I wonder if anyone has analyzed NFTU against Plato’s cave allegory. It seems obvious to me now.
Nice tie-in with Farscape.
Chricton’s “man of action” is precisely the type of person the Underground Man would resent. The problem is that even if the men of action are complete dipshits, mortality requires us to do something; even underground men must eat and shit. We’re embedded beings ergo we must go with the flow.
The Underground Man is also a man of action yet he can’t tolerate the implications of success—it would erode his self conception. He would need to give up either his enlightenment or his self-loathing, but then who would he be? He’s too smart to believe in self-redemption and too in love with his intellect to take the fools path.
The Underground Man’s Kafka trap is that he can’t accept any solution which sets him free. This is probably where Christianity steps in to save the day—only the grace of divinity can break the loop.
Without a higher force to appeal to only a fool can convince himself his actions have merit and purpose.
Aw who am kidding that was all just blather. I’m going back to my pit.
The theatre of the absurd in full view, Fydor promotes the alienation of his character in a similar way that Farscape captures, he’s the last of the Mohicans, just not as equipped for battle.
Remarkable writing, it leads me to great discoveries that all kind of suck. Do you have to be a utopian socialist to write stories?
Welcome back, Prester John.
Marx would call your subject "alienation," and so would I.
I also love Farscape, find Dostoevsky too depressing to bear, and tremendously enjoyed your article. Good points.
I wonder if anyone has analyzed NFTU against Plato’s cave allegory. It seems obvious to me now.
Nice tie-in with Farscape.
Chricton’s “man of action” is precisely the type of person the Underground Man would resent. The problem is that even if the men of action are complete dipshits, mortality requires us to do something; even underground men must eat and shit. We’re embedded beings ergo we must go with the flow.
The Underground Man is also a man of action yet he can’t tolerate the implications of success—it would erode his self conception. He would need to give up either his enlightenment or his self-loathing, but then who would he be? He’s too smart to believe in self-redemption and too in love with his intellect to take the fools path.
The Underground Man’s Kafka trap is that he can’t accept any solution which sets him free. This is probably where Christianity steps in to save the day—only the grace of divinity can break the loop.
Without a higher force to appeal to only a fool can convince himself his actions have merit and purpose.
Aw who am kidding that was all just blather. I’m going back to my pit.
Very insightful
It’s the antithesis of AUDACES FORTUNA IUVAT.
The theatre of the absurd in full view, Fydor promotes the alienation of his character in a similar way that Farscape captures, he’s the last of the Mohicans, just not as equipped for battle.
Remarkable writing, it leads me to great discoveries that all kind of suck. Do you have to be a utopian socialist to write stories?