The Storm of Progress(ive)

"Grim-faced and forbidding
Their faces closed tight
An angular mass of New Yorkers
Pacing in rhythm
Race the oncoming night
They chase through the streets of Manhattan
Head-first humanity
Pause at a light
Then flow through the streets of the city"
- Rush - The Camera Eye

Rush and other progressive rock/metal bands espouse the wondrous textures and timbres of eclectic rhythms and melodies, crafting their instrumental mastery for eyes to gape and have ears struck down in disbelief - but what about lyrics? Often overlooked as peripheral or perfunctory, evocative lyricism in progressive metal has undergone a decline since the heady and erudite days of Rush, the early Dream Theater, Pink Floyd and others. However, despite some band's classification by others residing outside the progressive realm, could poetic lyrics substitute for poetic showmanship and composition? Case and point, Dark Tranquillity in Hedon:

"Enter Suicidal Angels;
How hungry we've become;
like animals naked in shame
Fed with the hooves of apocalypse
that galloped down, disordered worlds behind

From word to a word I was led to a word
that spanned over cultures in rage
Crimson masses, sleeped in decadence
holding our tongues to the thirsty sun
So, it the future still open?
Then enter, hornet, from our hive-dark hearts
to draw down the end from within"

The image of nihilistic angels swooping from the heavens to desecrate the human spirit is like Zamyatin's "dynamite that explodes eternally" - it just immerses you in dread and inevitability. The gothic music just heightens an already existent atmosphere. Katatonia in their "so simple it's brilliant" aesthetic of pure lyrical brilliance is exemplified in the following passage which requires no music to move and inspire.

"Old light and new colors
Your picture hangs in the night
Is this the right time to set one free and go away
In the emptiness behind you I will walk about
Surely you'll miss me, but long live the doubt

What will replace us?
What will be our memory of this time?
Second hand impressions
Hand them over so we can let it die

I remember one time when we were abroad
I was laughing at a book I had bought
But you were standing against the hotel wall
Frozen in an unknown thought"
- Katatonia - Burn the Remembrance

Beautiful.

---

http://twitter.com/crushtor

General Semantics: Relationships and Politics - Over and Under Definition

While thinking about my past and my intellectual preferences as to how to approach it, my mind took flight on a question that I find many others approach with caution, disdain and confusion - in the realm of human relationships and whether the terms we use to describe them are problematic, thereby contributing to their collapse and almost routine failure. As Korzybski provides in his Science and Sanity, I believe that the term "boyfriend/girlfriend" or "husband/wife" or even "partner" which is used as an abstraction for same-sex relationships are over/underdefined, and as such carry with them the burden of disappointment and unfair expectation.

Over/underdefinition runs rife in politics and media. An example of over/underdefinition in a political context can be found in the word "democracy" - while the intensional definition of "democracy" could be applied to an extensional dictatorship such as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (functionally, the DPRK exists as a multi-party democracy, although no power is ever delegated to anyone else except for the "Dear Leader") it becomes apparent that the word, democracy, has been overdefined to fit a political agenda and not the facts as we confront them.

As the Wiktionary states as an intensional definition, the term "girlfriend" means the "female partner in a romantic relationship" - but when we declare to ourselves or even others (setting our Facebook status to reflect the territory to the dreaded 'In a Relationship' status) are we displaying a definition rather an an extensional fact? If your boyfriend cheats on you, claiming the relationship dissolved in his mind's eye, does the intensional term still fit the extensional territory? (By that definition, if you thought him to still be your boyfriend, but did not extend the same courtesy as you being his girlfriend, does the relationship still exist?) If one partner intensionally defines a relationship as something akin to a "booty call" or some such vulgar term while the other expects total fidelity of word and deed, who is "in the relationship"? In this example, does it appear that either of these two are in a relationship, by extensional definition? Why do so many over/underdefine the term to satisfy a tendency to decieve oneself for the sake of an equally over/underdefined term "love" or "companionship?"

Simply put, some relationships simply dissolve from a mismatch in expectation - the maps for the relationship simply do not fit the territory and neither party shall give the other the benefit of the doubt to explore one another's map to evaluate fully as to what map will be followed and how to apply this to the territory that confronts them day-by-day. It feels like a struggle to be surmounted - however one can find the vividness in life's grand palette by drawing more detailed maps and becoming more extensionally oriented to avoid such conflicts arising from mere "definition."

References:
Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics, Alfred Korzybski, Institute of General Semantics, 1994, 5th edition.
The New Peoplemaking, Virginia Satir, Science and Behavior Books, 1988.

---

http://twitter.com/crushtor

Corruption or Reason

It felt like a day that reminded of me the worth of being alive. Going out for curry with Rae, Kris, Gemma and Ash (all of whom couldn't finish their plates...)
So, since we had to obey the Kirae house rules of no drinks after bedtime, Gem and I drove to one of the most opulent mansions I've ever been in. It had French Louis XIV style gilded mirrors, statues of cherubs lining ornate mantlepieces, grand pianos, four-poster beds and for some reason a really shithouse computer. (Rich people have more money than sense) After watching the unbelievably piss-funny hyper-observational humor of Carl Barron, we retired to a grandiose turkish-style bed, draped in huge, soft cushions. It was insane. But comfy as. Such a mint house...

Also, I finally purchased a copy of Science and Sanity after looking for it for so long. I plan to read it again over summer like last time and gain even more insight into GS and how to apply it.

For example:
Intensional definition: needs moar = construct additional pylons!
Extensional definition: needs moar = Open your NetBank. Look at the CR column. The gap between that amount and a car could be considered a definition of the above term.

To my American friends: I implore you to use the new word I created in lieu of "cockblocking." I now use the word "lunchcutsmanship" instead. (e.g. "That was a fine display of lunchcutsmanship")

---

http://twitter.com/crushtor