Here is a close paraphrase of LaRouche's remarks:

He began, by emphasizing "the crossover from an animal or bookkeeper, to a human being." The key is the concept of immortality, and this is brought to the fore by comparing Hamlet with Jeanne d'Arc. The mastery of this is essential to the ability to maintain political staying-power.

Sir Lawrence Olivier never understood Hamlet. Hamlet is a killer. He is not afraid of death. He is afraid of immortality. The distinction between man and beast is the same as the issue between Gauss's 1799 intervention on the one side, and Euler and Lagrange on the other.

Euler committed conscious fraud. He was well aware of Leibniz's work on the concept of the infinitesimal and the principle of least action. Everything Gauss did was connected with this implication.

But in later discussions, up into the 1850s, Gauss said, "I made a discovery, but I don't talk about it." Why? The domination of Romanticism. After Jena/Auerstedt, Romanticism dominated Germany.

Initially, this Romanticism was not so blatant, as later. It was a parody of Classical principles. Following Lessing, Classical principles were well-defined. Goethe in his earlier period was primarily Classical. The revival of Greek Classical principles was well-established by the time of Schiller's death. The influence of this revived Classical principle was so popular, that the Romantics were forced to parody Classical works.

Clara Schumann told her students in the 1890s: "My husband never wrote passage-work." Passage-work is exactly what Lagrange does. Similarly, Liszt in his Second Piano Sonata tries to parody Mozart's K. 475. He couldn't do it. Whereas Chopin's Second Piano Sonata, first movement, is successful.

So, Romanticism took over virtually as a parody. Berlioz's Requiem for Napoleon, performed by three military bands and a mass chorus, is an example. The ugliest part, the second section, is a parody of Mozart, typical of the Romantics. The Romantics wanted to appear like Classical artists, but with no soul. They are not really human.

This is what took over. Heine's paper on the Romantic School attacks Goethe in his later period, for having capitulated to Romanticism. After 1806, Romanticism had a dominating position. Beethoven was constrained by the situation, as exemplified by what he had to compose in 1812 on Wellington's victory. Also Mozart was cut off, after Joseph II went crazy, and the Classical movement he had sponsored, died. So most of Mozart's compositions after that were written for Prague. Romanticism came to dominate even the Classical repertoire.

This is why, despite the discoveries of principle by Leibniz, Gauss, and Riemann, what you are taught today is the tradition of Lagrange and Euler.

The essence of the complex domain is already implied by Leibniz. Gauss was a continuation of development of the idea of the complex domain. What is that? Plato poses the issue in his dialogues, and it is in Archytas and Eratosthenes. It is the concept of Plato's Cave. Your sense organs are part of your organism. Your sense organs don't tell you what the outside world is. The senses only tell you the impact of the outside world on your sense organs. Only the mind can discover reality, by interpreting what comes from the sense organs.

How can you prove that? What is the reality, of what you can't see, touch, or hear?

This is the key to science. The complex domain is reality. Algebra and arithmetic are not real. What Lagrange and Euler call "imaginary," is real. There is no direct representation of reality in what your senses give you. For example, you can not use simple counting numbers to deal with reality.

You are real, but your naive interpretation of sense perception is not reality. Reality has a different geometry, which is the complex domain.

How do you find that? By the paradoxes of sense perception. By the conflicts among shadows that reflect reality. If you solve a paradox, and you can prove that the result is to increase your ability to control the universe, then you can know reality. Then you can say: That's me! The principles were already there. I discovered them, and now I can change the universe. That's the difference between man and the beasts. That is the spiritual quality of the universe. Now you know who you are.

Before, you were a Lagrangian formula. You ask, "Who am I?" and what you get is just scribbling. Romantics, like Lagrange, make everything into a mumbo-jumbo. But, if you don't know who you are, how can you cope with the universe?

Hamlet said,  "I can fight, I can kill. I may be killed. But don't talk to me about immortality. I don't want to know the consequences of my existence for the future."

Life is not a beginning and end, but just a place in space-time, from which you act on the universe. Thus, you get a sense of immortality. Acting to change the future in a beneficial manner. If you are confident, that you can change the universe this way, then you have nothing to fear. You have no fears of the sort typified by Hamlet.

Romantic composers fake it. Liszt was a student of the Satanic devil Carl Czerny. When Liszt as an adolescent he was brought to Beethoven, Beethoven said the youth was talented, but unfortunately was being taught by "that devil" Czerny. Liszt was a cocktail lounge pianist. He could fake it that way, but he could not compose. The Romantics are largely fakers. Their egos are very important to them. They always ask, "Did you see me? Did you admire me?" Whereas Classical actors, don't want you to see them, but rather to see the idea they are performing. They want to catch your imagination. Just so with Gauss. Gauss in his 1799 paper was a good actor.

That is the essence of politics, the essence of staying-power.

The importance of the Gauss 1799 paper is not simply the paper, but the experience of a discovery, of something you can prove.

This concerns something that was clear to Plato, the notion of powers. Energy does not exist. Energy is just an effect, as opposed to the notion of powers, which are real.

Double the line. How did you do that? You cheated. You had to go outside the line itself to double it. You can't double it, except by the concept of a higher power. You must move into space, or at least in a surface. You have to use rotation, to double the line. Rotation is a power. Now double a square. You need something new, you need to introduce other considerations. When you come to doubling the cube, you get to the real fun. Now you know what Plato meant by power.

What Gauss meant becomes clear when you look at it this way, from the complex domain. You know you are involved with powers.

Counting numbers are not self-evident. They reflect a structure of the universe, you didn't know existed. To account for this, you must consider unseen powers, other considerations, that exist in the mind. Euclidean geometry is not real, it is at most a shadow. What is real is the powers, principles. By discovering and using the principles, you can change the universe.

So, who are you? Well, try to discuss science without the names of individuals. The name of the discoverer of a principle is the identity of that person. Also, the name of the teacher who led you make a discovery of principle. Now the teacher has an identity.

Similarly, a great artist. Is music a bunch of notes? What makes it real? It is that guy, who can make music out of this. As Furtwaengler described it, playing between the notes. You never perform the notes, you perform the music. Where does the music exist? In the complex domain. The great performer presents paradox, selecting one which continues to resonate, all the way to the end of the composition.

For example, how do you compose a poem? Never compose until it is complete as an idea. Once you have the idea, you compose the poem. Every idea comes as an indivisible principle, expressed as a paradox, like doubling the cube. Once you have that, the elaboration of the discovery becomes a Classical presentation. Put people through the experience of the discovery. That is great art.

Great performance recaptures the experience of composition. Performers may take years of working a composition through, to make a Classical work their own. "It comes from me. I see it as a single idea. I will now perform with confidence, that I will do nothing except that idea."

Look at how Furtwaengler starts a performance. The orchestra is waiting, they know it is coming. Then, Furtwaengler launches the performance, as a surprise. From the beginning, he uses tricks that are not in the score, to make the music work. Why? Everything he does, is subordinated to the idea he is re-creating. So, the performer, like all great singers, says, "Now, this is mine."

So, when you play Hamlet, what do you have to do? You have to become Hamlet. You have to re-create who he is. You have to take the whole work, from the scene with the ghost, through the second and third soliloquies, to the conclusion, when Horatio goes to the fore-stage, to say to the audience: "Now let's reflect on what has happened, before more disasters occur." The actors and directing must show Hamlet's problem, his fear of immortality, not of death -- the tragic failure of Denmark. The failure of the tragic figure is what they can't do. Now compare Hamlet with what Schiller did with Jeanne d'Arc.

What you must do, is to change popular opinion, to violate it, to change it, to lead it in a direction contrary to its own tendency.

Look at Gauss. Popular opinion was the opinion expressed by Lagrange and Euler. Gauss's life's work was based on what he did against that, rooted in his training, with Zimmermann and Kaestner. Kaestner's teaching, was to throw out the geometry as taught by Euclid, to dump the whole works, to go back to earlier Greek authors. There was already in Kaestner an attack on Aristotle and the Aristotelian method.

You had a tragic situation. The prevalent culture of Europe was the Enlightenment. Gauss acted as Jeanne d'Arc. He was so successful, that modern science came about, despite the Romantic influence.

People run around, disguising themselves as people. But under the attire there is no real personality. You need an inside identity. When you are 18-25, you have escaped from adolescence. You have enthusiasm and the energy of adolescence, but you are now an adult. Don't lose that energy. Develop yourself. Then you never grow old.

You guys have a mission, a mission within which there are other missions. This time the youth movement will prevail. This time, it will no longer be just a few people, pulling the rest of society up. This time, we must make sure, that mankind does not slide back into a dark age.

If you get that sense of authority, then you can't be stopped.

Gauss is a beginning, for this. Think of Gauss as your friend. 

-30-

Return to the Home Page
Top