The 48 Laws of Power (Law #48 – Assume Formlessness)

Leave a comment

 

When you want to fight us, we don’t let you and you can’t find us. But when we want to fight you, we make sure that you can’t get away and we hit you squarely…and wipe you out.

-Mao Tse-tung

 
“The human animal is distinguished by its constant creation of forms. Rarely expressing its emotions directly, it gives them form through language, or through socially acceptable rituals. We cannot communicate our emotions without a form.

“The forms we create, however, change constantly – in fashion, in style, in all those human phenomena representing the mood of the moment. We are constantly altering the forms we have inherited from previous generations, and these changes are signs of life and vitality. Indeed, the things that don’t change, the forms that rigidify, come to look to us like death, and we destroy them. The young show this the most clearly” (424-5)

People rise to power by using their creativity to create new forms – but then they tend to get attached to these forms, develop fixed identities, and lose their power as the public gets bored and demands newer forms.

“When locked in the past, the powerful look comical – they are overripe fruit, waiting to fall from the tree.” (425)

“To be formless is not to be amorphous; everything has a form – it is impossible to avoid…formlessness is in the eye of the enemy who cannot see what they are up to and so has nothing solid to attack. This is the premier pose of power: ungraspable”

“The first psychological requirement of formlessness is to train yourself to take nothing personally. Never show any defensiveness. When you act defensive, you should your emotions, revealing a clear form.” (426)

“When you find yourself in conflict with someone stronger and more rigid, allow them a momentary victory. Seem to bow to their superiority. Then, by being formless and adaptable, slowly insinuate yourself into their soul. This way you will catch them off guard, for rigid people are always ready to ward off direct blows but are helpless against the subtle and insinuating.” (427)

“In evolution, largeness is often the first step towards extinction. What is immense and bloated has no mobility, but must constantly feed itself. The unintelligent are often seduced into believing that size connotes power, the bigger the better.” (428)

“It is not a matter of mimicking the fashions of youth – that is equally worthy of laughter. Rather your mind must constantly adapt to each circumstance, even the inevitable change that the time has come to move over and let those of younger age prepare for their ascendancy.” (429)

“Never forget, though, that formlessness is a strategic pose. It gives you room to create tactical surprises; as your enemies struggle to guess your next move, they reveal their own strategy, putting them at a decided disadvantage. It keeps the initiative on your side, putting your enemies in the position of never acting, constantly reacting.”

“Rely too much on other people’s ideas and you end up taking a form not of your own making. Too much respect for other people’s wisdom will make you depreciate your own.”

Reversal: Formlessness will make your enemies scramble and scatter their forces (mental as well as physical) to find you. But once you do engage them, hit them with a powerful, concentrated blow.

The Romantic Lifestyle: Becoming Your Own Magnum Opus

1 Comment

She was looking up at the face of a man who knelt by her side, and she knew that in all the years behind her, this was what she would have given her life to see: a face that bore no mark of pain or fear or guilt. The shape his mouth was pride, and more: it was as if he took pride in being proud.

-Atlas Shrugged, page 531, Dagny Taggert’s first impression of John Galt

 

This weekend I finished The Romantic Manifesto by Ayn Rand. In it, Rand argues that all art is “a selective recreation of reality according to one’s metaphysical value judgments.” This means that any work of art intrinsically says, “This is life as I see it”, either intentionally or unintentionally. If an artist defaults on this responsibility, his work will still represent a certain world-view, but it will be perverse, scattered, and portray some sort of malevolent universe.

Its viewers have to decide whether they agree or disagree with the work’s world-view, again, a process that cannot be avoided even by default.

The objective standard of value that art should be judged by, however, is not whether it is generally agreeable, but by how well it represents its particular metaphysical world-view. For example, even if you disagree with Shakespeare’s view that people have a predetermined fate and a tragic flaw that will lead them to that fate, it does not mean that Shakespeare is not still brilliant. You just won’t personally enjoy his work quite as much.

(A nice illustration of the opposite effect is my love of the HBO series Entourage; I get an infinite amount of enjoyment from that show because of its general themes of friendship and prosperity, despite the fact that it has little objective aesthetic value.)

Essentially, the standard of value for a work of art is not what it is, just that it is.

An easy false conclusion to come to from all of this is that art is a medium of teaching others about your views, but that is only a consequence of art, not the purpose. The purpose of aesthetics, according to Rand, is simply to show. She offers a brilliant analogy to explain:

The primary purpose of an airplane is not to teach man how to fly, but to give him the actual experience of flying. So is the primary purpose of an art work.

-The Romantic Manifesto, page 163 (emphasis added)

In the book Rand is referring to literature, paintings, sculptures, plays, and music. But this got me to think: could this apply to your physical appearance as well?

The answer: of course!

Just as a disheveled and feeble appearance with no thought put into it suggests a weak internal constitution of beliefs and values, a congruent, physically-fit appearance can serve as an aesthetic demonstration of the potential of human beings, what man could and ought to be like. This is romanticism, or, as Rand refers to her particular brand of it, romantic realism.

Crafting your appearance into an aesthetic experience is not the kind of endeavor that one can dabble in, however. Half-measures are pointless; mediocre-to-average is not something to aspire to. It requires a serious amount of sustained effort, but after reading The Romantic Manifesto it’s hard to deny how absolutely worthwhile it is.

Treating your physical appearance as a Romantic work of art is such a brilliant frame of mind to have in your daily life. It’s one of my best ideas in months, and that’s saying something because I am smart.