The topic of Nihilism of course is central in the Dude saga.
One inevitable question that must be answered is "where to fall on the spectrum of believing in stuff".
On one extreme is Nihilism. On the other may be Walterism. "I have buddies who died face down in the so that we could enjoy this family resteraunt"
In the middle is the Dude. Who believes shit but mostly just "occupies various administration buildings and smokes a lot of Thai Stick".
So much of the explanation of the central tenants IMO amounts to finding the appropriate level of belief.
To strike balance between drawing lines in the sand and being a nihilist.
Carrying some water but not breaking your back in the process.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-sYDf0YGv4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8UTMl3BK80
No belief or all belief.
For a psychologist he's hitting the extremes. I'd like to see the entire lecture to see if he's trying to bring his students to a middle ground.
Quote from: Rev Beach Bum on June 19, 2018, 12:51:53 PM
No belief or all belief.
For a psychologist he's hitting the extremes. I'd like to see the entire lecture to see if he's trying to bring his students to a middle ground.
Well yeah he does.
But defining the extremes is the point.
In the context of TBL I contend that there is a strand that positions the Nihilists at one extreme and Walter at another with the Dude in the middle.
Another strand is the "manhood" question. Donny at one end being totally emasculated (shut the fuck up Donnie) and Walter defining a cartoonish machoism. Again with the Dude in the middle. He ties the room together.
So the Dude is all things (and nothing). He is a nihilist (hence the Sartre book we see on his shelf Being and Nothingness) but not totally a nihilist.
He is after all one of the authors of the port Huron Statement. He believes in things and more importantly believes in believing in things. But not so much.
He'll show up but he's fine with just sparking some Thai Stick.
He's equally ambivalent about the topic of manhood. He contends that his manhood is essentially a pair of testicles. Johnson?
Which he is in Jeopardy of losing to the nihilists. The Dude defines the middle path and is beset from both extremes.
It all does lead to Jung.
The idea of archetypes.
This has been covered a lot.
I've seen articles in the Dudespaper and elsewhere.
But basically it is in the extremes that we reach a sort of purity that makes these characters archetypes in the Jungian sense.
And it might be relevant to compare the story with the Jungian "hero's journey".
As long as we are doing JP ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHx9i3sQD8Y
I believe this is the entire lecture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_7hCPYgXEk&t=999s
And the most obvious is still Goldilocks and the Three Bears.
Absolutely.
No doubt about it.
See the "Ranger" speech at the beginning.
https://youtu.be/UKEhWZc9M24?t=88
And how he wraps her all up at the end.
https://youtu.be/zgx5x6cyzgo?t=319
It's about finding the just right.
Not to hot and not too cold.