The Grotesque God & The Taste of Shit

David Arthur Walters



Our frustrated realist, Gustave Flaubert, a romantic at heart, bitterly said that reality, meaning the way things really were from his perspective, tasted like shit. He contrived an imaginary reality to escape from his distasteful perception, a construction that Jean Paul Sartre, in his voluminous psychoanalysis of Flaubert,The Family Idiot, analyzed according to his Psychology of the Imaginary.

An artist’s job, as jazz-dance master Luigi Facciuto once averred (may he rest in peace although his motto was Never Stop Moving) is to make shit smell good: “This shit just came to me out of nowhere,” he told his dancers after he moved, “and now it’s our job to make it smell good.” Still, given the materials employed, the result has scatological implications to critics with an acute sense of smell.

Flaubert’s Imaginary…

View original post 1,547 more words


A Note To Myself About Writing Novels

David Arthur Walters


If writing novels is your calling and you write an ideal novel, you will be not only a philosopher but an artist as well, for only a lover of wisdom and revealer of truth can write an ideal novel. The great ‘poets’ of old were philosophers, ‘makers’ not of truth but of revelations – for the truth is always there to be seen after the chisel is applied to mute stone.

Other than writing poetry, what occupation could be more divine than novel-writing? And today the best novel might be a freely styled prose-poem. What? Never mind. You will be the creator, the creating, and the creation, namely, Maya. You will be the author, and, in the process, the several different characters under your investigation. You will be the synthesis of the universal and particular. What could be…

View original post 383 more words

Cliche: “You must have lots of time on your hands to defend the police.”





I am obviously a prolific writer keenly interested in learning as much as I can about the subjects I am interested in and then expressing my views thereupon.

That is, researching subjects and expressing my opinion is my vocation. Yet I am occasionally presented with the cliché, “You must have a lot of time on your hands,” when I logically contest a proposition put forward. That is meant to imply that I am not engaged in a legitimate i.e. personally profitable pursuit.

For example, an international attorney who has taken up liberalism with a vengeance after the election of Donald Trump to the Presidency posted a video on Facebook of police officers removing a cursing young woman from a subway. Apparently she had put her feet up on another seat of the relatively crowded subway car. She appeared to be refusing their commands and resisting arrest.

The indignant attorney, who has in the past served some time as a municipal judge, claimed that putting feet up on subway car seats is not an arrestable offense, and that the First Amendment right to free speech had been violated. One of his followers chimed in with outrage at an alleged abuse of the police power, although it was exercised rather minimally, just enough to get her off the train.

The rest of his followers agreed with the forceful removal of the foulmouthed woman from the train, and one viewer hoped she had learned a lesson. Another pointed out that we did not see what happened before the video was taken by a person questioning the conduct of the police and demanding badge numbers.

I remarked that the police action was proper. Furthermore, I said that I rode the New York City subways for decades, remembered the Bernhard Goetz incident, and why he had been moved to take the law into his own hands, as vigilantes are wont to do when the police power is dysfunctional.

Putting feet on subway seats happens to be an arrestable misdemeanor albeit the law is controversial, so I posted a New York Times article to that effect. To that the attorney said other issues were involved, yet he refrained, when asked, from identifying them.

He did not respond when asked whether or not the woman was detained and released, or taken to the police station and booked.

I declared that a lawyer should inquire into all the facts before presenting a case, and should not be unduly prejudiced by ideological preferences. I observed that if he knew the history of law enforcement on the subway system, as I did from personal experience, he would understand the reason people might be removed from trains or arrested for misdemeanor conduct. He perceived that remark as a personal insult.

He deleted my comments, and came after me in the Messenger facility, apparently not wanting the verdict of his jury of followers.  He said I must have a lot of time on my hands, and that he did not have such time, and that I did not know when to stop.

I responded that I had ample time to seek the truth and state my opinions. As a matter of fact, I had invested no more than five minutes in making those few brief comments. He has time to posting political subjects on his “news” feed, and to hover over commentary, responding immediately to comments as if he were being rated by Facebook, as some accounts are.

He mentioned President Trump, whom I said was irrelevant, as was the reference to free speech, for the woman had spoken freely with fighting words, and had a right to suffer the consequences.

I said I thought it contradictory that he would delete my comments when he was arguing for a right to free speech, to which he said he had a perfect right to do on Facebook.

It was obviously his own free speech he was concerned with, that there would be no consequences or “arrests” of his argument. Of course he can delete at will, but I informed him I had learned from several lawyers to tolerate critical commentary, and sometimes I love it when it is ridiculous. He claimed I was “hard not to delete.”

He said I did not know whether he rode the subways as I had. I said I did know because I had collected a file on him and knew that his background did not include decades in New York City or time when transit law enforcement was pathetic.

He felt threatened that I said I had a “file” on him, and I explained that I had accumulated information about him before I came to his defense when he was sitting as a magistrate and city officials interfered with his independence. My coverage of that issue was influential.

The time I expended was about forty hours, pro bono, and well worthwhile since I believed justice was served in that matter. In this matter I believe he was mistaken.

Another cliché he resorted to was, “Get over yourself,” which I informed him was his own projection. “You must have a lot of time on your hands” I have heard several times, almost always when I disagree with someone who believes they have a license on truth.

He knows I am a journalist. I thanked him for the interview and the quotes, which I have not directly quoted here. He deleted the entirety of his post. Case voluntarily dismissed.

Perhaps this record will be useful. Normally reasonable people are losing their heads and jumping to conclusions. It is time to take more time thinking.


Miami Beach

January 28, 2018

Donald the Great Born Again as Je Suis Moi


Je Suis Moi, as the reader may know, had been an Existentialist before he perused Pence’s classic, Donald The Great, About Whom Nothing Greater Can Be Thought, which led to his free subscription to the How to Make Yourself Great Again Channel, and, ultimately, to his magic mushroom conversion to Egotism.

He had been a very depressed existentialist at that. He found no joy in the concept that life was meaningless so one should be happy with a menial job providing there was sufficient budget after rent and enough time off work to get a suntan, drink tequila, consort with prostitutes, and smoke hashish. What depressed him all along was the absurd notion essential to existentialism, that existence was before Being because all the misconceptions of Being got humans in trouble, even caused wars.

He intuited that he was not a speck of dirt, a tomato living in the now, or a naked ape with some kind of being pasted on as an afterthought. There is certainly a more essential being, some Being that comes before existence, as we should all know by now, but he did not know who he originally was. If he did, he would have gone home again.

“Existence in itself does not even exist,” he thought during one of his drunken mental masturbations.  “I am someone at least, someone that actually is, that is what comes first, not existence.”

He mentioned his doubts to a fellow kitchen worker, who handed him a dog-eared copy of Donald The Great.

“Don’t be stupid, stupid, read this,” said the short order cook, “everyone else has, and become someone, an independent contractor like the rest of us.”

Sure enough, Donald The Great not only confirmed that he was someone, but that he was whatever he thought he was, and that was always something very, very great, indeed, because he was once very great and could be even greater again, thus he was born again.

It would not be long before he encountered Maya, his alter ego, a dissident from French Welandia, and changed his name to Je Suis Moi. He signed on to the independent contractor program at work, convinced, despite Maya’s advice, that he would be so great again that he would never need social benefits.

He would be promoted to server two years later. He was laid off and found himself without unemployment benefits. The benefits would have been minimal anyway, and not because of his low pay: no more than a thousand workers in Melandia, most of them Welandians with temporary permits to work jobs Melandians did not want, were contributing into the fund.

Maya, once a jurist in France, now reduced to selling drawings of Je Suis Moi on the sidewalks, threatened to leave him unless he got another job. Wherefore he contracted for doorman work at Trump Island, known as “Puerto Rico” before Donald the Great purchased it with a Russian loan after forcing it into bankruptcy liquidation.

His egotistical expectations exceeded his station there and it was not long before the both of them were deported with only each other and the clothes on their backs. They managed to escape from the ship bound for Welandia and made their way to Chania, capital of Independent Crete, where Je Suis Moi took a dishwasher job,  immersed himself in Greek myths and imagined himself not only to be the famous Cretan necromancer, Epimenides, but  the personification of Zeus from time to time.

Such was the tremendous influence of the book Donald The Great that it literally saved Je Suis Moi’s life, for he had decided that a merely existential life was not worth living, and he would have ended his if Pence’s book had not been thrust into his hands on that fateful day in the kitchen.   


Fake Capitalist Deductions

boar 20170305_104244~3

The excuse for the new deduction from income passed through defined business entities was said to compensate for a radical reduction in C-corporation tax. Shareholders who take dividends are in effect taxed twice, once at the corporate level and then at the personal level. So-called pass-through income is taxed whether retained or paid out, so now a percentage of that will not be taxable up to a limit, and a provision for game-playing is made after that limit is reached. True parity would eliminate corporate taxation altogether, leaving only the personal income tax. Income retained to be employed for growth would not be taxed. The current change actually increases inequity by disfavoring employees and encouraging them to become fake “self-employed” capitalists doing the same work, and by benefiting wealthy beneficial owners who do not need the taxation deduction from income passed through to them.  In any case, the problem is the deficit, so the Hogs will attempt to reduce the welfare of 90-percent of the population, providing them with temporary scraps to avert immediate rebellion until the Boars take over.

David Arthur Walters 2017 CE

Hoggish Charity


Experts who perceive President Trump as Hog-in-Chief believe charities will lose billions because the standard deduction has been doubled are probably mistaken. Charitable donations were not always deductible. People donate to charities to be charitable, and not for tax deductions. Besides, the values of things donated are often exaggerated to reduce taxes, and the system is otherwise gamed without benefit to the needy. People who itemize generally have more to donate. A single person who itemizes instead of taking the new $12,200 standard deduction may still deduct his or her charitable contributions. The needy might be served better if donations could be deducted “above the line” i.e. in addition to the standard deduction. Still, historical data indicates that donations do not depend on tax deductibility. That is not to say the tax reform is not hoggish. It certainly is. The rich will become richer and the poor even poorer and more people will depend on private handouts. The pendulum will swing back, perhaps with violent effects on animal farming, so that the Boar dictates instead of the Hog.

David Arthur Walters 2017 CE

My Cro-Magnon Beauty



My friend in North France believes her jaw is too wide, but I believe a rounder face is more beautiful than one with small mouth and markedly pointed chin. The wider face was believed to be that of the Cro-Magnon woman much loved in France by Neanderthal man. She is an artist, and Cro-Magnon people were artists as well as hunter-gatherers. Sadly, artists do not reconstruct skulls to flatter prehistoric humans according to modern standards of beauty.  My Frankish friend also says her coworkers made fun of her because we are friends, and they see me as an old man. It is true that we are friends, meaning “free.” And I am actually much older than they think, nearly 200,000 years old

David Arthur Walters 2017 CE