The Arrival of the Maverick
This article is based on this Dutch article of Martijn Benders
## Here comes the maverick
Probably the track on the album with the most ‘hit potential,’ although I always find that quite dubious, especially in times when the hit as a phenomenon has essentially become extinct.
Here comes the maverick, oh yeah
Here comes the trailblazer!
Even Diogenes makes an appearance, amid this clown-ass world which the lioness of Zion, who is no peon, disapproves of.
Here comes the wordphaser!
I’ve decided to promote this record for an extended period, as I have a tendency to quickly move on and promote something only once among friends, and then consider it done. That’s, of course, not promotion. People are too numbed to appreciate new music anymore, I have the impression. Why is that? Let’s involve some philosophy in the rest of this post.
I think it’s because the toxic defense mechanism that social media has cultivated in everyone views everything as advertising. The doomscroller is trained not to fall for anything, and thus music or poetry are no exceptions: they too have been downgraded to ‘too much information,’ and his mind is trained to exclude them.
Combine that with increasingly intrusive forms of (self-)censorship, and you also get people who don’t even give likes or hearts anymore, because then they’re being watched.
And voila, there’s the modern musician, constantly trying to promote his record to his own circle of friends, who don’t listen and barely hand out hearts or likes, because you are an advertisement.
I was watching a discussion on television by chance, on an episode of Eva with Nina Haanappel and others, about banning social media for people under eighteen, a very complicated discussion. Under the Facebook post of this broadcast, there is exactly one comment:
A comment that is irrelevant—but that’s precisely what’s striking here. This man didn’t watch the broadcast, he sends out a blurb to let the world know he still exists.
A kind of spam, really.
People hardly posted new music before the advent of social media. The average person lives their entire life in their teenage years with the music that accompanied it. The core formula of their being is ‘new = tiring.’
People who have managed to retain the curiosity of childhood are quite rare.
But music and poetry are not information. They can do something against the information flow; they are healing.
But perhaps not for everyone? Are some people too far gone? That’s what you would think if you look at the news with the horrifying genocides here and there, and the tame non-reporting about it in our media. Israel, for example, lost more than 40 tanks in a week, no mention of it in our media. Ban social media? Perhaps better to first ensure independent media, not all owned by the same group?
It is unimaginable for some shady company to advertise every 10 seconds in every phone call you make, while listening in on your conversation. Why is this unthinkable for phone calls but not for social media? Because the privacy of correspondence doesn’t apply there? And who says that exactly? No one, people just act as if it’s normal, and it becomes a kind of customary law. A bit like arguing over quality in court in the case of the Literature Fund became customary law: the art pion complains about quality, we say quality is subjective, case closed.
A script born out of customary law.
In our information society, we are inundated with stimuli, news, advertisements, and opinions. As a result, we shield ourselves, erecting a mental wall to avoid feeling overwhelmed. But in doing so, we also exclude the valuable: the art, the music, the philosophy that prompt reflection and can enrich us.
The philosopher Theodor Adorno talked about the ‘cultural industry,’ where art is commercialized and reduced to a consumer product. Unique expression gives way to standardization and mass production. This leads to a flattening of culture and a passive attitude in the audience, which merely consumes without truly experiencing or reflecting.
Heidegger spoke of ‘distraction’ or ‘Verfallenheit’—the phenomenon where one loses oneself in the mundane and superficial, thereby losing contact with their authentic being. Instead of developing oneself and truly living, one is guided by the crowd and prevailing trends.
In Sein und Zeit (1927), Heidegger describes how human existence, which he calls Dasein, tends to lose itself in daily activities and social conventions. He introduces the concept of das Man, which refers to the anonymous crowd that dictates how we think and act. Heidegger states:
“Das Dasein verfehlt sich selbst ständig und verliert sich in das Man.”
(Sein und Zeit, §27)
This means that the individual constantly misses itself and loses itself in the anonymity of the masses. Instead of being authentic, we conform to the expectations and norms of others.
Heidegger also speaks of Alltäglichkeit (everydayness) and how this leads to Verfallen (decline or degeneracy):
“Das In-der-Welt-sein ist als Verfallen an die Welt bestimmt.”
(Sein und Zeit, §38)
Our being-in-the-world is therefore determined by falling away to the world, to the superficial and material. This distraction results in a state of inauthenticity or Uneigentlichkeit, where we are not our true selves but a version shaped by external influences. Heidegger emphasizes:
“In der Alltäglichkeit ist das Dasein zunächst und zumeist uneigentlich.”
(Sein und Zeit, §43)
The challenge lies in rediscovering our authentic being or Eigentlichkeit. This requires a conscious confrontation with oneself and the world, breaking through routines and imposed expectations. Heidegger introduces the concept of Entschlossenheit (resoluteness or determination) as the path to authenticity:
“Die Entschlossenheit erschließt dem Dasein seine eigensten Möglichkeiten.”
(Sein und Zeit, §60)
In the context of modern society and the influence of social media, these philosophical insights are particularly relevant. Social media function as an amplifier of das Man, where algorithms and trends determine what we see, think, and feel. We get caught up in a constant stream of information that distracts us from deeper reflection and authenticity.
You cannot ban das Man, that’s the whole problem. It is, to paraphrase, as if you would want to ban the Matrix itself, a standpoint most likely originating from Agent Smith. The problem is inherent in the structure of our society and the way we relate to the world.