Meanderings on “Crumb” (1994)

I watched this documentary on Jordan Peterson’s recommendation.

He says you can understand Freudian pathologies through it, and particularly serial rapists, and I think he’s right in an important way. Now, I don’t pretend to know or understand Freudian psychology, myself, except at the level you’d find on Wikipedia. But after watching this documentary you will feel (at a visceral level) that there exists a there there, and that’s at least as important as understanding or knowing anything about it. Here’s a link, but you may have to search for your own because the JewTube (((copyright))) police are on the prowl, tireless and ever diligent.

Unlike his brothers Robert Crumb grew into an extreme ectomorph. Physiognomically, he looks like a maldeveloped Nikola Tesla, and I think they would have agreed on a lot of things regarding modern culture. This is interesting because if you watch closely, the brothers appear to have agreed by mutual unspoken agreement to act out the three Freudian archetypes, where Robert is the superego, the older brother is the ego, and the younger brother is the id. In response to their childhood abuses and fixations, the id becomes a solipsistic sexual degenerate, the ego becomes a sexless, hyperverbal ascetic and then kills himself, and the superego flees the country in despair and powerless disgust and frustration.

Crumb is without doubt an artistic genius, and it’s almost a shame because the inner and external worlds he recreates are disgusting and portrayed through a lens of contempt and creeping horror. At this point, I doubt he’s even capable of misrepresenting himself to the world. You can see this contempt every time Crumb laughs at someone for saying something utterly absurd (I don’t think he ever laughs except at horrible things). He’s one of the most implausible Omega -> Sigma stories you’ll ever see, and interesting for that reason if for none other. I daresay Freud was the greatest mind the Jews ever produced. Speaking of Jews, this Crumb comic may tickle your counter-semitism (click for better but not great quality):

That’s the most concise summary of Kevin MacDonald you’ll ever see. It’s ugly, but it’s true and reality is ugly.

His character Mr. Natural interests me from an edenic perspective. I think he’s an expression of the archetypal neanderthal and the occipital lobe itself, which may be the same mental archetype as the Green Man motif in folklore.

RobertCrumbMrNaturalButto

302192_ddfd9465d1d8f5c9db7ee31f7868b8fb_large

Crumb 1976

nucrumbpitchfork

I’ve been internally referring to my occipital bun as “the old man in back” for years. It’s a very natural way of describing the occipital’s conservatism, peripatetic obstinacy, and overwhelming sensibility. The method to its madness was perfectly described in Goethe by Jung:

Goethe, for instance, says that when he sat down, lowered his head, and vividly conjured up the image of a flower, he saw it undergoing changes of its own accord, as if entering into new combinations of form. In the halfwaking state these phenomena occur fairly often as hypnagogic hallucinations. Goethe’s automatisms differ from truly somnambulistic ones, because in his case the initial idea is conscious, and the development of the automatism keeps within the bounds laid down by the initial idea, that is to say, within the purely motor or visual area.

-Carl Jung
On the Psychology of So-Called Occult Phenomena

This mental ability is a beautiful faculty to behold if you have the good fortune to experience this dreaming facility on the conscious level. Such intuitive meditations are likely what allowed Goethe to write his Metamorphosis of Plants well ahead of its time.

Versuch die Metamorphose der Pflanzen zu erklären, known in English as Metamorphosis of Plants, was published by German poet and philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in 1790. In this work, Goethe essentially discovered the (serially) homologous nature of leaf organs in plants, from cotyledons, to photosynthetic leaves, to the petals of a flower. Although Richard Owen, the British vertebrate anatomist (and staunch opponent of Charles Darwin), is generally credited with first articulating a definition of the word “homology” (in 1843), it is clear that Goethe had already arrived at a sophisticated view of homology and transformation (within an idealist morphological perspective) more than fifty years earlier.

Infogalactic

The Green Man motif therefore makes sense as an expression of this mental ability.

Advertisements

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to Meanderings on “Crumb” (1994)

  1. Pseudorandom Bypasser says:

    http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Hard_Haid_Moe

    Unlike the other dog-nosed characters he’s an actual human.

  2. Koanic says:

    Hm. My siblings and I display the same tripartite division.

  3. Bill Chance says:

    Interesting take on a fascinating film. I found it horrifying that he is, by far, the most well-adjusted of his three brothers.

    Thanks for sharing.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >Interesting take on a fascinating film. I found it horrifying that he is, by far, the most well-adjusted of his three brothers.

      It’s not a happy documentary. But, meditating on such things can make us more grateful for how good we have it.

      >Thanks for sharing.

      Thanks for saying so.

  4. MM says:

    ancient physiological basis for the increased efficiency of voluntarily facing problems head on:
    If you only RE-ACT you go into prey mode.
    If you take ownership and action- you use hunter brain circuits!

  5. Mr Natural is basically the Woz

  6. Pseudorandom Bypasser says:

    Here’s something I found. How well does this map to thal life trajectory and such?

  7. as says:

    “Here’s a link, but you may have to search for your own because the JewTube (((copyright))) police are on the prowl, tireless and ever diligent.”

    Hang on for little more.
    Soon Heritage America will have its versions of Fakebook, YouTube, …

    and the (((ones))) that are popular now will pale in comparison.

    Whites to the rescue, let’s show them who’s the best!

  8. mendicant says:

    Dostoevsky was aware of the three sibling archetypal pattern (brothers karazamov) before Freud named the archetypes.

    I haven’t read much Freud either, so couldn’t say for sure, but D. was famous enough, and Freud literate enough, that he was very likely to have read the novel and picked up the foundations of his psychology from it. Nothing to be ashamed of though, the Russian was simply a more insightful psychologist.

    More recently, Infinite Jest.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >I haven’t read much Freud either, so couldn’t say for sure, but D. was famous enough, and Freud literate enough, that he was very likely to have read the novel and picked up the foundations of his psychology from it. Nothing to be ashamed of though, the Russian was simply a more insightful psychologist.

      Eminently plausible.

  9. Pingback: Analysis of origin myths | Aeoli Pera

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s