Foreword by the Author
The world-famous GrenobleWMD blog was launched with little fanfare on Saturday the 11th of February 2012 with a post entitled simply "Arrival". Since that fateful action on a cold winter morning in Grenoble, an additional 98 blog posts have been published over a period of 893 days, for an average of a new post about every 9 days. During those two and a half years, visitors from Canada, Germany, France, the United States, Russia, the UK, the Netherlands, Ukraine, Latvia, Poland, and other countries (in that order of page views), have been enthralled, enchanted, baffled, dismayed, horrified, and yes, even enraged, by the trials and tribulations, photos and memories, rants and short stories, and other writings, of Pemulis, Joelle, and all their friends as they made their way around the western side of the peninsula of Eurasia with brief stops in Canada and elsewhere thrown in when appropriate.
Today, we mark the 100th entry to this blog. This moment shall afford us a rare chance to look back on the years that were. To assess how we have all grown as individuals and as members of a collective society at large. But most importantly, this one hundredth entry shows that we all -- even though it never feels like it -- probably have a little too much time on our hands.
Introduction by Jonathan Franzen
The news about George and Joelle Pemulis leaving Grenoble, and leaving France altogether, was mostly ignored in the St. Laurent quartier where they had lived for the previous 19 months. Pemulis's barber Cédric did not even become aware of their departure until several months after the fact. They arrived in St. Laurent in the midst of the partial economic recovery of early 2012, approximately a year and a half after the publication of my most recent novel, Freedom. Heard of it? President Obama himself has been quoted as calling it "Terrific". Oprah called it a "masterpiece" but let's not get into that. Who are these people I'm supposed to be writing about again?
The Actual Post
Well it looks like we made it. 100 posts and counting. An Introduction by Jonathan Franzen. Hundreds of digital photos laid bare for the world to see. And most importantly, a continuous inner view into the workings of the author's mind and soul. What are his convictions, beliefs, fears, and desires? It has all been presented here to the unsuspecting public. At times under the surface, at other times clear as day. Soon, Blogging scholars from around the globe will gather at Pemulis 100Con in San Jose to share their theories. For only $37,000 plus transportation, accommodation, catering, electricity, venue rental (apportioned by participant), and your dignity, join such Blog visionaries as Aaron Wall, Adam Curry, John Gruber, Andy Baio, Gina Trapani, Heather Champ, and dozens of others as they discuss the latest scholarly thinking on Who is Pemulis? Why did he gain a first name? Why is it George? Who has the clefs for some of the more esoteric blog à clef entries? What psychological issues is the author trying to hide by always writing sarcastically? What deep-seeded emotional problems do some of the more famous entries point to? What do the many metaphors employed on GrenobleWMD lead us to? Are there any metaphors at all? Is that the greatest metaphor of all? Is it true that the blog is funded primarily through the secretive Bilderberg Group as many have speculated? Why did Pemulis turn down a lucrative offer with the US Intelligence community-backed RAND Corporation? Is Pemulis really Matt Damon? Or Will Hunting? Or neither? What level of Latin does Joelle really read and understand at? Is LaMont modeled on a famous Xerox executive as Thomas Piketty recently charged in a heated editorial for Le Monde? Are the photos on GrenobleWMD used to steganographically transmit hidden messages for the still-active members of Weather Underground? Or is it something entirely opposite? Some participating members of the conference will present research that -- they claim -- arguably demonstrates a tight link between the true Pemulis character, his associates, and hard-right nationalist parties in the UK and France attempting to drive the EU apart. This is going to be some conference, and it is all in celebration of this 100th post. Be there!!!
Registration details to follow...
Thursday, July 31, 2014
Friday, July 11, 2014
Thou wast not born for death, immortal Bird!
"But what's the point in doing something 'amazing', as you call it?"
"Well there are lots of reasons. To become rich, for instance.. But more importantly, I guess, is knowing that people will remember you."
"Ok, the rich part I understand," the second man conceded, "but, what does it matter if people remember you or not? I mean, you won't know either way."
The first man grinned and quietly chuckled, looked down briefly, and then back at the second man; "It's the knowledge that I have now, while I am here, that I will be remembered and remembered well."
"But still, you will never know -- because you'll be dead -- and never experience any happiness or sadness related to that because you won't feel anything or indeed know anything when you're dead. So, what's the point?"
"Well," the first man started again, "as I said, it would make me happy now to know that, after I'm gone, people will think well of me."
"You still don't understand," the first man said in exasperation. "You're not answering why that would make you happy now. There are two parts. The first part, that you have answered, is that some future event will make you happy. For example, I may feel happiness now if I have a winning lottery ticket. But why does that make me happy? Because of the second part. In the future, that lottery ticket will be exchanged for money and I will be rich and I will be happy. You say that knowing you'll be remembered well is what's making you happy now. But why is that making you happy now? You don't have the second part; you won't be happy at that future point when you are remembered well because you won't be able to feel."
The first man paused at this, but was still clearly not swayed in the other man's thinking. He thought for another moment and then rhetorically asked: "Ok, why does a person make a will? A man draws up a will because he wants power over what happens with his possessions when he dies. This is no different from wanting power over your intangible possessions when you die, which includes how one is remembered."
"I'm afraid all you've done there is found an alike situation. You have not answered the heart of the question which is, again, and extended to your will example, why do you -- and why might anyone for that matter -- care what happens if you are not there to witness it, feel it, or experience any effect whatsoever from it?
I think that we both agree that after one's death, you no longer have any sentiment. That is, you do not feel happiness or sadness or regret, etc. So, why does one even leave anything at all? You are out of the picture entirely and all outcomes from that point on have zero effect on you whatsoever. So, why is having that power important?"
"Yes, I agree that after one's death a man cannot and will not experience any emotions. But thank you for raising that because I believe it helps me to explain my viewpoint. One generally makes a will and plans his estate because you are making the choices now that will help the people you care about once you are gone. If you made a different choice now, then you are consciously doing things to hurt those people, and you feel -- and they feel -- those actions over a course of time. Some are now, and some happen later. Going back to the original issue, of being well-remembered, there is a parallel. Every decision we make has repercussions that fan out and extend forward in time. Sometimes they are immediate, and more commonly they play out over time, possibly even infinitely. For the particular example of being remembered well, that happiness that one feels of being well-remembered can be equated with the choices of either hurting or helping those you care about. If you care for someone now, a decision you make now will affect that person in different ways and at different times. And since you are choosing, you will prefer to help them. If you make the converse decision, one that would have the effect of hurting someone, everything connected to that choice will start to be felt upon you at the moment you make it."
"Ok, that makes sense," agreed the other man. "But, what if you change your mind? What if that person does something that changes the way you feel towards them?"
"Well, you said yourself that once you're gone, you're gone, and you can therefore no longer have any interests."
"Right, so why do some people include fulfillment-like clauses in their wills? For instance, I leave my grandson a home, but only once he has graduated medical school."
"That's just another example of making a choice with a long-tailed trajectory. I feel that it would be best for my grandson to become a doctor, as I enjoy it so much and it seems to me one of the best ways to make a noble living, and so I could either do something now to encourage that, or not.
I think that generally people don't think about the fact that their wants are no longer important after their death, but there is a reason that they can and should make decisions that will have implications beyond what they would ever feel.
To say the opposite would be to deny the existence of selflessness."
"Ok. But I do deny it."
"You what?" the man asked incredulously.
"Every man and woman behaves in all acts out of purely selfish reasoning."
"You cannot possibly think that!"
"But how could you be sure of the opposite?"
"Any parent giving up economic and social freedom for their child."
"A parent has a strong interest in the success of their child to ensure that their genes are passed on."
"So now we're arguing from an evolutionary psychology angle?"
"We can argue from any angle you'd like, but I don't believe in such a thing as selflessness."
"Take this: during World War 2 it was proposed to train dogs to go ahead of the soldiers in minefields to ensure that the path was clear of mines. Not a single soldier agreed to the idea and that was done out of selfless care for the animals."
"Not true. There could have been a number of other factors at play. But most importantly, the soldiers did not want to see, or even know about, dogs dying for their benefit. Pay close attention: it was the soldiers that didn't want that to happen. That is making a decision purely out of self interest. That is the default, selfish behavior of which I speak."
"So you don't believe that any decision can be rooted selflessly? Or you don't believe that any decision is, though it could be."
"I don't believe that any decision could possibly be rooted in anything else than selfishness. Would you help your friend to succeed? Of course, but only if you wanted your friend to succeed. Etc."
"But I think what's important is why you want your friend to succeed. The selfish/selfless question comes at the origins of what outcomes lead to your utility and happiness."
"Well now you're talking like an economist!"
"Well there are lots of reasons. To become rich, for instance.. But more importantly, I guess, is knowing that people will remember you."
"Ok, the rich part I understand," the second man conceded, "but, what does it matter if people remember you or not? I mean, you won't know either way."
The first man grinned and quietly chuckled, looked down briefly, and then back at the second man; "It's the knowledge that I have now, while I am here, that I will be remembered and remembered well."
"But still, you will never know -- because you'll be dead -- and never experience any happiness or sadness related to that because you won't feel anything or indeed know anything when you're dead. So, what's the point?"
"Well," the first man started again, "as I said, it would make me happy now to know that, after I'm gone, people will think well of me."
"You still don't understand," the first man said in exasperation. "You're not answering why that would make you happy now. There are two parts. The first part, that you have answered, is that some future event will make you happy. For example, I may feel happiness now if I have a winning lottery ticket. But why does that make me happy? Because of the second part. In the future, that lottery ticket will be exchanged for money and I will be rich and I will be happy. You say that knowing you'll be remembered well is what's making you happy now. But why is that making you happy now? You don't have the second part; you won't be happy at that future point when you are remembered well because you won't be able to feel."
The first man paused at this, but was still clearly not swayed in the other man's thinking. He thought for another moment and then rhetorically asked: "Ok, why does a person make a will? A man draws up a will because he wants power over what happens with his possessions when he dies. This is no different from wanting power over your intangible possessions when you die, which includes how one is remembered."
"I'm afraid all you've done there is found an alike situation. You have not answered the heart of the question which is, again, and extended to your will example, why do you -- and why might anyone for that matter -- care what happens if you are not there to witness it, feel it, or experience any effect whatsoever from it?
I think that we both agree that after one's death, you no longer have any sentiment. That is, you do not feel happiness or sadness or regret, etc. So, why does one even leave anything at all? You are out of the picture entirely and all outcomes from that point on have zero effect on you whatsoever. So, why is having that power important?"
"Yes, I agree that after one's death a man cannot and will not experience any emotions. But thank you for raising that because I believe it helps me to explain my viewpoint. One generally makes a will and plans his estate because you are making the choices now that will help the people you care about once you are gone. If you made a different choice now, then you are consciously doing things to hurt those people, and you feel -- and they feel -- those actions over a course of time. Some are now, and some happen later. Going back to the original issue, of being well-remembered, there is a parallel. Every decision we make has repercussions that fan out and extend forward in time. Sometimes they are immediate, and more commonly they play out over time, possibly even infinitely. For the particular example of being remembered well, that happiness that one feels of being well-remembered can be equated with the choices of either hurting or helping those you care about. If you care for someone now, a decision you make now will affect that person in different ways and at different times. And since you are choosing, you will prefer to help them. If you make the converse decision, one that would have the effect of hurting someone, everything connected to that choice will start to be felt upon you at the moment you make it."
"Ok, that makes sense," agreed the other man. "But, what if you change your mind? What if that person does something that changes the way you feel towards them?"
"Well, you said yourself that once you're gone, you're gone, and you can therefore no longer have any interests."
"Right, so why do some people include fulfillment-like clauses in their wills? For instance, I leave my grandson a home, but only once he has graduated medical school."
"That's just another example of making a choice with a long-tailed trajectory. I feel that it would be best for my grandson to become a doctor, as I enjoy it so much and it seems to me one of the best ways to make a noble living, and so I could either do something now to encourage that, or not.
I think that generally people don't think about the fact that their wants are no longer important after their death, but there is a reason that they can and should make decisions that will have implications beyond what they would ever feel.
To say the opposite would be to deny the existence of selflessness."
"Ok. But I do deny it."
"You what?" the man asked incredulously.
"Every man and woman behaves in all acts out of purely selfish reasoning."
"You cannot possibly think that!"
"But how could you be sure of the opposite?"
"Any parent giving up economic and social freedom for their child."
"A parent has a strong interest in the success of their child to ensure that their genes are passed on."
"So now we're arguing from an evolutionary psychology angle?"
"We can argue from any angle you'd like, but I don't believe in such a thing as selflessness."
"Take this: during World War 2 it was proposed to train dogs to go ahead of the soldiers in minefields to ensure that the path was clear of mines. Not a single soldier agreed to the idea and that was done out of selfless care for the animals."
"Not true. There could have been a number of other factors at play. But most importantly, the soldiers did not want to see, or even know about, dogs dying for their benefit. Pay close attention: it was the soldiers that didn't want that to happen. That is making a decision purely out of self interest. That is the default, selfish behavior of which I speak."
"So you don't believe that any decision can be rooted selflessly? Or you don't believe that any decision is, though it could be."
"I don't believe that any decision could possibly be rooted in anything else than selfishness. Would you help your friend to succeed? Of course, but only if you wanted your friend to succeed. Etc."
"But I think what's important is why you want your friend to succeed. The selfish/selfless question comes at the origins of what outcomes lead to your utility and happiness."
"Well now you're talking like an economist!"
Monday, July 7, 2014
A Sunday Lost in the Bavarian Alps
At the top, the view is quite beautiful. The difficulty, however, is making it there. To be able to capture such a breath-taking view, you have to make it to the top of the mountain. Here is the route:
19km, 1,120 metres of vertical climbing, "unpaved, gravel" -- ha! Well, it probably would have consisted of unpaved and gravel routes if we'd stayed on the marked path as we intended to do. However, somehow in our ("our" = one George Pemulis and his university chum) infinite wisdom we missed a turn or something and ended up crawling up 50+ degree inclines hanging on to roots and fallen trees for dear life and manically searching for the lost path for an entire morning. We pushed ourselves through the thick brush of the Alpine woods in steadily-climbing 30-degree heat, dreaming of cold water, feeling our way, ascending onwards by creating an imagined and dangerous route through the virgin-forest untouched by human hands until our own. The temperature continued to rise and the sun-beat down hard on us whenever the tree-canopy briefly opened itself to the sky. Just when it seemed like all hope was truly lost, several hours after setting out in the Bavarian morning, neon colours appeared in the periphery of our vision, far in the distance.
The neon came closer and at first I imagined that this may have represented the end of it all. The world ends not with a bang, not with a whimper, but with a flurry of neon colours approaching from the distance, bearing down, like lycra-clad trail runners come to deliver me from every evil work and preserve me unto the heavenly kingdom of... oh, no wait, I guess they're actually trail runners and therefore, over there is the path. Woohoo! We found the path.
Following any near-death experience it's important to both celebrate and bring your nervous system-induced elevated heart rate back to within an acceptable level on the safe-living-heart-rate-o-matic. We made it to the top, had a short break at the beer hut, and made our way safely to the lake.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)