Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>You once interestingly pointed out the parallel
> between a devotional practice which makes sense of the holy ghost and a
> social practice which makes sense of (what seems equally odd to me)
> "self-expression."
Miles's post was rather a long time ago, and I didn't paraphrase it very precisely. Here it is:
--------
Subject: [lbo] school uniforms (was: Ehrenreich responds to BDL) Sun, 24 Aug 2003 10:58:56
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, Carrol Cox wrote:
> I'm asking for an explanation
> more than an argument, actually, since I
> really don't have the slightest clue
> what "individuality" (as something
> to express) can possibly mean. It seems
> to me to be an advertising cliche.
C's perplexed response here is like that of a non-Catholic trying to make sense of the Holy Ghost. The idea of "expressing your individuality" is important in our culture simply because we use the idea and make it important. I think C's getting stuck here because he thinks it refers to something. If you participate in the Catholic religion, you'll eventually "get" the idea of the Holy Ghost; it doesn't require an empirically verified referent. --And just so with expressing individuality.- Miles
----
Perhaps the Reichian idea of a vague energy fluid being dammed in one pipe (sexuality) then flowing into another pipe (religion) is the same sort of thing as "holy ghost" and "expressing your individuality." A good deal of the dominating ideology at a given time is expressed (when explicitly expressed at all) in such odd metaphors.
Carrol