Non-intentional rumination

In an era in which sound-bytes prevail, thinking is not fashionable.

It's a feature of all clichezist the usage of sound-bytes and quotes for any situation in life. Any situation. It can be better observed on the internet, either in the comments of a news website, or in the comments of a video on YouTube, or even in the virtual clichezism college, the Facebook.

The need of feeling included in this order may perhaps be explained by the necessity of self-assurance plus the inferiority feelings face to the clichezists, that can be pass an image that they are cult people, that they have strong personality and that have opinion. They may impress only two types of people: the obtuse and themselves when the risk of losing an argumentation is imminent. Losing an argumentation is humiliating, they have to win all, they have to have the last word, always. And these are argumentations that are not about any intelligent issue, even because those that may sound intelligent are nothing but a “repente* of cliches”, that is, it's redundant and a clear egos war.

The problem of the clichezism is that it goes besides the difficulty of having a conversation that doesn't end up in the so-called “repente of cliches” or talking to a “cliche player” that will flow the conversation to a foreseeable end. It reflects the lack of critical sense of the person and his functional illiteracy. The clichezist doesn't think, doesn't reflect, doesn't contest the absolute truths of certain quotes. Cliches are used as shut-up arguments and its misunderstanding makes the clichezist to reproduce some quotes in absurd moments, showing that he has no idea of what he's talking about and that he isn't able to talk by himself.

If all the books of philosophy and psychology of the world were burned, jointly with all its digital copies, the clichezists would crumple. Who's would they copy sound-bytes and quotes? Would they be quiet once that don't have any ammunition? Would it occur a process of natural selection in which only the non-clichezists would survive and the clichezists would have to abandon the clichezism having to finally think by their own?

The greatest philosophers and literature writers had to think a lot, to observe, to reflect for then, be able to write their books that would become high level students' obligatory reading. They haven't underestimate their common sense and took a worthy advantage of all the the knowledge they accumulated throughout the years. The greatest thinkers haven't expected to become “ruminants” that chew the knowledge, swallow it, chew again until it be ready, compacted in a sound-byte.

Perhaps the functional illiteracy promotes the clichezism, perhaps the clichezism promotes the functional illiteracy. Perhaps both promote themselves. Such philosophers and writers books are an invitation to reflection, the the expansion of the horizons but for them to understood in its essence, it's necessary to be willing to do it. They save us to start from zero because we can't comprehend the world thinking that life can be summed up as our particular universe, besides it is a complementary reading for those who want to get closer to the reality of what he's studying.

The clichezism preaches the superficiality of the knowledge. What's the use of saying a Freud's, Nietzsche's, Lispector's quote or any other if the person doesn't understand what they mean? What's the use reading a whole book if the functional illiteracy and the fondness for clichezism block its comprehension? Reading is not a synonym of comprehending. First of all, it's necessary to live the situation for better understand it and to be critical and have some trustworthy foundation.

The clichezists fool themselves with numbers and affirmations of people they consider more intelligent than them when, in fact, they are nothing but pseudo-intellectuals clichezists. From the moment the individual stop despising his common sense, develops a critical sense independent from his passions and logic and stop seeing the self-criticism as a “certificate of lack of self-confidence” (because we are not perfect human beings even the police themselves the more for us not to be), we will understand why the clichezism if a bad order. The clichezism blocks, reprehends the free and independent thinking, it's aggressive and offensive due to the defensive behavior of its followers, and ties the individual in a universe of fallacies and utopias, perpetuating the ignorance.

*Repente is a musical challenge in which two poets have to create rhymed verses offhand. It's more popular in the Northeast of Brazil. (example)

The clichezist order

What would it be of the clichezists if all the philosophy and psychology books of the world were burned? Who's would they copy soundbites?

Lately it hasn't been easy to have a conversation with anyone not closer besides the formalities. Not necessarily because they are empty and aliened and manipulable, but mainly because of the foreseeability of the answers plus an arrogant and inflexible behavior. Recently, the phenomenon of the clichezism has becoming more perceptible, specially on the internet, but it doesn't mean that outside it things are very different.

We can start talking about bullying. What's bullying? Some years ago this English word was unknown in Brazil for several people, even though anyone who had already seen an American film or TV series once in a lifetime, had seen a scene of a kid or teen physically stronger and surrounded by thugs to hit and ridicule another weaker and reclusive one. It was physical aggression and public humiliation: only this. But we were wrong because bullying is anything that displeases or offends and that may raise difficulties in the social relations of the victim but... is it life, specially the adult life, full of people concerned in not hurting people's feelings?

The clichezist order is also strongly present in politics. Talking about politics in Brazil still disgusts many people, but the fewer who talk about it, many of them hardly can't do it without hanging to unrestrained passions and cliches. There's a true war between the right-wing and left-wing militants. Corruption denunciations are common and done to blacken the political rival and give demagogy speeches. As it seems to be impossible to exist a serious and impartial press in Brazil, boycotts and criticisms to TV shows and tendentious soap-operas are suggested, besides that the numbers 13 and 45 are as terrible as the Nazi swastica.

The politically correct is one of the marks of the clichezist order. Words that were used for decades were replaced by others with more complex and fancy names. It was bullying. Historically repressed groups as women, black people, and homosexuals have been – finally – achieving some respect in the last years, but it seems that this respect is imposed by quotas and the psychology of the fault. If a homosexual says he is proud of being homosexual, claps to him, he overcame the prejudice. If a straight man says the is proud of being straight, throw stones against this homophobic evangelist. If a black man dresses a “100% black” t-shirt, claps to him, he overcame the prejudice. If a white man says he is proud of his color or his European ancestry, throw stones against this Nazi racist.

There's a tendency, a subtle dictatorship that promotes the homogenization of the philosophies and ideologies. We all know that perfection doesn't exist, but the human mistake it isn't very well accepted. The free thinking and the own opinion are stimulated... Teorically, because in real life, if you raise a opinion contrary to the clichezist order, they reply with aggression. The more impolite say offensive words. The higher educated one, specially the “intellectuals”, delight in ridiculing with sarcasm. Language experts corrects your orthography and punctuation according to the standard language rules. Adverbs may agree with researches and studies. The clichezists of the Geography and Statistic Institute want numbers: “majority, minority, many, few: who they are? I want numbers!”

Review your values, the argumentative clichezists anti-religious want to ridicule your faith and repudiate anything that has a religious background: “why is promiscuity bad, why is raping bad, why having sex in public squares is bad, why being a hypocrite is bad? Don't you know the answers? Where's your God now?”

And the clichezism on Facebook not only recycles classical cliches, as well as it reaffirms the obvious and sells utopias of a world where everybody is immaculate, perfect, wise and full of causes for us to worry about. Obviously every Facebook's perfect human being respects the elderly, the women, the gays, the black people, the children, the nature, the animals, God and all the religions. “It's an absurd that a soccer player receives millions of euros to kick a ball and what about the corruption, what about the violence, what about starvation in Africa, what about education, what about the hospitals? I want chu, I want cha, I want to complain about the success of popular music while the world is dying. What the world will think about Brazil, oh my God, Valesca has a song that says 'take my pussy and suck it', oh my God, wake up to corruption, Brazil, that's why this country doesn't go ahead, everybody's concerned in watching Big Brother”...

Thanks to the clichezist order, people feel the necessity of converting, of being part of this movement for them to feel included in a group that they hate so much. You can't be an ambulant metamorphosis, your opinions must be equal to the clichezist's because theirs are right and absolute. Have a opinion about everything, everything! And as it is impossible, adopt the clichezism. Have a learned by heart saying for any situation in life, like an intelligent humor page on Facebook. Read two hours of synopsis on the bookstore website and have argues won by the rest of the month. Clichezists get satisfied with superficial arguments and ideas because their knowledge is also superficial. It isn't necessary catching the essence of the books, the less reading them because soundbites and the writers thought and expressed themselves by you. With clichezism, you can disguise you necessity of self-affirmation through phrases with chewed philosophies. You don't need to think. Just take part of it.

Delicious nostalgia

It comes and it goes like the waves of the sea, it goes up and it goes down like the stock exchange actions. There are days when everything goes right, day when everything goes wrong, there are days of apathy, days of uprising face to small things, nights of loneliness and despair and nights when the joy recycles itself.

Every one lives his own particular universe in a better convenient way for him. Despite of the attempt of uniforming the ideologies and lifestyle, people are still free to imagine. Memories, even they can seem worthless to some closer of further people, they are theirs, they are unique, nontransferable.

And not only what you lived, as well as what you think and feel. People can really try to imagine what you feel when you share some of these emotions and memories, but they'll never get closer. First of all, because they haven't lived the sensation you described; second of all, where you see magic, they can see ordinary things; third of all, you have no way to know due to the impenetrability of the souls.

But getting closer is a half of this. Identifing yourself in some parts too. It is like smelling a perfume that can please to you and bring you back to good memories at the same time it makes another one to have a headache. Or understanding the deepness of a painting while one sees only scratches. And it can be only scratches, perhaps the painter was so pissed off due to the non-recognized work that he decided to scratch because it is “art noveau” – or it was or it will be one day. The art admirer interprets the world according to the window of his eyes, not as people say him to do. People give their own value to the things. Imposing is useless. Contesting too. Then, in these cases, you'd better artificialize expressions and reactions.

Music... oh music. Able to promote an spectacle of synesthesia and awake memories and sensations of years, decades ago. It is listening “Crying in the Rain” and remember a cold dawn, the lights of the poles still on and everybody sleeping on a mattress upon the living room floor. It is listening to “She Drives Me Crazy” and reminding the time you jumped on your younger brother's belly. It is listening “Total Ellipse of the Heart” and remember that in that time the naive people of your street got impressed about a Saint John balloon burning in the sky – would it be an UFO?

Old songs bring back the good sensations, they bring back that one you was, less experienced, but more purer and dreamer. And when you look back in the past, it is like the life was more colorful. Colors fade away until it remains only black, white and gray while we don't meet the death in the total blackout or during the darkness of the indifference. But not only because of this, it seems like people were more glad, simple and spontaneous, different from the desperate people of today concerned in taking part of a dictatorship that promises happiness but that only makes them feel more internally unhappy, despite of the yellow smiles and the vapor tears being convincing to prove the opposite.

Music have this power of awaking the delicious nostalgia that make you want to share, but it is a little disappointing when you do it and the feedback is less effusive. This is not a question of antipathy, but what has a ego-historic value to you, may not have to the other one, anyway. And well, let's accept and enjoy the rich universe of our imagination, of our liberty land. Dreaming is nice, but it would be better to dream in two in a cold and rainy Saturday night, listening to the delicious songs of Antena 1 remembering the great classics and overeating a pizza without feeling guilty.