HCJ - The intellectuals and The masses

The intellectuals and the masses.

John Carey clearly has a dislike for people who follow the masses, however one of the people he writes about Arnold Bennett, says that even the masses who follow people are all individuals in their own way even if they are following people. He thinks that if people write books that appeal to the masses this should be seen a good thing and the masses that read them should not be looked down on.

Talks about the anti-feminist movement in modernism and how women allow themselves to be subjected to a lower social class to men.

Carey agrees with Hitlers view on a weak human race. Hitlers idea of a weak race was eastern Europeans, Jews, blacks homosexuals etc. any one not of aryan race. He even considered Russians as 'sub-humans' ( a tactic mainly used to stir up anti russki feelings during the campaign against Russia.)

''The remedies of the twenty-first century...will entail the recognition that, given the state of the planet, humans, or some humans, must now be categorised as vermin."

This is an almost fascist outlook, to categorise any humans as vermin is a prejudice view discriminating against them for whatever reason similar to one Mr Hitler.

Thought that Hitlers 'Mein Kampf' was not an evil look at society, but what all of western philosophy thinking is like.

Carey says that intellectual people are scared by the threat of the masses and there capability to overhaul the hierarchy. Carey says that the emergence of people being taught to read and learn for themselves scared the modernist intellectuals that had used literature and art exclusively to exclude the masses. He uses Nietzsche as an example of this who thinks the masses will always be lower in society.

Carey views the intellectuals in the same way as Hitler, he sees them as superior and that the masses should essentially be exterminated. The weak were seen as an inferior and they cannot contribute to society and are therefore useless.

Overall he believes that the masses should be controlled and cannot understand intellectual thinking and that if they are given the right to express their views and opinions they will overhaul the intelligentsia. This is similar to Hitlers views, believing that the masses are a threat.

Totalitarianism - HCJ

Hannah Ardent was a writer writing in post holocaust society, in a time where Stalin was allegedly still sending immigrants, Jews, Slovaks etc to essentially die in Serbia. This was part of the Communist movement in Russia still being run by Stalin who, like Hitler, wanted to destroy entire races and cultures that he considered to be inferior. The communist’s ultimate triumph was the defeat of Nazi Germany in the 40’s. The left wing socialist movement of the 60’s was seen as the right thing to do and is often referred to as ‘The popular front’. This was also the time where anti-communist views were very popular; the cold war between America and Russia was very strong this followed a movement for individual rights and liberation of; blacks, disabled, Jews and so on. The 60’s movement of freedom and love was very much an American Ideal that revolved around liberation and individual prosperity (such as the idea of the American dream).

Hannah Ardents main point was that she believes the Nazi holocaust and Stalin’s killings were ultimately down to society’s participation. She does not see Hitler or Stalin as dictators who simply hypnotised people and made them do things without consciously knowing what they are doing. She says that the people who were involved in the whole Nazi ‘final solution’ are as much if not more to blame than Hitler or Stalin respectively. From the people that made the maps and designed buildings to house people, or helped run the transport they are the people systematically wiping out entire cultures. She argues that people should not simply obey authority just for the sake that they have to, they should think before they obey. Mass submission was the reason for the extermination of the Jews due to the large amount of collaborators.

HCJ- seminar 2

Thus Spoke Zarathustra
Part 1
· Says that the search for knowledge should be followed to the furthest degree possible, even if it creates war as war itself is good.- war and warriors
· He says that most writers are so in depth that are hard to understand and almost pretentious and no one else understands. (Although the book itself is exactly that, Pot kettle black). – Reading and writing
· A murder that kills someone is more aware of their own emotion as they can at least be aware of their want to kill. Someone who hasn’t killed can’t even admit to wanting to do it and therefore has less moral awareness.- Pale criminal

Talks a lot about suffering and the struggle. He says that if you preach about struggling and suffering and saying that this is the only way to prepare for the afterlife then you are preaching for death. Essentially these people are preparing themselves to die when they are supposedly preaching about living and how to live.


· Says that freedom can only be found outside of the state. The state sets the rules, runs the economy and has the say on which religion to follow. Although all are seen as free within any state, only personal freedom and choice can be found outside of state rules.- The new idol
· Says that sex is natural and good for some but bad for people too. It is natural to look for sex but if don’t constantly nothing else will be done? - Chastity
· ‘Overman’ comes up frequently in the book. This must be ‘GOD’ or a god, but this is not specified as a certain religion, it could be anyone someone that is in charge of everything. However he says you can strive to become an overman presumably in the afterlife, how you achieve that is not really made clear. – The way of the creator
· Says that there is a knack to dying at the right time. Sounds like he is hinting at having an honest and noble death at the right time could inspire others ( such as Socrates with Plato).
· His attitude towards women is very negative as he says they are only capable of loving men and that basically that is the only need for them. They can also bare children which are handy, but they are not capable of friendship.

Part 2
· Nietzsche Talks a lot about ‘Slave morality’ and how he is against Christian views on life.
· He says that slaves struggle like Jesus did and this is a good thing as the afterlife will reward them.
· This preaching is similar to the first part of the book where struggle needs to happen.
· ‘Self-overcoming’ Is a common theme, Nietzsche talks about powerful people and how you can only be truly powerful if you can control yourself. If you cannot control yourself then there is now way that you can lead and therefore you need someone to control you. Will power is an underlying feature as it determines your ability to overcome yourself in pursuit for power and leadership.
· Nietzsche is anti-nationalist and thinks that if you believe in only the state so strongly then the only outcome is going to be war. Nationalism surrounds people with a false sense of security, and makes everyone believe that if they follow everything the state has to say then they can be free and that everyone else should follow them. This is what Nietzsche believes will happen.
· Nietzsche talks about how our will and change effect so much in life in ‘on redemption’. He says that our will to be different or in fact do anything effects our present and indeed future. However we can never change the past. This is why, he argues we change is so important, as without it we can never improve ourselves or become better people.
· He talks about will being so powerful that it has created your past and that therefore to forget about your past you must forget about will all together. This would leave you in a state of doing nothing and therefore you could not create anything so you would never regret your past as you will never create a present for it to become the past. If people do not have complete control of themselves then doing things with will, will constantly happen and you will always regret the past. In order to be happy and not regret one must obey and control themselves at all times.
Part 3
· In part three we learn about events reoccurring all the time throughout life and that there is no way we can change this. In the book Zarathustra finds it hard to accept that everything that is happening now in the present has already happened in the past and will happen again in the future. This is a never ending cycle that will happen through the human instinct of will. However this does not mean that all things will happen exactly the same, Nietzsche says that things will constantly change and this is what is reoccurring not necessarily the same thing happening over and over again. The way in which people interpret the planet has constantly changed over years. Since the begin of time people have accepted and followed different religions and ways of living. People’s moral code of weather killing is or isn’t acceptable has changed from cavemen having no morality but just survival instinct all the way through to following society’s boundaries and rules. Although it was once acceptable to cut a man’s hands off for stealing a loaf of bread it would now be seen a morally outrages to punish in this way, showing a change in moral code. This happening although being a reoccurrence it is a change and it is change in itself that keeps happening, and through this change we can strive to become better people and let go of our past.
· Nietzsche therefore thinks there is not one set god or in fact morality. He believes that all gods that have been forgotten about such as Egyptian, Greek and Roman etc. have at one point asserted themselves as the one and only God or Gods for all eternity.
· Zarathustra is against a lot of Christian fundamental beliefs a common theme in the book looks at sex. Christianity says that sex should only be used for pro-creation and otherwise is dirty and wrong. Zarathustra believes that it is a natural human feeling to want sex and it is emotional and a happy thing for people to experience in person. Selfishness and pride is another issue taken up as in Christianity it is sinful for be proud. Zarathustra thinks that you must be proud of yourself if you like yourself. If you are not proud then you must have something to conceal and you are not truly happy within yourself. The sin of wanting to rule is a very important area that Nietzsche or Zarathustra disagrees with as not wanting to rule or better yourself means you have no will, and earlier in the book he says that having will leads to change and this is the way in which the natural world works.
· Change is an important issue in this chapter as it is pinpointed as Nietzsche seems to think that the world is in a constant state of change. He believes that Christianity in particular does not allow for people to feel emotions that will lead to change. Maybe he thinks that humans although in their own mind think they are living morally sound according to the bible, they are in fact ignorant to the real world. As he thinks morality is always changing if you commit yourself to one religion or even to the state and follow nationalism you can never be open to change. Although things are constantly changing every moment that people experience in life such as praising God and things of this nature will happen again. However this maybe be praising a different god or following a different type of moral code but either way the principle of following a set of rules and regulations will happen again due to change.
· It seems like Nietzsche does not believe in fate or destiny as we create our own destiny. The theme of change is only controlled by our will to do things for good or for bad, so if people are using their will this will create whatever happens to us. The term creating your own luck seems to fit his mindset; however luck in itself may not be something he believes in himself!

Part 5
· When Zarathustra comes across the kings that have fled their city, you get another taste for Nietzsche’s Sinicism for the human race through what the kings tell him. They are leaving their city as they are not contempt with leading mundane mediocre lives that their people lead. Nietzsche’s view on how people lead their lives comes across as arrogant and pompous. He believes that people are happy with just enjoying the simple pleasures of life, and he sees this lack of ambition or ‘will’ as a weakness that should not be present in society. He thinks that everyone should strive to be better and achieve, other than those content in the past to be slaves and follow a god to get justice in an afterlife. Every character that he comes across seems to have a negative attitude towards society all giving their two cents on how society is so pathetic and how individuals cannot create their own lives to become over men, the criticism of how people live their lives is relentless and patronising. For example the ugliest man gets pity from people however he despises the fact that he gets pity as it is a feeble emotion. This is another flaw that Nietzsche picks out from humanity.
· The men that Zarathustra is surrounded by are all men that bear the ideals of Nietzsche. These are men that could eventually become overmen they don’t like pity or peoples inability to achieve anything above mediocrity.

The whole book essentially boils down to change and that people have to accept fundamentals in life will be repeated. Even though specifics may change, having will and determination is the only way to create change and become a better person. Nietzsche has shown that not all people posses the ability to change, and these people should not even be accepted as they are just wasting their time they are a speck of dirt in as dirt storm insignificant. Without change we cannot progress.

HCJ seminar 3

Freud and Ulysses
• Chapter 15 essentially brings Bloom and Stephen closer together, bloom follows Stephen to ‘night town’ and is trying to protect from the lurid things he may see ( It being a red light district and all)

• They are having hallucinations because they are drunk or high or something; e.g. ‘On a step a gnome totting among a rubbishtip crouches to shoulder a sack of rags and bones’.

• The hallucinations seem to be coming out of their sub-concious, when bloom sees the sombrero wearing image it seems like his paranoia is coming to surface something key to his personality perhaps, a lot of blooms seem to be about sexual guilt such as when he is with the Nymph.

• Bloom has a hallucination about his parents were they confront Bloom about things he's done wrong, this links with Freuds theory of people constantly looking for acceptance and approval from their parents.

• Bloom has a hallucination about smoking and how he shouldn't be doing it which shows his sub-conscious voice speaking against what he is doing, something that he would not consciously think of.

• Stephen reacts more emotionally to seeing his dead mother, whereas Blooms apparitions are more of a drunken nature. Stephen seems to be intellectually and artistically independent due to his rejection from his parents, this has been pushed into his sub conscious something that has been repressed.

• Stephen is left unconscious at the end of the piece bloom helps him to his feet and helps him gather his things. Bloom is shown to be stephens metaphorical father by helping him to his feet. He is always trying to protect and shepard Bloom throughout the episode.

• Blooms hallucinations seem to be fuelled by his drunken state rather than his sub conscious thought but it still shows what he is really thinking/ feeling.

Freud
Freud's thinking circles around sex, everything people do all actions and emotions are linked to a sexual desire.

Rejection by parents can shape personality

Sexual desire to kill father and marry mother

The drive to live and the drive to die - Humans want to stay alive but also want to return to a natural state of calm i.e. be dead