Main site

 This was just the prototype

AlexanderLorincz.com

Berchtesgaden (“A Music Drama”)

NB: Wanted to keep a record of it for posterity. Thanks to my mother for saving it. A very different “religious” work than I usually create. I wrote it in my 20s.

Berchtesgaden (“A Music Drama”)

From the white Bavarian Alps, you could see the red.

It was the wine-drenched cloth of the National State,

draped over Europa after plundering her.

To the East, the rose-colored wave surged onto the mystic steppe; (1)

it was a rising, fermenting Islam (2), flooding onto Asia.

On the bench, Leader and Architect sat. (3)

From it, they oversaw the white and black and red.

They oversaw the music drama, they oversaw the Rhenish wave; (4)

they oversaw the thunderous lines and ripples of the new religion.

At the Berghof they had met with every Angle (5). The Leader had told each 

that he wanted no occidental war. That he looked, instead, to the mythic East.

That Russia was India; that all his actions—to occupy, annex, agree and award— (6)

were with the end of Russia as India in mind.

 

But the Angles did not believe in eagles or wolves,

and they did not believe in red-bearded emperors. (7)

Except the folk (8) did. They followed him, like a Johannine messiah (9), clause after clause. (10)

They followed him as he occupied, annexed, agreed and awarded;

it was because indeed, they were the ones who had contracted him.

 

You see, the peace had blamed everything on a check.

It had blamed the old order. It had blamed Habsburg and Hohenzollern.

The peace spoke of self-rule, of self-governance, (11)

but banned any admission which would have benefited the folk.

The peace thus aroused an imperial feeling,

and it was this that made the next Struggle inevitable.

 

So from the north they descended with a Wagnerian cry! (12) They fell from Gotland

to the Vistula, and then from the Vistula

to the Volga. From its left bank, one could smell Asia.

They were there to Germanize the world like it had once been Hellenized.

They were to pedestal an Alexandrine leader’s vanity, and to follow a malicious destiny.

 

Indeed, their State was corporate. Each organ was a part of a body,

contributing and extending, eastward and tumescent. But the corpus,

of course, was run by compensatory fantasists, by virgins (13) with untenable insecurities,

who thought the crux of their pains was traceable to imagined, eternal wanderings. (14)

Everywhere, they betrayed the draped white cloth of the National State.

It was stained like a painter’s rag, a rag which was also used for onanism. (15)

 

At the Berghof, Leader and Architect planned cities, planned wonders,

and planned utopias. Everything was to be large for the Leader; (16)

they were to outdo Alexander, Augustus and Napoleon.

There was to be an arch of Titus that could stretch over Germania,

to embody a symbolic closure to a diaspora. (17)

Their edifices were to have a quality to them which was both inhuman and artificial.

Their gross structures were to be like pornographies, with inflated breasts or genitalia,

but transported with those proportions to the actual world.

 

Except on the first day there was a portent which foreshadowed the last day.

Over the Wolf’s Lair there was a sign, a sky which was sickly and colored.

This was because the epics, you see, ended always in Twilight.

It could never be New York which assented to fire, but Munich (18)

and Vienna and Nuremburg. Each, in its turn, would bathe in the glow.

 

As time passed, the steppe became haunting and dim. There was no more goose-stepping,

only a white-noised resonance, a chained-linked palpitation,

which preceded the trembling of the folk.

And then, with a shot, (19) the folk turned. There came an explosion of symbols, (20)

an explosion of pornographies, an explosion of artificialities.

Down came each crumbling artifice, each monolithic, quite strange construction.

The Leader, not married to the State (21), was empyred.

No Triumph, no Ariya, only Twilight. (22)

Notes

1. The mystic connotation of “the east” was likely inspired by Hitler’s readings as a youth. Despite his disparaging comments about America, he widely read novels about the “wild west” in Vienna and reread them during the Great War, which likely implanted the idea of eastern Europe occupying a similar, mystic connotation for the Germans.

2. Carl Jung compared Nazism to Islam of the 7th and 8th centuries, describing it as a “political religion” or a “military religion.” Hitler himself compared his movement to “a religion.” Just as Islam demanded the surrender of individuality to the movement, Nazism did as well.

3. This refers to Hitler and his chief architect (and the closest thing he ever had to a “friend”), Albert Speer. The two would meet at Hitler’s retreat in Berchtesgaden in the Bavarian Alps and plan architectural and cultural projects for Nazi Germany.

4. Rhenish references a type of wine. The drunkenness motif repeats, affirming the theme of individuals entering a trance or state of intoxication during the mania of the war.

5. A play on “Anglo-Saxon.”

6. The early actions of Hitler: to re-occupy the Rhineland, to annex Austria, to take the Sudetenland, to award the border region of Slovakia to Hungary. Hitler met with Neville Chamberlain and other British leaders at Berchtesgaden in the late 30s. Hitler stated openly to his acolytes he wanted conflict with Russia and the east, not the west.

7. References Frederick Barbarossa, who the invasion of the Soviet Union was named after.

8. Refers to “volk.”

9. The Gospel of John often labels “the Jews” as a hostile group opposed to Jesus, and is interpreted as antisemitic.

10. Clauses of the Treaty of Versailles.

11. The western powers conceded that the “14 points” of Woodrow Wilson had been applied justly to all the other powers of Europe, but not the Germans - ie, the exclusion of Austria from Germany. This rationale allowed Hitler to get away with many of his early foreign policy actions in the late 1930s.

12. When he lived in Vienna, Hitler’s preferred recreation was listening to Richard Wagner’s famous operas or “music dramas.” Wagner was also famous for his antisemitism.

13. Hitler likely had few sexual expriences and was described by some as sexually repressed. His two definitive relationships during his lifetime were to his cousin Geli Raubal and to Eva Braun. Psychologists have speculated that sexual repression was the basis for his interest in war, and for his fixation on either complete “conquest” or “annihilation.” These tendencies reflect pathologizations of the primal unconscious forces described by Freud of “eros” and “thanatos,” sex and death.

14. Refers to a common trope of Nazi propaganda, the “wandering Jew.”

15. Hitler was a painter. The latter line reflects the incredulity even in Hitler’s own time that some observers felt about his grandiose visions for the future - excessive and self-indulgent, and to be disparaged.

16. Hitler had a size fixation. He was obsessed with setting records, scale, etc. The intersection of unconscious sexual forces in his personal and political psychology is thus inescapable. The most famous example was the massive domed “pantheon” (Volkshalle) he planned to construct with Speer’s assistance in the future capital of Nazi Germany.

17. References the Holocaust. Titus refers to the Roman general (later emperor) known for suppressing the Jewish Revolt.

18. This is a reference to a recurring vision of Hitler which he stated to his subordinates, the idea of New York City in flames. During the war, plans were made to engineer the extremely long-ranged “Amerikabomber” to make this image a reality.

19. Refers to Hitler’s suicide in the bunker at the end of the war.

20. Refers to one famous event in particular, which was captured on film: the Red Army useing explosives to destroy the Nazi swastika over the Reichstag after the Battle of Berlin.

21. Hitler was famously portrayed as a bachelor “married to Germany.” At the end of the war this ended, and he married Eva Braun shortly before their mutual suicide. Hitler was additionally not burned on a pyre - his adjutants took his body to the courtyard, where his corpse was unceremoniously burned using fuel salvaged from derelict cars left in the Fuhrerbunker’s garage.

22. Concludes with several powerful references - to the “Triumph of the Will” of Leni Riefenstahl, a film portraying the grandiose Nazi Empire; “ariya,” the Sanskrit word for “noble” that was appropriated by the Nazis; and “Twilight” referring to the “Twilight of the Gods” or final battle of the apocalypse referenced by Richard Wagner (and originating in Germanic mythology). Ultimately, Hitler would lead the Germans to annihilation and self-destruction: Ragnarok.

Categorizing the levels of religion

I have been pondering an argument I could make about religion. Over the years I have spoken to many so-called “religious people” and found they can be some of the most difficult and unpleasant people to interact with. They can be judgmental, narrow minded, and provincial. At the same time, I have always been inspired by the great spiritual figures of humanity, such as Christ, the Buddha, Dante, Walt Whitman, and John of the Cross, and believe them to be among the greatest figures of mankind. The contradiction here - that religion can produce both the worst and best people - is what I want to reconcile.

Interestingly, we find that these figures - both the worst and the best - are often produced by the same religion. Thus, it is not appropriate to say “well, these religions over here are good” and “these religions over here are bad.” Christianity has produced both inquisitors as well as philanthropists. Thus, we will take the perennialist’s position, and simply state that all religions are attempts at man to express certain universal truths about the human condition; that the outward forms they take on are simply reflections of the cultures and psychologies of the civilizations that produced them.

Thus I wanted to propose categorizing the followers of every religion in the following way. Individuals may belong to the same faith, but they interpret it according to these different stages of maturity.

1. Superstition

The lowest level of religion. A childlike understanding of it. Results in mass hysteria, violence, or witch hunts. The world is ruled by spirits. Magic is possible. Religion is corrupted by man’s weaknesses.

2. Dogma

A slightly higher form of religion. The tenets of faith are codified. However, the faith becomes repressive, insecure, and controlling. It falls under the influence of fallible human institutions. Here we can think of the Popes who lived in sprawling pleasure-palaces, and the great affluence and avarice of the Church. We can think of the Inquisition, the Catechism, and the drive for conformity of belief. This stage of religion can have utility in bringing social and political order, but simultaneously censors and suppresses human flourishing.

Here I will mention that it is not by accident that Christ criticized the Pharisees (the religious authorities) in the Gospels, referring to those at this stage of religion; or that in the Paradiso St. Peter becomes irate when discussing the corruption of the Catholic Church to Dante.

3. Transcendent-mystical

The highest form of religion. I would argue that this is the “adult” or “mature” understanding of faith. It is usually observed in the initial founder of a religion. It is visible in figures such as Christ or the Buddha. It is also embodied by the major saints and mystics of a faith who follow the personal life-path that returns man to the transcendent. It is open and tolerant (unlike the former stages) as it sees the divine in all. It is a faith that embodies the “mysterium tremendum et fascinans.”

A final category - though it does not quite fit the above - would be what I would call “pathologies of religion.” This would represent a lower level of religion than that of superstition. This would include movements founded by cult leaders that exist only to enrich or empower themselves. These kinds of groups are harmful and damaging. Indeed, in life we find pathologies exist of everything, and religion is no exception. These movements take advantage of the desire deep in human nature to commune with the sacred, and exploit it for selfish and destructive ends (ie, the benefit of the founder, a charlatan).

Solipsism, Separation, and Nondualism

1. Recently I have been reflecting on the idea of solipsism. This is the idea that only the individual “I” exists: “I” am the only verifiable thing that is real, and everything else is an illusion. The best analogy to understand this is to think of a single player computer game. The first-person player is real, however all the other individuals and entities are actually non-playable characters or NPCs.

In many ways this idea has value, because it is hard to definitively prove the individuals you observe are “I”s the same as you are. At the same time, denying the existence of others is not a path to healthy functioning, and the excesses of this idea would state one’s moral actions have no import: which is clearly not the case.

Solipsism causes us to reflect seriously on the idea of separation: on the division between subject (I) and object (you). This idea is built into our everyday experience, and we see it reflected in our basic grammar when we use words like I, you, us, and them. Speaking practically, “I” is always the most important: as while if “you” perish it is unfortunate for me, if “I” perishes there is effective nonexistence, with the annihilation of the subject who is able to perceive objects. 

2. In India they have an interesting idea that is related to this. It is called “nondualism.” Nondualism is the idea that the separation between “I” and “you” is an illusion. The Indians say this illusion is a very powerful deception created by the divine. This illusion is needed to give its emanations (in other words: creation, all living beings) individuality and autonomy.

Nondualism makes a very bold argument. Certainly, someone facing death would not be pleased to hear the line “oh it’s fine to die, because you see, we are all actually one consciousness that has divided itself.” The person on their deathbed would look you in the face and state how very real their idea of selfhood is and state the profound tragedy that it is to face death.

3. The premise of nondualism leads to a couple of interesting ideas.

First, the idea would show the clear foundation of karma. Harming others leads to negative effects because you are literally harming yourself. Helping others leads to positive effects because you are literally helping yourself.

Second, if nondualism is correct, then selfishness and selflessness are of great significance and would constitute a major part of why we are here. In our normal, default state, selfishness is the path of progress. Yet - paradoxically - selflessness would be the true path to fulfillment.

4. This idea makes me think of the story of Christ. In the Gospels, Christ dies on the cross, and in this presents an example of self-negation and self-sacrifice. Yet when he does this, he attains immortality. This story seems to suggest that if one overcomes selfishness (and the individual “I”), one can rise to a higher state.

5. This idea also makes me think of Buddhism. In Buddhism, there is the teaching of Nirvana. Nirvana is the highest spiritual state, an incomprehensible state in which one loses individuality. It is a state in which one loses a sense of “I-hood” and unites with the Source of the cosmos.

Nirvana is distinct from heaven. While in Buddhism it is good if one dies and is reborn among the gods, the Buddha counsels there is an attainment that is even greater than this. This suggests that even the gods still embrace the illusion of individual I-hood, and the highest goal is to transcend this.

6. Two final thoughts I had here were of “proximate” states: states where one gets close to I-hood dissolving back into unity but doesn’t entirely make it there.

Sexual union would be the first of these. In the sexual act, selfhood partly dissolves and one comes into a state of unity with the other person. Certainly, losing the strong sense of I-hood is a motivator for many in pursuing sex.                              

Another example of a “proximate” state would be that of the “hive-mind.” You can find examples of this in science fiction, like the Borg on Star Trek. A hive-mind is a state of many individual “I”s linking together and communicating as one in a collective consciousness. When they do this, they maintain their individual I-hood but also come together as a larger I. Interestingly, we see a version of this in the very cells of our bodies. Another example could be visible today in the Internet: perhaps an early version of a collective consciousness for human beings.

7. Finally, returning back to solipsism – the idea we started with – it seems this idea has a great deal of truth to it. As if the premise stated here is correct, the divine “I” is not distinct from you, but it *is* you. “Thou art that,” and “you” are no different from the objects you perceive. It is only the illusion of separation that keeps us from perceiving this.