Category Archives: philosophy

>Planet Earth and misanthropy

>Originally posted November 01, 2007.


The BBC series Planet Eart is truly amazing. I got it on Blu-ray the other day and wow… 550 minutes of pure brilliance. I’ve seen a lot of these programs before, and the first twenty minutes didn’t quite cut it for me, but then these jaw dropping scenes of fantastic footage, time lapsed stuff and brilliant slow motion sequences began to appear and I was on my knees worshipping.




But since I’m a dystopic kind of guy holding a deep pessisism for the future (which has been nurtured for so many years), I ask you: how can you not be misanthropic after watching this series? How can you not loathe the human race? What better way to save the planet than to end all human life? What better way to end all suffering than to end our profane existence?
We’ve been destroying the earth and ourselves for so long and there is no change up front as far as I see it.






If I could I definitely would.

>Situationism, Part 2

>Originally posted September 18, 2007.


Part one of the Situationism series can be found here.
In addition to this you may want to read about Oswald Spengler as well, here (English) and here (Swedish).

I take my desires for reality because I believe in the reality of my desires.
(Anonymous graffiti, Paris 1968)

People who talk about revolution and class struggle without referring explicitly to everyday life, without understanding what is subversive about love and what is positive in the refusal of constraints, such people have a corpse in their mouth.
Raoul Vaneigem, The Revolution Of Everyday Life

The situationist movement was at its peak in the late sixties, but kind of folded after the riots and shit that were trendy at the time. Their ideas live on, though. And mind you, I’m not that much into their art — or anti-art – since most of the times it just sucks. It’s their ideas that I like.

Having concluded that the art and culture of bourgeois society was intellectually fucked, doomed to repetition and soulless, meaningless activities, the situationists referred to art as something that truly could change peoples lives and their way of thinking.
Art to them was not just something to feed the senses for a while, making you feel good and momentarily happy. That way of looking at art is shallow. In the eyes and mind of Guy Debord, art was revolution. Art was war. War against the everyday madness, the everyday slaughter of the soul. Most of all, art was real and goddamn important, and the situationists were determined to see through the lies, myths and bullshit that is being thrown at us every single second of our lives.
“It was about the radiation of art into pure existence, into social life, into urbanism, into action and into thinking which was regarded as the important thing”, as stated in the book Situationister i konsten (1966). Art wasn’t supposed to be a useless medium.


So what do you get when you mix art with politics?
Street art, of course. It’s available for free for everyone to see, and the creator is most of the times totally anonymous. We cannot judge the art and the message by who the creator is, but rather by what the message constitutes and how it is executed. True art. True politics. No names, no games. Well, names in a way, since there’s usually a tag attached somewhere, but close to nobody knows the person behind the tag, and that’s what’s fascinating about graffiti. It’s the deed and action that counts, not who’s done it.
No gods, no masters.

Must erase…all signs of…life by Hop Louie
Banksy at the separation wall in Israel/Palestina

Banksy at the separation wall in Israel/Palestina

Art of Destruction Sweden (AODS)

However, street art to me is not about reclaiming the streets. Well, it is in a way, but since Reclaim The Streets today seem to equal mindless destruction executed by degenerated fuck ups with nothing better to do, I strongly reject that kind of “reclaiming”. And I bet most of the serious situationists of the 60’s would’ve done so too. Such behaviour is nothing but fake and I spit blood on their useless corpses.

The moment of revolt is childhood rediscovered, time put to everyone’s use, the dissolution of the market and the beginning of generalised self-management.
The long revolution is creating small federated microsocieties, true guerilla cells practising and fighting for this self-management. Effective radicality authorises all variations and guarantees every freedom. That’s why the Situationists don’t confront the world with: “Here’s your ideal organisation, on your knees!” They simply show by fighting for themselves and with the clearest awareness of this fight, why people really fight each other and why they must acquire an awareness of the battle.
Raoul Vaneigem, The Revolution Of Everyday Life
Mindless scribbling on walls is not about reclaiming the streets,
it’s about mindless scribbling on walls.

On a sidenote:
Scribbling is for children (and adults!), and we should strongly encourage them here. Marvin Bartel has written an essay entitled “Working with children who scribble on walls” here. You should read it! And when reading, try to relate to graffiti…


Debord et al argued that the great Spectacle, the world’s greatest soap opera, is so influental that not only does it superficially bomb us with commercials, but it possesses such power that it shapes almost all human life (this Spectacle being a small ruling minority dominating the masses, forcing the individual only to consume and participate in society as an alienated, passive idiot).

In this consumer’s society, everything is always “getting better and better”. There’s no end to perfection. Just think about it; how will Gillette’s razor blades look in a year or two? Like a rocket ready to be sent into outer space? It seems like they’re inventing a new revolutionary shaving system every year.


When will this madness end? Not until we say so. And that’s where the passive idiot thing enters the scene. The Spectacle is by no means a dialogue. It is in fact the exact opposite – a monologue, talking to itself, about itself. And as we all know, opposition (for example, in the form of street art) is not looked upon with keen eyes. This artificial “evolution” of Gillette’s shaving systems is a lethal blow to our own evolution. We’re trapped and cannot evolve at all. The situationists labelled this forced existence “a colonization of our everyday lives”.

In a future post I’ll probably write something about the situationist critique against urbanism, which in some ways touches upon what Spengler had to say about cities and such.

>Situationism, Part 1

>Originally posted August 13, 2007.


Looking at political critique today, the usual opinion is that it’s an attack against the state, and debating sacred subjects is looked upon as something suspicious, odd and even dangerous. In my sinister and pure way of looking at things, it definitely should be dangerous! I love it when independent thinking is considered a threat, for to combat blindness and stupidity one has to think for himself.
Independent thinking all comes down to one thing: trying to understand your situation.

Irreverence, blasphemous thoughts, depriving something of its sacred character… That’s disgusting! You should go to work, consume and obey, and that’s it. Shut up. Do not speak your mind. Preferably, do not think at all. Because if you do, you might want to change things. And change is dangerous!

Shallow thinking means you’re subject to lies — or for the sake of it, let’s just call it “illusions”. Sounds less… dangerous.
I’m talking about everyday illusions, like meaningless “any friend of yours is a friend of mine”-clichés, or commercials, where happiness is the latest mobile phone. They soothe your mind. They are there so you won’t have to think for yourself, because if you did chances are you might go berserk with a loaded gun.


There’s an old saying:
“When faced with two options, choose the third”, meaning you should look for new perspectives instead of having to choose between two forced options.

We live in a world so dominated by consumer goods that even our social relations are “commodified”. We relate to others through cars, stereos, mass-produced music, TV shows and vacation packages.


Guy Debord and the situationists had some great ideas, mainly regarding consumer society and the human condition therein.

“The situationists see modern consumer society as a society of the spectacle where our selves are absorbed into the mass entertainments provided by film, TV, music, advertising, and consumer goods. The spectacle breeds isolation, and alienates us from meaningful work, play and communities. We are caught up in false choices between spectacles in a society which offers us spectacular abundance, yet at the same time separates us from each other and from active resistance to the cultural alienation this society represents.”

But then again, commercials and buying stuff can be damn fun! I’m a big fat sucker for records, books, movies and everything Adidas, but still; some awareness might be good if you want to make a change.
Independent thinking is revolutionary thinking.

The great band Counterblast put it this way in their song Independence:
There’s no point in life, but a big point in living.

>Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt

>Originally posted July 24, 2007.


I wrote an essay for the Swedish paper Tidningen Kulturen and it was published today. It’s about Spengler again (more about him here), but this time in Swedish. I named it “Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt — kulturens förfall, enligt Oswald Spengler”.
By coincidence, Dagens Nyheter published an article by Mikael Löfgren today entitled “Vad ska vi ha kulturen till?”. Read that one as well.

But for now, here’s the essay. Enjoy.
Photos shot by me, myself and I in July 2007.
Skanstullsbron, Stockholm.

Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt
Kulturens förfall, enligt Oswald Spengler

Finns det plats för den fria anden i dagens samhälle?
Vårt rotlösa irrande på jakt efter uppmärksamhet, status och bekräftelse – och kanske framför allt jakten på tid för att hinna med jakten (!) – ger svaret nej. Själva tror vi kanske att vi är det bästa som historien kunnat frambringa – en produkt som formats, alltjämt till det bättre, sedan evolutionens begynnelse. För en utomstående torde det västerländska levernet dock te sig allt annat än intelligent.
Och det är vår intelligens som kommer att föra oss ner i avgrunden.

Så trodde Oswald Spengler (1880–1936). Han levde i den tyska turbulenta tid som föranledde politisk, ekonomisk och själslig katastrof, och han var förmodligen väl medveten om vad som stundade. I sitt mest kända verk, Der Untergang des Abendlandes (1918–1922), Västerlandets undergång, utgiven i två volymer, menar han att vi i dag befinner oss i en tid där kulturen – mänsklighetens egenvärde – är på väg att dö ut.

Spengler verkade som filosof och bemöttes kanske just därför med frän kritik från etablerade historiker för sitt nästintill mystiska och måhända flummiga sätt att skildra världshistorien.
Han kritiserade å sin sida historikerna för att de inte ”på allvar studerade övriga civilisationer”, undgick att se parallellerna och det återkommande cykliska, och i stället fokuserade alltför mycket på nutiden och det egenupplevda.

Spengler menade nämligen att det traditionella linjära sättet att se på historien åskådliggör den västerländska egoismen; som vore den västerländska människan ett praktexemplar av all tidigare mänsklig verkan, som om nuläget är det bästa möjliga. Att betrakta mänskligheten som en enda lång utveckling från lågt till högt är dömt att misslyckas. Han skriver:

”Det som fattas hos den västerländska tänkaren och som inte borde fattas hos just honom, är insikten om den historiskt relativa karaktären i hans resultat, som i själva verket är uttryck för en speciell, unik tillvaro. Han borde förstå att det finns nödvändiga gränser för resultatens giltighet och att hans ”eviga sanningar” och ”ovedersägliga insikter” är sanna för honom och hans aspekt på världen. Det borde vara en plikt för honom att söka efter andra insikter, som människor i andra kulturer utvecklat med samma grad av visshet. En framtida filosofi borde ha en sådan fullständighet. Först då skulle man förstå historiens formspråk, den levande världen. Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt. Allmängiltighet är felslutet att mitt också gäller för andra.”

Spengler uppmanade alltså läsarna att upptäcka och utforska bortom sig själva. Han jämförde själv vilt mellan olika kulturer genom världshistorien för att påvisa likheter och bevisa sina teser.

Enligt Spengler finns det blott åtta högkulturer som stått för den kulturella evolutionen: den babylonska, egyptiska, kinesiska, indiska, mexikanska (Mayakulturen och Aztekerriket), grekisk-romerska, arabiska och västerländska (europeisk-amerikanska). Var och en av dessa högkulturer har bidragit till utvecklingen, och alla har varit lika värdefulla.
Tydlig gemensam nämnare för att styrka Spenglers tes om de åtta högkulturerna: de varar alla i omkring tusen år och följer samma evigt återkommande organiska livscykel. De rymmer således både födsel, blomstring, förfall och död. Det finns ännu inga undantag.

Spengler använde sig av årstiderna för att förtydliga sina resonemang.
Våren innebär kulturens nedkomst. Här formas religionen (bakom varje högkultur finns en värdefull, mentalt samlad religion) och de grundläggande principerna.
Sommaren är kulturens höjdpunkt. Har skapas bestående verk, väsentliga tankar föds och frodas och storslagna prestationer utförs.
Hösten betyder början till slutet. Kulturell förbistring, omfattande katastrofer, massiva människoomflyttningar och oförmågan att kommunicera bidrar till att vintern nalkas. Den fria, intelligenta tanken har resulterat i ateism, ett tänkesätt som försvinner i sinom tid, och i samband med städernas och civilisationens död sker en återgång till den ursprungliga religionen och släktskapet med naturen. Våren kommer alltid igen.
Spengler ser alltså en övergång mellan kulturen och civilisationen. För oss i väst skedde detta någon gång under 1800-talet.
Civilisationen representerar makt, pengar, irreligiositet, en koncentration av intelligensen till staden. Spengler skriver:

”Vad är morgondagens civiliserade politik i motsats till gårdagens kultiverade?”

Och det gäller inte enbart politiken. Även moralen, konsten, kunskapen, vetenskapen och känslolivet har drabbats av civilisationen. Konsten handlar om mode. Vetenskapen finner inga självklara svar. Politiken styrs av pengar. Kulturell förvirring råder. Det är den verkliga början till det verkliga slutet.
Civilisationen är en kulturs oundvikliga öde, då ingenting angår ”folket”. Den så kallade ”demokratin” styrs från städerna av en själlös människomassa, som till skillnad från den kultiverade människan riktar all energi utåt, uppåt, mot något evigt – något som följaktligen är ouppnåeligt. Självförintelse pågår.
De stora städerna utgör spiken i kistan för civilisationen.

Låt oss ta det från början:
Kulturen uppstår på landet. Bonden brukar sin jord – sin jord — och upprättar en själslig, andlig relation till den. Hembygden blir oerhört viktig, något att dö för, då det är det eget skapade som brukas. Bondens hus är ”bofasthetens stora symbol”, ty det har vuxit fram ur den egna marken.
Stadsmentaliteten representeras av en gruppsjäl. ”Det är inte storleken som skiljer staden från byn, utan existensen av en mentalitet”. De civiliserade jättestäderna föraktar bondens själsliga rötter och tar avstånd från lantlivet. I staden talas ett språk som endast talar till ögat och som till slut blir oförståeligt för bonden. Det finns nu två liv: ett utanför staden och ett innanför. Bysmeden lär ha mer gemensamt med bysmeden i andra länder och kulturer än med stadssmeden några kilometer bort.
Denna stadsbildning och distansering är en förutsättning för varje kultur. Alla stora kulturer har nämligen varit stadskulturer.
De tidiga byarna har samma sorts närhet till jorden. De följer landskapsbilden med kullar, ängar och vattendrag. De lantliga småstäderna bekräftar landsbygden, låter pyramiderna och katedralerna växa ur marken. Storstäderna vill vara något annat, något mäktigare. De trotsar naturen, förnekar den. De strävar uppåt och utåt, absorberar landskapet och kräver sitt utrymme i form av breda huvudvägar i stället för slingriga landsvägar, parker i stället för skogar och fontäner i stället för källor och så vidare. Det är konstgjort och själlöst. Stadsmänniskan blir därefter. Den har höjt sig över bondebefolkningen och dikterar nu reglerna. ”Antikens forum och den västerländska pressen är i hög grad andliga maktmedel för den härskande staden”. Stadsmänniskorna, som föraktar hela sin kulturs moderslandskap, bor nu i en världsstad som inte längre behöver hävda sig mot landsbygden. De är lika beroende av penningtänkandet som bonden förr var beroende av jorden. Imperialismen är slutepokens givna symbol.


Men det hemska slutar inte där. Spengler talar även om avfolkningen. Staden befolkas av intelligenta människor, och han menar att det är intelligenserna i varje kultur som utgör de ”sista” människorna. Han talar om den civiliserade människans ofruktsamhet:

”Storstädernas sista människor vill inte leva längre, möjligen kanske som enskilda individer, men inte som typ, som massa; där slocknar rädslan för döden. Det som fyller den äkta bonden med en djup och oförklarlig ångest, tanken på familjens och namnets utdöende, har förlorat sin mening. … Barnen uteblir, inte bara för att de blivit överflödiga, utan för att den skärpta intelligensen inte hittar några skäl för dess existens.”

Och det som är bundet till ”stenen och intellektet” går sakta men säkert under.
Spengler skriver emellertid, krasst konstaterande men ändå hoppfullt, att:

”Bonden är den eviga människan, oavhängig all kultur som tagit plats i städerna. Han finns före den, han överlever den, sturigt avlande nya släktled, inskränkande sig till jordbundna sysselsättningar och färdigheter, med en mystisk själ och ett torrt, till det praktiska bundet förstånd, basen för och den ständigt flytande källan till det blod som skapar världshistoria i städerna.”

Kjell Ahlinge, radioveteran med programmet Eldorado i P2 som ständig ledsagare, fick nyligen frågan ”Är kulturvärlden väldigt trångsynt egentligen?” av riotbrain.se. Hans svar löd:
- Det är mycket roligare att prata med frisörer och snickare än med dem som kommit långt i kulturvärlden.
Och det är så långt vi har kommit. Vi bevittnar kulturens dödsryckningar.
Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt.

Mattias Indy Pettersson

Published in Tidningen Kulturen #22/2007, July 24th

>Oswald Spengler — The Decline of Cultures

>Originally posted June 03, 2007.

Excerpt from the Sick Of It All song Just look around (1992):

The question they keep asking me
How can one so young be so bitter and angry
Well, the answer is plain to see
Maybe if they weren’t so blind they’d see what I see
I see the homeless livin’ out on the street
on every corner they’re asking for money
I try to help them whenever I can
but sometimes I can’t afford to help myself
I see diseases and modern plagues of our times
The greed of our leaders has made them blind
to our problems, they spend millions overseas
people right here are fightin’ wars everyday

I see the whites that hate the blacks
blacks against the jews
race against religion
and they’re all too blind to see

So you digest that for a moment. Take a look around. What do you see? It shouldn’t come as a surprise that the world is marching towards death in the fast lane, speaking of morals, art, spiritual beliefs and the environment.

Oswald Spengler
(1880–1936), german philosopher and historian, took this look around and came to some mighty fine conclusions. He summarized those in 1918 in his book Der Untergang des Abendlandes (The Decline of The West – Form and Actuality), which later on was completed by a second volume, Perspectives of World History (1923).

Spengler makes two clear points:
• That histories of various cultures can be shown to follow a similar pattern
• That all aspects of a culture – arts, politics, mathematics, science, etc– have related underlying principles, which differ from culture to culture

Spengler looks upon history as an organic cycle, rather than linear, that has to pass through the stages of birth-development-fulfillment-decay-death. In the West we tend to look upon history as something always moving forward, evoluting to the better. This, according to Spengler, is the result of the Western man’s ego, thinking that everything in the past pointed to him, making him the center of the world and so on.
The cyclical movements of history are not those of nations, states, races and events, but of High Cultures, each and everyone of equal importance. So when Spengler speaks of the decline of the West, he speaks of the decline of its culture. Thus, the people live on, but their culture is destroyed.

The eight High Cultures so far are:

• Babylonian
• Egyptian
• Chinese
• Indian
• Mexican (Mayan/Aztec)
• Classical (Greece/Rome)
• Arabian
• Western (European-American)

These eight cultures have all had a life span of 1000 years.

Spengler uses seasons as an analogy to elaborate:
Spring is the birth of religion and where the basic principles of this culture are being formed.
Summer is when acts of lasting value and great accomplishments are being made. This is the peak and the cultural prime.
Autumn is when all this start to break down and turn into Winter. We’re there already.
Politics is motivated by money and moves through imperialism. Science no longer reaches certainties. There is much cultural confusion. The arts do not speak from or to the soul of the people, but rather follow materialistic fashions with lots of changes of styles, not asking much from neither the artist nor the people. After a moment of atheism the people will turn to a renewal of religion and spiritual faith, based on the religion developed in the spring of the culture.


Spengler also uses a “prime symbol” for every culture. For example, the ancient Egyptian culture had the “Way” or the “Path” as symbol, pointing to their preoccupation in art, religion and architecture and its symbolism – the passages of the soul.
The prime symbol of the Western Culture is the “Faustian soul” (soul meaning “mentality”), symbolizing the upward reaching for the infinite, which in itself is an impossible feat (which we all know), and thus we will soon face the final doom and the end of our culture.

And so we’ve entered the Civilization phase which is — as opposed to the Culture phase we’ve just left behind — occupied with materialism, continual wars, mass movements of people, environmental crises, rootlessness and lack of vitality, strenght and intellect.
The history of High Culture is the only history that counts, according to Spengler, because pre- and after-Cultural man is simply without history: as man plunges into materialism and advocates the degeneration of his mentality he loses his historical weight.

Spengler speaks of cities, mega-cities, “megalopolis”, huge urban and suburban centers that breed a mindless mob and suck the life and vitality out of the countryside. Religion starts in the open, moves in to the cities where it loses its gist and then dies in the world-cities, engulfed in the flames of materialism.


Spengler is, just as Nietzsche, seen by some as an intellectual precursor for National Socialistic ideas. However, Sprengler didn’t see any bright future for Europe and his motherland, and he defied the Nazi ideas of racial superiority and anti-semitism until the very end. His thoughts on these subjects can be explored in his work The Hour of Decision (1933).
As for the term “race” used by Spengler, he is quoted saying: “race that one has, not a race to which one belongs. The first one is ethos, the other – zoology”. Apparently not the narrow definition as used by the National Socialists at the time.

On another note, in his book Man and Technics (1931) he is occupied with the development and usage of the technical, a development which is unique to the West. His prediction read that coloured people of the Earth will use the very technology of the West to destroy the West.

Public Enemy said it on Fear of A Black Planet (1990):

Breakdown, 2001
It might be best to be black or just brown
Countdown!


For further reading:
The Oswald Spengler Collection
On The Decline of The West from Wikipedia

>Nietzsche — Revaluation of all values!

>Originally posted May 12, 2007.

With this I am at the end and I pronounce my judgment. I condemn Christianity. I raise against the Christian church the most terrible of all accusations that any accuser ever uttered. It is to me the highest of all conceivable corruptions. It has had the will to the last corruption that is even possible. The Christian church has left nothing untouched by its corruption; it has turned every value into an un-value, every truth into a lie, every integrity into a vileness of the soul. Let anyone dare to speak to me of its “humanitarian” blessings! To abolish any distress ran counter to its deepest advantages: it lived on distress, it created distress to eternalize itself.

The worm of sin, for example: with this distress the church first enriched mankind. The “equality of souls before God,” this falsehood, this pretext for the rancor of all the base-minded, this explosive of a concept which eventually became revolution, modern idea, and the principle of decline of the whole order of society—is Christian dynamite. “Humanitarian” blessings of Christianity! To breed out of humanitas a self-contradiction, an art of self-violation, a will to lie at any price, a repugnance, a contempt for all good and honest instincts. Those are some of the blessings of Christianity!

Parasitism as the only practice of the church, with its ideal of anemia, of “holiness,” draining all blood, all love, all hope for life; the beyond as the will to negate every reality; the cross as the mark of recognition for the most subterranean conspiracy that ever existed — against health, beauty, whatever has turned out well, courage, spirit, graciousness of the soul, against life itself.

This eternal indictment of Christianity I will write on all walls, wherever there are walls —
I have letters to make even the blind see.

I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great innermost corruption, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means is poisonous, stealthy, subterranean, small enough — I call it the one immortal blemish of mankind.

And time is reckoned from the dies nefastus with which this calamity began—after the first day of Christianity!
Why not rather after its last day? After today?

Revaluation of all values!

From The Antichrist, Section 62, first published in 1895.

>Nietzsche — Perhaps premature

>Originally posted May 06, 2007.

Perhaps premature.

…There is no morality that alone makes moral, and every ethic that affirms itself exclusively kills too much good strength and costs humanity too dearly.
The deviants, who are so frequently the inventive and fruitful ones, shall no longer be sacrificed; it shall not even be considered infamous to deviate from morality, in thought and deed; numerous new experiments of life and society shall be made; a tremendous burden of bad conscience shall be removed from the world — these most general aims should be recognized and promoted by all who are honest and seek truth.

From The Dawn, Aphorism 164, first published in 1881.

>Bon Scott — Saviour of The Soul

>Originally posted December 06, 2006.

Haha, just look at this man! Look at his jeans way up high, so tight that his balls seem to be gasping for air…
This dude is on to something. Or was on to something, since this is the great Bon Scott who died rock’n’roll style in february 1980.

So what’s that got to do with anything? I almost never listen to AC/DC anyway.

Well, me and my good friend Micke (his online keyboard warrior name is WorkKills) had a very serious talk the other day. We discussed deep shit like how to gain control and freedom in your life, how to cultivate one’s independence, totally controlling your own time, living the life you really want to live, freeing your soul… The biggest problem here mainly being that we both work 8 hours a day. Fucking bummer.

What are you prepared to sacrifice? You have to sacrifice something valuable in order to gain something else, roughly speaking. Are you willing to live your life in constant poverty because you quit your job? Are you willing to leave your loved ones, your wife, your best friends, to live like a hermit… all for the sake of freedom? What about ending your life?
ACTA NON VERBA!

Stuff like that.

It was a good discussion and it was serious as hell. We didn’t reach any mindbending conclusions, but it’s really great to have these kind of talks once in a while. It makes you think even harder.

The best thing though was when Micke put on this AC/DC record and everything just fell into place. So perfect, so simple and so true. And so cheesy in a way.
But the fact is that the very essence of what we’d been talking about was put into words with such ease by the man with the tight trousers… Bon Scott put it this way:

My Daddy was workin’ nine to five
When my Momma was havin’ me
By the time I was half alive
They knew what I was gonna be
But I left school and grew my hair
They didn’t understand
They wanted me to be respected as
A doctor or a lawyer man
(But I had other plans)

Gonna be a rock ’n’ roll singer
Gonna be a rock ’n’ roll star
Gonna be a rock ’n’ roll singer
I’m gonna be a rock ’n’ roll,
A rock ’n’ roll star

Well I worked real hard and bought myself
A rock ’n’ roll guitar
I gotta be on top some day
I wanna be a star
I can see my name in lights
And I can see the queue
I got the devil in my blood
Tellin’ me what to do
(And I’m all ears)

Gonna be a rock ’n’ roll singer
Gonna be a rock ’n’ roll star
Gonna be a rock ’n’ roll singer
I’m gonna be a rock ’n’ roll,
A rock ’n’ roll star
(I hear it pays well)

Well you can stick your nine to five livin’
And your collar and your tie
You can stick your moral standards
’Cause it’s all a dirty lie
You can stick your golden handshake
And you can stick your silly rules
And all the other shit
That you teach to kids in school
(‘Cause I ain’t no fool)

The last verse pretty much says it all.

I’m not saying we’re dreaming of becoming rock stars, that’s not the point at all. What’s he really saying? Just listen to the words, the way he sings these last lines and then worship forever.

The essence of it all? Well, maybe something like do what thou wilt, do your own thing, do it yourself, don’t believe the hype… The standard clichés. You know all that crap. But why the fuck do you still sit around doing nothing then? Think about that instead.

Sometimes all you need is a dude like Bon Scott, telling it like it is, and then things seem just a tiny bit better.

R.I.P.

(The song is called Rock ‘N Roll Singer and is from their second album T.N.T. (1975))