After a nearly a whole lifetime of deliberately avoiding Ayn Rand’s 1957 classic “Atlas Shrugged,” five or six years ago I finally unavoided it. I could cite more reasons to not like this book than Martin Luther had theses to nail to the Wittenberg door, but one simple fact trumps all of my objections - namely that I couldn’t put the damned thing down. Say what you want, the book is a page-turner.
Compare that to the movie version, released as “Atlas Shrugged - Part 1.” Inside 30 seconds I was looking at my watch. Let’s put it this way. The movie invites comparisons to such classics as “Santa Claus Conquers the Martians” and Ed Wood’s immortal “Plan 9 From Outer Space.” Really, we’re talking “Mystery Science Theater 3000” quality here.
Ayn Rand’s dystopic novel asks us to identify with a band of hero capitalists getting squashed by big government, who in their frustration stage their own version of going on a strike led by the mysterious John Galt. Everything ends happily when the US of the future is plunged into the Dark Ages as a result, setting the stage for a return to reason.
Crazy as it seems, Rand pulls it off. The story centers on a hard-as-nails railroad heiress, Dagny Taggart and a much-maligned self-made steel magnate, Hank Rearden, who team up to save the country from its own stupidity (but only in pursuit of their own rational self-interest, which is Rand creed), and fall in a higher kind of love in the process, only to bow to the inevitable and join John Galt.
Rand’s oddball over-philosophizing is about as subtle as a headache (and just as painful) and the various plots and sub-plots and sub-sub-sub plots unfold like George Orwell on acid, only not nearly so coherent, but she does stick to literary convention in serving up virtuous and heroic (and ultimately doomed) Arthurian archetypes with whom we can easily identify.
This is far from the case in the movie version, which effectively turns our heroes into JR Ewing and Marie Antoinette.
No, it’s worse than that. At least JR Ewing was fun to watch. Whatever induced the producers to think that a main course of thudding right-wing speechifying would make compelling cinema? “Santa Claus Conquers the Martians,” by contrast, is a cliff-hanger. Unfortunately, my cinema seat did not come equipped with a fast-forward button.
It was no coincidence that the Dagny Taggart character seemed to have come straight from a Fox News desk. It was as if the producers felt that we would instantly identify with a limo-riding blond in short skirts, gorging herself on fine delicacies while the rest of the country couldn’t afford to feed their families. Any second, I expected this bloodless wonder to spout on about the evils of Obama Care.
What idiot could possibly identify with a character like this? I could only think. Oops, that’s right, Sean Hannity. He loved the movie. Then again, he probably wrote the screen play.
I’m sure the military right now is playing this movie to suspect terrorists at Gitmo to get them to confess. Where water-boarding failed, this horrible excuse for a movie may well succeed. In the name of humanity, we need to find a more humane form of torture.
Poor Ayn Rand. This is the last thing she would have wished for. “Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain.” Alas, she is doomed to a similar fate as her Nietzschian supermen.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Monday, April 25, 2011
Ayn Rand Mike Wallace Interview 1959 part 1
I'm headed out the door to see the movie "Atlas Shrugged - Part I." I am no subscriber to Ayn Rand or libertarianism or objectivism, but I do applaud her for her intellectual honesty and moral integrity. You can see both qualities on ample display in this 1959 interview with Mike Wallace. You can search out Parts II and III of the interview for yourself
I look forward to at least two or three blogs on the Ayn Ran and her legacy, and to lively discussions. Enjoy ...
Labels:
Atlas Shrugged,
Ayn Rand,
John McManamy,
Mike Wallace
Sunday, April 24, 2011
A Song of Deliverance
You are my hiding place;
you will protect me from trouble
and surround me with songs of deliverance.- Psalm 32
Friday, April 22, 2011
The Day I Fired God
God and I have issues. It all came to a head yesterday morning when I leisurely double-checked my 1 PM lunch appointment only to discover it was for 12 noon. I had to leave now, right now. Now as in NOW!
Shit!
It was all God’s fault, of course. Was it too much trouble on His part to actually equip me with a brain that worked? Or at least a non-working brain that came with technical support? Ever try getting through to God? I’ve been on hold all my life. Never mind. Just grab my wallet and I’m outta here. Wallet? Wallet!
One minute ... no wallet. Two minutes ... no wallet.
Now I was really mad at God.
Three minutes, four minutes ...
I’m late! Or rather late for being a half-hour early. I had to give myself time for getting lost, stuck in traffic, or a comet randomly landing on my head. And the way things were going with my day, there was clearly a high probability of things falling out of the sky, totally exclusive to me.
There’s a passage in Homer’s Iliad that best describes how I was feeling. This is when the Greek’s mighty warrior, Achilles, discovers that the god Apollo has played a trick on him (sort of equivalent to hiding my wallet on me). As Homer describes it: “Achilles of the nimble feet was furious.”
“You have made a fool of me!” Achilles lashes out at Apollo. To add a bit of context to the conversation, our mere mortal only minutes before had had a run-in with the river god Xanthus, who “towered up and rushed upon Achilles with an angry surge, seething with foam and blood and corpses.”
First the river god, and now Apollo. “Much as I should like to pay you out,” Achilles rages at the son of Zeus, “if I only had the power.”
Being a mere mortal totally sucks.
At least Achilles got to vent his anger on Troy’s best warrior, Hector, whom he confronted “looking like the god of War, in his flashing helmet, girt for battle,” brandishing “the formidable ashen spear of Pelion.”
Me, I had the option of punching the crap out of my throw pillow-laden love seat.
I looked up at the ceiling instead. “God, you’re fired!” I said in a voice that would have caused all the plants in the house to shrivel and die had I been a god, myself. The plants paid no attention.
Minutes later, I found my wallet, or rather God surreptitiously returned it to where I had left it in the first place. At least, where I think I may have left it. How the hell would I know where I left it, me with my factory-reject brain with no tech support.
I looked back up at the ceiling. Let this be a lesson to you, God, said the look on my face.
Nothing dropped out of the sky on me on the way to my lunch appointment. Lunch was great.
Shit!
It was all God’s fault, of course. Was it too much trouble on His part to actually equip me with a brain that worked? Or at least a non-working brain that came with technical support? Ever try getting through to God? I’ve been on hold all my life. Never mind. Just grab my wallet and I’m outta here. Wallet? Wallet!
One minute ... no wallet. Two minutes ... no wallet.
Now I was really mad at God.
Three minutes, four minutes ...
I’m late! Or rather late for being a half-hour early. I had to give myself time for getting lost, stuck in traffic, or a comet randomly landing on my head. And the way things were going with my day, there was clearly a high probability of things falling out of the sky, totally exclusive to me.
There’s a passage in Homer’s Iliad that best describes how I was feeling. This is when the Greek’s mighty warrior, Achilles, discovers that the god Apollo has played a trick on him (sort of equivalent to hiding my wallet on me). As Homer describes it: “Achilles of the nimble feet was furious.”
“You have made a fool of me!” Achilles lashes out at Apollo. To add a bit of context to the conversation, our mere mortal only minutes before had had a run-in with the river god Xanthus, who “towered up and rushed upon Achilles with an angry surge, seething with foam and blood and corpses.”
First the river god, and now Apollo. “Much as I should like to pay you out,” Achilles rages at the son of Zeus, “if I only had the power.”
Being a mere mortal totally sucks.
At least Achilles got to vent his anger on Troy’s best warrior, Hector, whom he confronted “looking like the god of War, in his flashing helmet, girt for battle,” brandishing “the formidable ashen spear of Pelion.”
Me, I had the option of punching the crap out of my throw pillow-laden love seat.
I looked up at the ceiling instead. “God, you’re fired!” I said in a voice that would have caused all the plants in the house to shrivel and die had I been a god, myself. The plants paid no attention.
Minutes later, I found my wallet, or rather God surreptitiously returned it to where I had left it in the first place. At least, where I think I may have left it. How the hell would I know where I left it, me with my factory-reject brain with no tech support.
I looked back up at the ceiling. Let this be a lesson to you, God, said the look on my face.
Nothing dropped out of the sky on me on the way to my lunch appointment. Lunch was great.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Can an Extravert Do My Job?
This is from a recent article on mcmanweb, which in turn is based on three pieces I did for HealthCentral's BipolarConnect. At the moment, I am back in my element of restorative splendid isolation following a Saturday of being on conspicuous public display during our NAMI San Diego Walk.
The NAMI San Diego Walk video I posted a couple of days ago lends the impression that I'm an extravert who thrives amongst people. Wrong! It's very complicated, but chances are a lot of this applies to you, as well. Let's get crackin' ...
In a post from last year, I reported that most of us with mood disorders are introverts rather than extraverts, which brings on a dangerous tendency to isolate. This in turn makes us sitting ducks for depression.
I am a card-carrying introvert. I can testify to this. But neither introversion nor extraversion is all good or all bad, though not everybody sees it that way. "What's concerning me," commented one of my readers, "Jane", on HealthCentral's BipolarConnect, "is that the pdocs of the world have decided we need to be a nation of Rotarians."
Nothing against Rotarians, but you get the picture. Give me a nice quiet cave on a mountain top in the most remote region of Tibet for the next ten years, any day of the week. But eventually, I must return to a world of Rotarians. I may be a one-man majority in my personal cave, but out in the real world three out of four individuals on this planet are extraverts.
So, the ex's have it. Extraversion IS the norm, with introverts the outsiders, struggling to fit into a world set up for the numerical majority.
If anything, psychiatry is collaborating with our oppressors. Personality tests based on the five factor model (FFM) measure for positive traits, including extraversion. The new version of the DSM, due out in 2013, incorporates the FFM into its new criteria for personality disorders, focusing on what it sees as the negative trait of introversion. This might be forgivable if extraversion/introversion were only a small piece in the personality puzzle, but that is hardly the case. The FFM, for instance, also tests for "openness" and "agreeability." An "agreeable" personality to an introvert is hardly going to be an agreeable personality to an extravert, and guess who is likely to be doing the assessing? As Freda at BipolarConnect remarked:
Where [introversion] was once, some years back, considered quaint and "tolerable," it is now considered snobbish, offensive, and completely not accepted, at least in my circle of the world. ... I am repeatedly informed and I must be trained and taught and given "coping skills" to master.
It gets worse. The FFM fails to measure for traits that play into our strengths, such as introspection, insight, imagination, and creativity. In other words, psychiatry - reflecting the world-at-large - values sociability over personal reflection, superficial social connections over deep thinking, pat answers over nuanced problem-solving, and conformity over breaking the mold.
Off the top of my head, George W Bush would be psychiatry's ideal poster boy. Is something very wrong with this picture?
What psychiatry fails to recognize is that someone out there needs to be generating ideas and new ways of looking at the world, and these tend to come from the type of people who enjoy being alone over long stretches of time, or at least know how to function in solitude. Even those who perform in public are obliged to master their craft in lonely settings. Writers definitely need to be alone. Same with those in science and technology and a host of other disciplines.
How does an extravert handle these situations? Not too well. As Diana reports on her younger sister:
She dies a thousand deaths each night she is alone. She lives for companionship and would almost rather be with the wrong person than to be alone. She is either on the phone or with someone or planning her next outing - all the time. ... And when she is alone, she feels abandoned.
Ironically, when we introverts do surface, we are often mistaken for extraverts, precisely because we're bubbling with fresh thoughts and ideas, much to the amusement (or consternation) of the extraverts in our company. But if they are fascinated (or appalled) by us, we quickly become bored with them, unless they, too, can feed us new insights.
Extraverts thrive in glad-handing, banal-conversation situations. We suffocate. The air we breathe is in our nourishing and stimulating private world. Diana's sister can't hack it in this environment, yet she is considered the normal one, an FFM-DSM model of perfection.
To each his own, you may say. If only that were the case. But not with the extravert majority judging us.
Could an extravert do my job? I asked in a post on Bipolar Connect. Over six weeks in the beginning of 2011, I hunkered down in my quiet corner of the universe, blotting out all distractions, completely overhauling my website. This involved being at the keyboard at about nine every morning, and calling it a day around midnight, seven days a week, with frequent (but mostly solitary) breaks in between.
I was totally in my element. By contrast, an extravert - a citizen in "a nation of Rotarians" - would be climbing walls. Or, perhaps Citizen Rotarian would have attempted to drag me out the door, thinking he was doing me a favor.
Oh, and by the way, introversion nearly killed me (though that was much earlier).
The extraverts are right about one thing. Strange things happen to our brains when we shut ourselves off from the outside world for too long. Extraverts need to come up for air, fast, which is why they could never do my job. But, eventually, there comes a time when I can't do my job, either.
They can't spend too much time in my world. I can't spend too much time in theirs. But for my own sanity, I do need to set aside special time for their world. Of all things, once I acclimate myself to the chill waters, I do enjoy myself. I perk up, I become animated. Neurons spark. I make connections.
But the effort drains me, and I have to return to my world. It's all about balance. My concept of balance is very different from an extravert's concept of balance, or, for that matter psychiatry's concept of balance. We're the minority. The majority out there is never going to understand us. They think that what's good for them is good for us. They're wrong, of course, but every once in awhile they're right.
Postscript: My post-Walk recuperation ends today. I'm meeting a couple of mental health advocates for the first time for lunch in a restaurant with valet parking. Shit! The place probably has tablecloths, too, which means no jeans for me. The last time I wore dress slacks had to have been six months ago, which I recall throwing very carefully on the bedroom floor. I think they're still there. I'll be fine ...
The NAMI San Diego Walk video I posted a couple of days ago lends the impression that I'm an extravert who thrives amongst people. Wrong! It's very complicated, but chances are a lot of this applies to you, as well. Let's get crackin' ...
In a post from last year, I reported that most of us with mood disorders are introverts rather than extraverts, which brings on a dangerous tendency to isolate. This in turn makes us sitting ducks for depression.
I am a card-carrying introvert. I can testify to this. But neither introversion nor extraversion is all good or all bad, though not everybody sees it that way. "What's concerning me," commented one of my readers, "Jane", on HealthCentral's BipolarConnect, "is that the pdocs of the world have decided we need to be a nation of Rotarians."
Nothing against Rotarians, but you get the picture. Give me a nice quiet cave on a mountain top in the most remote region of Tibet for the next ten years, any day of the week. But eventually, I must return to a world of Rotarians. I may be a one-man majority in my personal cave, but out in the real world three out of four individuals on this planet are extraverts.
So, the ex's have it. Extraversion IS the norm, with introverts the outsiders, struggling to fit into a world set up for the numerical majority.
If anything, psychiatry is collaborating with our oppressors. Personality tests based on the five factor model (FFM) measure for positive traits, including extraversion. The new version of the DSM, due out in 2013, incorporates the FFM into its new criteria for personality disorders, focusing on what it sees as the negative trait of introversion. This might be forgivable if extraversion/introversion were only a small piece in the personality puzzle, but that is hardly the case. The FFM, for instance, also tests for "openness" and "agreeability." An "agreeable" personality to an introvert is hardly going to be an agreeable personality to an extravert, and guess who is likely to be doing the assessing? As Freda at BipolarConnect remarked:
Where [introversion] was once, some years back, considered quaint and "tolerable," it is now considered snobbish, offensive, and completely not accepted, at least in my circle of the world. ... I am repeatedly informed and I must be trained and taught and given "coping skills" to master.
It gets worse. The FFM fails to measure for traits that play into our strengths, such as introspection, insight, imagination, and creativity. In other words, psychiatry - reflecting the world-at-large - values sociability over personal reflection, superficial social connections over deep thinking, pat answers over nuanced problem-solving, and conformity over breaking the mold.
Off the top of my head, George W Bush would be psychiatry's ideal poster boy. Is something very wrong with this picture?
What psychiatry fails to recognize is that someone out there needs to be generating ideas and new ways of looking at the world, and these tend to come from the type of people who enjoy being alone over long stretches of time, or at least know how to function in solitude. Even those who perform in public are obliged to master their craft in lonely settings. Writers definitely need to be alone. Same with those in science and technology and a host of other disciplines.
How does an extravert handle these situations? Not too well. As Diana reports on her younger sister:
She dies a thousand deaths each night she is alone. She lives for companionship and would almost rather be with the wrong person than to be alone. She is either on the phone or with someone or planning her next outing - all the time. ... And when she is alone, she feels abandoned.
Ironically, when we introverts do surface, we are often mistaken for extraverts, precisely because we're bubbling with fresh thoughts and ideas, much to the amusement (or consternation) of the extraverts in our company. But if they are fascinated (or appalled) by us, we quickly become bored with them, unless they, too, can feed us new insights.
Extraverts thrive in glad-handing, banal-conversation situations. We suffocate. The air we breathe is in our nourishing and stimulating private world. Diana's sister can't hack it in this environment, yet she is considered the normal one, an FFM-DSM model of perfection.
To each his own, you may say. If only that were the case. But not with the extravert majority judging us.
Could an extravert do my job? I asked in a post on Bipolar Connect. Over six weeks in the beginning of 2011, I hunkered down in my quiet corner of the universe, blotting out all distractions, completely overhauling my website. This involved being at the keyboard at about nine every morning, and calling it a day around midnight, seven days a week, with frequent (but mostly solitary) breaks in between.
I was totally in my element. By contrast, an extravert - a citizen in "a nation of Rotarians" - would be climbing walls. Or, perhaps Citizen Rotarian would have attempted to drag me out the door, thinking he was doing me a favor.
Oh, and by the way, introversion nearly killed me (though that was much earlier).
The extraverts are right about one thing. Strange things happen to our brains when we shut ourselves off from the outside world for too long. Extraverts need to come up for air, fast, which is why they could never do my job. But, eventually, there comes a time when I can't do my job, either.
They can't spend too much time in my world. I can't spend too much time in theirs. But for my own sanity, I do need to set aside special time for their world. Of all things, once I acclimate myself to the chill waters, I do enjoy myself. I perk up, I become animated. Neurons spark. I make connections.
But the effort drains me, and I have to return to my world. It's all about balance. My concept of balance is very different from an extravert's concept of balance, or, for that matter psychiatry's concept of balance. We're the minority. The majority out there is never going to understand us. They think that what's good for them is good for us. They're wrong, of course, but every once in awhile they're right.
Postscript: My post-Walk recuperation ends today. I'm meeting a couple of mental health advocates for the first time for lunch in a restaurant with valet parking. Shit! The place probably has tablecloths, too, which means no jeans for me. The last time I wore dress slacks had to have been six months ago, which I recall throwing very carefully on the bedroom floor. I think they're still there. I'll be fine ...
Labels:
extraversion,
extravert,
introversion,
John McManamy
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Rerun: The Ultimate Self-Awareness Dialogue
I'm taking a bit of a post-Walk blogging break. This oldie-but-goodie from Dec 2009 ...
India, sometime during the second century AD: Indo-Greek King Milanda and his retinue drop in on the famed Buddhist sage, Nagasena. “How is your reverence called?” Milanda asks.
“O great king,” Nagasena responds. “As Nagasena I am known, and as Nagasena do my fellow religious habitually address me. … Nevertheless this word ‘Nagasena’ is just a denomination, a designation, a conceptual term, a current appellation, a mere name. For no real person can here be apprehended.”
We should have known better than to expect a straightforward answer from a sage. Fortunately, ancient heads of state had a lot of time on their hands:
“Now listen, you 500 Greeks and 80,000 monks,” Milanda responds. “This Nagasena tells me that he is not a real person. How can I be expected to agree with that?” Then, addressing Nagasena, he enquires that if the party to whom he is speaking is not real, then who is it who consumes food and medicine, guards morality, and practices meditation? And because he really has a lot of time on his hands, Milanda throws in a generous litany of all manner of activities a sage - and a sage in non-sage moments - might indulge in. Finally, he ties a bow on his query with this question:
“What then is this ‘Nagasena’? Are perhaps the hairs of the head ‘Nagasena’?”
This is the cue for a laconic change-up: “No, great king!” Nagasena responds.
“Or perhaps the hairs of the body?”
“No, great king!”
We’ll compassionately spare you the full inventory of teeth, skin, muscles, sinew, and snot, not to mention feelings, perceptions, and so on, and in combination, that flow off Milanda's regal tongue. Now Nagasena turns the conversation around to Milanda’s mode of transportation:
“Please explain to me what a chariot is. Is the pole the chariot?”
“No, reverend Sir!”
The wheels, the framework, the flag-staff, the yoke, the reins, the goadstick? In combination?
At last, Milanda is forced to concede there is no chariot, that it is simply a “designation, this conceptual term, a current appellation, and a mere name.”
So who the hell are we? Draw any lesson you wish from the conversation.
India, sometime during the second century AD: Indo-Greek King Milanda and his retinue drop in on the famed Buddhist sage, Nagasena. “How is your reverence called?” Milanda asks.
“O great king,” Nagasena responds. “As Nagasena I am known, and as Nagasena do my fellow religious habitually address me. … Nevertheless this word ‘Nagasena’ is just a denomination, a designation, a conceptual term, a current appellation, a mere name. For no real person can here be apprehended.”
We should have known better than to expect a straightforward answer from a sage. Fortunately, ancient heads of state had a lot of time on their hands:
“Now listen, you 500 Greeks and 80,000 monks,” Milanda responds. “This Nagasena tells me that he is not a real person. How can I be expected to agree with that?” Then, addressing Nagasena, he enquires that if the party to whom he is speaking is not real, then who is it who consumes food and medicine, guards morality, and practices meditation? And because he really has a lot of time on his hands, Milanda throws in a generous litany of all manner of activities a sage - and a sage in non-sage moments - might indulge in. Finally, he ties a bow on his query with this question:
“What then is this ‘Nagasena’? Are perhaps the hairs of the head ‘Nagasena’?”
This is the cue for a laconic change-up: “No, great king!” Nagasena responds.
“Or perhaps the hairs of the body?”
“No, great king!”
We’ll compassionately spare you the full inventory of teeth, skin, muscles, sinew, and snot, not to mention feelings, perceptions, and so on, and in combination, that flow off Milanda's regal tongue. Now Nagasena turns the conversation around to Milanda’s mode of transportation:
“Please explain to me what a chariot is. Is the pole the chariot?”
“No, reverend Sir!”
The wheels, the framework, the flag-staff, the yoke, the reins, the goadstick? In combination?
At last, Milanda is forced to concede there is no chariot, that it is simply a “designation, this conceptual term, a current appellation, and a mere name.”
So who the hell are we? Draw any lesson you wish from the conversation.
Labels:
Buddhism,
chariot,
John McManamy,
Milanda,
Nagasena,
Self-awareness
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
My NAMI San Diego Walk Video
The video speaks for itself. Great weather, great day, great people. Special thanks to Annie Dunlop for her efforts and the crew supporting her.
You can still donate by going to my NAMI San Diego Walk page.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Scenes From My NAMI San Diego Walk
These are freeze frames from video footage I shot of the NAMI San Diego Walk on Saturday. I serve on the board of NAMI SD and was on the committee that planned the Walk. My main task was to bring my didgeridoo, round up drummers, and shoot video. I showed up at 5:30 AM to film people setting up and organizing. Then the mobs descended.
We had gorgeous weather, it was a great turn-out, and Annie and her crew did a spectacular job making this event truly special.
I arrived back at my place 5 PM, immediately crashed, and didn't wake up for 14 hours.
Stay tuned for the video ...
Thursday, April 14, 2011
My NAMI San Diego Walk
This is video I shot last year. I'm walking again on Saturday, with about 3,000 others. I'm bringing my didgeridoo and hope to be able to round up some drummers. I can't emphasize enough the positive experience of walking for NAMI, and the video makes my case.
This summer NAMI San Diego will be honored by NAMI national as the local affiliate of the year. We're out there in the community, we're there in small groups, we're there one-on-one. Our people on every level are an inspiration, employees and volunteers. Many first came to NAMI San Diego in a state of extreme distress, then stayed in all kinds of capacities, helping out any which way they could, with the kind of determination and drive and compassion that words do no justice to.
I'm proud to be serving with them and walking with them.
We're walking to send the world a message and to raise money. Even when we are offering a free service run by volunteers, money is involved. The second someone switches on the lights, money is involved. Lights switch on. More money. More lights, points of lights. Lights, illumination. Money-money-money.
We want to switch on more lights. You can help by going to my Walk Page and making a donation.
Better, yet. Join me on the Walk. One of my readers from Arizona contacted me to say he'll be in San Diego this weekend and wants to walk with me. I can't begin to tell you how this made my day. But you can walk with me in spirit. Some of my readers are involved in their own local NAMI Walks, from places such as Iowa and Connecticut, and I'm there in spirit with them as well. Connections, community, healing.
This is about all of us. Physically apart, perhaps, but together - together - big time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)














