#Hugo's perpetual political evolution

[pilferingapples]

Victor Hugo in June 1832

I think it’s generally known that Hugo’s political sentiments underwent Some Change as he got older; in 1832, he was still a moderate of the day, insisting that he liked the the idea  of a republic But Not Yet.   Here’s a letter from him to Sainte-Beuve, whose friendship he was still trying to hold onto (for Reasons I guess?!?) at this point, from a collection of his letters :

12th June 1832  I am quite as indignant as you are, my dear friend, with these miserable political jugglers who put Article 14 up their sleeve, and keep the declaration of a state of siege all the time in the false bottom of their conjuring box!(1) 

I only hope they will not have the hardihood to blow out the brains of these hot-headed but generous young fellows. If these would-be keepers of the peace were to venture on a political execution, and four men of spirit were to get up a riot to save the victims, I would make a fifth.(2)

It is, indeed,a  sad, but at the same time a fine subject for a poem, all this folly steeped in bloodshed.(3)  We shall have a Republic some day, and when it does come it will be a good one.  But we must not gather in May the fruit which will not be ripe till August.  We must know how to wait.  The Republic proclaimed by France in Europe will be the crown of our old age.  But we must not let our flag be smeared with red by these blackguards,  For instance, a Frédéric Soulié, who a year ago was devoted to M. d’Argout’s dramatic quasi-censorship(4), must not be allowed to bawl out in the middle of a café that he is going to make bullets.  People of this kind throw back the political ideas which, but for them, would make progress.  They frighten the honest tradesman, who is made savage by reaction.  They make a bugbear of the Republic.  Ninety-three is not much of a bait. We ought to talk a little less of Robespierre and a little more of Washington. 

Farewell. We shall meet soon, I hope. I am working hard just now.  I approve of all you have done, and only regret that the protest(5) did not appear.  At any rate, my friend, keep my signature next to yours. 

Your brother, 

Victor

(1) There had been a brief state of siege declared in Paris in consequence of the uprising; it was not a popular move.

(2) I’m not sure how earnest Hugo was about being ready for active confrontation over this ; I’m not sure even he knew. But he was  entirely ready to fight legally or in the court of public opinion on behalf of anyone who was facing the death penalty; it was one of the few really consistent political opinions in his life. 

(3) of course, thirty years and a major political crisis or two later, “a poem” turned into about 100 solid pages of Barricade Action:P

(4) Frédéric Soulié was another French writer; he would die in 1847. Minister Argout was a moderate conservative politician and governor of the Bank of France from 1834 to 1857. I haven’t been able to find any reason why Hugo should particularly resent either of them; in his memoirs, Argout is a rather easygoing and reasonable figure, who got along fairly well with Hugo despite any political differences, and he was known at the time for having argued against the Four Ordinances;  and I can’t find other outstanding mentions of Soulié at all off the usual easy sources (though there may well be something in correspondence somewhere)--at any rate, he seems to have been a pretty minor author of the day?  Given the year, it seems very likely this was just a brief personal feud. 

(5) There had been plans to print a letter/petition, signed by many prominent public figures like Hugo, in defense of the arrested barricade fighters. 

(Hugo’s  general correspondence at the time shows an extremely mixed and often contradictory bag of social and political opinions and his decades-later edits of some of his work show that he knew full well it wasn’t the neatly unified philosophy the very much wanted to have.  My further opinions about his politically Pontmercying younger years I will save for other times, but I do think it deserves mention that this letter was not part of a particularly consistent political stance or anything-- aside from its obvious contradictions, and the real objection to the death penalty.)

[eruptionsanddisasters]

The Role of the Behavioral Scientist in the Civil Rights Movement

By Martin Luther King Jr.

It is always a very rich and rewarding experience when I can take a brief break from the day-to-day demands of our struggle for freedom and human dignity and discuss the issues involved in that struggle with concerned friends of good will all over the nation. It is particularly a great privilege to discuss these issues with members of the academic community, who are constantly writing about and dealing with the problems that we face and who have the tremendous responsibility of molding the minds of young men and women all over the country.

The Civil Rights Movement needs the help of social scientists

In the preface to their book, 'Applied Sociology' (1965), S. M. Miller and Alvin Gouldner state: 'It is the historic mission of the social sciences to enable mankind to take possession of society.' It follows that for Negroes who substantially are excluded from society this science is needed even more desperately than for any other group in the population.

For social scientists, the opportunity to serve in a life-giving purpose is a humanist challenge of rare distinction. Negroes too are eager for a rendezvous with truth and discovery. We are aware that social scientists, unlike some of their colleagues in the physical sciences, have been spared the grim feelings of guilt that attended the invention of nuclear weapons of destruction. Social scientists, in the main, are fortunate to be able to extirpate evil, not to invent it.

If the Negro needs social sciences for direction and for self-understanding, the white society is in even more urgent need. White America needs to understand that it is poisoned to its soul by racism and the understanding needs to be carefully documented and consequently more difficult to reject. The present crisis arises because although it is historically imperative that our society take the next step to equality, we find ourselves psychologically and socially imprisoned. All too many white Americans are horrified not with conditions of Negro life but with the product of these conditions-the Negro himself.

White America is seeking to keep the walls of segregation substantially intact while the evolution of society and the Negro's desperation is causing them to crumble. The white majority, unprepared and unwilling to accept radical structural change, is resisting and producing chaos while complaining that if there were no chaos orderly change would come.

Negroes want the social scientist to address the white community and 'tell it like it is.' White America has an appalling lack of knowledge concerning the reality of Negro life. One reason some advances were made in the South during the past decade was the discovery by northern whites of the brutal facts of southern segregated life. It was the Negro who educated the nation by dramatizing the evils through nonviolent protest. The social scientist played little or no role in disclosing truth. The Negro action movement with raw courage did it virtually alone. When the majority of the country could not live with the extremes of brutality they witnessed, political remedies were enacted and customs were altered.

These partial advances were, however, limited principally to the South and progress did not automatically spread throughout the nation. There was also little depth to the changes. White America stopped murder, but that is not the same thing as ordaining brotherhood; nor is the ending of lynch rule the same thing as inaugurating justice.

After some years of Negro-white unity and partial success, white America shifted gears and went into reverse. Negroes, alive with hope and enthusiasm, ran into sharply stiffened white resistance at all levels and bitter tensions broke out in sporadic episodes of violence. New lines of hostility were drawn and the era of good feeling disappeared.

The decade of 1955 to 1965, with its constructive elements, misled us. Everyone, activists and social scientists, underestimated the amount of violence and rage Negroes were suppressing and the amount of bigotry the white majority was disguising.

Science should have been employed more fully to warn us that the Negro, after 350 years of handicaps, mired in an intricate network of contemporary barriers, could not be ushered into equality by tentative and superficial changes.

Mass nonviolent protests, a social invention of Negroes, were effective in Montgomery, Birmingham and Selma in forcing national legislation which served to change Negro life sufficiently to curb explosions. But when changes were confined to the South alone, the North, in the absence of change, began to seethe.

The freedom movement did not adapt its tactics to the different and unique northern urban conditions. It failed to see that nonviolent marches in the South were forms of rebellion. When Negroes took over the streets and shops, southern society shook to its roots. Negroes could contain their rage when they found the means to force relatively radical changes in their environment.

In the North, on the other hand, street demonstrations were not even a mild expression of militancy. The turmoil of cities absorbs demonstrations as merely transitory drama which is ordinary in city life. Without a more effective tactic for upsetting the status quo, the power structure could maintain its intransigence and hostility. Into the vacuum of inaction, violence and riots flowed and a new period opened.

Urban riots.

Urban riots must now be recognized as durable social phenomena. They may be deplored, but they are there and should be understood. Urban riots are a special form of violence. They are not insurrections. The rioters are not seeking to seize territory or to attain control of institutions. They are mainly intended to shock the white community. They are a distorted form of social protest. The looting which is their principal feature serves many functions. It enables the most enraged and deprived Negro to take hold of consumer goods with the ease the white man does by using his purse. Often the Negro does not even want what he takes; he wants the experience of taking. But most of all, alienated from society and knowing that this society cherishes property above people, he is shocking it by abusing property rights. There are thus elements of emotional catharsis in the violent act. This may explain why most cities in which riots have occurred have not had a repetition, even though the causative conditions remain. It is also noteworthy that the amount of physical harm done to white people other than police is infinitesimal and in Detroit whites and Negroes looted in unity.

A profound judgment of today's riots was expressed by Victor Hugo a century ago. He said, 'If a soul is left in the darkness, sins will be committed. The guilty one is not he who commits the sin, but he who causes the darkness.'

The policymakers of the white society have caused the darkness; they create discrimination; they structured slums; and they perpetuate unemployment, ignorance and poverty. It is incontestable and deplorable that Negroes have committed crimes; but they are derivative crimes. They are born of the greater crimes of the white society. When we ask Negroes to abide by the law, let us also demand that the white man abide by law in the ghettos. Day-in and day-out he violates welfare laws to deprive the poor of their meager allotments; he flagrantly violates building codes and regulations; his police make a mockery of law; and he violates laws on equal employment and education and the provisions for civic services. The slums are the handiwork of a vicious system of the white society; Negroes live in them but do not make them any more than a prisoner makes a prison. Let us say boldly that if the violations of law by the white man in the slums over the years were calculated and compared with the law-breaking of a few days of riots, the hardened criminal would be the white man. These are often difficult things to say but I have come to see more and more that it is necessary to utter the truth in order to deal with the great problems that we face in our society.

Vietnam War.

There is another cause of riots that is too important to mention casually-the war in Vietnam. Here again, we are dealing with a controversial issue. But I am convinced that the war in Vietnam has played havoc with our domestic destinies. The bombs that fall in Vietnam explode at home. It does not take much to see what great damage this war has done to the image of our nation. It has left our country politically and morally isolated in the world, where our only friends happen to be puppet nations like Taiwan, Thailand and South Korea. The major allies in the world that have been with us in war and peace are not with us in this war. As a result we find ourselves socially and politically isolated.

The war in Vietnam has torn up the Geneva Accord. It has seriously impaired the United Nations. It has exacerbated the hatreds between continents, and worse still, between races. It has frustrated our development at home by telling our underprivileged citizens that we place insatiable military demands above their most critical needs. It has greatly contributed to the forces of reaction in America, and strengthened the military-industrial complex, against which even President Eisenhower solemnly warned us. It has practically destroyed Vietnam, and left thousands of American and Vietnamese youth maimed and mutilated. And it has exposed the whole world to the risk of nuclear warfare.

As I looked at what this war was doing to our nation, and to the domestic situation and to the Civil Rights movement, I found it necessary to speak vigorously out against it. My speaking out against the war has not gone without criticisms. There are those who tell me that I should stick with civil rights, and stay in my place. I can only respond that I have fought too hard and long to end segregated public accommodations to segregate my own moral concerns. It is my deep conviction that justice is indivisible, that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. For those who tell me I am hurting the Civil Rights movement, and ask, 'Don't you think that in order to be respected, and in order to regain support, you must stop talking against the war?' I can only say that I am not a consensus leader. I do not seek to determine what is right and wrong by taking a Gallop Poll to determine majority opinion. And it is again my deep conviction that ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher of consensus, but a molder of consensus. On some positions cowardice asks the question, 'Is it safe?!' Expediency asks the question, 'Is it politic?' Vanity asks the question, 'Is it popular?' But conscience must ask the question, 'Is it right?!' And there comes a time when one must take a stand that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular. But one must take it because it is right. And that is where I find myself today.

Moreover, I am convinced, even if war continues, that a genuine massive act of concern will do more to quell riots than the most massive deployment of troops.

Unemployment.

The unemployment of Negro youth ranges up to 40 percent in some slums. The riots are almost entirely youth events-the age range of participants is from 13 to 25. What hypocrisy it is to talk of saving the new generation-to make it the generation of hope-while consigning it to unemployment and provoking it to violent alternatives.

When our nation was bankrupt in the thirties we created an agency to provide jobs to all at their existing level of skill. In our overwhelming affluence today what excuse is there for not setting up a national agency for full employment immediately?

The other program which would give reality to hope and opportunity would be the demolition of the slums to be replaced by decent housing built by residents of the ghettos.

These programs are not only eminently sound and vitally needed, but they have the support of an overwhelming majority of the nation-white and Negro. The Harris Poll on August 21, 1967, disclosed that an astounding 69 percent of the country support a works program to provide employment to all and an equally astonishing 65 percent approve a program to tear down the slums.

There is a program and there is heavy majority support for it. Yet, the administration and Congress tinker with trivial proposals to limit costs in an extravagant gamble with disaster.

The President has lamented that he cannot persuade Congress. He can, if the will is there, go to the people, mobilize the people's support and thereby substantially increase his power to persuade Congress. Our most urgent task is to find the tactics that will move the government no matter how determined it is to resist.

Civil disobedience.

I believe we will have to find the militant middle between riots on the one hand and weak and timid supplication for justice on the other hand. That middle ground, I believe, is civil disobedience. It can be aggressive but nonviolent; it can dislocate but not destroy. The specific planning will take some study and analysis to avoid mistakes of the past when it was employed on too small a scale and sustained too briefly.

Civil disobedience can restore Negro-white unity. There have been some very important sane white voices even during the most desperate moments of the riots. One reason is that the urban crisis intersects the Negro crisis in the city. Many white decision- makers may care little about saving Negroes, but they must care about saving their cities. The vast majority of production is created in cities; most white Americans live in them. The suburbs to which they flee cannot exist detached from cities. Hence powerful white elements have goals that merge with ours.

Role for the social scientist

Now there are many roles for social scientists in meeting these problems. Kenneth Clark has said that Negroes are moved by a suicide instinct in riots and Negroes know there is a tragic truth in this observation. Social scientists should also disclose the suicide instinct that governs the administration and Congress in their total failure to respond constructively.

What other areas are there for social scientists to assist the civil rights movement? There are many, but I would like to suggest three because they have an urgent quality.

Social science may be able to search out some answers to the problem of Negro leadership. E. Franklin Frazier, in his profound work, Black Bourgeoisie, laid painfully bare the tendency of the upwardly mobile Negro to separate from his community, divorce himself from responsibility to it, while failing to gain acceptance in the white community. There has been significant improvements from the days Frazier researched, but anyone knowledgeable about Negro life knows its middle class is not yet bearing its weight. Every riot has carried strong overtone of hostility of lower class Negroes toward the affluent Negro and vice versa. No contemporary study of scientific depth has totally studied this problem. Social science should be able to suggest mechanisms to create a wholesome black unity and a sense of peoplehood while the process of integration proceeds.

As one example of this gap in research, there are no studies, to my knowledge, to explain adequately the absence of Negro trade union leadership. Eight-five percent of Negroes are working people. Some two million are in trade unions but in 50 years we have produced only one national leader-A. Philip Randolph.

Discrimination explains a great deal, but not everything. The picture is so dark even a few rays of light may signal a useful direction.

Political action.

The second area for scientific examination is political action. In the past two decades, Negroes have expended more effort in quest of the franchise than they have in all other campaigns combined. Demonstrations, sit-ins and marches, though more spectacular, are dwarfed by the enormous number of man-hours expended to register millions, particularly in the South. Negro organizations from extreme militant to conservative persuasion, Negro leaders who would not even talk to each other, all have been agreed on the key importance of voting. Stokely Carmichael said black power means the vote and Roy Wilkins, while saying black power means black death, also energetically sought the power of the ballot.

A recent major work by social scientists Matthew and Prothro concludes that 'The concrete benefits to be derived from the franchise-under conditions that prevail in the South-have often been exaggerated.,' that voting is not the key that will unlock the door to racial equality because 'the concrete measurable payoffs from Negro voting in the South will not be revolutionary' (1966).

James A. Wilson supports this view, arguing, 'Because of the structure of American politics as well as the nature of the Negro community, Negro politics will accomplish only limited objectives' (1965).

If their conclusion can be supported, then the major effort Negroes have invested in the past 20 years has been in the wrong direction and the major pillar of their hope is a pillar of sand. My own instinct is that these views are essentially erroneous, but they must be seriously examined.

The need for a penetrating massive scientific study of this subject cannot be overstated. Lipset in 1957 asserted that a limitation in focus in political sociology has resulted in a failure of much contemporary research to consider a number of significant theoretical questions. The time is short for social science to illuminate this critically important area. If the main thrust of Negro effort has been, and remains, substantially irrelevant, we may be facing an agonizing crisis of tactical theory.

The third area for study concerns psychological and ideological changes in Negroes. It is fashionable now to be pessimistic. Undeniably, the freedom movement has encountered setbacks. Yet I still believe there are significant aspects of progress.

Negroes today are experiencing an inner transformation that is liberating them from ideological dependence on the white majority. What has penetrated substantially all strata of Negro life is the revolutionary idea that the philosophy and morals of the dominant white society are not holy or sacred but in all too many respects are degenerate and profane.

Negroes have been oppressed for centuries not merely by bonds of economic and political servitude. The worst aspect of their oppression was their inability to question and defy the fundamental precepts of the larger society. Negroes have been loath in the past to hurl any fundamental challenges because they were coerced and conditioned into thinking within the context of the dominant white ideology. This is changing and new radical trends are appearing in Negro thought. I use radical in its broad sense to refer to reaching into roots.

Ten years of struggle have sensitized and opened the Negro's eyes to reaching. For the first time in their history, Negroes have become aware of the deeper causes for the crudity and cruelty that governed white society's responses to their needs. They discovered that their plight was not a consequence of superficial prejudice but was systemic.

The slashing blows of backlash and frontlash have hurt the Negro, but they have also awakened him and revealed the nature of the oppressor. To lose illusions is to gain truth. Negroes have grown wiser and more mature and they are hearing more clearly those who are raising fundamental questions about our society whether the critics be Negro or white. When this process of awareness and independence crystallizes, every rebuke, every evasion, become hammer blows on the wedge that splits the Negro from the larger society.

Social science is needed to explain where this development is going to take us. Are we moving away, not from integration, but from the society which made it a problem in the first place? How deep and at what rate of speed is this process occurring? These are some vital questions to be answered if we are to have a clear sense of our direction.

We know we haven't found the answers to all forms of social change. We know, however, that we did find some answers. We have achieved and we are confident. We also know we are confronted now with far greater complexities and we have not yet discovered all the theory we need.

And may I say together, we must solve the problems right here in America. As I have said time and time again, Negroes still have faith in America. Black people still have faith in a dream that we will all live together as brothers in this country of plenty one day.

But I was distressed when I read in the New York Times of Aug. 31, 1967; that a sociologist from Michigan State University, the outgoing president of the American Sociological Society, stated in San Francisco that Negroes should be given a chance to find an all Negro community in South America: 'that the valleys of the Andes Mountains would be an ideal place for American Negroes to build a second Israel.' He further declared that 'The United States Government should negotiate for a remote but fertile land in Equador, Peru or Bolivia for this relocation.'

I feel that it is rather absurd and appalling that a leading social scientist today would suggest to black people, that after all these years of suffering an exploitation as well as investment in the American dream, that we should turn around and run at this point in history. I say that we will not run! Professor Loomis even compared the relocation task of the Negro to the relocation task of the Jews in Israel. The Jews were made exiles. They did not choose to abandon Europe, they were driven out. Furthermore, Israel has a deep tradition, and Biblical roots for Jews. The Wailing Wall is a good example of these roots. They also had significant financial aid from the United States for the relocation and rebuilding effort. What tradition does the Andes, especially the valley of the Andes Mountains, have for Negroes?

And I assert at this time that once again we must reaffirm our belief in building a democratic society, in which blacks and whites can live together as brothers, where we will all come to see that integration is not a problem, but an opportunity to participate in the beauty of diversity.

The problem is deep. It is gigantic in extent, and chaotic in detail. And I do not believe that it will be solved until there is a kind of cosmic discontent enlarging in the bosoms of people of good will all over this nation.

There are certain technical words in every academic discipline which soon become stereotypes and even clichés. Every academic discipline has its technical nomenclature. You who are in the field of psychology have given us a great word. It is the word maladjusted. This word is probably used more than any other word in psychology. It is a good word; certainly it is good that in dealing with what the word implies you are declaring that destructive maladjustment should be destroyed. You are saying that all must seek the well-adjusted life in order to avoid neurotic and schizophrenic personalities.

But on the other hand, I am sure that we will recognize that there are some things in our society, some things in our world, to which we should never be adjusted. There are some things concerning which we must always be maladjusted if we are to be people of good will. We must never adjust ourselves to racial discrimination and racial segregation. We must never adjust ourselves to religious bigotry. We must never adjust ourselves to economic conditions that take necessities from the many to give luxuries to the few. We must never adjust ourselves to the madness of militarism, and the self-defeating effects of physical violence.

In a day when Sputniks, Explorers and Geminies are dashing through outer space, when guided ballistic missiles are carving highways of death through the stratosphere, no nation can finally win a war. It is no longer a choice between violence and nonviolence, it is either nonviolence or nonexistence. As President Kennedy declared, 'Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind.' And so the alternative to disarmament, the alternative to a suspension in the development and use of nuclear weapons, the alternative to strengthening the United Nations and eventually disarming the whole world, may well be a civilization plunged into the abyss of annihilation. Our earthly habitat will be transformed into an inferno that even Dante could not envision.

Creative maladjustment.

Thus, it may well be that our world is in dire need of a new organization, The International Association for the Advancement of Creative Maladjustment. Men and women should be as maladjusted as the prophet Amos, who in the midst of the injustices of his day, could cry out in words that echo across the centuries, 'Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream'; or as maladjusted as Abraham Lincoln, who in the midst of his vacillations finally came to see that this nation could not survive half slave and half free; or as maladjusted as Thomas Jefferson, who in the midst of an age amazingly adjusted to slavery, could scratch across the pages of history, words lifted to cosmic proportions, 'We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. And that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' And through such creative maladjustment, we may be able to emerge from the bleak and desolate midnight of man's inhumanity to man, into the bright and glittering daybreak of freedom and justice.

I have not lost hope. I must confess that these have been very difficult days for me personally. And these have been difficult days for every civil rights leader, for every lover of justice and peace.

(Copyright 1967 by Martin Luther King Jr. Copyright renewed 1994 by Coretta Scott King. Reprinted by permission by the heirs to the estate of Martin Luther King, Jr., care of Writers' House as agents for the proprietors.)

[hisourart-blog]

Anti-genre

New Post has been published on https://hisour.com/art/anti-genre/

Anti-genre

The etymology of the term anti-genre borrows its semantic form the terms anti- meaning against and genre, (French "kind," related to the English "gender") A genre may be defined “only by those of its charac­ teristics that have differentiating value,” as a bundle of distinctive traits defined in opposition to other such bundles, thus receiving its value from its place within a generic system of oppositions. The elementary traits which make up a genre may enter into the composition of any number of other genres and a series of genres may have several traits in common. The anti-genre of discursive systems have not been studied in the same way or to the same degree as the genre of languages, but the number of such traits in any system must be relatively small when compared to the essentially infinite field of discursive variations. The distinctive traits constitutive of genres vary from one discursive tradition to another, as will the set of genres they combine to create. Anti-genre is a new group formed with the purpose of connecting who don’t fall into typical “genre” fiction categories. Anti-genre don’t fall into other popular genre categories. They not only entertain, they also challenge us by making a statement about the world we live in. [pt_view id="53c7ae3stn"] Anti-genre is a self-descriptive label attributed to any artistic style devoid of genre. This lack of genre-status can either be the result of: (1) an active attempt to evade categorization (transcend all genres), (2) conscious negation of the ethos of its medium (unlearning of history), (3) an active and conscious negation of itself. The anti-genre is not simply an assault on tradition (previous artistic styles), for every anti-thesis in history would then fall under this title. The anti-genre, rather implies a more direct and nihilistic attack on the foundations of its medium. The anti-genre is in a perpetual state of evasion both from external taxonomy, but also from itself. The artistic movement known as Dada is likely the best example of the anti-genre, although the Dada manifestos of Hugo Ball and Tristan Tzara never use the term 'anti-genre' to describe Dada, DADA DOES NOT MEAN ANYTHING. Every man must shout: there is great destructive, negative work to be done. To sweep, to clean. Dada means nothing... Thought is produced in the mouth. Each genre will be distinguished from every other genre by at least one trait, but no single trait will distinguish a genre from all other genres. Genre suffers from the same ills of any classification system. Genre is to be reassessed and scrutinized and to weigh works on their unique merit. It has been suggested that genres resonate with people because of the familiarity, the shorthand communication, as well as the tendency of genres to shift with public mores and to reflect the zeitgeist. While the genre of storytelling has been relegated as lesser form of art because of the heavily borrowed nature of the conventions, admiration has grown. Proponents argue that the genius of an effective genre piece is in the variation, recombination, and evolution of the codes. Anti-genre Music: The best example of the anti-genre in music is John Cage's 1952 composition 4′33″, in which the entire performance consists of four and a half minutes of utter silence. The musicians are instructed not to play their instruments. All the audience can hear is the sound of themselves. In this famous and controversial piece, John Cage presents silence as the antithesis of music. Thus, the absence of all audible content becomes music's anti-genre. There are, however other examples. If music is the artistic arrangement of sound, then the non-artistic arrangement of sound might be a suitable candidate for musical-negation. Non-music becomes noise, rather than artful melody and rhythm. Examples of noise music range from guitar-based feedback recordings and live performances (The Melvins, Nine Inch Nails, Jimi Hendrix) to the screeching sounds of Screamo, Grindcore, industrial music or contemporary dance electronic styles like Gabber, Terrorcore, Breakcore, Glitch, etc. Indeed, the entire ethos of the Punk subculture was based on nihilism, which by its very nature seeks category annihilation. Examples in Literature: The anti-genre, in literature, comes into being in particular during the mid to late 19th century. Both Fyodor Dostoyevsky's 1864 novel Notes from Underground, with his introduction of the anti-hero (referred to as the Underground Man) as well as Friedrich Nietzsche's The Antichrist published in 1895, represent early works in the tradition. For Dostoyevsky's underground man, all the virtues of the traditional protagonist (the hero) are turned upside down. Rather than courageous he is weak and complains of both physical pain as well as deeper (more existential) angst. Rather than altruism and chivalry he feels vengeance and spite towards others. Dostoyevsky's underground man introduces to western literature the archetype of the anti-hero. His early work also attacks the positivists of the Enlightenment era, thereby strengthening the case against utopian optimism. The introduction of the anti-hero combined with his dystopian proposal, represent more of a soft anti-genre status rather than the more technical definition of the term. For Nietzsche, the task of overcoming history required a grand declaration of war. His enemies were many: In the last sane year of his life he was able to complete two final texts, Twilight of the Idols and The Anti-Christ. More technical examples of the anti-genre in literature might include meta-fiction or aleatoricism, but there is lack of contemporary scholarship on the topic to resolve this matter definitively. Examples in Computer Science: The most technical description of the paradox of the anti-genre can be found in computer science. In computer programming an infinite loop is often an un-intended result (bug) of circular self-reference in the program code. For example, the Dada artist's eternal maxim declares, Dada had only one rule: Never follow any rules. If we (hypothetically) run this maxim through a recursive computer algorithm, it would cause program error. For, if Dada does not obey this rule then Dada would be free to follow any rules (a direct refutation of this maxim), but if it obeys this maxim then there is at least one rule which it is following (a contradiction). In the language of computer programming this is fatal (it prevents an exit condition from being met) but for the artist this might be the ultimate goal of his/her art. Hard versus Soft: The technical definition of anti-genre (hard version) is not merely art that insults its predecessors. The hard version is more active in its flight from meaning. It is self-consciously involved in the process of not just breaking with tradition but undoing the entire framework that distinguishes the different genre categories in that medium. Silence in place of music and the blank canvas in place of paint, are two obvious examples of this. The soft version however, is a little harder to nail down. The definition of a soft anti-genre might include art intentionally dispensing with conventions of its medium or violently breaking with tradition by subversion, vandalism-art, irrationality, self-defeat or other strategies in a rebellious spirit. The problem with this lighter version of anti-genre is that all artistic movements by definition represent a decisive break with the traditions that came before them. If not, then they would merely be continuous with their predecessors. This is known as the process of dialectic. First, a thesis is proposed. Then the thesis is rejected by the anti-thesis. This rejection is eventually accepted by the community and a synthesis of thesis and anti-thesis come together to create the new proposal ready for rejection. And so the cycle continues. It is important to emphasize the hard and soft distinction however because there is a tendency in postmodernity to associate negative/rebellious attitudes in artistic movements with formal categories like anti-genre, despite the fact that the anti-genre, in its hard version, has a much more technical definition. Paradox of the Anti-Genre: Is the anti-genre itself a genre? This poses a problem. For, if it is a genre, then it does not exist but if it is not a genre then no discussion of it as a coherent entity can take place. The anti-genre therefore suffers from an identity crisis. Of course, nothing would make the anti-genre more happy than to deny its own existence. By referencing a negation of itself in its own definition, anti-genre achieves a contradictory truth status (both true and false at the same time). This happens any time that the definition of the word in question (or interpretation of the sentence in question) is a denial of its own meaning. For example, The statement in this box is false. When it is true (that it is false) it becomes a negation of itself. It cannot be both true and false at the same time. The anti-genre suffers from this same type of self-annihilation. But, although this might pose a problem for a symbolic logician or software engineer, it poses no problem for the anti-artist. The goal of the artist working in their respective anti-genre is to evade genre-classification. Thus, the inability of their category to hold down a definition becomes an asset rather than a liability. What is the logical conclusion of an artistic movement that is essentially suicidal? After annihilating everything in their path, every artistic style and movement that had come before them, every political attitude and social value, the DaDa artist eventually had nothing left to consume and so retired to a life of seclusion and chess. Likewise, and for all of his proselytizing (calling for a complete transvaluation of all human values), Nietzsche ended his life deep inside a state of mental illness. And so it is not uncommon to hear writers lament that the only cure for history is a good psychiatrist and a lot of prescription medicine.