Grey Matter

I know a few people are anxious to see a transcript of my Sunday morning interview on Victorian Community Radio, 3-VCR. I hope to get permission to post a recording of the interview on my website, but until then, a transcript will have to suffice. Matthew Collins made me feel right at home during the interview. I'd given him drafts of a number of chapters from my forthcoming book. You'll see from the interview that he'd obviously taken some time to understand them.

Matthew: This morning we welcome Virgil Keys to Religion, Respect and Ridicule. He regards himself as a lifelong student of Fictionology. Virgil, not too many people are familiar with Fictionology. Tell us a little about it.

Virgil: Thanks for inviting me, Matthew. Fictionology is a religion that embraces and transcends almost every other known religion. A true Fictionologist chooses which Fictions to believe and holds to them, drawing meaning, instruction, moral guidance, entertainment and comfort from them. It taps into the essence of what makes us human: stories. It's the foundation of human society, making sense of our existence and giving purpose to these collections of organic molecules that we call bodies. Fictionology is the single unifying concept that gives meaning to life.

Matthew: Those are extraordinary claims, Virgil. Does it worry you that other religions have made similar unifying claims?

Virgil: No. In fact Fictionology accepts those claims without reservation, and yet still embraces its own broader claim. Fictionology is a meta-religion, but at the same time is itself a religion. In that sense, it even encompasses itself, but let's avoid the more abstract concepts for the moment.

Matthew: Definitely. I think my brain just turned inside-out. What does Fictionology mean to the average person?

Virgil: It means peace of mind, understanding who you are in this chaotic universe, and making sense of how people behave. It means having access to role-models, mentors and companions in your journey. It broadens your outlook, makes you think outside the box, exposes you to new paradigms, and frees you from artificially constrained thought patterns.

Matthew: So far, you haven't said a lot about what Fictionologists actually believe. Is there some secrecy?

Virgil: Far from it, Matthew. The problem with trying to say what Fictionologists believe is there are too many widely varying beliefs. Adherents of Fictionology are free to choose their Fictions. The most important parts of Fictionology lie not in what you believe, but how you believe. It's a difficult topic and one that I don't think we can do justice to in the space of one interview.

I'd love to be able to give you and your listeners a five minute "fix" that could transform your lives, but it can't be done. That's why I'm putting so much time and effort into my book.

Matthew: Let's talk about your book for a couple of minutes. I hear it's been generating a lot of interest.

Virgil: Indeed it has, Matthew. Since I published that brief Fictionology FAQ on my journal, I've been stunned by the flood of emails. I'm not sure that I'll be able to answer them all personally. I figure the best thing I can do is complete the book.

Matthew: Yes. Thanks for the draft chapters you sent me last week. In chapter 4, I found your descriptions of the way Fictionology was changing people's lives very moving. It's been a running theme here on Religion, Respect and Ridicule that many forms of religion can have an extremely negative impact on individuals. Your examples present Fictionology in a very positive light. Is this realistic?

Virgil: It's true, most of the stories I've included are of positive life experiences. I've tried to present a cross section of Fictionological life without bias. My experience in studying Fictionology shows that the stories are, on the whole, good news stories. People aren't perfect and they can hurt one another very easily, but Fictionology minimizes the effects of these imperfections. Life is a storm of harsh uncaring physical reality with tiny shelters of communication and support. Sharing a Fiction opens up a channel of communication between people, allowing them to be really human. For most people, this is a positive rewarding experience.

Matthew: But you acknowledge that some people try Fictionology and then give it up?

Virgil: Fictionology is not for everyone. It requires imagination, and sadly, there are people who show a staggering lack of imagination. There are people who just can't get much out of reading a book.

Even imaginative people can have difficulties with Fictionology. In chapter 7, one I'm currently working on, I tell of my encounter with a lapsed Fictionologist named Barry. Barry had some bad experiences in a Sailor Moon Fiction group which left him bitter and dejected. Interestingly, he still regards his time in the group as the most connecting and fulfilling experience in his life, but he blames himself for lacking imagination: he couldn't imagine himself not actually being Sailor Mercury. It caused friction within the group and also ruined his promotional prospects as a taxation auditor. The only way he could cope was to cut himself off from Fictionology altogether.

Matthew: You make a point in chapter 2 about problems that arise when people try to live out the lives of their chosen Fictional characters.

Virgil: Yes, Matthew. It's a common mistake made by people who haven't understood Fictionology. Being in a role-playing group doesn't make you a Fictionologist. It's of paramount importance that you understand your own identity. You are one person. You cannot be anyone else whether you believe they exist or not. Role playing does have its uses in Fictionology as an aid to understanding your chosen Fiction, but at the end of the day, you are yourself.

We see this exhibited even in Naive Fictionology. Take, for example, the WWJD meme in Christianity. Its adherents try to base their decisions on the question, "What Would Jesus Do?" This is role-playing without any hint of a suggestion that the devotee could think of themselves as Jesus.

Matthew: So you'd conclude that Barry's problem with Fictionology amounts to a lack of understanding.

Virgil: That, and some unresolved identity issues. Yes.

Matthew: You said that Fictionology is not for everyone. Is there any hope for these people?

Virgil: There will always be those who are condemned to misunderstand life, just as there are people who can never detect sarcasm. I dream of a world of understanding, where everyone embraces their own Fictions while allowing others to have theirs. Most people are intelligent and imaginative enough to be a part of this world. Some will never be.

Matthew: I'm afraid that's all we have time for this morning. Thanks for coming in, Virgil.

Virgil: My pleasure, Matthew.

Matthew: Don't forget to look for Virgil's book, Fictionology: A Panacea for the Information Age (Part 1) when it's released later this year. Until then, I'll keep struggling to untangle my own Fictions.

PABAAH (Patriotic Americans Boycotting Anti-American Hollywood) win my boundless admiration for raising their flag over Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith. Sure, try to get everyone upset about a movie that allegorically criticises GWB's war. How anti-American can it get?

Lucas wrote his story (and the dialogue too) years ago based on his observation of a recurring political pattern. He had the Vietnam war in mind. That it so closely matches GWB's modus operandi, his black/white "for us or against us" polarization, his war initiated on false assertions of danger, should have made them engage their brains first. Was Lucas so prescient that he could criticise the Bush administration for what he knew they would do? Or, dare we consider that it is anti-American to tell of the dangers of absolutism?

If the black helmet fits, wear it.

Star Wars Episode III.

Surreal scenery. Scintillating cities. Sensational stunts.

Script sucked.

See spoiler.

In years of happy ever after
Even geese could dream
Of singing songs of light and laughter,
So she hatched her scheme.

She raised her voice in wacky wit
And wondered if some day
She'd ditch this gold-egg-gig and split,
Forgoing steady pay.

But Jack was gentle, Jack was safe,
And jobs like hers were rare.
(That years of choking eggs could chafe,
Her chum seemed unaware.)

The more she sang the less he listened;
Little would he hear,
Contented that the gold still glistened,
Growing year by year.

And so she knew her dreams were dead--
Her ditties: bland and trite.
The goose, too bored to leave her bed,
Then bade the world good night.

I've just had a message from Toxic to say that the OEDILF server is down at the moment. Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible.

Update: We're up and running again with a new server power supply. Thanks Toxic.

I was reading a satirical article in the Swift Report about Americans being scared of activist judges. Within the article there was a link to an Agape Press article (which was not so much news as a big plug for a book, but that's nothing new in any news source). Within that delightful piece of "Reliable News from a Christian Source" we read the following quote:

Another part of the strategy the conservative activist recommends is something she calls "starving" the courts; that is, limiting their power by limiting their money. "Now, we can't cut the salaries of the judges," she explains, "but we certainly can cut their budgets and cut off some of these perks, like traveling to foreign conferences where they get a lot of bad ideas about foreign law." [Emphasis mine]

Was there ever a clearer statement of the xenophobic undercurrent of the religious right? The other issues about jurisdiction over "the Pledge of Allegiance, the Ten Commandments, the definition of marriage, and the Boy Scouts" are just more of their program to limit freedom to their own definition of it--freedom for everybody to be Christian and to equate being American with being Christian. One could describe those as an ultra-conservative reluctance to change and an attempt to cling to the perception of a Christian society. It's the open denigration of "foreign" stuff that shows Schlafly's real fear and ignorance. Parody can't compete with these public displays of bigotry. Maybe slapstick would be a better tool.

A full night of sleep has cleared my head and allowed me to review the events of last night. It is apparent to me now that the theatre evacuation was no minor security scare or safety problem. It was clearly one of the slickest and most efficient cover-ups in the history of black helicopters. It would have been impossible to conduct without advanced mind control, well beyond the current state of human technology.

Here are the clues that led me to a greater understanding of what had been done:

1. SonOfVirge commented as we left the theatre that time had passed very quickly since we entered. He was surprised at the lateness of the hour. This observation, coming from a teenager for whom several hours at a screen are credited as "just a few minutes", should have told me that something unusual was happening.

2. There was a complete absence of anxiety in the crowd. The crowd's phlegmatic uncritical acceptance of the need to evacuate, together with my own uncharacteristic self-censored curiosity should have not only been ringing alarm bells, it should have had Mike Oldfield's greatest hit on track-repeat.

3. Most importantly, the evacuation served to interrupt my viewing of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The parallels between real life events and elements of the plot should have been a giveaway. The only thing that could have stopped me seeing the connection last night is mind-control.

I guess they didn't count on any of the victims wearing a tinfoil hat to bed. I'll tell more of my revelation later. Right now I have to go and see my private brain-care specialist.

We must have been close to half way through the movie when it happened. The screen went completely dark; the soundtrack stopped; we waited with bated breath for a resumption. This had to be a silly cinematic mind game, didn't it?

It happened at a tense moment in the plot. I expected to hear Stephen Fry as the Guide telling us that this break in continuity had been inserted in order to reduce nervous tension--to reassure us that Trillian would escape unharmed.

I was wrong.

The movie had stopped. Mutterings arose from the audience. Finally a theatre attendant's voice told us to evacuate the theatre complex and the shopping centre. We could retain our ticket stubs and present them to the box office for a refund later.

I still don't know what happened to cause the evacuation. Apart from police directing crowds and a general quiet exodus of patrons from the theatres and restaurants, I saw nothing unusual. There were no fire engines, no police marksmen in padded vests, no helicopters circling overhead, no news crews, no trembling weeping victims being comforted or carried off on stretchers, no palls of smoke, twisted metal, gas masks, not even a flashing light. In short, it lacked all of the drama one would normally associate with a sudden evacuation of a public building. How tediously suburban!

I thought about going to ask one of the police officers, but immediately realised it would be more responsible to exit the scene quickly and let them do their jobs.

There's nothing on the newspaper sites. Yet.

I guess we'll get to see HHGG some other time. *yawn*

What is Fictionology?

Fictionology is a religion above all other religions. It both embraces and transcends almost every other known religion. A true Fictionologist chooses which Fictions to believe and holds to them, drawing meaning, instruction, moral guidance, entertainment and comfort from them.

What is Naive Fictionology?

Most adherents of traditional religions refuse to admit that they are actually practising a type of Fictionology. We refer to this as Naive Fictionology. It is a much more mentally draining position, and has been shown in scientific tests to consume as much as 90% of an adherent's concentration just in coping with the interplay of simultaneously-held conflicting ideas. Some hold that it is this mental load that prevents Naive Fictionologists from comprehending true Fictionology.

Isn't Fictionology just believing any old crap?

An extremely facile view of Fictionology may lead to that interpretation. However, any mature, intelligent adult with even a rudimentary understanding of philosophy would recognise the wonder of the existence of narrative, the benefits of complete immersion in Fiction, and the edification that comes from exercising a faith. You must learn to think on the next level up from the prescriptive religions you're used to.

Do Fictionologists have churches?

Some do, but you won't always recognize them if you're used to traditional churches. Some meet regularly in small groups outside movie theatres. Some gather in members' homes to read, watch videos or role play. Some dress up and meet in dark noisy clubs. It depends on the Fiction selection of the group.

What are the benefits of Fictionology?

Peace of mind. Understanding. Significance. Prosperity. Friendship. Confidence. True humanity. (Not necessarily all at the same time and not necessarily just for you.)

Can I just choose my favorite book and believe it?

You can, but that won't grant you all the benefits of Fictionology. You need to know the way to apply Real Fiction to your ways of thinking.

How can I become a Fictionologist?

Send me an email and I'll add you to the growing list of people waiting to purchase my new book "Fictionology: A Panacea for the Information Age (Part 1)"

[From Pharyngula: It sounds so absurd, it might just be real…] Why oh why oh why must reporters pretend that all Fictionologists believe the same things? Read this pathetic mischaracterization in The Onion. And they quote a plastic surgeon saying:

"Sure, it's total bullshit," Jurgenson added. "But that's Fictionology. Praise Batman!"

That's disgusting! How can they call that fair and balanced reporting?!? Of course they only interview the Fictionology extremists--the Batman-worshippers, the big-budget Hollywood plastic-fiction Ellroyites--and make out that those are the views of the whole religion. By Zaphod, that makes me mad. People like Jurgenson give Fictionology a bad name.

Talk to any Rational Fictionologist and you'll understand that what we have is a sensible and logical faith. Fiction is only "pretend" while it's forming in the mind of an Author. Once it's published, it's real. (BTW, retcon is for the faithless hacks who lack the imagination to see the potential truth of Real Fiction.)

It's clear that we Rational Fictionologists need to do a better job of promoting our beliefs.