Generally I don't bother with this sort of illiteracy. If I want self-satisfying erotica, I'll shake hands with myself in the shower. But I found this particular piece of intellectual pornography to be so prototypical that I just have to masturbate a little to it, it public. What, is my conflation of religion and biology confusing? It is a phenomenon well-known to those familiar with the metaphysical musings of saints. Evinced here in Zappa's evocative image of God offering to "fuck" us over.
Zappa's conceit of God is, well, obvious. Sophomorically so. We all have spent some part of our adolescence admiring our capacity to be glib -- how proper and fitting it is, to outgrow this stage, as the outworking of normal maturation. As for the mis-particulars here, they are hardly worthy of note. Yes, Frank, that's right. God in the Garden was against knowledge. It's all about ignorant faith. Mm-hmm. Just be a dumb blond and you can use my jacuzzi. Cuz, first, we all know how dumb those blonds are. Me, for example. Pathetic. And second, God just wants to use us ... that's why he invented us ... like the pervert who has children so he can molest them. Mm-hmm. And third, God's gonna git you if'n you disobey.
Well, that last one is true. But the other two, not so much. And it isn't God who gets us anyway ... it's the implacable laws of physics, and their precursors, the laws of metaphysics. Quantum mechanics after all takes us only so far, teetering on the brink of potentialities ... beyond which, the only vocabulary that applies is borrowed from the lexicon of angels.
Zappa is/was too sophisticated to deign to notice this bothersome anomaly of his atheism. Zappa supposes that he -- and humanity, and the universe -- like Satan, created himself. As an act of will he calls himself out of the void of nothingness, thither to return upon his will's failure. It's a theory. And one theory is just as good as any other, as Communism and Evolutionism prove. If you just believe, it answers all questions. Didn't Marx tell us so? But I was wrong just now when I said "just as good" ... LOL ... what was I thinking? Silly me. Cuz I left something out. I said "Communism", when what I should have said was "Scientific Communism". Oh, the things science can prove. It's like a Dr. Suess tale ... irrefutable in its encompassing eloquence.
Zappa's conceit of God is, well, obvious. Sophomorically so. We all have spent some part of our adolescence admiring our capacity to be glib -- how proper and fitting it is, to outgrow this stage, as the outworking of normal maturation. As for the mis-particulars here, they are hardly worthy of note. Yes, Frank, that's right. God in the Garden was against knowledge. It's all about ignorant faith. Mm-hmm. Just be a dumb blond and you can use my jacuzzi. Cuz, first, we all know how dumb those blonds are. Me, for example. Pathetic. And second, God just wants to use us ... that's why he invented us ... like the pervert who has children so he can molest them. Mm-hmm. And third, God's gonna git you if'n you disobey.
Well, that last one is true. But the other two, not so much. And it isn't God who gets us anyway ... it's the implacable laws of physics, and their precursors, the laws of metaphysics. Quantum mechanics after all takes us only so far, teetering on the brink of potentialities ... beyond which, the only vocabulary that applies is borrowed from the lexicon of angels.
Zappa is/was too sophisticated to deign to notice this bothersome anomaly of his atheism. Zappa supposes that he -- and humanity, and the universe -- like Satan, created himself. As an act of will he calls himself out of the void of nothingness, thither to return upon his will's failure. It's a theory. And one theory is just as good as any other, as Communism and Evolutionism prove. If you just believe, it answers all questions. Didn't Marx tell us so? But I was wrong just now when I said "just as good" ... LOL ... what was I thinking? Silly me. Cuz I left something out. I said "Communism", when what I should have said was "Scientific Communism". Oh, the things science can prove. It's like a Dr. Suess tale ... irrefutable in its encompassing eloquence.
"Get smart and I'll fuck you over." Man that's good. Cuz I too have profound daddy issues. And I too am spiritually dry. I don't know if Zappa used drugs. Some of them didn't. If he did, he counted drug-induced psychoses as spirituality. If he didn't, he would have consoled his soul with the cold ruminations of his intellect. As for the absolute anti-intellectualism of the religion he was attacking, Zappa must have avoided intercourse with informed and articulate corespondents. Nobody challenged his opinions. He was convinced, in the echo chamber of his quotidian milieu, by the vibrations of his pervading sympathies.
It has to do with self-righteousness, which is no-righteousness. Real righteousness is comparative, not reflexive. Like some politician who declares that, when he has momentarily stopped speaking, the debate is over -- well, we must recognize hypocrisy when we run into it. Having a strong faith is the opposite of having a narrow mind. Strong faith is strong enough to confront, and answer, opposition.
I say all this as a way of diverting myself from discussing things of a more personal nature. Logic is easy. Vulnerability is hard.
J
No comments:
Post a Comment