Bad Boys, "swagger deficit," 'n stuff

[caroljane]

Ah but who's the guy with the lighter? Mr Right or Mr Right Now?

I see the man with the lighter as a statist/socialist type. He's the most successful at wooing the public.

J

And the lady waiting to be lit up would be....?

[Selene]

Ah but who's the guy with the lighter? Mr Right or Mr Right Now?

I see the man with the lighter as a statist/socialist type. He's the most successful at wooing the public.

J

And the lady waiting to be lit up would be....?

A non Muslim?

[Jonathan]

And the lady waiting to be lit up would be....?

She's the public.

J

[Selene]

And the lady waiting to be lit up would be....?

She's the public.

J

By the way Jonathan, that has been one of my favorites since you first posted it and I have used it to make a point with many folks.

I forgot how nice that website is, I just did one of the jigsaw puzzles. Now it is bookmarked.

Thanks.

Edited April 14, 2011 by Selene

[Ellen Stuttle]

Tansey has a few paintings that could be said to make use of the "bad boy" concept, but I think they're usually designed to make fun of others' notions of "bad boy" heroism. I'm having a hard time thinking of paintings which contain sincere, positive representations of "bad boys." But, I'm not at home at the moment, so I'll have to wait until I can page through some of my art books to see if I can come up with anything that might be close to Rand's notion of the rebellious sense of life.

J

I enjoy Tansey and was powerfully affected especially by one of his which you posted, I think the first which clued me in to his work as that of someone to notice but one I misinterpreted on first seeing because of the computer limitations -- the female figure climbing the "cliff."

But, not "bad boy" heroism in painting? Like, um, SATAN for instance?

The ultimate "'bad boy' heroism" in literature, as I see it, changing genres, is Satan in Milton's "Paradise Lost." Satan is the hero of the piece.

And then there is Louis Jourdan as Dracula in the BBC television version of Bram Stoker's story, but sexually intense as I found that portrayal, Satan is the big bad-boy antagonist/hero in the Western tradition. (Rand needed a major "Satan" figure herself. We all know who.)

Ellen

Edited April 14, 2011 by Ellen Stuttle

[Jonathan]

By the way Jonathan, that has been one of my favorites since you first posted it and I have used it to make a point with many folks.

Yeah, I've done the same thing. The image has a lot of metaphorical usefulness.

J

[Jonathan]

I enjoy Tansey and was powerfully affected especially by one of his which you posted, I think the first which clued me in to his work as that of someone to notice but one I misinterpreted on first seeing because of the computer limitations -- the female figure climbing the "cliff."

The cliff climber is one of my favorites as well, but, damn it, I can't find my link to it. I actually haven't seen the image in years.

But, not "bad boy" heroism in painting? Like, um, SATAN for instance?

What was I thinking? Duh! Devils and demons. You can't get much more "bad boy" sexual in visual art than Fuseli's Nightmare paintings.

J

[anthony]

[....]

I was thinking of a forum like O.Online where it seems that every fourth poster is a student of Physics and Maths.

At the least, it's apparent there is a higher proportion of them as opposed to Liberal Arts students, when compared to the general public at large.

That's interesting, Tony. I don't often look at O.Online, only when something there is linked to.

What's the age bracket of the Physics and Maths students posting there? Maybe things are changing. There was always a sprinkling of mathematicians -- and a lot of computer programmers. But few biologists and chemists, and even fewer physicists.

What happens with questioning of Objectivism, or outright dissent, on OO? I've always gotten the impression, from mentions of discussions there and the occasions when I've followed a link there, that the tenor is straight and narrow.

Ellen

Ellen,

I 'think' there has been a shift on O.Online lately. I can't be certain as I haven't been there much lately, but have lately noticed a greater tolerance of honest uncertainty or divergent opinions - there seems a willingness to discuss these at length in a spirit of goodwill. When I joined a couple of years back, I was horrified at the enmity towards NB, (I was new to 'splits' and things) and I pointedly but politely often mentioned his writing, and was shot down a few times. Now, recently, I saw a moderator recommending Branden's AND Kelley's books!

There is the exuberance of youth, with good minds, learning a powerful philosophy, so there can be an excess of dogmatism. But, yes - aged from late teens to early 30's, I'd hazard, with some very smart older heads.

(I've also found quite heart-breaking the problems with parents, girl-friends, and the like. Damn, there are some things I would not want to go through again. )

Tony

[PDS]

[...] the young people attracted to Objectivism are largely conformists, seeking spoon-fed answers to what they perceive to be life's challenges.

That's just what I don't understand, what people who are conformists find appealing in Objectivism. Is it simply the appearance of its providing "all the answers" ready-made?

Of course, the big question here is: are Howard Roarks "born," or "made"? I happen to think, when all is said and done, that they are born.

I once, back in '99, discussed the question of all the conformists with Nathaniel and he said that he thinks many who gravitate to Objectivism feel that by adopting it they therefore become the sort of hero/ines Rand portrays.

It's no surprise that many 'straight' scientist-engineer types are drawn to Objectivism, but what's wrong with an engineer (or Capitalist businessman) with the *Attitude* of a true individualist and rebel?

I think few scientists are drawn to Objectivism. For one thing, career scientists are awfully busy first learning all the math and the basics in their field and then pursuing their subject specialty. But more fundamentally, I think many of a scientific disposition recognize something inimical to the never-ending seeking of the scientific endeavor.

Ellen

Interesting theory from Nathaniel, and that may account for the occasional bout of Orange Hair. But that still does not seem to account for the "Stepford Wife" element among younger Objectivists. If they think they have become hero/ines, they sure don't seem to act like it.

[Selene]

By the way Jonathan, that has been one of my favorites since you first posted it and I have used it to make a point with many folks.

Yeah, I've done the same thing. The image has a lot of metaphorical usefulness.

J

I was looking for the woman climbing the cliff and ran into several of his works and articles about his artistic approach and this one struck me as quite powerful:

"Interception" --Mark Tansey

[Ellen Stuttle]

[...] this one struck me as quite powerful:

[ image ]

"Interception" --Mark Tansey

UM! Yeah. I hadn't seen that one before. Something wild gets into some of his work. Those are the ones that grab my attention with a thrill, though I enjoy the sophisticated cleverness of his more typical paintings. That one could be a cosmic Heathcliff spirit.

Here's a Wiki description which turned up when I Googled Heathcliff:

link

Heathcliff is a fictional character in the novel Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë. Owing to the novel's enduring fame and popularity, he is often regarded as an archetype of the tortured Romantic Byronic hero whose all-consuming passions destroy both himself and those around him. Heathcliff can also be viewed as a reflection and product of his psychological past: the abuse, neglect and scorn of those with whom he grows up render him abusive, neglectful and scornful.

Legend has stereotyped him somewhat into a romantic hero, and he is generally known more for his love for Catherine Earnshaw than his final years of vengeance in the second half of the novel, in which he grows into a bitter, haunted man (although there are also a number of incidents in Heathcliff's early life that show that he was an angry and sometimes malicious individual from the beginning; again, these tend to be glossed over in the popular imagination). His complicated, mesmerising and altogether bizarre nature makes him a rare character, with components of both the hero and villain.

[Ellen Stuttle]

[....]

I once, back in '99, discussed the question of all the conformists with Nathaniel and he said that he thinks many who gravitate to Objectivism feel that by adopting it they therefore become the sort of hero/ines Rand portrays.

[....]

Interesting theory from Nathaniel, and that may account for the occasional bout of Orange Hair. But that still does not seem to account for the "Stepford Wife" element among younger Objectivists. If they think they have become hero/ines, they sure don't seem to act like it.

That's what I thought, too, that NB's theory would account for the "Orange Hair" sorts, who are "colorful" but in a way that tends to impress others as obnoxious. But it doesn't account for the much more plentiful "Stepford Wife" type. The "Orange Hair" type I don't have trouble understanding as a misfire result (similar to the Young Werther imitators). It's the regimented catechismic results which seem disjunctual.

Ellen

[Xray]

And the lady waiting to be lit up would be....?

LOL, good one, Daunce!

The phallic symbols in the picture are so obvious that I get the impression of satirical intent on the painter's part.

Edited April 15, 2011 by Xray

[Greybird]

That thread title makes this link irresistible. From deviantART, with artist's comment:

Ayn Rand's Swagger by LackingInCharm

Ayn Rand and her hip-hop crew are f**king s**t up in the rap world, using rhymes born out of hip Objectivism-type slang. Watch out Wu-Tang.

[Jonathan]

I was looking for the woman climbing the cliff and ran into several of his works and articles about his artistic approach and this one struck me as quite powerful:

... "Interception" --Mark Tansey

I like the implied visual reference to Holbein's The Ambassadors (larger image here) -- if you look at Tansey's painting from an angle from the bottom left, the foreshortening of the image allows you to see The Origin of Painting: Dibutades Tracing the Portrait of a Shepherd by Jean-Baptiste Regnault.

Here's a digitally compressed version of the Tansey above a scan of the Regnault:

J

[caroljane]

I was looking for the woman climbing the cliff and ran into several of his works and articles about his artistic approach and this one struck me as quite powerful:

... "Interception" --Mark Tansey

I like the implied visual reference to Holbein's The Ambassadors (larger image here) -- if you look at Tansey's painting from an angle from the bottom left, the foreshortening of the image allows you to see The Origin of Painting: Dibutades Tracing the Portrait of a Shepherd by Jean-Baptiste Regnault.

Here's a digitally compressed version of the Tansey above a scan of the Regnault:

J

Jonathan,

Just caught by your Holbein reference.

One of the few times I actually looked at original paintings was at the National Portrait Gallery in London and being a Tudor aficianado I was drawn to the fearless, almost artless art of Holbein. I know that he was of course supremely artful but that was my impression.

[Xray]

Thanks Ellen for opening this thread.

If you swagger supposedly you have something to swagger about. Herding here means accepting Rand's intellectual radicalism but conforming to her ad hominem cultural dictates.

What would it be that an Objectivist ought to swagger about?

With "swagger" I connote strutting proudly etc., it sounds a bit ridiculous to my ears in that context.

Also needed for backdrop is the quote Jonathan provided from Rand's Journals on "bad boys." (I corrected a typo I noticed.)

As Rand wrote (Journals of Ayn Rand, 22):

I do not think, nor did I think when I wrote this play, that a swindler is a heroic character or that a respectable banker is a villain. But for the purpose of dramatizing the conflict of independence versus conformity, a criminal – a social outcast – can be an eloquent symbol. This, incidentally, is the reason of the profound appeal of the "noble crook" in fiction. He is the symbol of the rebel as such, regardless of the kind of society he rebels against, the symbol – for most people – of their vague, undefined, unrealized groping toward a concept, or a shadowy image, of man's self-esteem.

That a career of crime is not, in fact, the way to implement one's self-esteem, is irrelevant in sense-of-life terms. A sense of life is concerned mainly with consciousness, not with existence – or rather: with the way a man's consciousness faces existence. It is concerned with a basic frame of mind, not with rules of conduct.

Interesting comments by Rand about the profound appeal of the "noble crook" in fiction.

But I don't think that people's "vague, undefined, unrealized groping toward a concept, or a shadowy image, of man's self-esteem" is the reason for the noble crook's appeal.

Imo it is something rooted deeper, of biopsychological nature.

It has been pointed out that women are often attracted to "bad boys", in fiction as well as in reality.

My theory: all "bad boys", of whatever provenience, have one common denominator: they are all risk takers. Being a risk taker implies a certain amount of fearlessness, and at the time when our human ancestors still lived in caves, the fearless man was more likely to protect the females and their offspring against attackers.

The fictional heroes as well as the fictional bad boys can give women a feeling of adventure and thrill they may miss in their own lives.

Edited April 17, 2011 by Xray

[Jonathan]

Interesting comments by Rand about the profound appeal of the "noble crook" in fiction.

But I don't think that people's "vague, undefined, unrealized groping toward a concept, or a shadowy image, of man's self-esteem" is the reason for the noble crook's appeal.

Imo it is something rooted deeper, of biopsychological nature.

It has been pointed out that women are often attracted to "bad boys", in fiction as well as in reality.

My theory: all "bad boys", of whatever provenience, have one common denominator: they are all risk takers. Being a risk taker implies a certain amount of fearlessness, and at the time when our human ancestors still lived in caves, the fearless man was more likely to protect the females and their offspring against attackers.

It sounds as if you're pretty much saying the same thing that Rand was getting at. Aren't risk-taking and fearlessness the outward manifestations of self-esteem?

J

[Philip Coates]

Subject: This is a thread displaying the use of concepts imprecisely (sloppy, shifting, or ambiguous)

The admiration or esteeming of "swagger" or being a "bad boy", whether among Oists or among the opposite sex, is foolish and will lead one into many errors in "judging people by their cover".

In each case, it's a superficial attribute. It does not connote self-confidence or risk-taking but merely the ability to put on its facade.

Two analogies will make the point clear ==>

1) "Swagger" : Self-confidence and Self-esteem :: Being a "motor-mouth" : Intelligence

2) Being a "Bad-Boy" : Willingness to Act and Take Proper Risks :: The Cast of 'Jackass" : People who are Creative or Genuine Explorers

Edited April 17, 2011 by Philip Coates

[caroljane]

It sounds as if you're pretty much saying the same thing that Rand was getting at. Aren't risk-taking and fearlessness the outward manifestations of self-esteem?

J

I don't see how. There are good and bad and calculated risks; the willingness to take them would reflect a trust in your own judgment. But fearlessness would entail a suspension of judgment altogether; not to assess risk or danger at all,but to proceed anyway.Trust in your own judgment is part of self-esteem certainly, but to decide that one's own knowledge overrides every factor of reality in a dangerous situation, is not rational self-esteem as I understand it, and not to feel fear is not to be human. I interpret fearlessness here not as overcoming fear, but not feeling it.

[Brant Gaede]

Subject: This is a thread displaying the use of concepts imprecisely (sloppy, shifting, or ambiguous)

So?

--Brant

[Brant Gaede]

The admiration or esteeming of "swagger" or being a "bad boy", whether among Oists or among the opposite sex, is foolish and will lead one into many errors in "judging people by their cover".

In each case, it's a superficial attribute. It does not connote self-confidence or risk-taking but merely the ability to put on its facade.

Two analogies will make the point clear ==>

1) "Swagger" : Self-confidence and Self-esteem :: Being a "motor-mouth" : Intelligence

2) Being a "Bad-Boy" : Willingness to Act and Take Proper Risks :: The Cast of 'Jackass" : People who are Creative or Genuine Explorers

The problem here is starting from ignorance and then consulting some kind of dictionary as the basis of an incoherent lecture on a complicated aspect of human psychology.

--Brant

[PDS]

Subject: This is a thread displaying the use of concepts imprecisely (sloppy, shifting, or ambiguous)

The admiration or esteeming of "swagger" or being a "bad boy", whether among Oists or among the opposite sex, is foolish and will lead one into many errors in "judging people by their cover".

In each case, it's a superficial attribute. It does not connote self-confidence or risk-taking but merely the ability to put on its facade.

Two analogies will make the point clear ==>

1) "Swagger" : Self-confidence and Self-esteem :: Being a "motor-mouth" : Intelligence

2) Being a "Bad-Boy" : Willingness to Act and Take Proper Risks :: The Cast of 'Jackass" : People who are Creative or Genuine Explorers

Just curious, Phil: do you ever tire of wagging your finger at people?

[Ellen Stuttle]

[....]

-- if you look at Tansey's painting from an angle from the bottom left, the foreshortening of the image allows you to see The Origin of Painting: Dibutades Tracing the Portrait of a Shepherd by Jean-Baptiste Regnault.

Here's a digitally compressed version of the Tansey above a scan of the Regnault:

J

Trickster Tansey. I figured there was something of the sort which I didn't recognize. Did you see it immediately?

Do you know if there are allusions in the lower part of the painting? I can't make out detail well in that part.

Ellen

[Ellen Stuttle]

Just curious, Phil: do you ever tire of wagging your finger at people?

I think he doesn't ever tire, but I hope this thread isn't going to get deflected. The party was being fun there for awhile.

Ellen