Slow Motion Knuckles and Basement Ethics

Garage punk violence, wrestling nostalgia, and a code that still matters...

I grew up on blood and body slams.

Horror movies. Sci-fi. Action films. Anime. And professional wrestling in its loud neon '80s glory and its grittier '90s chaos. I loved all of it—the spectacle, the pageantry, the violence as theater. I never bought the idea that liking violent art makes you violent. That is lazy thinking. Violence in art is confrontation. It is rehearsal. It is mythology played out in sweat and noise.

Now I am a Quaker, which means I take peace seriously—not as a brand, but as a testimony. I oppose war. I oppose systems that turn violence into policy. I oppose domination as a structure. But I do not believe in passivity in the face of harm. I believe in defense. I believe in drawing a line. I believe that intent and fairness matter. That is why Letterkenny works for me in a way that surprises people.

The fights in Letterkenny are not chaotic. They are ritual.

Slow motion. Shoulders loosening. Knuckles flexing. Eye contact. The music kicks in, and it is angular garage punk. It sounds like it belongs in a basement show where the floor is sticky and the amps are too loud. When the punches land, it feels less like a bar fight and more like a mosh pit. If you have ever been in a real pit, you know there is a code. You collide hard but you do not cheap shot. Someone falls, you pick them up. The aggression is real, but it is contained. It ends when the song ends.

That is what Jared Keeso understands. Violence without a code is chaos. Violence with a code is conflict with boundaries. And those boundaries are everything. Before fists fly, mouths do. Letterkenny is built on chirping. Surgical trash talk. Weaponized wit. It is what Marc Maron once described as punching with your mouth—words that sting, test pride, and escalate.

But even that has rules. It is performance. It is ritualized confrontation. When someone crosses into dishonor, the show makes that clear. Which brings me to wrestling. I grew up in the Golden Era of '80s wrestling—big characters, clear heroes and villains. It was a morality play in spandex. The violence was exaggerated but symbolic. A wrong was committed. A babyface stood up. A villain cheated and got what was coming to him. There was a code even in the spectacle.

But as wrestling moved into the '90s Attitude Era, something shifted. The conflict stopped being about honor and started being about shock. It was often about humiliation, about dominance, about bigger men brutalizing smaller people, about violence against women played for heat, about degradation for ratings. It was entertaining. It was chaotic. It was fun in a reckless way, but it did not always age well.

The Attitude Era leaned into spectacle without restraint. It sometimes forgot the code. It confused escalation with storytelling. It chased shock instead of resolution. That is where it parts ways with Letterkenny and Shoresy. In Keeso’s world, masculinity is not about domination. It is about conviction. It is about standing up when something is wrong. It is about being willing to fight but not needing to.

Wayne does not fight because he enjoys hurting people. He fights because someone crossed a line. Shoresy chirps like a menace, but he plays hard and protects his team. They do not target the weak. They do not escalate endlessly. They do not glorify cruelty. If someone breaks the code, they are treated as cowardly.

That is ethical masculinity.

It is not chest beating. It is not about being the biggest guy in the room. It is about consistency. About backing up your words. About protecting people who cannot protect themselves. About knowing when to walk away. From a punk scene perspective, that makes sense. Hardcore taught me that aggression without community rots fast. Strength without compassion turns authoritarian quickly. Conviction without humility becomes fascism in a leather jacket.

The slow motion in Letterkenny matters because it shows you the ritual. It slows everything down so you see the consent. You see the mutual recognition. You see that this is not random cruelty. It is pride meeting pride and resolving.

It looks like violence. It feels like a mosh pit. But it ends with respect.

Wrestling at its best understood that too. When it forgot that and leaned into humiliation and degradation, it became something else—something louder but emptier.

As a Quaker punk with a soft spot for piledrivers and power chords, I can hold all of that at once.

Violence in art can be meaningful.  

Masculinity can have a code.  

Conflict can end.  

Respect can follow.

The difference between ritual and rot is boundaries. And boundaries are everything.

Rebellion From the Inside: Why Belonging Doesn’t Mean Obedience

I’ve always been rebellious by nature. Not in a performative sense, no reflexive contrarianism, no automatic rejection of whatever’s popular, but in the quieter, more inconvenient way. The kind of rebellion that asks why when everyone else has already accepted that’s just how it is.

Rebellion, to me, isn’t about standing apart just to feel special. It’s about refusing to let comfort, popularity, or group approval replace thinking. And that matters most inside the groups we identify with.

Belonging Is Easy, Thinking Is Not

Somewhere along the way, people started confusing belonging with obedience.

If you criticize pop music, someone says, “All music scenes have conformity.”

If you criticize your own political side, someone says, “If you identify with any group at all, you’re conforming.” If you question norms within a community, you’re accused of disloyalty.

It’s a clever rhetorical move. It flattens everything until no distinction matters anymore. If everything is conformity, then the concept stops being useful. You can’t critique power, culture, or norms if all behavior is treated as equally compliant.

That isn’t insight, it’s resignation dressed up as philosophy.

Why Pop Music Is a Useful Example

When people say pop music can feel boring or unchallenging, they’re usually not attacking listeners, at least I'm not and haven't since I was in my 20s since now I myself listen to Pop Music.  What we are describing is a structure.

Pop music is often engineered for mass appeal. It’s shaped by radio formats, streaming algorithms, branding concerns, and market incentives that reward familiarity and punish risk. That doesn’t make it bad or illegitimate, it just makes it managed.

And when art is managed, experimentation becomes a liability.

Pointing that out isn’t elitism, it’s media literacy. The same dynamic exists everywhere, politics, labor, activism, religion, culture. Once something grows large enough, it starts protecting itself from friction. That’s when rebellion becomes necessary.

The Most Interesting People Rebel From Within

Here’s what gets lost in these arguments. Rebelling against a group you care about is harder, and far more meaningful, than rejecting it from the outside.

Outsiders can dismiss a movement without cost. Insiders who push back risk being labeled difficult, disloyal, or disruptive. They risk losing status, access, and belonging. But every movement worth anything was shaped by people who loved it enough to argue with it.

They didn’t want to burn it down. They wanted it to live. That kind of rebellion isn’t betrayal, it’s responsibility.

Conformity Isn’t Belonging

Conformity happens when questioning becomes inconvenient. When consensus replaces curiosity. When comfort becomes more important than truth.

Belonging, at its best, should create space for disagreement, not demand silence in exchange for acceptance. A group that can’t tolerate internal criticism doesn’t want members, it wants mirrors. And mirrors don’t build culture. They just reflect it back unchanged.

Why I’ll Always Push Back

I rebel because I care. I push because stagnation is the real enemy. I question because I don’t trust anything that demands compliance as proof of loyalty.

I don’t want purity tests.

I don’t want brands disguised as movements.

I don’t want to be told I’m on the right side as a substitute for thinking.

I want living cultures, not museums.

I want living movements, not slogans.

I want living music, not product.

And living things only survive when someone inside them is willing to say, this isn’t good enough yet.

Operation Disconnect: The Anti-Capitalist Digital Exodus

Operation Disconnect: The Anti-Capitalist Digital Exodus

Objective:

To organize a mass social media deletion event as a direct action against Silicon Valley’s monopolistic control while integrating a broader anti-capitalist labor and political movement that challenges corporate power, digital colonialism, and economic exploitation.

---

Phase 1: Political & Labor Mobilization (Weeks 1-4)

1. Coalition Building

• Union Outreach: Engage with labor unions (APWU, IWW, DSA labor groups) to connect digital exploitation to workplace struggles.
• Tech Worker Solidarity: Connect with groups like Tech Workers Coalition to encourage internal sabotage, leaks, or even digital labor strikes.
• Anti-Capitalist Orgs: Work with leftist political groups (PSL, FRSO, Black Socialists, Anarchist collectives) to frame the exodus as a broader rejection of capitalist surveillance culture.

2. Ideological Narrative

• Social Media as Digital Wage Theft: Explain how big tech extracts unpaid labor from users via content creation and data harvesting.
• AI & Automation as Union-Busting Tools: Expose how platforms use AI to exploit workers while displacing traditional labor.
• Silicon Valley as a Class Enemy: Highlight how social media corporations reinforce neoliberal hegemony, suppress labor organizing, and create psychological dependency for profit.

3. Soft Exit Strategy

• User Data as Collective Power: Encourage people to download their data, opt out of tracking, and detox from algorithmic feeds.
• Alternative Infrastructure: Promote Mastodon (Twitter alternative), Lemmy (Reddit alternative), Matrix (Discord alternative), PeerTube (YouTube alternative) as decentralized, worker-controlled platforms.
• Real-World Organizing: Encourage people to reinvest time into labor organizing, community building, and independent media creation.

---

Phase 2: The Digital Strike (Week 5 - Execution Week)

1. Coordinated Mass Deletion

• Set a fixed date for mass exodus from major platforms (Meta, X/Twitter, TikTok, Reddit, Snapchat, YouTube, LinkedIn, etc.).
• Users post final messages exposing digital exploitation and calling for anti-capitalist organizing before deleting accounts.

2. Disruptive Actions

• Algorithm Sabotage: Flood platforms with anti-Silicon Valley messaging before leaving, making engagement data useless.
• Engagement Boycott: Urge people to stop clicking ads, liking posts, or using recommendation systems in the days leading up to deletion.
• Trend Hijacking: Use mass hashtags that mix viral pop culture trends with explicit anti-capitalist messaging.

3. Workplace Resistance

• Encourage tech workers and digital gig workers (content moderators, data labelers, Amazon Mechanical Turk workers, etc.) to slow down work, leak internal documents, or organize digital strikes.

---

Phase 3: Post-Exodus Political Action

1. Building an Alternative Political & Economic System

• Decentralized Digital Infrastructure: Support cooperatively owned social media, worker-controlled tech development, and open-source software movements.
• Real-World Community Networks: Use local labor councils, mutual aid networks, and independent media to replace digital dependency.
• Boycott Silicon Valley Services: Encourage mass unsubscriptions from cloud services, ad-driven apps, and corporate-backed digital platforms.

2. Pressure on Governments & Labor Unions

• Nationalize Big Tech: Demand that Silicon Valley platforms be turned into public utilities with democratic worker and user control.
• Enforce Digital Labor Protections: Push for laws protecting gig workers, banning AI exploitation, and ensuring fair wages for online creators.
• Tech Worker Unionization: Support the expansion of organized labor into software development, content moderation, and digital gig work.

---

Potential Challenges & Counteractions

1. Big Tech Retention Tactics

• Shadowbanning & Censorship: Platforms may throttle discussions—use encrypted messengers, forums, and real-world meetups to coordinate.
• Retention Tricks: They will push "mental health breaks" instead of deletions—reinforce mass action as a collective, not individual, strike.

2. Media Backlash

• Corporate media will frame the exodus as "paranoia" or "harmful to democracy"—counter with worker-led alternative media campaigns.

3. Internal Fragmentation

• Some users may only delete some accounts—stress the importance of full disengagement to maximize economic impact.

---

Impact Goals

• Ad revenue collapse & investor panic as engagement plummets.
• Increased organizing power as people redirect energy from social media to labor struggles.
• Stronger anti-capitalist consciousness among Millennials & Zoomers, turning them towards unionization, mutual aid, and direct action.

This could be the first digital general strike against corporate control. Want to add specific union actions or political statements to tie it to postal workers and other labor struggles?

The Wrestling Territory System: A Case Study in the Failures of Libertarian Ideals

American libertarianism champions the principles of free markets, individual liberty, and minimal government intervention. Central to this philosophy is the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP), which asserts that individuals should not initiate force, fraud, or coercion against others. However, the history of professional wrestling in the United States, particularly the evolution and demise of the territorial system, illustrates the inherent challenges and contradictions within libertarian ideals. This case study delves into how the wrestling industry's trajectory—from regional territories to a monopolistic entity—demonstrates the limitations of libertarianism and the inevitability of coercion and consolidation in unregulated markets.

The Territorial System: A Libertarian Microcosm

In the mid-20th century, professional wrestling in the U.S. was organized into regional territories, each overseen by local promoters. These territories operated under a loose agreement facilitated by the National Wrestling Alliance (NWA), which acted as a governing body to maintain order and delineate regional boundaries. In theory, this decentralized structure resembled a libertarian ideal: independent entities coexisting peacefully, driven by mutual respect and market forces.

However, beneath this facade of cooperation lay a system rife with coercion and intimidation. The NWA's territorial agreements, while ostensibly voluntary, were enforced through various unsavory tactics:

• Blackballing: Promoters who defied the NWA's territorial boundaries or challenged its authority often found themselves ostracized from the industry. Wrestlers associated with these promoters were similarly blacklisted, effectively cutting them off from potential employment opportunities.

• Intimidation and Violence: The enforcement of territorial boundaries sometimes involved physical intimidation. For instance, in the 1930s, wrestler Dick Shikat was sued for breach of contract after a double-cross incident, highlighting the lengths to which promoters would go to maintain control and discipline within the industry.

These practices underscore a critical flaw in libertarian theory: the assumption that free markets naturally discourage coercion. In reality, the absence of regulatory oversight can lead to the emergence of informal enforcement mechanisms that are equally, if not more, oppressive.

The Inevitability of Coercion and Consolidation

The wrestling industry's territorial system was inherently unstable. The lack of formal regulatory structures created an environment where power dynamics shifted based on economic strength and willingness to employ coercive tactics. This instability set the stage for aggressive consolidation efforts by ambitious promoters.

Vince McMahon's WWF Expansion:

Vince McMahon, owner of the World Wrestling Federation (WWF), exemplified the aggressive capitalist who exploits market freedoms to establish dominance. His strategies included:

• Talent Poaching: McMahon lured top talent from rival promotions with lucrative contracts, weakening competitors' rosters and enhancing his own product's appeal.

• Territorial Invasion: He expanded WWF's reach into rival territories by securing television deals and promoting events nationwide, effectively disregarding the NWA's regional boundaries.

• Market Saturation: By leveraging emerging technologies like cable television, McMahon ensured WWF programming reached a national audience, overshadowing regional promotions.

These tactics led to the rapid decline of the territorial system and the emergence of WWF as the dominant force in professional wrestling. The consolidation mirrored the monopolistic tendencies observed in unregulated markets, where dominant players leverage their advantages to suppress competition.

The Dark Side of Wrestling: Coercion, Violence, and Exploitation

The wrestling industry's history is marred by numerous incidents that highlight the darker aspects of its operations, further illustrating the pitfalls of unregulated markets.

The New Jack Incidents:

Jerome Young, known by his ring name New Jack, was involved in several notorious incidents:

• Mass Transit Incident (1996): During an ECW event, New Jack bladed an inexperienced 17-year-old wrestler, causing severe bleeding. The incident raised questions about the industry's oversight and the exploitation of performers.

• XPW Freefall Scaffold Match (2002): In a match against Vic Grimes, New Jack used a taser before throwing Grimes off a 40-foot scaffold. Grimes missed most of the tables meant to break his fall, resulting in serious injuries. New Jack later claimed he intended to cause harm due to a personal grudge.

• Gypsy Joe Incident (2003): Facing 69-year-old wrestler Gypsy Joe, New Jack assaulted him with various weapons after Joe reportedly no-sold his moves. The crowd's reaction, including racial slurs, exacerbated the situation, highlighting issues of racism and violence within the industry.

The Bruiser Brody Murder (1988):

Frank Goodish, known as Bruiser Brody, was fatally stabbed in a locker room in Puerto Rico by fellow wrestler José González. The incident, stemming from a backstage confrontation, was marred by allegations of a cover-up, with González acquitted of murder. This case underscored the lawlessness and lack of accountability prevalent in certain wrestling territories.

The Chris Benoit Tragedy (2007):

Chris Benoit, a renowned wrestler, murdered his wife and son before committing suicide. Investigations revealed severe brain damage, likely due to repeated concussions, and possible steroid abuse. The tragedy highlighted the industry's neglect of performers' health and well-being, emphasizing the exploitative nature of wrestling promotions.

These incidents reflect a broader pattern of exploitation, violence, and coercion within the wrestling industry, challenging the libertarian notion that free markets inherently promote ethical behavior and protect individual rights.

The Libertarian Paradox: Freedom Leading to Coercion

The trajectory of the wrestling industry illustrates a fundamental paradox within libertarianism: the pursuit of absolute freedom can lead to conditions that undermine freedom itself. In the absence of regulatory frameworks:

• Economic Power Concentration: Dominant entities can leverage their position to suppress competition, leading to monopolies or oligopolies.

• Coercive Enforcement: Without formal regulations, informal and often violent methods emerge to enforce agreements and maintain order.

• Exploitation of Labor: Workers may be subjected to poor working conditions, inadequate compensation, and lack of protections, as seen with wrestlers facing physical and mental health issues without sufficient support.

The wrestling industry's evolution from a decentralized system of territories to a monopolistic entity dominated by WWF mirrors the potential trajectory of unregulated markets, where initial freedoms give way to coercion and consolidation.

Lessons from the Wrestling Industry

The history of professional wrestling serves as a cautionary tale about the limitations of libertarian ideals. It demonstrates that:

• Unregulated Markets Foster Coercion: In the absence of oversight, individuals and entities may resort to coercive tactics to protect their interests.

• Monopolistic Tendencies Emerge Naturally: Free markets can naturally evolve towards monopolies, as dominant players exploit their advantages to suppress competition.

• Exploitation is Rampant Without Protections: Workers are vulnerable to exploitation without regulatory safeguards, leading to detrimental outcomes for individuals and society.

While libertarianism advocates for minimal intervention and maximal freedom, the wrestling industry's history suggests that some level of regulation is necessary to maintain fair competition, protect workers, and prevent monopolistic consolidation. The wrestling industry's trajectory—from a decentralized system of small promotions to a monopolistic behemoth—illustrates how unchecked capitalism leads not to a thriving competitive marketplace, but to coercion, exploitation, and monopolization.

---

The Wrestling Industry and the Illusion of Market Competition

A core belief of libertarian ideology is that competition naturally curbs abuses of power. The wrestling industry's history, however, contradicts this claim. Instead of competition fostering innovation and fairness, it led to a brutal cycle where the most ruthless actors—like Vince McMahon—exploited weaknesses in the system to consolidate control.

A. Destruction of Competing Promotions

While Vince McMahon was the ultimate victor in wrestling’s monopolization, similar power struggles played out within the NWA system itself, proving that monopolization was inevitable under such conditions. Before the WWF’s rise, individual promotions engaged in cutthroat tactics to secure dominance in their respective territories. Some notorious examples include:

• The Battle of Atlanta (1984): Jim Barnett’s Georgia Championship Wrestling was one of the strongest promotions in the NWA. However, McMahon secretly bought the company from under the NWA’s nose, taking control of its lucrative TV timeslot on WTBS. The move, known as "Black Saturday," blindsided competitors and showcased McMahon's aggressive strategy of using financial power to eliminate rivals rather than compete on equal footing.

• Mid-South Wrestling’s Decline: Bill Watts' Mid-South Wrestling was a highly respected promotion that had cultivated a strong regional fan base. McMahon systematically raided its top talent, including The Junkyard Dog, effectively gutting the promotion’s ability to draw crowds. Watts tried to rebrand as the Universal Wrestling Federation (UWF) but was eventually forced to sell to Jim Crockett Promotions, which itself later succumbed to WWF’s dominance.

These moves exemplify how McMahon did not "win" by offering a superior product, but by strategically leveraging financial and legal power to acquire or destroy competitors. This directly contradicts libertarian arguments that a free market ensures meritocratic success.

---

Talent Exploitation and Wage Slavery

One of the most damning aspects of wrestling’s transition into monopoly capitalism was its treatment of workers. In a libertarian market, employment relationships are theoretically voluntary, but in practice, economic coercion creates conditions where workers have no real choice.

Wrestlers in the territory days at least had multiple promotions to work for. But as McMahon's WWF consolidated control, wrestlers became increasingly beholden to a single employer, stripping them of leverage. This led to widespread misclassification of wrestlers as independent contractors, a practice that persists today.

The Independent Contractor Scam

Despite working full-time schedules, being subject to non-compete clauses, and having their travel, lodging, and healthcare expenses largely unpaid, WWE wrestlers were and are still classified as independent contractors. This classification:

• Denies them healthcare benefits – Despite suffering frequent and severe injuries, wrestlers were responsible for their own medical expenses.
• Prevents collective bargaining – Since they are not considered employees, they cannot unionize.
• Creates financial instability – Wrestlers were only paid when they were booked, leading to financial hardship if they were injured or fell out of favor with management.

The most infamous case of this exploitation was Jesse Ventura’s attempted unionization in the 1980s. Ventura, a WWF star at the time, tried to rally fellow wrestlers to form a union, only to be betrayed by Hulk Hogan, who informed McMahon of the plan. McMahon swiftly shut it down, ensuring that wrestlers remained economically dependent on him.

This type of economic coercion mirrors the feudal structure of the old territory system, where promoters controlled wrestlers' livelihoods. But under McMahon, it evolved into a corporate dictatorship, stripping wrestlers of any agency while simultaneously benefiting from their status as "independent workers."

---

Violence, Death, and the Price of Wrestling’s Libertarian Market

Beyond financial exploitation, wrestling’s unchecked industry has led to severe physical and mental consequences for its workers. Without regulatory oversight, wrestler safety was deprioritized in favor of profit, leading to numerous high-profile deaths and career-ending injuries.

A. The "Office Boys" and Enforced Brutality

The NWA territories employed enforcers, often known as "office boys," to physically punish wrestlers who stepped out of line. Some notable examples include:

• The "Broken Legs" Era – In the early days of wrestling, promoters like Eddie Graham and Bill Watts were notorious for ensuring that wrestlers who tried to jump territories or start their own promotions were met with violent retaliation. Wrestlers who broke "the code" would find themselves injured in "accidents" orchestrated by their employers.

• The Dynamite Kid's Brutality – Known for his stiff working style and real-life bullying, Dynamite Kid once beat up a fellow wrestler in the locker room so severely that his career was essentially over. Promoters allowed this kind of behavior because it maintained control and instilled fear among the workers.

B. The Long-Term Cost: Early Deaths and Brain Damage

Due to the lack of oversight and the grueling schedules wrestlers were forced to endure, many wrestlers suffered premature deaths. Some of the most infamous cases include:

• Eddie Guerrero (1967–2005) – Guerrero died at 38 due to heart failure, exacerbated by years of substance abuse linked to wrestling-related injuries.

• Chris Kanyon (1970–2010) – After years of struggling with mental health issues exacerbated by WWE’s treatment of him, Kanyon committed suicide. His struggles highlighted the lack of mental health resources available to wrestlers.

• Chris Benoit (1967–2007) and the CTE Crisis – Benoit’s shocking double murder-suicide was later attributed to severe brain trauma from repeated concussions. His case forced WWE to implement a concussion protocol, but only after decades of negligence.

Without any governing body to enforce safety standards, wrestlers were treated as disposable commodities. This underscores the key flaw in libertarian philosophy: without oversight, economic incentives push industries toward greater exploitation, greater coercion, and greater human cost.

---

Conclusion: Wrestling as a Warning Against Libertarianism

The history of professional wrestling provides a chilling example of what happens when industries are left to self-regulate. Despite libertarian claims that free markets promote fair competition and protect individual freedom, the wrestling industry’s history demonstrates the opposite:

1. Monopolization is inevitable – The strongest players will always use economic and coercive power to eliminate competition, leading to the kind of corporate feudalism seen in WWE.
2. Workers suffer under economic coercion – Wrestlers, classified as independent contractors, have been denied healthcare, pensions, and union protections while being overworked to the point of early death.
3. Violence and corruption thrive without regulation – From the early days of territorial blackballing to Vince McMahon’s monopoly, the industry has been rife with intimidation, blacklisting, and even outright murder.

The rise of WWE is not a story of free-market triumph but a grim warning about the unchecked power of capital. Just as McMahon crushed his competitors through economic warfare, unchecked capitalism leads to monopolies, exploitation, and the erosion of personal freedom. Wrestling’s history is a microcosm of libertarianism’s ultimate failure: when left to their own devices, the most powerful will always find ways to dominate and oppress.

Much like in wrestling, without regulation and oversight, the free market is just another rigged fight.

Altered States: The Barnes Foundation

The Dead Guy explains why he takes issue with the lack accessibility for low Income residents to the Barnes Collection and other Philadelphia public institutions.

http://youtu.be/5we6ZItTy28

From the Cave to Cyberspace: The Evolution of the Human Element in Visual Art

When we consider the creative capacities of mankind, specifically in terms of visual art, we should typically start with the artists and artisans themselves. Interestingly enough the more one examines art and art history, the more one begin to notice that the further back we delve into the emergence of the creative human being, the more anonymous the individual artist becomes. Prehistoric artwork such as The Lascaux cave, The Venus of Willendorf and countless other ruins and monoliths from around the world were created by many talented artists and artisans, yet a majority of them remain anonymous. Yet this is not surprising if we look at the role, or specifically the lack thereof, of the individual in early human societies. 

As we track the emergence of the creative human being we begin to see a trend where artists far and wide begin to acquire ever more autonomy and status within the context of more complex societies. Consequently, as the autonomy of the artist has grown it begins to fundamentally alter the artist’s relationship with conventional society. Evolving from one that, at one time, was so completely integrated that it rendered the artist essentially anonymous; while slowly developed into one that is so independent it then allowed the artist to represent what could be the paramount expression of individuality in western society. 

This I believe has transformed, and fundamentally altered, the dynamic regarding how an artist approaches their work, and subsequently, how the artist interacts with their audience. It is this fundamental shift in the function of the artist in society which has inevitably generated extreme hostility from the public for the self-aggrandizing nature of the contemporary art world. Perpetuating a profoundly incomplete view of what means to be an individual, and subsequently, what it means to be an artist.

Unfortunately western societies have evolved to view the individual, and particularly the artist, as being the antithesis of the collective within society, denying that the artist is inevitably bound, even in the abstract, to the collective through the language and symbols of human communication. What I mean by this is that artists, in order to be a truly great artist, must utilize our collective accumulated knowledge in order to thoroughly explore a vast amount of different themes and ideas, while utilizing our collective language of visual archetypes and symbol in order to engage mankind on the deepest level, the subconscious. In otherworld: 

“The individual is not an exception to the norm. He carries within himself and embodies the accumulated knowledge, skills and capacities of the collective. The individual is the conscious fount of the accumulated knowledge and experience of the collective… What is exceptional is the freedom and courage with which he explores, creates, invents, recombines and expresses the collective endowment in original ways.”  ~ WAAS (World Academy of Art and Science)

It is due to a chronic misunderstanding of what creativity actually is, which allows us to pervert the fundamental function of artistic creativity within our society. By designating creativity as a ‘skill’ or ‘talent’ possessed by a select few member of our society, we undermine the innate, and essential, creative abilities of the rest of the population. Inevitably this has allowed us to perpetuate an idea of creativity, the artist and the individual, which is not only incomplete but fundamentally flawed at its foundation. This distorted societal concept of creativity is incredibly pervasive, especially when it comes to the the way in which we approach fostering creativity within our society. And the artists themselves are far from innocent bystander in the persistence of such misleading ideas. 

Due to the increased autonomy of the artist within our culture, artists have moved further to the fringes of society, leading many artists into the blind alley of conceptualism, which has become increasingly misanthropic and nihilistic in their relationship with society in general; in its continued assault on the audience with vague concepts, meant to shock and confuse rather than communicate or engage humanity on a deeper collective level. The general public, who the contemporary artist has grown to view as Philistine, has developed an increasingly contemptuous attitude towards these inside jokes, if one could even call them that, littering the pretentious postmodernism of contemporary galleries, while only the affluent, not society at large, continue to perpetuate these dead art movements.

In this age of connectivity there is no excuse for artists to be so detached and condescending in their interactions with the audience. As we move into a new era of human civilization the art world, just like the society around us, will experience some unprecedented changes, particularly when it comes to how artists engage and interact with their audience. Audiences have traditionally viewed art only within the narrow confines of the sterile venues of the contemporary museums, which have become tiresome and lack the crucial engagement that our society is looking for.  

One specific aspect of art, which the audience has been excluded from largely throughout history, is the creative process itself, which would explain the overall societal lack of understanding and appreciation for the creative process in general. What I mean by this is in a traditional gallery setting the audience only gets to experience the final ‘masterpiece’. In seeing only the final work in a state of perceived perfection it helps to foster a misconception that artists are exceptionally gifted at creating forms which are prefect. And that, quite honestly, simply isn’t true. 

For far too long it has been considered taboo for artists to share their own creative process, out of an unsubstantiated fear that it will cheapen the work. These machinations, especially for the legions of contemporary conceptual artists allow artists to put more time in creating insincere concepts meant simply to shock and confuse, rather than genuine living artifacts. This idea that simply sharing your creative process with someone else could cheapen your work is a ploy, one meant to shroud the fundamental lack of vision with in the contemporary art world.  

Fortunately, we are begin to see a shift within the underground arts, which is helping counter this pervasive culture within the art world, and it is taking place before our very eyes online, throughout the numerous social networking sites that populate the internet. More and more artists are sharing the magic of their creativity with their fans and younger artists. These fully interactive artists are using numerous hashtags, which has helped to create, perhaps unknowingly, huge repositories of creativity in progress. Hashtags such as #creativity, #newartwork, and #WIP (work in progress) allow fans and artists access to a massive accumulation of documented creativity, incidentally helping to foster within others a genuine appreciation for creativity, and the arts, through direct observation. Not to mention a system of hashtags being used to create digital art groups of global artists sharing their work with each other. 

This new paradigm within the art world has many advocates throughout the social media world. Artist like Chet Zar have inspired hundreds of artists worldwide to share their artwork every Friday night with a hashtag he created (#fridaynightartdorks).  Unfortunately, many of these artist have been continuously marginalized and relegated to the scene of underground ‘lowbrow’/surrealism, which has typically been viewed as ‘illustration’ or  ‘too commercial’ to be high art, rather than celebrated for being the contemporary visionaries that they truly are. 

Artists like Chet Zar, Buddy Nestor and myself, love sharing the process of our work, not because we think we have to, but because we want to. The creative process, or what Arthur Keostler referred to as the ‘Act of Creativity’, not just the finished product, is precisely what fuels our own creativity. We enjoy direct interaction with our fans, and other artists, which is driven by a collective fascination with the creative process in general, which becomes a common bond. We are, as Chet had put it an interview with Juxtapoz Magizine, ‘process junkies’.  

There are also a growing number of artists whom also find joy in participating in ‘live’ art sessions around the world. Artists such as Guy Atchinson, Michele Wortman, Jon Clue, Chris Dingwell and Alex and Allyson Grey can be found painting live at galleries, events such as Burning Man or a number of the art/tattoo conventions. Painting without haste and taking time to speak to the many of the onlookers as they actively reveal the equally captivating process of their work. These are the artist who are engaging people on a very human level, forging new ways to creatively engage their audience with openness and sincerity.  

We must remember that just because artists tend to have a greater propensity for creativity it doesn’t mean they are the only ones whom possess such 'skills'. Furthermore, those in the contemporary art world, may not even possess any kind of exceptional mastership of such creative capacities; they might just be well versed in the conceptual theology of bullshit. And this is the poisoned pill that many accredited art schools sell to unsuspecting students.  

Edward De Bono once said that, “Far too many people believe that creativity is just being different. Being different for the sake of being different may attract attention but that is not sufficient value. True creativity must deliver real value.” The problem with the post-modern conceptual art movement is that it, even though it may deliver original ideas and concepts, it fails miserably at delivering value, except on a very superficial level to the affluent people that buy it, not for its value, but its ability to exemplify a privileged status.  

Artists are gifted people but not because they're simply creative. They are gifted because of a compulsion to create, refine and eventually deliver the imaginative, and visionary, realms in which they dwell; creatively. Art is an artifact, in the most beautiful sense. By using creativity and communication, an artist navigates through a window within what Carl Jung called the collective unconscious; at a specific time and place with the accumulated lexicon of symbolic language, and imagery, which allows the emergence of ever more novel forms. Therefore art is an artifact in the most fundamental sense, since it carries with it a specific collective history, language, and culture from which it was produced, preserving a living vestige to the society at large. And it is this which makes art a truly magical phenomena.

Dear Friends: My Letter of Membership to the Religious Society of Friends

Dear Friends,

 I’ve been attending meeting now for a little over a year, and I would like to formally become a member of the Byberry Friends. For as long as I can remember, I’ve always been acutely aware of my own personal spiritual nature, and have spent my time, mostly as an artist, attempting to explore and express it though a visual medium. After attending meeting for over a year I feel that the Religious Society of Friends is the only religious organization that has thoroughly resonated with me on both a personal and spiritual level enough to pursue membership.

 I feel that my attendance at the local Byberry Meeting has given me a safe and quite place to reflect on my inner thoughts, allowing me to center my spiritual being in a vast and captivating universe. I feel that the Religious Society of Friends has also expanded my social conscience by, not only making me more aware of my fellow (hu)man, but also the social injustice that surrounds me, while providing me many avenues to address such issues. The Society’s dedication to social justice, peace, and equality is something that I would be honored to be associated with.

 I find the history of the Quakers, especially its art history, extremely fascinating, rich, engaging and something that I would love to continue to learn more about. As an artist, activist, feminist, and humanist I believe that the Religious Society of Friends best reflects my personal and spiritual sensibilities. As one of the younger attendees of the meeting I would like to contribute whatever I can to help continue the compassionate and loving spirit that I have encountered in my attendance at Byberry Friends Meeting.

 I would also love to share my love, not only for the arts, but creativity in general, in order to help nurture the growing art community within the Religious Society of Friends, specifically by participating more directly with
The Fellowship of Quakers in the Arts. My ministry, as a member of the Society of Friends, would be sharing my passion for the arts and human creativity, specifically regarding how creativity relates to the cathartic expression of our inner human experience. I would like to help foster within others, both Quakers and Non-Quakers, the idea that creativity is an innate and universal aspect of mankind, while also examining how creative expression can highlight the infinite possibilities of humankind. By reexamine what creativity actually is, through creative play, perhaps we can enhance our understanding of the creative power behind the natural world, which is responsible for building the human organism through the creative process of evolution, in order to better understand our role on this planet as wholly evolved, and creative, beings.

 Thank You For Your Time And Consideration.

Respectfully,
Chuck Angeline