"Who's that behind those Foster Grants?"

 It occurred to me that sunglasses are a remarkable cultural phenomenon. When did they become popular?  And also, the psychology of concealing the eyes seems pretty extreme. While I grew up with sunglasses, they always struck me as being fake, showy, and somewhat obnoxious, but also useful and therefore forgiveable.

After looking up some of the history, I am even more impressed by the cultural phenomenon: from 1970 to 1980, they went from being used by the fringe and elite to being used by virtually every man, woman, and child in all socio-economic groups (of the US, at the very least).

To quote:
Early sunglasses served a special purpose and it wasn't to block the rays of the sun.  For centuries, Chinese judges had routinely worn smoke-colored quartz lenses to conceal their eye expressions in court. It wasn't until the 20th century that modern-type sunglasses came to be. In 1929, Sam Foster, founder of the Foster Grant company sold the first pair of Foster Grant sunglasses on the Boardwalk in Atlantic City, NJ.

Well-known fashion designers, as well as Hollywood stars, escalated the sunglass craze in the ‘70s with their brand-name lines. A giant industry developed where only a few decades earlier none existed. As women since ancient times had hidden seductively behind an expanded fan or a dipped parasol, modern women-and men-discovered an allure in wearing sunglasses, irrespective of solar glare.


http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/sunglasses.htm

Batman Costumes

Cars are like expensive clothes.
Tinted windows are like masks.

Dodge Chargers are like Batman costumes.

Seven Deadly Sins

While looking up a thing or two about the phrase "a nation of clerks", I came across a right-wing website with what I found to be a funny side bar link/comment:
---------
Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins
Sexism
Intolerance
Xenophobia
Racism
Islamophobia
Bigotry
Homophobia

A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.
---------
My reaction:
a) On a very superficial level, it almost seems to accuse liberalism of being guilty of these sins.

b) As more of an after-taste, it seems to suggest that it shouldn't be a problem to be guilty of one or all of these sins.

Try Bad Art

If you think some form of art is so bad that you could do it, you should try it. I think you will find the art is not so bad as you think.

Fear

Alain de Botton recently tweeted, "Fear of the right: laziness. Fear of the left: meanness."

To which, as a joke, I could add: Fear of libertarians: stupidity. 


Which could mean, if you have a "No Fear" sticker or label, you would be mean, stupid, and lazy.

Lounge Safely Through Existence

A passage in the beginning of Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad struck my interest.  In his description of the white men living in a far-east sea port:

There were two kinds. Some, very few and seen there but seldom, led mysterious lives, had preserved an undefaced energy with the temper of buccaneers and the eyes of dreamers. They appeared to live in a crazy maze of plans, hopes, dangers, enterprises, ahead of civilisation, in the dark places of the sea; and their death was the only event of their fantastic existence that seemed to have a reasonable certitude of achievement.
...[The others] - in their actions, in their looks, in their persons - could be detected the soft spot, the place of decay, the determination to lounge safely through existence.


This is a nice, poetic caricature of my own extreme states of mind.  The words "to lounge safely through existence" bump rudely against an existential angst I frequently feel. 

Creativity Fetish

I feel our contemporary culture has a strong fetish for creativity. This culture we live in seems to raise creatives to a very high level of praise, reward and envy.  Artists, writers, entrepreneurs, story tellers, film makers, scientists, tweeters, social media meme makers, etc - Oh what glory to be the One that comes up with the next big thing.

While bouncing around in an unfocused adhd manner, I passed through links on consciousness and the evolution of religious psychology to something about the fear of death that seems to resonate around the same note as that ringing sound I hear in regards to our culture's creativity fetish.

[I will not cite my sources here, because you can easily Google any unique string of words to find more primary sources.]

Death awareness became a highly disruptive by-product of prior adaptive functions. The resulting anxiety threatened to undermine these very functions and thus needed amelioration. Any social formation or practice that was to be widely accepted by the masses needed to provide a means of managing this terror. The main strategy to do so was to "become an individual of value in a world of meaning…acquiring self-esteem [via] the creation of maintenance of culture", as this would counter the sense of insignificance represented by death and provide 1) symbolic immortality through the legacy of a culture that lives on beyond the physical self ("earthly significance") 2) literal immortality, the promise of an afterlife or continued existence featured in religions ("cosmic significance").
-
Because cultural values determine that which is meaningful, they are also the basis for self-esteem. TMT describes self-esteem as being the personal, subjective measure of how well an individual is living up to their cultural values.
-

The terror of absolute annihilation creates such a profound – albeit subconscious – anxiety in people that they spend their lives attempting to make sense of it.  On large scales, societies build symbols: laws, religious meaning systems, cultures, and belief systems to explain the significance of life, define what makes certain characteristics, skills, and talents extraordinary, reward others whom they find exemplify certain attributes...