mindblown

[manuscript]

have you ever been mindblown by a piece of literature, that seemed to make you forget your self or make your personality disappear or disintegrate, became obsessively involved in the piece of literature, so that you transcended your self into knowledge of something greater, and it changed your self afterwards into some differently made self?

(if so, what piece of literature - or other art - was it that made you feel this way?)

what is the meaning of an idea like this? should we human beings collectively look to art for this sort of experience, and could it be a possible category in defining greatness of literary or other art as an ability to incite this reaction in its consumers? is it good for a person to experience this intense, apparently transformative pitch of emotion and thought? or perhaps art that incites inner explosions or destructions of personality can never be true art?

what is the truth value of claims to this sort of experience? is it true in a practical way? or is it true in a mystical way? or is it false and illusory? or something else altogether?

[cacian]

Hi manuscript I was just thinking outloud a minute about what I call the ''literature of the gods''.
That is the kind of literature I would like to mainstream.
I would imagine it to the mindblowing experience ever. It is not written yet or I have not got my hand on it yet but I think that would my answer to you.

[manuscript]

Divine Knowledge!

[cacian]

Divine Knowledge!

Indeed sorry I did not mean to distract.
I can think of a book I really took to because I found it to be about modern time and people.
It is called ''In Praise of Slow'' Carl Honore.
It was fascinating because it talked about normal people life the speed in which we have put ourselves into and what we have become.

[MorpheusSandman]

I think the kind of experience you're referring to has often been called "the sublime" in aesthetic theory. I'm guessing that most who love art has had such an experience at least once, because it's usually those powerful experiences that fuel their passion to begin with. Personally, when I think back to the works that have had such impacts on me it's a short list, but one that's very important to me:

Paradise Lost
Hamlet
War & Peace
Moby Dick
Tintern Abbey / Intimations of Immortality
Neon Genesis Evangelion
2001: A Space Odyssey
Seven Samurai
The Seventh Seal
Passion of Joan of Arc
Mozart's 41st Symphony, 23rd Piano Concerto
Beethoven's 3rd Symphony, 9th Symphony
Bob Dylan's Blonde on Blonde
The Beatles' Abbey Road

As for your questions:

what is the meaning of an idea like this?

I don't think it has a "meaning."

should we human beings collectively look to art for this sort of experience, and could it be a possible category in defining greatness of literary or other art as an ability to incite this reaction in its consumers?

I don't think it's something we should actively look for, because I don't think you can reasonably hope to find it often. Normally, it just happens in one of those "right place, right time" kind of things. As for it being a "possible category," I think it already is, in a way. What becomes part of the canon tends to be those works that move people in extreme ways, including in these life-changing ways.

is it good for a person to experience this intense, apparently transformative pitch of emotion and thought? or perhaps art that incites inner explosions or destructions of personality can never be true art?

I think anything that gets people thinking deeply about themselves, the world around them, philosophy, psychology, art, etc. is a good thing. It's how human beings advance and evolve both personally and as a species. I don't know why such "inner explosions" shouldn't be considered "true art."

what is the truth value of claims to this sort of experience? is it true in a practical way? or is it true in a mystical way? or is it false and illusory? or something else altogether?

I think they're true in both personal and universal ways. Typically art that has this kind of affect really hits on something primal in us that we didn't initially realize was there, expressing feelings and thoughts that we had but didn't have the ability to express. I once wrote an essay about what a life-changing experience I had in my early 20s with Neon Genesis Evangelion and how its depiction of depression resulting from past psychological trauma seemed to express something that was very deeply true about what I'd experienced in my own life, but, until then, hadn't been able to deal with or put into words or express in any way at all. Really, I think that's the inherent value in art and all forms of expression, the ability to symbolize, externalize, and, hopefully, understand our experiences, thoughts, and emotions.

[kelby_lake]

Yep, I think it fits into "the sublime". I'm not sure which ones I'll put down yet. Certainly Hunchback of Notre Dame- it's Hugo's old sublime/grotesque dichotomy. I'll probably add Return of The Native- at least, the opening bits.

[ChicagoReader]

I think for me it has to be Lolita. Right from the first page, which I believe to be the greatest opening ever, it blew my mind. Stylistically, it was miles ahead of anything else I had read, and his portrayal of Humbert Humbert was also quite astonishing. I go back and re-read bits and pieces all the time, just to remember how great writing can be.

[mal4mac]

have you ever been mindblown by a piece of literature, that seemed to make you forget your self or make your personality disappear or disintegrate, became obsessively involved in the piece of literature, so that you transcended your self into knowledge of something greater, and it changed your self afterwards into some differently made self?

That's a good list by Morpheus. I'd add:

Nicholas Nickleby - made me feel about thirty years younger and far more dynamic.