I wonder whether Nietzsche would have accepted the label "philosopher-entertainer." He might have done. He's just about the only one of those old time post-enlightenment philosophers that it's actually fun to read...
At least...at least... that's what I used to think, but I picked up one of his books the other day and started reading at random and the frisson was no longer there. The death of God, moral relativity... these things no longer come as lightning strikes. They're old news; I've processed them, adjusted to them, moved on down the bus.
Another thing that soon loses its zing is porn. Or so says Alain de Botton (also a philosopher-entertainer though not playing in the same division as Watts and Nietzsche) who has an enjoyable little You Tube video called The Poignancy of Old Pornography in which he shows us dagurreotypes of hairy 19th century people interacting with one another's more sensitive parts while telling us how untitillating they are and how looking at bodies we know to be long-dead provokes thoughts more proper to the graveyard than the boudoir. But is any of this really true? Is old pornography as unexciting as old philosophy? Actually, I'm not sure it is. Nietzsche has gone back on the shelf and will probably stay there but my delight in his frolicksome contemporaries remains undimmed and unassuaged.
Besides, as Watts could have told you, Alain, all times exist in an eternal present and the pornstars d'antan are no more dead- or come to think of it, alive- than you are.
Cut the threnody, shows us the pix....
At least...at least... that's what I used to think, but I picked up one of his books the other day and started reading at random and the frisson was no longer there. The death of God, moral relativity... these things no longer come as lightning strikes. They're old news; I've processed them, adjusted to them, moved on down the bus.
Another thing that soon loses its zing is porn. Or so says Alain de Botton (also a philosopher-entertainer though not playing in the same division as Watts and Nietzsche) who has an enjoyable little You Tube video called The Poignancy of Old Pornography in which he shows us dagurreotypes of hairy 19th century people interacting with one another's more sensitive parts while telling us how untitillating they are and how looking at bodies we know to be long-dead provokes thoughts more proper to the graveyard than the boudoir. But is any of this really true? Is old pornography as unexciting as old philosophy? Actually, I'm not sure it is. Nietzsche has gone back on the shelf and will probably stay there but my delight in his frolicksome contemporaries remains undimmed and unassuaged.
Besides, as Watts could have told you, Alain, all times exist in an eternal present and the pornstars d'antan are no more dead- or come to think of it, alive- than you are.
Cut the threnody, shows us the pix....
no subject
Date: 2022-05-09 12:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2022-05-09 01:02 pm (UTC)