to Hive being
welcome
What is Hive Being, and Why the Name?
You have likely heard talk of a hive mind, where one global mind finds more or less figurative expression in various local minds. Such talk is common enough in nature documentaries, especially ones concerning ants or bees, and in sci-fi programs. Take that notion, at least a loose version of it, and broaden its scope. That will be a decent first step in understanding the title I have chosen both for my Blog and for the first five-volume installment of my magnum opus Made For You and Me, a fragmentary collection of minimalist stanzas from 2016 to 2020.
In alignment with Spinoza (the 17th Century Rationalist to whom I devoted my doctoral studies), I view reality in its totality as a grand hive Being: all entities are but pulsating manifestations of the buckstopping fount of everything, an ultimate being we might call “God” or “Nature” (so long as, out of respect for the capital “G” and the capital “N,” we limit it neither to some anthropomorphic cloud father hurling lightning bolts nor to mere wilderness untouched by human smog). According to the hive-Being view (where reality is one lone superorganism, a monistic—and we might even say unividualist—conception I defend in both my creative and academic capacities), each non-foundational being (each being, that is, whose essence does not involve existence) is an utterly necessitated expression or eruption or exudation of this eternal source—each is, perhaps better put, a mode or manner of being, and so a focal point through which is disclosed, what classical theists sometimes call “being itself” (ipsum esse subsistens): the realness of the real, the being of whatever may be, the sheer activity of being, the very isness of whatever is. This Blog, which duplicates my Substack, throbs as but one among many literary unfurlings of this self-necessitated foundation, this supreme wellspring, of which we—like black holes and broken beliefs, like fractal ferns and flickering flames—are the inevitable stylings.
My Journey
I am an academic who found himself pressured into early retirement by the rising tides of cancel culture. The illiberal scourge of censoring, silencing, and shaming—although always with us throughout our evolution—reached a local peak around 2021. That was the turbulent year my creative pursuits, which the old left once encouraged as a healthy outlet for the stresses of a childhood steeped in poverty and illiteracy, drew the ire of the new safe-space left. A small cadre of self-proclaimed victims and their allies, several of whom continue to berate me years later under pseudonyms as see through as their sexual infatuation, sought to erase me and my heterodoxy. They found support from a wannabe-woke dean, covered in the grand inquisitor robes of our decadent modernity (full-body tattoos) and just itching to signal his commitment to protecting “vulnerable populations” from triggering material (even if just, as it was in my case, off-duty poems “unbecoming for someone calling himself a teacher”). Although I eventually won my due-process case with the help of The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, I slunk away from a college that turned its back on protecting freedom of expression and from an institution increasingly intolerant of intellectual diversity.
The wrecking ball to my too-comfy office in the windowless ivory tower came with a silver lining. From the ashes of my professional aspirations rose a phoenix of increased freedom to fulfill the literary calling I have pursued for decades. Reputation concerns never stopped me, even within academia’s sterile halls of conformity. Indeed, my unapologetic defiance, which has long baffled friends and family, no doubt chummed even safe waters—almost as if I were asking for it all along—until the cancel shiver grew too frenzied to hold back its blind thrashings. But now, now I piston the most forbidden territories of human thought with no longer even a twinge of conscience. The newfound freedom means extra time to hone my craft. When not assisting special-needs communities (a day job far more rewarding than freeway-flyer drudgeries), I pursue my literary mission with Dionysian fervor.
Call for Co-Conspirators
This space, my digital sanctuary, showcases the fruits of my mission. Think of my posts, even those linking to my publications, as works in progress. I want your input, unflinching brutality included. Each post begins with an invitation to action: “Let’s workshop this [draft about x, y, z].” Your contributions, whether through public comments or my contact page, help hammer scraps of ore into polished blades fit for magazine publication.
Your input is valuable, even if you are neither a writer nor a reader of literature—twin disciplines dying by the cyber nanosecond. Sometimes—even if at the risk of uttering banalities—an outsider’s fresh vantage can pierce the veils of convention to reveal what insiders miss. It often takes an outsider to make us even think to question our ingrained presuppositions and attitudes. I stand by the hygienic value of contagion. That is one reason I advocate so strongly for intellectual diversity and freedom of expression. And that is also one reason I was so harrowed by the anti-diversity swell of cancel culture in academia (an institution that should be the utmost caretaker of such values)—harrowed especially insofar as that swell masqueraded under the gaslighting guise of “diversity”).
You will witness the breathing evolution of my writings over time. To track these changes, I label each revision by round: “ROUND 2,” ROUND 3,” and so forth. Each piece undergoes continuous refinement based on your feedback and my own revisitations. Sometimes changes will mar the work. That is the risk of creative tinkering as a finite creature. I hope you will alert me to missteps. After many semesters of university writing workshops, one rule has impressed itself upon me: when someone senses a flaw, something almost always needs to change—even if, yes, the proposed solution misses the mark (which often it does). From a quick look into the archives, accessible here, you can see how much I have benefited from your feedback so far.
My Hope
Sharing drafts can be daunting. But showing you the ravaged and unperfumed real deal unfiltered by makeup (stuttering starts and falsities, awkward line breaks and clumsy word choices, grammatical errors and misspellings)—that not only makes my work more relatable, but helps me refine things through your input. I hope the unfiltered look at the raw process of fumbling, rather than just the polished product, also helps other writers develop their craft. Imperfect works often instruct more than perfect ones: whereas the perfect ones tend to have a grace by which they slip inside us without activating our scrutiny, the imperfect ones—especially the near perfect ones—show us glaringly what not to do.
People laugh at me, seeing—in my tilting at the windmills of literary excellence—a Don Quixote clunking around in Arthurian armor in a post-knight era. I am not naïve. I am well aware of the diminishing ability to read, let alone well: slowly and deeply, with gratitude. I am also aware that my style, which often nests subpoints within larger points, never waters down virtuosity for the sake of mass appeal. I watch readers stumble over my sentences, unable to unlock even just the music of the envelope let alone the semantic meat within, which—given my tendency to flashlight through the darker facets of human nature (the addicts, the miscreants, the abusers among us)—only adds an additional alienating layer of difficulty). Beholding these depressive scenes of even supportive family members getting bucked off my syntactic bronco makes me feel like a dinosaur who should get a hint and, if not succumb to the brain rot of skibidi-toilet speak, just hang himself already. Even though the decline in linguistic background and grammatical voltage makes my compositions seem quixotic in a world binging Netflix and TikTok, I persist—raging against the dying of the light—by some internal compulsion to celebrate the richness of language and thought.
My hope is that, despite social media’s unparalleled power to farm our attention, people never forget the unique power of writing. Beyond unveiling hypocrisy, teasing out complex implications, and detailing the commonalities between even the most alien phenomena, writing offers something we need today—trapped in agoraphobic cyber bubbles only thickened by the Lyme dangers of forests and the COVID dangers of cities—perhaps more than ever. Granting us rich access to the first-person perspectives of others (to how things feel to them), writing serves as one of humanity’s best tools for combating loneliness. It allows us to linger, broadly and deeply and at high resolution, within the inner lives of others in a way that other arts can only suggest.
What to Expect
My work spans a broad spectrum: from metaphysical discourses on free will and determinism and the ontology of holes to the ephemera of western culture (whether the childhood impacts of the hypersexual mono-image of black woman as squirting twerkers or Terrence Howard’s sham revolution of mathematics). Some tight and minimal, others free-flowing sprawls; some heady and abstract, others emotional and imagistic—my inkwell musings, which often blend scholarly rigor with a dark humor from both high and low culture, aim to capture the visceral intensity of our personal and social and ultimately existential predicaments.
By no means can I deny that drug abuse, sexual assault, and the tales of the broken and the damned loom large in the tag cloud of my work. My writing will never be a paradise of easy truths and comforting lies. It will challenge you, provoke you, and at times even repulse you. I offer no apologies for the monsters I unleash. They are as much a part of us, at long root scared rodent mammals scurrying in the shadows of dinosaurs, as our noblest aspirations.
But make no mistake. It is not all downer darkness. The archives are my receipts. You will find pieces exploring the pursuit of authenticity in a media-saturated world, the search for meaning in an indifferent cosmos, and the celebration of beauty in both the sublime and the profane. I locate much of my inspiration, in fact, in novelists like Dostoevsky and poets like Ted Kooser—writers unafraid to pursue moral agendas or risk Hallmark sentimentality in an age that often sneers at sincerity.
Be they satirical dissections of modern social dynamics or poignant poems about addiction or academic articles on moral responsibility, my goal is to provoke thought, evoke emotion, and foster meaningful dialogue. Fear has not and will not stop me from challenging humanity’s fundamental taboos (like bestiality and cannibalism) or self-reflecting into the dark chaos of the subconscious, even if that means exposing the Jungian shadows—the inner Goebbels—lurking within us all!
Expect posts each day, no day missed. Donations are welcome, but I impose no paywall: it feels wrong to charge for art, especially given our date with obliteration. Feel free to explore what amounts to, at the time of writing this, close to a thousand pieces of poetry and prose here. That should give you a sense of what awaits.
Join me—specula holstered—on this literary odyssey into the public and private nooks of the hive Being. Let us navigate the labyrinth of creation together, confronting our demons and even slaying our darlings if we must. Let us dance on the razor’s edge between the sublime and the profane in pursuit of an elusive literary perfection never to be confused—as it has been confused in our declining civilization—with the pursuit of popularity or likeability over truth.
tag cloud
- poetry
- literature
- literature community
- poem
- literary
- American literature
- writing
- creative writing
- poetry community
- Michael Istvan
- Istvan
- perception
- defiance
- suffering
- existential poetry
- dissociative
- poet
- healing
- existential
- human
- adolescence
- sex
- power
- campus warrior
- art
- artist
- Nietzsche
- substance abuse
- sensual
- Earth
- resilience
- evolution
- hardship
- death
- darwin
- mortality
- murder
- Life affirming
- God
- anxiety
- parenthood
- teen
- sexuality
- taboo
- love
- prison
- parenting
- woke
- disease
- dysmorphia
- crack
- abuse
- love letters
- hypermasculine
- vines
- meditation
- poison
- transgressive
- christianity
- fatherhood
- father
- junkies
- drugs
- social justice warrior
- religion
- philosophy
- music
- hoodlum
- artistry
- teens
- worship
- thugs
- poor
- rape
- Biggie
- disturbing
- change
- islam
- hypocrisy
- poverty
- muslims
- cocaigne
- children
- babies
- transformation
- addiction
- survival
- safe space
- SJW
- pound town
- Hudson Valley
- Camus
- feet
- baby feet
- collection
- collections
- care
- cops
- Prometheus
- bully
Posts
Pillow Fort Password
"Pillow Fort Password" examines the horrifying reality of childhood molestation, a subject approached through unsettling imagery and a juxtaposition of innocence and corruption. The poem opens with "wide-eyed curiosity unfazed," suggesting the child's initial innocence, but this is quickly undermined by a darker narrative. The reference to Elsa’s "Let It Go," a song typically associated with childhood joy, contrasts sharply with the description that follows—"cherub hands" turning into a "gargoyle grip." The transformation from an angelic to monstrous image hints at the violation of innocence, with the child becoming an unwitting participant in something grotesque.
The line "pump that veiny rigidity with an obscene autonomy" is a disturbing and explicit reference to a child being involved in an act of molestation, underscoring the obscene and coercive nature of the situation. The phrase "too vigorous, too disinviting of oversight" points to the lack of adult intervention or awareness, a damning critique of societal failure to protect children from such abuse. The absence of "oversight" speaks to the hidden, secretive nature of molestation, where acts of violation occur beyond the gaze of those responsible for the child's safety. The use of the word "demonic" in the final line encapsulates the evil inherent in the situation, framing the molestation as not just a moral failing but a violation of the child's very humanity.
The pillow fort, typically a symbol of childhood innocence and imagination, becomes a setting of betrayal. It symbolizes a supposed place of safety turned into a site of trauma, furthering the sense of innocence corrupted. The use of sexual imagery combined with the context of childhood play creates a disturbing tension, reflecting the grotesque inversion of something pure into something deeply harmful. The poem is a stark portrayal of the hidden, horrific reality of child molestation and the failure of those who should be safeguarding the vulnerable.
"Pillow Fort Password" addresses the troubling intersection of childhood innocence and burgeoning sexual awareness, using stark and provocative imagery to critique societal discomfort with discussing bodily autonomy and sexual curiosity in young people. The poem sets up a tension between the external appearance of innocence, symbolized by the “wide-eyed curiosity” of the child unfazed by something as innocuous as Elsa’s “Let It Go,” and the darker, more complex undercurrent of premature sexual behavior. The "gargoyle grip" that is "hellbent on velocity" portrays an intense, almost otherworldly force behind the child’s actions, raising questions about the role of natural curiosity versus the taboo nature of such behaviors in society’s view.
By invoking a children's figure like Elsa, the poem establishes an environment of childhood innocence that contrasts with the more disturbing image of the child’s autonomous, unregulated exploration of their body. The saliva-evoking laughter transitions into an act that society may view as inappropriate or ‘demonic,’ highlighting the cognitive dissonance adults experience when witnessing children express forms of sexuality, however innocent the intention may be. This tension between innocence and obscenity underscores a larger societal reluctance to confront the reality of childhood sexual exploration, preferring to demonize or repress rather than guide.
The use of phrases like “obscene autonomy” and “too disinviting of oversight” reflects on the failure of adult intervention in such scenarios, whether due to ignorance, fear, or discomfort. The poem suggests that the child’s actions, though natural, become coded as demonic or inappropriate due to the inability or unwillingness of caregivers to engage with them constructively. It critiques the societal impulse to impose moral judgments on behavior that falls outside of traditional expectations of childhood purity, exposing a failure to reconcile the realities of bodily autonomy with normative ideas of innocence.
The poem can be read as a commentary on the complexity of child development, where boundaries between innocence and emerging sexuality are often blurred, and societal taboos prevent meaningful guidance or understanding. It calls attention to how these taboos, far from protecting children, contribute to a culture of avoidance and silence, leaving them to navigate their curiosities in isolation. The child’s “veiny rigidity” represents not just a physical reality, but the rigidity of societal structures around sexuality that fail to offer the fluid, adaptive responses children might need in such formative moments.
Test for (Red-Flag) Interlocutors
**Test for (Red-flag) Interlocutors** is a reflective piece that introduces a reasoning test designed to filter out individuals who might engage in unproductive or aggressive debates. The author emphasizes the importance of having a foundational understanding of reasoning to engage in meaningful discussions, especially on controversial topics.
The introduction explains that receiving the test sheet is not a personal attack but a measure to ensure productive conversation. It likens the test to a note explaining personal allergies, aiming to prevent unnecessary conflicts and frustrations.
The background section elaborates on the author's perspective as a philosopher, comparing engaging in deep conversation off-duty to asking professionals to work during their downtime. It highlights the challenges faced when engaging with individuals who lack respect for intellectual expertise or exhibit flawed reasoning. The author underscores the prevalence of a culture that undermines intellectuals and the importance of a break from professional duties to recharge.
The reasoning test is introduced as a way to filter out individuals who might not have the basic reasoning skills necessary for a productive conversation. The author shares personal experiences of frustration when dealing with poor reasoning and highlights the negative impact of engaging with individuals who approach discussions with hostility or condescension.
The test itself comprises ten logical cases and one bonus ethical question. The logical cases are designed to assess basic reasoning skills, while the bonus question challenges the respondent's ability to remain objective under pressure and handle uncomfortable ethical topics.
The ultimate goal of the test is to ensure that discussions are grounded in rational thought and to protect the author's time and energy from unproductive engagements. By setting this prerequisite, the author aims to foster a more respectful and meaningful exchange of ideas.
blog
FAQ
Visit my Substack: Hive Being
Visit my Substack: Hive Being
Don’t let anyone tell you that real life is lacking in poetic interest. This is exactly what the poet is for: he has the mind and the imagination to find something of interest in everyday things. Real life supplies the motifs, the points that need to be said—the actual heart of the matter; but it is the poet’s job to fashion it all into a beautiful, animated whole. You are familiar with Fürnstein, the so-called “nature poet”? He has written a poem about growing hops, and you couldn’t imagine anything nicer. I have now asked him to write some poems celebrating the work of skilled artisans, in particular weavers, and I am quite sure he will succeed; he has lived among such people from an early age, he knows the subject inside out, and will be in full command of his material. That is the advantage of small works: you need only choose subjects that you know and have at your command. With a longer poetic work, however, this is not possible. There is no way around it: all the different threads that tie the whole thing together, and are woven into the design, have to be shown in accurate detail. Young people only have a one-sided view of things, whereas a longer work requires a multiplicity of viewpoints—and that’s where they come unstuck.—Goethe (Conversations with Eckermann)
Featured Blog Posts
have appeared last night—
all those met along the way?