The self fulfilling false economy
At the bus station the competition is rife beyond compare. Those that do not know their destination shall be eluded to the hounding of touts; prey for the uninitiated. You will be told that you have many options of class. One can take a ‘luxury’ vessel, one that has been steeped in superfluous livery, or the cheaper, better value buses, of which there are many and far to choose from. However, it is in this dichotomy that one realises the true nature of the situation. Buoyed by the touts, the expensive option stands out as the scapegoat for everything evil. Out numbered it is, by a plethora of independent and ramshackle vehicles, it is the bringer of problems for the local operator; the bane, harbinger of modernity. Weighing up ones options you can easily be caught applying fake figures on the competition. for example a bus can only deviate in terms of quality having only one main task, that is, to arrive at point B from point point A. And having assumed that the more expensive bus have ‘superfluous’ extras, it will still only deliver you to the same station. The discrepancy in monetary value cannot possibly hold up to the ability to deliver on a base level in that a comparison of services with mirrored results cannot possibly be out-bettered. Here is where the archaic notion of values for money and the local companies ability to utilise this anachronistic fallacy. The ensuing effect is that the false economy feeds off of itself, commanded by ones desire to carry out the out-dated myth. A paradoxical situation envelopes it, causing more passengers to travel by the best value, or what is perceived to be in their case. Of course the signified luxury; of the more glamourous, modern bus must signify that the older, broken and overcrowded buses must signify better value. Notice I, as do not the touts - mention the actual prices of each service. Of course if you might make a guess you can imagine the discrepancy in price is not that great. The modern carrier, running less services, more efficiently and with better clientele can afford to run with minimal mark up to lesser services. The cheaper buses, having to satiate the masses of involved and demanding touts and what can loosely be called ‘staff’ must amend its prices accordingly. And thus a almost similar scale of prices arise, leaving one to make a decision; if you can get passed the overwhelming urge to save money, you can choose the genuine best value bus for your journey.
Methods of non-forceful limitation of liberties (tools for a modern government)
There are, in a generalised worldwide scale, drugs and devices that are both entirely utilised, held with rapture, personal or societal esteem: and those that are beyond the bounds of complete unacceptability. This astounding feat of intercultural acceptance and revoke, even segregative liberties exists only to satiate the current ruling powers, state, government or otherwise. For example, in duty countries tax is used as a legislative tool for minor drug control. Certain narcotics could easily be outlawed along with other more serious drugs (obviously the intensity and danger of each drug correlates reasonably with its legality - or does it?). However the individual government would be loathe to eradicate a lucrative money generative endeavour such as this, as much as the user would be loathe to give up entire use of said substance. A pristine example of alcohol suppression would be the scandinavian standard of tax oppression. This devastating omnipotence forces drinkers to reconsider even the necessity as much as the government equally arbitrate the loss in taxable revenue. Similarly the restaurateur that chooses not to serve alcohol must balance the enforced better and more controllable behaviour of their clients with the loss in amicable and accepting clientele - both institutions here achieve similar resounding benefits. The degree to which an institution condemns a narcotic device to the degree a user capitulates to the imposed effects is directly correctable, and the source of implication to the judicious overseers. In terms of economic hardship, the enrolling parties are quite obliged to increase the taxation of various controlled substances, not to overly control the usage but to garner the increase of revenue in a situation where uncertain times befit extra indulgence. In such situations the imposed cruelty serves with no authority to the effects produced and therefore cannot feasibly be culpable for the correct management. A government has ultimately no universal intelligence with which it can authorise the situation, but relies on the general populace either capitulating to its principles or negating its usage entirely - a situational divide the power is happy to enforce with clear minds. Aside from the inevitable revenue garnering such authorities take, legalising certain types of a substance or a certain usage greatly effect a narcotics plausible preference. Something slight has the ability to defer the usage and pleasure enacted from it. The smoking ban made smokers the target - it was backed by the burgeoning popular vitriol towards the act of smoking and its derisive health status. Preventing a drugs usage in a certain area implies its antisocial behaviour. Smoking, a once universal normality (see african nation attitudes where it is a national pastime) has been afflicted with the burden and signified disgust of other far more incriminating drugs. By implying its use should be retracted - almost hidden for the non-smoking population, the drug has assumed the negative attribute other more socially unfeasible drugs have; and the user, impaired by its limitation feels more guilty - despite the lack of change of substance itself - finds themselves divided by friends, ideals and original choices made. These measures truly instigate resounding effects beyond their intentional use, and yet judicious rulers apply them with risible function and weak reasoning. Whatever the correct enforcement should be, the arbiters will always be one step behind in the understanding and application in terms of street level resonance of their lofty ideals. Whilst some are applied consumed and legislated without problems, there will always be a element of guess work that will require a degree of misfortune; something those in control are willing to take.
A polarised society
It is a resounding misnomer or myth that as a holiday signifies a lack of work it must only contain the laments of a traditional holiday and exist within the most polar bounds that extremes can produce. To work is to not relax, and to relax is to vacate. However in reality of course a holiday without some degree of effort is unfeasible. LIkewise, a job without an element of relaxation or pleasure is one of an unbearable nature. Having embedded these abject into the pliable social conscious has made an unnecessary pressure of the focus of each event as a ‘project’ and one that must satiate the principles of the clearly defined system. This, coupled with the complimentary public opinion (vastly subjective to the fact it has been brainwashed by its inherent malleability) creates the pressure and overwhelming responsibility to occupy the roles of worker and vacationer. It is as if they were two different worlds, two parts which must be played by the same lead actor, having to change outfit and never appearing simultaneously. It is almost if, in the case of the worker experiencing pleasure in his work, it might very well temper their enjoyment of the downtime of a vacation and ultimately render it useless as a power. It is sort of an Orwellian conformity, where items were rendered with the livery they employed as descriptions, such as the standardised ‘gin’, the block capitals leaving nothing to be interpreted but only to learn to connote such a substance with leisure, of the substance of benefits. This process of implied emotional reaction following a contrived motivational and propaganda like action is one of danger. In the least part because it learns the human characters in the game are driven mad by the constant focus on doing the right thing and become accustomed to not getting their way. Worse still there is the effect that once taught, those will only be able to condemn those that rebel and thus beginning the process of universal dumbing down and ultimately (in the extreme) the hold of power by autonomous tyranny.
The International Holiday
Sitting on the terrace of a distinctly European feeling Moroccan city, the diners forgo their cultural identity to their gestures. It is said that the devide is east and west, 1st and 3rd and in a country with abjects it would appear from the outset as such; a divide as pervasive as the summer heat; to have and to have not. However with every great devide can subdivisions be noted. A moroccan tout will obviously assume some generalisations from appearance, granted a great deal can be connotated from the mere perception and possessions and can be divulged with a little probe of inquiry. But as a target emanates rings of correlating score, as the corresponded implied worth is derived on a linear contiguous scale, so is a similar inverse scale; that of the understanding of a culture exponentially linked with it’s proximity. A European - tempted by the engorged tourism of the continent - knows that everything is temporary. A vacation to a French family can mean going from one country to the next without taking to the air, remaining ‘on the continent’, in the same time zone, and perhaps even adhering to the same principles of language and cultural ideals. As much as one can envisage it’s terminal nature a european can dwell on it’s ability to be prolonged. Here, the proximity belies the Europeans understanding of the terminal, finite nature of the holiday, and perhaps grasps - whether rationally or consciously - onto culture as a method of forcibly prolonging the mental state of vacation. And honestly speaking, we as Europeans are bombarded with a sense of connection to the world, as if the epicentre of earthy creation; as if the land mass itself fell from a single point in Europe. Bombarded is the European to the ease of escape to a foreign climb and the inherent state of mind activated once therein.
.
However here is where the doubt may arise. Struck by all the points previously made, the European becomes accustomed to the subtle ‘differences’ and moreover the failed-to-mention-in-the-advertising similarities of life inside the postcard. Hyper aware and somewhat unable to ignore the proximity to normality becomes a reason to continue the perception of ‘endemic’ understanding.
.
An American tourist is so aware the struggle to reach his or her destination that they are indicted to the idea of the event. Time does not pass, but merely the event itself unfolds; starts, continues and persists for its allotted predestined time; as is categorised by ones economic stature, driven by ones wealth and enacted by ones intention. We can contrast a morbidly time aware European with a unconsciously ‘satisfied’ American. It would be garnered that the American exudes condescension - embezzled in the outer ring of proximity and having endured the endeavour of transcending the zones of proximity have embed him with a gleefully accepting notion, that he is part of something, complicit within the event he participated in will unfold and bring itself to his attention. To endeavour to vacate their country of origin a north American becomes almost over conscious, meta-conscious of their position as a ‘tourist’ enacting a certain arbitrary and almost (in the paradoxical anachronism of modern sophistication) linear timeframe which he or she happily proceeds to accept and then ignore. Therefore forsaken to the arbitrary ‘itinerary’ - the archaic notion that there is always a right place to be at a correct and most advantageous time - they are happy and above all - for the sake of comparison to the European - content; satiated by the experience.
The innocence of sleep
Man looks innocent when sleeping, calm among the chaos, resting in projected innocuousness he is at peace unable to respond or reply, a inoculated force. Of course to make this assumption we must be prepared to readily accept that he is capable of something much in the antithesis of the tacit, eunuch like state. For the signified inert benevolence signifies that by nature he must not, by normal standards be such a reserved character. Here is the revelation that, by realisation that sleeping exacts such resounding physical metamorphosis over the masculine body, one has already come to terms, nay to the realisation that man by very nature is one of the opposite of attributes.
.
For example, the sight of the female form sleeping is of course, placid and in general peaceable, but the observation of the form would not be so much as to necessitate a perception of overwhelming anesthesia, as in general no such comparison would be required, a sort of acceptance of a perm-state of placidity exists. Also if you are to be ‘innocent when you dream’ then an implied non-innocence must exist some when during you waking hours?
.
To take this further, perhaps one could derive a simple scale of alertness over haziness. From experience one could say with ease that the more sedated (a term that by nature exacts a certain implied connotation) someone is, the more capable of innocence they are, and possibly - on a more subjective level - the more sociable and amicable they are. From this scale we can say the most un-male men exist at the more sedate dopey end of the spectrum. And the more masculine a man exists at the more attentive end, where comparisons when sleeping can and are more viably made and accurately seen. This begs the question, which attributes do men possess more of over the feminine nature? Arrogance seems to be the dividing condition that separates the species and plies the differences inherent in each. An arrogance that persists until incapacitation and survives until sedation. An arrogance that commands attention and instils confidence - overpowering and overbearing - never satisfied unless indebted to tiredness.
The appeal of hyperbole
When encountered with a set of disparate ideals or substantially superior attributes, it is easy for one to overreact to the plausibility that the world is a largely divided place, full of extremes. This manic ‘artist’ mentality can begrudge even the most confident of personalties, irrespective of age, gender, class or culture. The notion of forfeiting ones position - an archaic ‘bowing down’ or capitulation - seems drenched in some form of ordain honour. What goes through the artists mind - a generic ‘creative’ as the catch all term cannot possibly describe an individual but moreover a group of mentalities that no such word has yet been coined or should see best fit - is something of a perspective shift. A creative is as their name connotes, bequeathed with a substance as subjective and interminable as his nature: that of a creative mind. Without it, all power of self worth or motivational drive are exhausted. Look at the writer with writers block; not only does he suffer from the intangible feeling of the lack of self motivation but his outlook becomes weak and short sighted. In the absence of a creative flow his common motive to contrast and compare are lost to the critically self serving failure to be able to write, to feel to write; to desire to write. Thus in the absence of desire so does the reciprocal need for comparison also retire.
.
An artist is more likely to aggrandise a situation to derive its full negative capabilities. It is all too easy to - as one embarks on a scheme of creative endeavour - become acutely aware of the apparent discrepancy of quality, skill and their attributes.
.
To compare, to contrast, to get lost in the myriad methods the mind takes us through to try and out do the bodies our minds exist within is a constant battle of integrity to persist. Maybe for this reason the artist becomes ever wary of a new and more potent style or school that may have the ability to usurp or overpower his or her own oeuvre. Either way, not satiated by their own abilities creatives will be forever cursed by the come-down of creativity; that of never fully understanding its real potential.
On the notion of genuineness (as an attribute)
The function of a form or device imbued with a genuine nature has long been confirmed as the most honourable hallmark of quality - something held higher than its actual worth, its real price or the sum of its parts. It was then, the gestalt of the argument; the crux of a decision for one to buy into, something that can be resolved by the simple notion of implied genuineness. This overwhelming projected perception serves as a guide to the observant, whilst others accept it as merely a token accepted value. We all, for example, know someone who operates on the alternate notion, of adhering to the cheapest, most risible means of survival, as some kind of perverse character trait - as if they had been conditioned from birth to concede to buying in the least, nay avoiding buying altogether when possible, and when necessary not forgoing any superfluous wealth on anything with any value. They seem to be imbued with a skill to detect value and to detect the objects genuineness from a distance and just as quickly remove themselves from its grasp. They seem to be driven by a sort of negativism that forces them to self impose this cheapened puritanism upon themselves, like the selfless self-flagellated. Therefore people clearly do exist that are able to derive the difference between the implied quality of a object (its purported worth, its genuineness) and its actual true value.
.
Although they act out of seemingly arbitrary conditions (what could be more random and unimposed than that of a self flagellating persona in a modern context?) They undermine the imposed and connotated integrity of the puppeteers that walk the ideals of such genuine natures. However - they act out of uncontrollable urges, and are not in any way complicit in the undermining. The very act of which is one of the hardest to defy. We are conditioned to believe in the notion of genuineness from birth, it is a value pronounced as deep as that of honour and honesty and therefore can be adapted in similar ways to be used without integrity. Just as much as we understand the frugal efforts of our spendthrift friends so too can we comprehend our friends of value. They rely on a sizeable source of integrity that is imparted on something as the fuel for implying quality. But quality is subjective and as much moreover an attribute, indeed it is inherent in the nature of genuinity that it must shift and be interpretable by its very nature to be regarded with any real substance. For example, if it were a single entity locked in time then no need for improvement or progression would ever be needed to be made. However, locked in a system bereft of variables, no discernible differences could be made to its value and therefore no ultimate salvations from normality can be made. Thus quality is a value - tangible, physical, whereas genuinity merely an attribute, allowing it to be used, morphed, edited and manipulated as the user sees fit. It is this clever anti-system that allows quality to arise as a value and every user or producer/creator to attain and imply their own genuinity upon the object that can be as genuine or not, as the next.
