Never From Concentrate | Two friends and a blog.

Page 5 of 10

Youth-in-Asia

June 13, 2015 / valentin / 0 Comments

One of the legends in the climbing community, Dean Potter, died base jumping in Yosemite National Park on May 16th. His death affected me on some profound level. On one hand I felt remorse: he was one of the brightest lights in the climbing community and I grew up watching some of his incredible stunts.

On the other hand, I felt his death was strangely inspiring – a fitting culmination of his incredible journey. Potter’s life was spent pioneering new ways to explore remote terrain, climb it, and fall back down to do it again. In an almost literal interpretation of The Myth of Sisyphus, Potter found meaning in pushing a boulder up a mountain, watching it fall back down, and repeating the whole thing over and over again. One by one, he found ways to remove safety ropes, to be free of all the training wheels, right up until his death. He fought against all of the limitations that the world places on us, socially and physically. In the end, the world got the better of him, just like everyone else. But he died doing what he wanted to do; he died free.

I think of Dean and all of the other extreme athletes (Alex Honnold, Reinhold Messner, to name some of my favourites) when I think of the assisted-suicide and euthanasia debates. To me there is no debate at all. We all hold our own mortality in our own hands. Whether you risk your life climbing massive vertical walls, jumping out of airplanes, or just walking down the street on your way to get a Grande Blonde, it is your life to risk. The absurdity of the human condition is up to every individual to interpret, and everyone should have the option of ending it all when they see fit.

Of course, this is all very idyllic. I’m a romantic Rachit; guilty as charged. Maybe the most interesting debates in euthanasia arise when the will of the individual is not so clear. What happens if the person is in a coma or is in some other manner unable to communicate? Who gets to decide what happens? How do you balance the minute, but ever-present, sliver of hope for improvement with the drain on the medical system that can use the resources to help other people? Would you kill me if I asked you to, even though the pain I feel may only be temporary?

Pulpy, pulpy questions.

-V

NFC Podcast #9 – Sad Horses

June 8, 2015 / valentin / 0 Comments

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS

The ninth Never From Concentrate podcast where we talk about horses, artists and what it means to feel happy.

Some Notes:

Major Depressive Disorder

Pain without meaning

May 20, 2015 / rachit / 0 Comments

Can you have good without evil? Pleasure without pain? Do you need a spice of anguish to really appreciate the romance of life? A classic philosophical question that’s been raised and asked throughout human existence. And as you mention, on one extreme, a life devoid of the understanding of sorrow, suffering, a broken heart, one without a little Toska Seasoning (trademark pending), reeks of boredom. But on the other end of this imagined dichotomy, a life with a constant slew of anguish is by in it’s own accord, insufferable. So here, we arrive at this ‘b’ word again. Is there a happy balance somewhere in between? Let’s say there is. The obvious follow up is how do we get there? We often discuss these conceptual dichotomies. And a general, and obvious understanding is we can’t balance a weightless idea: there isn’t a scale that measures 50 pounds of suffering to 50 pounds of joy. So how do you actually go ahead and evaluate something that isn’t quantifiable? Here’s my stab in the dark. Much like you have to put yourself in the position to appreciate a piece of art, you need to put yourself in a position to reflect, create, and internalize the story of your own anguish and happiness. It needs to be interpreted through a romantic lens, different for each person, with their own hindsight story telling.

But how do we look through the right lens to colour meaning in our lives to begin with? In a world with no clear message of why, without a faithful dive in an imagined explanation, ultimately, we are left to make meaning in life by our own convictions. There are tendencies in our programming that incline us to stamp meaning on certain things more easily than others: babies, love, food, and babies, to name a few. But beyond that, and even within that, lies a rainbow of possibilities to make meaningful. We can romanticize Toska, and I am definitely in that ship called Titantic. But what if you aren’t? What if you don’t? What if art doesn’t tickle your fancy? Then what? Then, that Toska is just pain without meaning. And pain without meaning is gruesome.

The Axiom

May 9, 2015 / valentin / 0 Comments

You’re right, it’s easy to romanticize this particular idea so it’s good we have some research to back up our claims. The actual depressive episode itself is not very conducive to creative outbursts; that seems straightforward to understand. Nevertheless, I’m not convinced that creativity has to come from ‘elated’ moods that follow. Many artists use the feelings of sorrow and longing as the outline of their work, exploring and projecting their emotions onto their metaphorical canvas. Their mood certainly doesn’t have to be one of elation – though perhaps more ’stable’ than one of manic-depression. Further, the word ‘creativity’ here would be useful to define. One person’s creative work is another’s drudgery. My intuition is that for many people who deal with intense unsettling feelings, the work that results does not feel terribly ‘creative,’ though the end product may be original. The feelings of Toska do not inspire the creativity, they are the creativity. It’s only a matter of channeling the complex, multi-layered emotions into some medium other people can consume. “Let it all out,” if you will.

To address your last, more direct, point, I want to clarify something. You paraphrase my question to you as,

..is feeling Toska sporadically, and intensely, and often, worth giving up your own definition of happiness?

I think you are jumping to conclusions here. I don’t think you have to give up any feelings of happiness at all – just spice them up with some freshly ground Toska. A ‘fulfilling’ life, a life that you would be willing to repeat, shouldn’t be prescribed as one that is unequivocally happy. In a sense, I am directly opposing what many Buddhists, Hindus, and Epicureans seek – a life of pure nirvana, free from pain. Is this what we really want? To just feel happy and content all the time?

I think pain, both emotional and physical, is the spice of life. Without it, our lives may be perfectly nutritious, and satisfying – but ultimately, dull. To quote the captain of the spaceship Axiom, from the film Wall-E: ‘I don’t want to survive, I want to live.’

Toska kinda sucks

May 5, 2015 / rachit / 0 Comments

Before we romanticize, lets speak some science. The link between creativity, in its more raw form of coming up with novel ideas frequently, and mental illness is an established one. However, your interpretation is ever so slightly off. This correlation is typical between manic-depressives (bipolar disorder), and not depressives (unipolar). The evidence for the former is almost overwhelming in case studies from history (Ernest Hemingway, Virginia Woolf, Beethoven, Mozart, Vincent van Gough, to name a few), and even from just a quick Google scholar search of the topic. The unipolar depression topic is one up for debate on the merits of whether it should be considered a separate disorder altogether, or if it should be considered on the spectrum of bipolar disorder. However, what does remain clear from the evidence is that the creative process does not occur during the depressive episodes themselves. It comes from the elated moods that follow them. It’s a subtle difference, but an important one. And it’s a bit easier to express from the romantic spin of the conversation..

The tortured soul saunters the emotional playground of the human cavity. The wandering above a comfortable height, and down beneath a comfortable bank, flutters the psyche with a variety of human experience to pick and play from. When swimming below, the pressure of existence and the worthlessness that follows does not contextualize itself in usefulness to produce art. It pokes. It slices. It bleeds. And the blood flows as relentless as gravity forces a feather to fall. It drowns up the emotional void with a sludge of despair, draining and swallowing. A sudden blissful gasp of air to see the sun shining above you, the clouds floating gleefully in the blue sea sky, offers up a sense of temporary release. Here, you are free to float in the sea of emotions’ past below you. You have a necessary push to express the volcanic spectrum of possibilities, ultimately realizing it won’t be there for long. The outlet becomes a channel for the whirlwind explosion that rumbled below clogged up all the while.

So now we’ve cleared up the ordering of the creative release, lets discuss another point you bring up, and that’s about worth. Is going through the despair worth the potential creation you can output? It’s difficult to determine really. Ultimately, it’d be determined by the artist / do-er themselves. To go back to the discussion we had last month about the pursuance of originality in art, we concluded that the journey of the artistic adventure is the ultimate reward. Realizing and internalizing this as a way of living, however, is not simple. And especially not simple when swimming with mountains of pressure weighing you down sporadically Tuesday through Friday. People get lost, and to some degree understandably so, in finding a meaning of their outputs, often through the judging eyes of their peers, or their targeted audiences. And here, a ruthless world of worth arises. For all the Justin Vernon’s out there, there are thousands of “untalented” bipolar artists. Are their lives not fulfilling if not successfully distilled into acclaimed form? The other layer of this discussion is the layer of what we want to describe as a fulfilling life. You chose to use the word ‘happiness’ to define this fulfillment. And it gets thrown around a lot to coincide with states of being, from moksha, a buddhist, Eastern religious concept of eternal content-ness, to a general feeling of euphoria, achieved by sex, laughter, drugs, in it’s more raw sense. It’s become so loaded that I don’t know how to really define it myself – so I won’t define it just yet. But to answer your question more directly, is feeling Toska sporadically, and intensely, and often, worth giving up your own definition of happiness? No. It’s fucking miserable, and I’d like to hope I’d pursue my artistic desires regardless of what they produce, and for whatever audience that would drown me with boo’s or cheers.

Toska

April 25, 2015 / valentin / 0 Comments

Rachit,

Bon Iver is one of my favourite bands. They’ve released two fantastic albums, but have been on an extended break since 2012. I was listening to the most recent recording of Justin Vernon (Bon Iver’s lead singer) and Sean Carey (the drummer) on YouTube, when I stumbled onto this comment:

I know this is awful, but I’m kind of hoping his girl breaks his heart and his band breaks up. What would Van Gogh have been if he hadn’t been so damned depressed? I think Justin just moved on from Bon Iver because his life moved on. I doubt he’ll ever be back in that place where his music is all he has. As a man, I wish him all the best. As an artist, I hope he’s starving.
– Queen Rexy

The last sentence stood out for its gravitas. As an artist, I hope he’s starving. She doesn’t just recognize that artists starve, she hopes he starves. Sure, the starving artist is a well-worn cliche – everybody knows it’s difficult to make a living producing art. But does starving really serve a purpose? I think it does, and I think we don’t give starving enough credit.

Starving for what, exactly? It’s difficult to write music when you haven’t eaten. We don’t want the artist to literally starve. What artists need is to long: to long for times past, to long for love lost, and to long to be a better artist. In art, it pays to be unhappy.

In Russian, there’s a word that describes this state of mind a little more aptly: toska (pronounced tah-ska, with the stress on the second syllable). Vladimir Nabokov says this about it:

No single word in English renders all the shades of toska. At its deepest and most painful, it is a sensation of great spiritual anguish, often without any specific cause. At less morbid levels it is a dull ache of the soul, a longing with nothing to long for, a sick pining, a vague restlessness, mental throes, yearning. In particular cases it may be the desire for somebody of something specific, nostalgia, love-sickness. At the lowest level it grades into ennui, boredom.

Some of the greatest thinkers, philosophers, artists and (ironically enough) comedians have been in one of the states of toska at some point in their lives. From Nietzsche, to Van Gogh, to Robin Williams, some of the world’s best art has been produced by the deeply distressed.

Ok, so many artists produce their best work when their life is in turmoil. So what? Well, I think this is an important point in the context of mental health.

With the advent of positive psychology, and an increased societal focus on how we can live fulfilling lives, I want to highlight this point: a fulfilling life does not have to be an unequivocally happy one. The state of longing and toska can be an incredible tool for creating powerful pieces of emotive expression. Perhaps toska can also be a drug, a constant state of darkness that is unsustainable for a lifetime if left unchecked. We must be able to recognize and disconnect from it when we feel it overwhelms us. As a temporary state of mind, however, I think it is perfectly natural, healthy, and inspiring.

For those of us whose lives are (for better or for worse) benign, and for the most part satisfactory – we may need to access toska through sheer imagination. Maybe Justin can try that, so Bon Iver can make a brilliant third album without his life falling apart.

NFC Podcast #8: Originality and Blue Collars

April 22, 2015 / valentin / 0 Comments

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS

The 8th NFC Podcast. In this one we talk about what it means to be original, Robin Thicke, and blue collar workers.

Original NFC Post 2.0

April 10, 2015 / rachit / 0 Comments

Let’s stick to some unorthodox posting methods. Below is a conversation exchange we had after your last post. I think it can stand alone as an expansion on our discussion itself, but for the lazy reader(s) out there, here are a few highlights of some of the major points that we made:

Originality is valued and interpreted differently as the ‘do-er’ of the piece of work, versus how we judge other people’s final product. As the ‘do-er’, we should not be concerned about the perception of originality in it’s final work, and rather just focus on the journey and be true to your own “special sense” of your original thoughts along the way – whether significantly inspired by others or not.
Analogously, you can judge your own legacy from a third party perspective, similar to how we judge other’s work. However, this again falls to the same argument of not concerning yourself with the destination and perception of your work.
And finally, how this fits into the larger scope of balancing originality versus other ‘gains’ that factor into our overall decision making.

It’s a lengthy exchange, but definitely worth the re-read.

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:25]
post is up

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:25]
sorry for the delay

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:26]
I ended up talking much less about science than I thought I would

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:26]
I think this sets it up fairly well for the hipster angle actually

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:30]
read it

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:35]
One comment: feels like it lacks substance in the point. I get the academic corrollory you’ve made to add to the discussion, but where on the line are you actually dancing? Try your best to narrow in the answer to he ‘b’ word? What are examples of people who push on either? Where do you stand on it? I think it’s easy for us to just say “B word bro. Duh. End of discussion”, but what’s more interesting is actually trying to scope out that line, and see where you stand on it. For example, with vegetarianism, yes it’s a balance of practicality and moral utility, but instead of just highlighting that continuum, take a stance on where you think the dance should be drawn – whether it’s from your own perspective, or from a policy/society persepctive.

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:38]
i think it’s a general point on how we should approach the whole ‘b’ word issue

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:38]
we’re both guilty of it

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:38]
yeah i agree, this is more of that question back and forth that we talked about before

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:38]
take a stance, don’t just throw up a question

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:39]
or just say ‘it’s somewhere in between’, where in between?

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:39]
I thought this post could tie in nicely the issues of culture and originality we talked about

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:40]
also simply identifying this trade off is not that trivial i think

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:40]
the main idea is that there isn’t a right spot to be on this spectrum

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:40]
but that culture greatly affects the range in which you can travel

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:41]
but we did identify the trade off on originality earlier in the discussion, this is just another example of it specifically with academia

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:41]
no I dont think we talked about the legacy angle

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:43]
that’s a specific take on how you judge your own products, versus how we judge other’s

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:43]
taking intention of originality out of the picture

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:43]
i dont think so

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:43]
i think wes anderson intends to be original and intends to leave behind something that’s uniquely his

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:44]
well, if ‘being original’ is tied with the legacy of his products, then sure

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:45]
i think it is, just like if you listen to the beatles now, it’s nothing particularly special

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:45]
but they created new genres of music, because they wanted to be original

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:48]
right, but your point to that was that as an artist/decision maker on originality, that it shouldn’t matter what the result of the product is (original or not), it should be the intention of the pursuit. Then, I said, take intention out of the picture, and think about how we judge other people’s work and qualify originality as a variable of importance. Maybe we should give it less importance. Now, with legacy, it’s how someone would imagine they would judge their own work, ‘x’ years into the future. How much would they value that the work was original and not mainstream?

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:48]
or perceived as original and not mainstream

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:49]
my point is that it’s in the shell of the same point on judging originality and it’s importance, just shifting the perspective

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:50]
yepp, agreed. I think I’m coming at this in a more first person angle of the artist/scientist, whereas you’re looking at it more objectively in a cultural view

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:51]
so for me, originality becomes more of a bet of long term payoffs and it’s hard to separate it from intention

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:51]
because originality without intention is just accidental

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:53]
right, but that goes back to your initial point you made, that from the perspective of the individual, it shouldn’t matter as much about the outcome for being original for originality’s sake, it should matter that you intended to try to add your own flavour to whatever it is you tried to do

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:54]
right but HOW MUCH flavour?

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:54]
a little? or should I start wearing pink pants and cheese blocks for hats like GaGa?

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:54]
well that comes down to who you are as an individual

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:54]
what speaks to you

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:55]
im not sure about that

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:55]
this is your point bro

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:55]
!

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:55]
lol i’m devil’s advocating your own thesis

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:55]
what I mean is that it’s not genetics or bread into anyone

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:55]
it’s a conscious decision that depends on so many factors

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:56]
and lady gaga or wes anderson could have, in a parallel universe, just as easily become much less ‘original’ artists if they chose to

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:56]
with their own flavour still

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:58]
Right, but i think it’s more purposefully vague when it comes down to the ‘do-er’ of the actions. I interpreted your perspective from, as an artist/researcher/contributor, the intent of contributing something unique should matter most to you, depending on the landscape of the field, what you find fun, what inspires you, etc. But, if the final product comes across as a revolutionary piece of work, or just a try hard trying to be ‘like Mike’, it shouldn’t matter to the individual. The pursuit of the journey should matter, and not the result

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 13:59]
how we judge them or their art is a different perspective

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 13:59]
I agree with the last sentence, definitely. But there is still definitely this originality factor to consider.

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:00]
that point actually kinda tells you that you shouldn’t be worried about your legacy

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:00]
that’s as irrelevant as the individual desitinations of your pieces of work

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:00]
it’s the collection of them

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:02]
Right, so even if legacy itself is not in the forefront of your thoughts, the long term vs. short term ‘gains’ certainly are

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:02]
and in the limit, long term gains are basically the way the world views you and your work

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:03]
Also, as a meta point, we’re basically art critics

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:03]
Who want to take sides for entertainment value

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:03]
Instead of just give in to the inevitable ‘balance’ of the world

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:07]
‘gains’ is a completely different part of the equations to why you produce what you produce. If you’re isolating the variable of originality, then under that point, it shouldn’t matter how the world views you and your work – it should only matter to you.

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:09]
Interesting, so are you saying you’re not a Utilitarian anymore?

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:09]
replace the word ‘gains’ with the word ‘utility’

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:09]
no

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:09]
that’s when you isolate ‘originality’

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:09]
as a variable

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:09]
and base the discussion on that

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:10]
so how does originality work into utility then?

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:10]
it’s in contrast to it

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:10]
or it can be

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:13]
Actually, it doesn’t necessairly have to be. Your individual pursuit of art for being the ‘original you’ should be for that persepctive alone. To put it into ‘utility’ perspective, i get the most self satisfaction and ‘happiness’ when i take that perspective of publishing any pieces of work attributed to my name. But, sometimes there can be arenas where ‘selling out’ and following the crowd makes more sense in terms of maslow’s lower pyramid gains, so the utils for my ego are diminished and the ones for my survival are replenished

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:14]
i define utilitairianism differently than the classical interpretation

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:14]
I agree that it doesn’t have to be in contrast to it, that’s my point with the long term vs short term stuff

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:16]
yeah, but if you are to isolate the originality point, based on the purity of the pursuit, you shouldn’t, hence the existence of the ‘starving artist’

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:17]
so what i think this highlights is the balance is from this pure ideal and real world ‘survival constraints’, and not an originality spectrum —— all of this being from the ‘do-er”s perspective of course

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:17]
ok

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:18]
that’s an interesting meta point

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:18]
you break out of the spectrum

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:18]
and say no, the only way to live is in the ultra-original

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:18]
ultra-violet

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:21]
not ‘ultra original’ that’s misleading, as vague and as cliche as it sounds, ‘as long as you’re true to your own orginal voice in your pursuit of your work’ —- which you may find your voice dances the inspiration/plagairism line, for example you are obsessed with The Beatles, and you end up in a cover band for them – it shouldn’t matter how ‘original’ or ‘unoriginal’ you’re perceived, but the fact that your intention of your work was as true to your original voice

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:21]
(PS, this is all stemming from the point you made on your post)

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:21]
yeah I see how it is

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:22]
I don’t know if I fully agree with that because I think there is no ‘your original voice’

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:22]
p.s. I’m almost done season 2 of breaking bad now

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:22]
and I think I know where all of this is going

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:23]
where?

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:23]
I think Walter White’s character is going to evolve

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:24]
they’ve already dropped the ‘you don’t know me’ line a few times

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:24]
and I think that’s my main point

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:24]
or main jist

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:24]
evolve into what?

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:24]
all characters evolve

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:25]
well in the good shows at least

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:25]
so reconcile that then

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:25]
you say true original voice

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:25]
but then all characters evolve

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:25]
what is left of the true original voice?

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:25]
(p.s. this is like the basic Greek philosophical idea of how can change be possible)

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:27]
i think it translates more to ‘for the sake of the pursuit’

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:27]
why did you climb mount everest?

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:27]
just cause vs. for the accalaides

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:27]
accolades*

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:28]
that’s fundamentally not utilitarian

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:28]
but i’d argue that there’s ‘utility’ / ‘happiness’ in that perspective

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:28]
that’s just another accolade

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:28]
sure

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:28]
it’s not ‘just cause’

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:29]
i mean, to some degree

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:29]
you’re not aware of it

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:29]
it’s whether you meta-analyze your decisions or not

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:30]
utilitarianism is about that analysis. if given two options, how should you decide?

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:30]
if you admit ‘sometimes you do things ‘just because” then you admit utility is clearly not the only way to reason

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:32]
sure, so i made a decision about pursuing art for the sake of the pursuitearly on in life, and thinking about it rationally I realized i’m setting myself up for more satisfaction / utility in the future from having this perspective

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:33]
this is an interesting point, whether or not originality can be woven into a utilitarian perspective

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:35]
also, i think there’s a difference in the pursuit of utility versus the reality of utility based on your decisions. You more often than not don’t make rational choices, but you are in pursuit of trying to simplify your world to gain u

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:35]
‘utils’ from it

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:42]
I think the reality is that sometimes you make decisions based on some framework you’ve set up (based on utility, religion, family values or otherwise), sometimes you make decisions because they are the path of least resistance (i.e. ‘status quo’), and sometimes you make decisions because of your genetics. The third category is the ‘just because’ category and it may speak to our over-emphasis on consciousness and its role in

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:42]
‘rationality’

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:45]
Most of the time, it’s a combination of the three

Valentin Peretroukhin, [05.04.15 14:51]
you still in London?

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:51]
agreed

Rachit Chakerwarti, [05.04.15 14:51]
yeah

North Korea’s Wes Anderson

April 5, 2015 / valentin / 0 Comments

Rachit,

You couldn’t get some better pictures of your chicken scratch? Throw an Instagram filter on them at least, or maybe spill some alcohol to add a real authentic grunge. I could barely read the entire thing, but I commend you for pushing the boundary of what a two person science, art, sports and philosophy blog can get away with. You took a known medium and altered it just slightly to make it interesting (maybe we can make it a bit more legible next time). This is the part of the originality spectrum where the majority of our favourite artists operate. They take a known medium, and give it a dash of original flavour. For every Wes Anderson, there are 10 David Fincher’s and Christopher Nolan’s who lack a completely novel style but make up for it with a few distinctive flairs and an overall solid understanding of their medium.

As a society, we understand and appreciate this style of art: take what we know and make it a bit better or present it in a way we haven’t seen before. Case in point: Christopher Nolan’s take on Batman. But if you ask yourself, in 50 years, whose movies will we be more likely to see studied in film school, Anderson’s or Nolan’s, you’d probably bet on Anderson. Being completely original doesn’t necessarily bring in the most dough, but it leaves a legacy: your own permanent stain on the cultural zeitgeist that is hard to wash out.

This is true in art, and I think it’s also true in science and academia. Academia is the only industry I know of that actually pays for novelty first and foremost. As a researcher, your job is to produce novel insights and conjectures that broaden the state-of-the-art. This novelty is not unbounded however – there are accepted research fields where the majority of researchers spend their times and where the majority of grant money is to be found.

As a researcher, much like as an artist, you have to ask yourself: how original do I want to be? Pushing the envelope may cost you research funding in the short term, but your work may turn out to be more important to the field in the long term. This is the originality spectrum, and it comes with the same dreaded ‘b’ word as all the other spectrums we’ve talked about. How original do you want to be? The answer clearly depends on the culture and society in which you operate.

Kim Jon-un may like basketball, but I doubt he’s too big of a Wes Anderson fan.