pick up the pamphlet, it should omit the stuff aimed specifically at Discordians and SubGs.

The target audience is definitely ,Äúthe public,Äù on page 8.
The target audience is definitely ,ÄúDiscordians,Äù (and their ilk) on page 12.
The target is People on the Web on page 23 (,Äú,Ķhere on this website, talking about this goddess,Ķ,Äù)

Generally the tone flips between adding nuance to already established Discordian issues (like the Machine and the Con), and trying to shake up people who are pinned to their sofas. These are two different audiences, two slightly different messages, and I think they should be approached in separate (but equal) ways. Trying to cover the whole spread in one pamphlet decreases the effectiveness of both. For example: Most Discordians feel (perhaps incorrectly) that they,Äôve left the couch. Maybe you can convince them otherwise. But be clear ,Äì when I first read the pamphlet I (in part) thought ,Äúoh, they,Äôre talking to fingerlicking mouthbreathers, not me. I already hate American Idol.,Äù




Miscellaneous Stuff I Don,Äôt Like
The introduction on page 2,Ķ I don,Äôt like it. I don,Äôt think it does a good job at describing exactly what the prison is. ,ÄúIt,Äôs your life, it,Äôs the cold trap of your existence.,Äù (that line made me hurk a little ,Äì I think it reads like teen goth poetry). So how exactly is that a prison and why should I hate it? Note - I think I understand what you,Äôre talking about, and I,Äôm not asking for an answer ,Äì I,Äôm just pointing out how the guy on the bus may feel about this vitriol. The first page of text is the make-it-or-break-it page of the whole pamphlet, and it,Äôs basically only frustration and metaphor. It needs something concrete to anchor.

It,Äôs possible to explain the two man con on page 4 without making the reader feel stupid for not having read American Gods. Likewise page 26 references Kant, Hume, and Locke, who are probably strangers to those people on the train.

The ,ÄúTUC,Äù mentioned on the bottom of page 5,Ķ what does that stand for? I,Äôd either spell it out or delete it. Same with SSOOKN.

This may be purely a matter of taste,Ķ
Page 14 begins by attempting to describe TEH NATURE OF REALITY. I hurk a little bit every time someone else tries to ,Äúexplain,Äù reality to me. That passage goes on to very effectively argue that we ignore / are unaware of most of reality. But then the consecutive point on p15 is that there might be great fun in exploring the reality that,Äôs currently invisible to us. Though I,Äôm hip to the metaphor that,Äôs been set up, the passage literally suggests that there,Äôs great fun in being aware of my feet inside my shoes, and being aware of the post-it note barely visible in my peripheral vision. It,Äôs plausible that the dude on the bus missed the point with all the metaphor.

We all have a little chunk of brain at the top of the spine called the Reticular Formation which filters out unnecessary information, like the temperature inside my shoes, the sound of the fluorescent lights, the entire world when I,Äôm asleep, etc. I trust its decisions. Yeah, it,Äôs filtering out a LOT of information, but is that information relevant?

That big Why Bother question is answered several times throughout the pamphlet by demeaning the people who don,Äôt ,Äúget it,Äù. Citation: page 4, ,ÄúNot wanting to beat the shit out of very stupid people is hard work.,Äù The authors must be pretty smart to see all this stupidity! In answer to the question ,ÄòWhy bother?,Äô Because I want to be smart like you, can I send you a membership fee and jump behind your smart rebel label? :-P


Page 20 is mostly metaphor. I think the point gets lost without something concrete to anchor it.

Appearance:

There,Äôs a bit that can be done to make this pamphlet easier to read.

Page 6, paragraph 2. Should begin with ,ÄúYou,Äôre,Äù, not ,ÄúYour,Äù. Page 8, paragraph 2, I think it should be ,Äúensure,Äù not ,Äúinsure,Äù. Page 21, the SSOOKN quote should drop the word ,ÄúFor,Äù. I know, I know, that,Äôs really anal. But since its in print it should matter.

Some of the leaves are out of order. Maybe I,Äôm printing it wrong, or doing something dumb, but I tried a zillion different ways, and no matter how I paginate it, p18-19 is followed by p12-13, and p8-9 is followed by p16-17. Luckily, it doesn,Äôt really seem to matter.

I think the large blocks of text (read: the entire pamphlet) need to be broken up with some graphics or quotes or what-have-you. This is your opportunity to punch the reader right in the limbic system. Some lighter images could go a long way to soften the austere bitterness (unless you really like the bitterness ,Äì personally, I think it,Äôs unattractive). I know that this commutiny has no shortage of hysterical graphics.



Conclusion:

I,Äôm equally impressed by the BIP pamphlet as I am with the PD.com community. You guys have shaken off the mummy-wrappings of ancient Discordia and created a new episkipos which is, perhaps, even more radically free than previous incarnations. It was really refreshing to realize that there are people who are putting a new spin on Discordia, even though sometimes some seem to be a bunch of elitist, cantankerous, endearing assholes (you what I mean). Likewise the BIP perfectly reflects the commutiny ,Äì it,Äôll enlighten you ,Ķif you,Äôre tough enough to stomach it.

In My Humble Opinion it can use a bit of levity. What attracted me to Discord when I was something like 17 years old was that it was the first time someone tried to convince me of something important without cramming it down my throat. It tasted good so I swallowed it on my own. The humor and lack of self-importance is what (according to The Prankster and The Conspiracy) Greg and Kerry thought would save Discord from Dogma. And I don,Äôt just mean LAIL dada humor.  Maybe absurd silliness doesn,Äôt have a place in this document, but I for one would be able to take it more seriously if it didn,Äôt take itself so seriously.

And on that note I acknowledge that I am also quite full of shit. All of this long wind emanates, perhaps, from a narrow, stubborn mind. I sure couldn,Äôt do any better than you guys have done, but I,Äôm hoping that all this jazz will somehow help. Looking back on this post, I find it pleasantly absurd that my report on the BIP is approaching the length of the pamphlet itself. But whatever.

Um, I shall leave you with a llama,


A llama

[B_M_W]

Holy shit, the Proffessor's got the goods.

X will mindgasm when he sees this.  :-D

[LMNO]

Good points, prof.


We should really conceive of a second edition.  Do some editing.  We pretty much threw that shit together raw.


What would you suggest would be the best essay to start with?

[AFK]

some valid points are made.  I can see how the amount of vitriol that ended up in the BIP could be a deterrent.  Of course as you can see in other threads, I don't think we've ever really nailed down who the audience is.  But, I think that's where some salesmanship comes into play.  The people I've shared it with in person I try to give a bit of a context of where it came from and what it is about.  That way, they aren't totally blindsided by the fits of hate-shitting that come out.  I also agree with the comment about visuals.  Unfortunately, we were all so into the writing that there weren't any visuals offered up.

[LMNO]

There has been a standing offer of anyone who wants to submit graphics (and knows how to place them in a PDF file) should do so.

[Triple Zero]

i think the confusion of audiences is really the most important point of them all. it is in fact a problem that seems to crop up qutie often with some of the rants posted here. when i want to print them off, i think "is this useful for the random person who's going to find it? or is it rather some 'motivational' text for discordians sort of?"

[Triple Zero]

one other thing - got reminded when i just printed it out - is that some parts of it appear rather oriented towards a US audience. it already starts with the image at the front: a variation on the american flag.

a lot of people over here are perfectly capable of understanding and reading english, but references to america in specific might have a peculiar effect on them:
- the image at the front might be interpreted as the american flag, symbol for consumerism, or kind of the way it's used in the movie Fear&Loathing. this might not be a bad thing.
- but when a piece of text specifically talks about America, people not from America will think "ah those poor saps in America, being deluded and all, fortunately that kind of stuff could never happen over here"

[LMNO]

And vice-versa for Cain's rant.


So, we seem to be wanting to break this into fours:

Non-Discordian
Discordian
American
Non-American

The most I can do is try to re-vamp my rants, and re-submit them.  I think I'm aiming for Non-Discordians.

[Triple Zero]

American
Non-American

i would suggest just leaving out specific "locale" information?

given that we're battling a global problem (in short: stupidity of a specific kind), the descriptions could be worded globally right?

[P3nT4gR4m]

In terms of target audience - I'm always preaching to the 'marginals' or 'borderlines' with humour that they'll only get by crossing the line. Therefore it should appeal to real true discordians too - but that's academic.

I don't want to make a piece of work that'll make the people in this forum laugh - when I do that it gets posted here.

For general public consumption I want to take someone who's disenchanted with the world but still plugged into the con and make them piss themselves laughing for reasons they'll have to look deep inside themselves to explain properly. Maybe attaining a bit of clarity in the process.

Maybe this bears some relevence to this project. Maybe not.

[Jenne]

I see an editor in the making ITT.

[LMNO]

American
Non-American

i would suggest just leaving out specific "locale" information?

given that we're battling a global problem (in short: stupidity of a specific kind), the descriptions could be worded globally right?

When reading the original PD, did you "get" the references to Nixon, et al?  Did they feel alienating?

What I mean is, we make many pop cultural references in these writings.  Should the all be excluded?

[LMNO]

Also, I think we should keep in mind that we should not present a unified message.

One of the things I like about the BIP et al is that each person is coming from a different angle, a different style, even a different opinion of what the metaphor is.  To me, it helps keep in perspective that this is all a metaphor, and personal interpretation counts for a lot.

[Triple Zero]

American
Non-American

i would suggest just leaving out specific "locale" information?

given that we're battling a global problem (in short: stupidity of a specific kind), the descriptions could be worded globally right?

When reading the original PD, did you "get" the references to Nixon, et al?  Did they feel alienating?

1 - no i didn't "get" them, probably still don't, in fact.

2 - well, kind of. but since there was already so much gibberish in the PD, i didn't really separate between bits i didn't understand cause they were (apparent) nonsense and bits i didn't understand because i didn't "get" them (due to lack of background knowledge).
in fact there are probably still new bits i would "get" if i were to reread the PD, take the Law of Fives which has taken on quite a bit more meaning after i first encountered it.
but the BIP-pamphlet isn't the PD and it's not written in the 60s either. If we could (or want to) get away with a background noise level of nonsense to overshadow the mistakes or cloudy inside-jokes parts, we wouldn't be having this discussion, i think.
also i didn't know what a "starbucks" was when i first read it, nor a whole lot of american cultural icons (that weren't really imported in europe yet).

but it's not really my point that people will understand certain things without the proper background knowledge. it's more that american culture references attach a certain kind of hollywood/movie/commercial and therefore unreal feeling to a text.

especially with the horrible troofs that ought to be revealed in this BIP pamphlet, people will be on the lookout for excuses of why this doesn't apply to them, why they don't need to start thinking for themselves Right Now, why "everything will be allright with ME" etc. if the pamphlet is obviously speaking about something in a different continent, and especially a continent about which they have heard already so many bad things about (lack of freedom, patriot act, gay marriage, etc etc etc are not really ignored in the media here) ...
think about (ok this is exxagerating a bit but) finding such a pamphlet, telling you to wake the fuck up, loosen your chains, stand up against the man get organized start the revolution etc and then finding some clues that the pamphlet in question was written not only in but also about China sure you give it an interested read, but then dismiss it as something "that does not really apply to you".
now certainly europe and america are culturally a lot more close than that, but as i said, with difficult and horrible information like in the BIP, the same effect might apply.

[Triple Zero]

Also, I think we should keep in mind that we should not present a unified message.

One of the things I like about the BIP et al is that each person is coming from a different angle, a different style, even a different opinion of what the metaphor is.  To me, it helps keep in perspective that this is all a metaphor, and personal interpretation counts for a lot.

ok, i like that. meaning it would help if one or more of the texts would obviously come from a european. would give the pamphlet an even more global attitude, adding extra importance and urgence.