Musings on Excellence

Excellence is the manifestation of superiority in some form of endeavour, and, by definition, there are far fewer creations or endeavours that are superior than there are those which are merely competent or less than competent. …

Each individual values self more than others, except perhaps parents who behold their children. Yet in revering their children, they seek another form of self-affirmation. Even those who adopt nationalistic or patriotic ideals and offer their lives for the culture are seeking self-affirmation through a greater "good." …

The presence of excellence reminds the majority of humans that they are not superior. If that demonstration of excellence is great enough, it can be humbling, and humans dislike being humbled. Excellence is therefore established by some form of elite, initially by those who can create it, then hailed by those who can recognize it, and finally used as a tool by those who can do neither.

Excellence is generally ignored by the majority of any society, except when it can be used for other ends. Great poetry is seldom read, because there are few such uses for it, while the excellently simple design of the paper clip dominated paper-pushing cultures for more than a century, its inventor immediately forgotten. Great drama was written or revived only when it could be used to part human beings from a portion of their wealth. Great works of physical art [paintings, sculpture] have been historically the most valuable after the death of their creatiors, when their excellence could be seperated from the superiority of their creators.

Excellence and popularity are seldom manifested in the same work, because popularity derives from the ability of humans to identify with the endeavour or the creator, and few identify comfortably with genius. …

The "dead white male" syndrome of the late Noram Commonacracy was highly instrumental in creating the decline of excellence which, in turn, exaggerated the effect of the Collapse. What was conveniently overlooked by the revolutionaries, never accepted by the masses, and never confronted effectively by the declining pre-Collapse establishment was one simple corollary to excellence. It takes training, education, discipline, and intelligence to create and/or recognize excellence. In general, most of the individuals in any society capable in practical terms of creating excellence must come from the priveleged or near-priveleged strata of society. There are exceptions, often distinguished and notable ones, but statistically, they are insignificant. This has meant that, for most of history, most endeavours of artistic excellence were created, funded, and supported by white males. In those few places and cultures where equal or near equal resources went to others, others also created works of excellence. Resource allocation was the key, but the revolutionaries of the pre-Collapse cleverly established the position that excellence was merely a code for values supporting the white male status quo, rather than a reflection of the allocation of resources necessary for the creation of excellence.

By debunking the entire concept of excellence as status quo propaganda, and by insisting that all artistic values and creations were equal, and that true beauty did not exist, but was only an ephermal phantom in the mind of each beholder, or a tool of the white male elite, the revolutionaries undermined the very basis of excellence … and thus contributed to the Collapse, and, in the end, to their own demise, because once they had destroyed the concept of objective and not theologically-based values and excellence, they also destroyed the social restraints that had shackled the commercial and political elites, to the point that the only value was power. …