Restoration and Invigoration of the Romantic

In The Romantic Manifesto, Ayn Rand writes about the natural Romantic tendencies of certain children and how as they mature this anti-Romantic society of ours immediately puts them on the defensive. They must either conform or prepare for a fight that they are ill prepared to wage at their level of maturity. I related whole heartedly.

Children look to society as it is presented to them via their parents, siblings, peers, and the media to find who to be and how to be it. Often children will identify with one set of messages over another. When "normal" children were into sports or music, I was into heroes. Comics, Mythology, American Tall Tales, Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, and Indiana Jones. All strong with Romantic themes. I learned about relationships from the old Hollywood musicals my mother loves so much. This was the world I thought was normal. Of course that wasn't the case.

I have no doubt that other juvenile Romantics shared similar interests, but in the end we all come down different paths to the same rallying point as Romantics. When we take whatever our social imprints are into the playground we find that they are not normal, therefore we see ourselves as not normal.

Suppose there is no interest in sports and no innate athletic ability, then if you are an American your social status is immediately second class. If you are British and have not chosen a team to support, then you might as well be an atheist.

Suppose your intellectual strengths lie in the humanities, well, you won't be a science geek. Or let's say your musical tastes aren't't top 40 status. So you fall in with the "alternative crowd" who base their entire sense of self on the music and paraphernalia they consume. What if that's not your identity?

For girls, lets say you are a late bloomer or not immediately attractive? The upper status boys aren't going to sweep you into their league. If you're not into soap operas then you're out of the social loop with the other girls.

For the developing Romantic all these are knock backs. The message clearly received is you are weird, different, and at best interesting. As these children learn their place in society it is as the outsider. They begin to view their perception of mainstream society as representing the normal people and themselves as abnormal. Naturally, they seek to find "their own kind" and if they succeed they will largely congregate together throughout their school years. As a result they may or may not find successes in other available aspects of school like drama or politics because they would rather avoid others.

Some juvenile Romantics give in and join the greater social network within that microcosm that is school. Others may continue consuming their fantasies and become the stereotype sci-fi geek content in his little world but never learning any social skills. And others still may create an identity for themselves based on being different and never actually develop the necessary values associated with Romanticism. The result is being different for difference sake and reveling in that oddness.

Then there's politics. The images associated with the right are the businessman, the redneck, and the born-again Christian. If you do not see yourself as fitting in with these types then you automatically default to the left with the intellectuals, artists, minorities, and the poor. Notice children have no Libertarian Romantics on the menu of images to choose? Where does the developing Romantic have to go?

I always believed that I was destined to be the hero. I was not content to fantasize or pretend. Heroes are not fan boys. Indiana Jones would not wear an Indiana Jones T-shirt. He would wear a suit in town and a leather when out in the world. I did what a young Romantic should do. Emulate the hero until you find your own style.

But there was a problem. The social knock backs of youth become trivial when the wider world opens up after school years are done and the real task of living begins. The social pressures lessen, the variety of people and worldviews widens, and new opportunities for success, failure, validation, and rejection present themselves. Despite this emergence into adult life the old programs are still running.

I once read that people with a poor self-image see themselves as funny looking, awkward, and socially inept. The reason for this is that our sense of self develops as teens when we are funny looking, awkward, and socially inept. The pattern becomes set.

The mind then determines what we can and cannot have from the smorgasbord of life according to this pattern and will do all it can to both facilitate what it believes we are worthy of having and undermining those things "out of our league".

For example, if by some quirk of fate you find yourself joined to a partner that you deep down honestly believe that you do not deserve, then you will unconsciously sabotage the relationship and thus restore the pre-programmed state of how your life "should" be. It's the same principle as when the vast majority of lottery winners loose their multi-millions in a few years. The temperature is changed to match the internal thermostat.

It is important to remember that you are not your mind. Your mind does not care if your heart is happy or sad. It only wants to maintain a stable, familiar, pre-programmed mental state. If this state is left-over nonsense from junior high and high school keeping you from getting what you want, then so be it.

Paul McKenna is his book, I Can Make You Rich, tells of comparing notes of school memories with a friend of his. In maths class McKenna's working class word problems involved buying and selling apples and oranges whereas his upper-class friend's memories were of problems involving the buying and selling companies. One man was imprinted for poverty and the other for wealth.

The same holds true for the young Romantic's socialisation. He is imprinted as an outsider. Of course every person has those experiences as not everyone is in the schoolyard elite. Even the elite are in competition with each other. We all know the feeling of being the unworthy, misunderstood, outside. The real issue is one of degrees.

During my examination of the gothic idiom the great recurring theme was not sorrow, as any might expect, but power. The self-identification is with the powerful "monster" and not the victim. And yet in society we see that the gothic subculture is among the least powerful. Why? Because people work best as part of a team and the larger team tends to wield more power. The outsider persona cripples both Goths and the greater community of Romantics of which they are a natural part.

Power is the means to work ones will in the world. The more power someone has the closer they are to being their true self. As Nietzsche observed, we are driven by the will to power, but most people learn to accept their state of powerlessness.

I do not hold to the notion that power corrupts, it simply allows one's true nature the means to act out without limitations. If the end result is corruption and cruelty, then it was always there and only lacked the power to act on it. But what happens if our juvenile programming prevents us from attaining enough power of expression to achieve our Romantic aspirations?

I have identified seven forms of power: characteristic, physical, social, material, titular, legislative, and time. Underlying all of these is the basic requirement of self-belief. You have to believe in yourself and your worldview in the face of a world you perceive to be against you. Without that self-confidence your power supply will be limited. It is difficult to walk through the world with ease when you're in a state of fear and defensiveness due to an actual or perceived lack of power and efficacy.

There is a creature in Glasgow, and indeed Scotland in general, called a Ned. They are usually underclass or barely working class. There are those among them who have never worked a day in their life and some whose parents haven't either. For some, their availability to work is sorely handicapped by their mental, emotional, and social retardation possibly due to being pre-teen alcoholics killing off those developing brain cells. They are socialised among others like themselves and so know nothing of the world outside their little bubble.

For fun, Neds generally drink, but the greatest past time seems to be abusing others, either physically or verbally. I once knew someone, a fairly average, "normal" guy, who was mocked by Neds because they thought his hair cut resembled someone in a boy band popular at the time, so you can imagine the amount of abuse I have received.

The single greatest difficulty I faced in immigrating to Scotland was the Neds and the general Ned-mentality. Suddenly I was back in junior high, but facing a level of verbal abuse I never experienced as a child growing-up. The messages I received from their taunts were that I was a social outcast with no grasp of reality and at worst a joke. Imagine walking onto a bus and a group of people laugh at you then one says, "get a grip" or the ubiquitous "yeeha" on the street.

It wasn't just the Neds. It seemed that everyone I encountered wanted to make some comment about my appearance. Some negative, some positive, and some people thought that they were being funny (usually with a line that I have heard a million times before). The dominant feeling invoked was "how dare you".

I dress to impress myself, and if someone else is impressed then they are welcome to come along for the ride, but I do not dress for the benefit of others. I am not pretending to be something I am not. I am not wearing a costume. I am not here for your entertainment.

The words sting because deep, deep, down my unconscious programming agreed with them. On the surface I may fight them, debate them in my mind, and justify myself, and yet underneath part of me – my programming – agrees with them. The comments act as triggers evoking all those feelings of alienation from childhood along with all the baggage that goes with it.

I became very angry and defensive in my life, stuck to "my own kind", and constantly questioned myself filling my mind with self-doubt. If I wanted anything outside of my safe bubble I convinced myself that I could not have it on account of my handicap.

I have since adjusted to my life in Glasgow. The level of abuse is not what it once was and I have developed what I considered to be the correct posture for dealing with this. It is more than answering, or not answering, the fools who inhabit our globe. It is about self-belief. The reason I am either praised or mocked is because I stand-out, not unlike celebrities who are praised and mocked by people who do not even know them. I have come to accept these comments part of being who I am, just as any public figure must. So yes, these days I'm cool with it.

The post-modern Romantic has been told throughout his life that he is wrong. Is he? Of course not. He may consciously see himself as being right, he may stand defiantly, but how much of that defiance is born of fear, anger, bitterness, and jealousy? These negative motivations stem from the deep unconscious belief that he is, in fact, wrong. Who can blame him? Throughout his life he has been damned or praised for being different, which is the same as being outside, weird, and ultimately unlike everyone else.

You see, humans are creatures of two worlds. We have individual consciousness and we are also group animals who work best in a team. How do we reconcile this? What is too individualistic? What is too collectivist? We crave both liberty and acceptance. How can we have both?

We also crave truth. Whether we are right or not is largely irrelevant. We just want the assurance that our worldview is valid. This usually comes from other members of society telling us that we are right, also known as social validation. So how do you deal with life when society (as you perceive it) has been sending you direct or indirect messages telling you that you are wrong?

I want to emphasis again that this is not just the burden of the Romantics. Our commercial society is quick to tell people that they are wrong if they do not buy their product or their ideology. It's a matter of degrees and fundamentals. Romantics fundamentally disagree with the social mainstream.

Here is an example. There is more than one ethical system. Most people do not realize this. The dominant system is called altruism. The good is self-sacrifice for another and the bad is selfishness. The Romantics look to the Aristotelian system where the good is to flourish and the bad is destruction. Those who embrace the Aristotelian system are perceived as being selfish. This is a far cry from buying the wrong brand of deodorant in the grand scale of fitting in. The Romantic is not just wrong or weird; the Romantic is evil in the eyes of society.

The Romantics created the Modern world; unfortunately we do not live in the Modern world. Welcome to post-modernity. Of course there are still Romantic elements, but they have the style and lack the substance. For example, as a child growing-up I remember a TV ad for a clothing store called Millers Outpost. In one ad they called on people to be individuals while selling Levis, the most conformist article of clothing a person could wear. So we promote the Romantic virtue of individualism while at the same time encouraging conformity.

In the same vein, people outside the goth community say that Goths are trying to be individuals but they all look the same. This same person will happily go to the shopping mall surrounded by hundreds and hundreds of people wearing jeans and a casual top or T-shirt. Sure, the goth scene is subject to the same fashion trends as any other group, but a handful of Goths does not compare to a multitude of conformists who also see themselves as individuals.

In the modern world, the Romantics were heroes, but in the post-modern worlds they are outcasts, weirdos, and some times just plain evil. What we have here is a conflict of fundamental beliefs concerning the nature of reality. Children are exposed to elements of the Romantic, the style without substance, from an early age and if they identify themselves with those elements they find no encouragement from society in general and no means to develop along that path.

I have written extensively on the three "realities". Here's a recap. There is the Objective Reality, the world that is; the Subjective Reality, the world as each individual perceives it, and the Artificial Reality, the material and social man-made world. Each person lives in the Objective Reality and exists within their Subjective Reality as based on their experience of the Objective and Artificial realities.

In other words, the world and the people in it are real, however you can only experience your idea of it, therefore much of what you call "real" is not. It's just your idea. Likewise just as you respond to your idea of reality, other people respond to their idea of reality. Sometimes these Subjective Realities correspond and sometimes not. When they do not, then the result is conflict. When a whole group of people share a worldview that you do not, then you might begin to question yourself.

The final arbiter as to whether one Subjective Reality is truer than another is Objective Reality, the real reality. The outsider may have the opportunity to debate his point, but that rarely occurs in normal routine life. If it does, there is no guarantee that your opponents will see reason. Most people are happy with their Subjective Reality as it is and any threat to it is perceived as a threat to reality itself, since they believe that their perception is truth.

In conflict resolution, this reasoning together to arrive at a mutual win/win solution is called collaboration. There are five types of conflict resolution in total which are: Avoid, Accommodate, Force, Compromise, and finally Collaborate. Avoidance is simply withdrawing; Accommodate is acquiescence; Force is attacking either verbally, physically, or emotional to get your way; and Compromise is as it says on the tin.

In conflict situations people will use certain styles first and if that does not work thy will move through the list. For example, when I was tested on this I start with Collaboration and scored a zero on Compromise. So I would rather go along with things than compromise.

When the young Romantics face their initial conflict with society, there are those who avoid and become introverts avoiding others in general. Some accommodate in order to fit in and eventually join the collective. Some use force and become fierce individualists driven by the anger and fear that once dominated me. Some compromise never loosing their Romantic tendencies, but always cutting themselves short from what they really want for themselves. I advocate collaboration.

Collaboration requires a respect for the worldviews of others and an acceptance of the fact that not everyone sees the world as you do for whatever reason. I believe the Romantic is superior, however that does not give license to disrespecting others who are simply ignorant.

Collaboration also requires self-respect. You're views may not be mainstream. You may be mocked or damned by those who do not understand or those who wish to use force against you. In the face of this you must hold firm to the belief that your worldview is just as valid as theirs (if not more so).

If collaboration is not possible then avoidance comes into play. Will any good (flourishing) be accomplished by either using force or accommodation? When I was mocked by the Neds, I saw avoidance as silent accommodation. I believed that if I ignored them that I was given silent consent to their attacks. If I used force, as I have on occasion, I may change one mind but there are a lot of Neds. Do I want to live my life in perpetual conflict? No. Can I save them? No. In the absence of reason and the threat of physical force the only logical path is to leave them to their own fate to punish them.

Sometimes the conflicts come closer to home from family, friends, and co-workers. People close to us seem to love telling us who to be and how to live. Here, it is important to know your boundaries.

Victorians loved rules. Rules make sure that everyone was on the same page. Rules can be oppressive, yet it also makes life easier when the social expectations are clearly defined. For the Victorians, it was considered rude for a man to pry or question the motivations of another man. Of course it was done, but usually prefixed with an apology. "Not to pry into another mans affairs, but..." There was recognition of another person's right to themselves, their mind, their liberty, and their free will.

These days it seems that everyone has their hands in every else's pockets. The very notion that they should mind their own business is alien to them. To tell them to back off is seen as rude, mean, or hurtful. So a person is forced into a position of accommodation to keep the peace or out of fear of either being hurtful or being seen as a mean person.

In these worldview conflicts, collaboration comes first, but if that is not possible then force may be required if your personal boundaries are threatened. Be polite but firm. Your life is your own and your choices are yours. My parents did not always agree with the choices made by myself and my sisters, but they always supported our free will decisions. They even helped pick-up the pieces if it went wrong. There may have been an "I told you so", but it was in the spirit of "now you've learned something" and not "I'm right, listen to me from now on."

Here are few final thoughts. One thing that I have learned from studying hypnosis is that people will generally believe what you tell them about yourself. If you accept and believe in yourself, then they will too unless given evidence to the contrary.

Sometimes I see or meet girls that I think are out of my league. They are usually attractive, motivated, career women with boyfriends who are career men. I have no career. They are "normal" and I am, well, eccentric. I question my reality and see my reality as less real and therefore inferior to theirs. They are grown-ups and I am a child in a costume.

See the problem here? I've given myself a handicap from the start. Most of what we think is reality is just an idea. It's an illusion. So why not have an illusion that benefits you instead? If you see yourself as an outsider, then you are. If you perceive others to have it more together than you, then you are less than them (even if the fact is that they don't have it all together). If you believe in your world with confidence and conviction, then others will too.

I wrote earlier of Paul McKenna's childhood math problem. His working class schools used fruit for math problems and his upper-class friend's school used companies. McKenna then goes on to explain the importance of reprogramming these old imprints imposed upon us as children. This goes towards resetting the mental thermostat of what our minds will allow us to have.

McKenna's book is called I Can Make You Rich, so it focuses on resetting the wealth thermostat. He advocates reimaging a wealthy childhood instead of a poor one. This same process can be done regarding Romanticism.

On a positive note, Romantics are people who live life to the fullest, take chances, and walk through the world with ease. Their level of self-confidence is such that there is nothing that they fear. They do not fear failure, ridicule, or experience the "need" to fit it because they know that they do. The Romantic is not the freak or the outcast. He is a man of values and principles who does not compromise his beliefs or himself. His most prized possessions are his soul and his honour, which no one can take from him.

The contents of your mind whether they be memories or fantasies are equally valid as far as the mind and heart are concerned. Where the mind goes the body follows, so tell the mind where you want to go. Re-imagine your life as the one you want it to become. Think back on your past as one where you were that self-confident Romantic I just described. Imagine that wealthy childhood, the admiration of your peers, the great accomplishments even if it did not actually happen that way.

I know this may reek of self-delusion. Does it matter whether you were popular or not in school? It only matters in your memory – a memory that is setting the patterns of your life today. Besides, most of our memories are misremembered perceptions of events anyway. If that inner Romantic was repressed in your youth, then reconfigure your memories so that it wasn't repressed. Imagine a better past and you will have a better future.

In my teenage years I had no luck with the opposite sex. I was the loser without a girlfriend. At least that was my mental self-image. Since then I have had remarkable good fortune with many beautiful women. Did this matter? Nope. I still saw myself as the loser who couldn't get the girl. I always found some excuse to validate this poor image. When I was young it was because I was different, then it was because I was loosing my hair, then it was because I was getting old. The fact is that none of this matters.

I'm sharing all this personal information because none of us is unique in this regard. Everyone, Romantic or otherwise, has this same experience. For me it was relationships, for some people its wealth, for others its success. We all have this childhood programming holding us down.

Rousseau said that we live our lives in bondage from swaddling clothes to the shroud. I believe these chains are those of the mind. We are bound by our programming, but alas this is no master programmer. Random events, media images, social pressures, parental concerns, or lack thereof, all contribute to the mental system we foolish call ourselves.

You are not your mind. You are not your heart. You are your will, the will to power to be who you choose to be through your actions. When people look at you they do not see your mind or your heart. They see what you do.

I believe that there are many people who share my experience of Romanticism frustrated and misled in youth. As adults, we are still burdened by our perceptions and memories of the experiences. Likewise, I believe that process is still at work in schools across the Western world.

The answer is not to fight but to simply be. Use the power of imagination to recreate your programs. Speak out with boldness. Be confident. Walk the world with ease. Be an example of individualism gone right. And reach out to the lost lambs trying to find their place in the world. Most of all, remember Truth, Beauty, Freedom, and Love.