VL-IV, Frenesi's god

[rich]

what exactly does "full-auto qualified" mean?

On 1/29/09, bandwraith at aol.com <bandwraith at aol.com> wrote:
> tres
>
> "When the sixties were over, when the hemlines
> came down and the colors of the clothes went
> murky and everybody wore makeup that was
> supposed to look like you had no makeup on, when
> tatters and patches had had their day and the
> outlines of the Nixonian Repression were clear
> enough even for the most gaga of hippie optimists
> to see, it was then, facing into the deep autumnal
> wind of what was coming, that she thought, Here,
> finally- here's my Woodstock, my golden age of
> rock and roll, my acid adventures, my Revolution.
> Come into her own at last, street-legal, full-auto
> qualified, she understood her particular servitude
> as the freedom, granted to a few, to act outside
> warrants and charters, to ignore history and the
> dead, to imagine no future, no yet-to-be-born, to
> be able simply to go on defining moments only,
> purely, by the action that filled them. Here was a
> world of simplicity and certainty no acidhead, no
> revolutionary anarchist would ever find, a world
> based on the one and zero of life and death.
> Minimal, beautiful. The patterns of lives and deaths...."
>
> Such is Frenesi's nostalgia on the cusp of a new day
> which will find her back up "on the surface" to deal,
> fiinally, with the "clockwork of cause and effect"
> from which she fled underground those fifteen or so
> years ago. Her nostalgia balances that of the aging
> "hippie optimists" - the other side of the same coin.
> It has the ring of romantic nihilism common to all
> fascist movements, but it goes beyond even that
> and transcends the need for what Michael Polanyi
> called "moral inversion," in that there seems to be
> no justification required- i.e., your society is corrupt
> and decadent, so therefore, anything goes, any-
> thing is justified to bring it down- the dismissal of all
> "bourgeois" values, checks and balances, etc. For
> Frenesi it's a more honest than that, no need for
> rationalizations or appeals to secularized religion,
> just her own personal aesthetic.
>
> This must be operant somewhere in the back of
> her mind as she is about to become "clairvoyant."
>