Atonal

[rinue]

The tone of the twentieth century was set by three things: Sigmund Freud, Jack the Ripper, and the Russian Revolution. Almost any definitive historical event can be traced to one of them, or more often to all three. From Jack comes the sexualization of violence, sensationalist news as entertainment, the idea that the rich should care for the unfortunate, conspiracy theories as common trade, and the notion that the bad guys get away with it. From the revolution, you get class struggle on a large scale, the end of aristocracy, equality among all classes, war conducted on and by civilians, Josef Stalin, and the Cold War. The two combined birthed Hitler, nationalism, and paranoia. Freud rounded us out with sexual liberation, psychotherapy, blaming our parents, and the preeminence of the brain.

I'm not saying that none of these concepts existed before, but that these three factors drove them home and influenced everyone so profoundly -- whether directly or indirectly -- that they can be given almost full credit for the last century. They were definitive.

I strongly suspect that September 11th set the tone for the twenty first century. Much as I'm tired of hearing about it and talking about it, the fact that it is still so present throughout the world speaks to its effect. I think this will be a century of uncertainty and fear, but with a sense of unity that I hope will prove more powerful.

Fuck, I'm not saying this right and I sound like a high school philsopher. Stop listening to me explain it and just think. Speculate.

Comments

[okoge.livejournal.com]

Freud, definitely.
What about Darwin?

[rinue.livejournal.com]

Darwin wasn't all that influential if you think about it. I'm not saying he wasn't important -- I'm not saying that I don't respect the guy, and that he didn't set science on its way. But I have the feeling that some scientists already believed what he articulated, and that more would have come to that opinion if he hadn't.

Moreover, there are a lot of people who still don't believe him. Darwin only rocked the worlds of the uber-religious.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't look at, for example, Vietnam and say "Darwin at work!" in the same way that I say "reminds me of the Russian Revolution, and the American response is very Jack the Ripper." I don't look at the race riots and say "natural selection!" so much as "Russian Revolution again -- the class struggle!" With computers, I don't say "origins of the species!" I say "ah, Freud's theories on how the mind works led to this."

To be fair, though, I do think that natural selection did have a certain influence -- just look at the eugenics movement, and the justification for keeping certain races/genders down. But since that had been going on for centuries prior, I simply look at Darwin as a new justification, not a crucible.

Re:

[okoge.livejournal.com]

have the feeling that some scientists already believed what he articulated

yes, definitely, most of the ideas he put together had been around since the Greek philosophers/natural scientists

Moreover, there are a lot of people who still don't believe him.

in his ideas, i think you mean. ;)

I certainly haven't studied him [and 20th century history] enough to say yes for certain his ideas, and the idea of Darwin, have majorly influenced the 20th century. Just an intuition. I would also add Einstein to that list of major influences on the 20th century... maybe?

I don't look at the race riots and say "natural selection!" so much as "Russian Revolution again -- the class struggle!"

but class struggle is as old as civilization.. of which the Russian Revolution was only one manifestation. But again, I don't know enough to say anything definitive about it's influence, one way or the other. :)

thanks for some ideas to ponder, though.

[rinue.livejournal.com]

The "Darwin Issue" has been on my mind ever since I read your comment, and I think you should know that Val is fully in support of you. With Darwin came social Darwinism which set up nationalism, which set up WWI, which set up WWII, which set up the Cold War and Vietnam, etc.. So whether I agree with you or not, your position may be more valid than mine and we should investigate this further.

I think my major concern (or mental block, depending on your perception,) is that I place Darwin firmly in the 19th century. I see him to a large extent as a culmination of that century instead of a lead in to the next. Whether they disagreed with him or not, they made him.

[keieru.livejournal.com]

fascinating. Out of curiousity, which would you attribute the scientific revolution to? Not Newton's, but Einstein's: the replacement of the existing logical, mechanistic worldview with the current weirdass quantum uncertanties. I mean, to a certain extent, most new technologies can be traced to nationalism (computers, cryptosystems, atom bombs, space travel, etc), but what about the more neutral advances like relativity and particle dynamics? They required a major leap in thinking from the 19th century school of thought.

I definitely agree about Sept 11th. It'll be interesting to see what kind of long-term global effects we end up with. (For instance, I don't think this paranoia thing will go away any time soon.)

[rinue.livejournal.com]

My God, that's a brilliant point. I could say that there's a certain Freudian attitude to it, the idea that while you can trace things backwards you can't take them forward -- you can say that a man's depression stems from his unhappy childhood, but you cannot say that because someone has an unhappy childhood he will be depressed in the future. You also wind up with small things that have huge impacts, or things divergent from what everyone else sees as reality.

It's also possible that quantum physics -- which are still not fully understood and certainly not fully accepted (let's face it -- I've taken half a dozen physics courses (ahh, engineering majors,) and they're almost entirely composed of classical physics except maybe one class period out of the semester) actually belongs more to the 21st century -- that the computer and information revolution began in the 20th, but is really just a precursor.

In addition, I don't know how much Einstein's theories have really impacted everyone's imaginations. That is -- I know they've influenced me profoundly, as well as almost any science fiction buff. Or, well -- okay, the people who understand relativity on an instinctual level, the people to whom it was introduced early enough to influence thought processes (consciously or un) are people of my (our?) generation, people who haven't come to power yet.

Score one for the 21st century! We've got September 11th, quantam physics, and the Internet. Whatever else happens, we're sure going to be international.

And Jesus will there be privacy issues.

wow

[marcyleecorgan.livejournal.com]

that while you can trace things backwards you can't take them forward -- you can say that a man's depression stems from his unhappy childhood, but you cannot say that because someone has an unhappy childhood he will be depressed in the future.

I was actually thinking about this last night. Mankind in general is always looking back to find a scapegaot for their behavior. With Freud and the emergence of psychology as a "normal" everyday kind of thing, the public had an explanation and excuse for every mistake they ever made. Sad, really, but I just can't hate anybody. They just all do what they percieve as right at the time.

[marcyleecorgan.livejournal.com]

forgive the horror that is my spelling.

Re: wow

[rinue.livejournal.com]

. . . and quantum physics reverses all that, doesn't it? (Or maybe it doesn't. ::laughs:: Here I go attributing free will to sub-atomic particles. ::rolls eyes::) It is their choice, because how they are now is only one option along an axis of probability curves. Existentialism again: the past explains the present but does not justify it. Psychology is not about explaining the past, but about overcoming it.

. . . and that's why we can still love everyone -- because it's our choice to do so. Their past is irrelevant, whether they've hurt us or not. I don't love people or not love people based upon who they are or their reasons for being who they are; I love people because they are people and I made the decision long ago that I would.

[hipgunslinger.livejournal.com]

I hate to bring something new up, and in what seems like such an uneducated light, but it's my honest opinion that so much of the 20th century was ruled by the concepts of efficiency and convenience.
I've no real idea who could be held responsible for this... but despite the fact that it doesn't appear as an international concept (I will stipulate that most of these trends being discussed here are mostly for the luxury of first world countries - which on a national scale would make me feel that there was less of a Russian Revolution equalizing of the classes occurring) it just seems to me to be too prevalent an undertone to ignore in the spirit of the discussion.
And now I'm going to have a drink and TRY to go to bed. I can't sleep worth a damn, so if this sounds dumb, it's just because I was lonely and sleepless.

[katiebec.livejournal.com]

For this I'd point to either the long-term effects of the Industrial Revolution or to the innovations of Henry Ford. Which were, I suppose, those effects.

Also might tie into the Russian Revolution, though -- worker-controlled production, practicality over luxury, etc.

Is it a cause or an effect of the increased speed and ease of transportation and communication, the weakening of boundaries, the growing rift between economic classes, and the internationalism that's taking us into the 21st century?

'efficiency and convenience' -- they seem less a catalyst like the Russian Revolution/Jack the Ripper/Freud and more a mood or an aim. A result.

Frivolous idea: if you read Trotsky's History of the Russian Revolution, watch "From Hell", and take a Psych 101 course, have you experienced a condensed version of 1901-2000?

[hipgunslinger.livejournal.com]

I woke up this morning too, after having had a dream about the Marquis de Sade working as a janitor.

I think perhaps we need honourable mentions.

[rinue.livejournal.com]

::mentions you both honorably in dinner conversation::

I suppose I'm not thinking as much about cause and effect as . . . millieu. In which case . . . yes, reading some Freud, studying the revolution, and watching From Hell does give you a pretty good primer on the 20th century.

[rinue.livejournal.com]

Johnny --

If you've been having problems with sleeplessness and nightmares, you might want to go to an herbalist and track down some dried valerian. Brew it into a tea (ie pour hot water over it and let it steep) just before bedtime. It's both a sedative and an anti-depressant, so it works fairly well for stressful sleep. (You may also want to sleep next to something that smells like lavender, but I find that a bit excessive.)

--Romie

Re:

[hipgunslinger.livejournal.com]

I actually already have a small bottle of lavender extract romie... it has done little good for me. It's not so much that I am stressful, just that I have always had trouble getting to sleep for a number of reasons. I lack the discipline to get into an alpha level stage of mind beforehand. Repetitive mantras do me quite well at certain times, but conditions beat me out overall.
For example, last night, the fact that I had slept for two hours and then awoken was the death of me. Daylight, loud noise, quiet conversations and anything other than the lying down position also do me in as well.
I am a moody sleeper.
Thank you though. :)
I will find some dried valerian though... I keep hearing wonderful things about it. But somehow I think that my whiskey shooters will go badly with it...
Hahah. That's funny.
Well, I hope it is anyway.

[deche.livejournal.com]

d'oh! Ok I think I'll go back to doodling in my sketch book now. you guys have gone way beyond my mental capabilities... that or, I tend to not give a shit about the rest of the world and whatever the hell goes on in it and/or why.