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
- literature community
- American literature
- poetry
- literature
- poem
- literary
- creative writing
- writing
- poetry community
- Michael Istvan
- Istvan
- perception
- defiance
- suffering
- existential poetry
- dissociative
- existential
- healing
- human
- mortality
- power
- art
- artist
- God
- evolution
- death
- love
- darwin
- anxiety
- rape
- psychoanalysis
- addiction
- homeless
- addict
- trauma
- therapy
- rapist
- traumatic
- hypersexual
- hyperarousal
- grooming
- anal
- anal sex
- heart
- incendiary
- meditation
- dead
- tyrant
- Identitarianism
- poverty
- fap
- choking
- traitor
- treachery
- identity
- honey pot
- true crime
- power dynamic
- cunnilingus
- Vaginal
- woke
- OwnVoices
- animals
- empathy
- crack
- ally
- disease
- crime
- scarf
- summer
- body disposal
- kidnapping
- identity politics
- indians
- Vagina
- turtles
- Klan
- sex
- surrealism
- fisting
- anality
- erotic
- scatalogical
- poet
- Pussy
- sublime
- safe space
- poetry editor
- adolescence
- violence
- censor
- artistry
- borders
- censors
- class
- Nietzsche
- campus warrior
- mega dildo
- substance abuse
- gut puncher
Posts
Clinical Excommunication (ROUND 1)
"Clinical Excommunication" is a poem about the coercive grammar of therapeutic and institutional interpretation — the way certain professional frameworks demand a particular kind of self-disclosure, and penalize those who withhold it not by engaging with their refusal but by converting it into a diagnostic category. Its nine lines move through three tercets with comic precision, deploying two extended analogies before arriving at the clinical notation that retroactively names what the speaker's resistance has been classified as. The poem's argument is compressed into its title: excommunication is a religious act, the formal expulsion of a member who has failed to conform to doctrinal requirement. The clinical setting, the poem insists, performs the same operation under different vocabulary.
The governing analogy structure — psychoanalyst, Pentecostal revival, mall hypnotist — is the poem's central formal achievement. Each figure represents a system that requires the subject's surrender as proof of the system's validity. The psychoanalyst needs the mommy-daddy answers: the stock narrative of parental origination that confirms the theoretical framework before the session has properly begun. The Pentecostal reverend — "Reverend Sho'Nuff," whose name carries its own freight of performative authority — needs the congregant to fall under the holy-ghost hand, to drop as physical evidence of the spirit's presence. The mall hypnotist needs the subject to bark, to perform the loss of autonomous will that justifies the whole enterprise. In each case, the subject's non-compliance is not interpreted as evidence that the system may be limited or wrong. It is interpreted as evidence that the subject is deficient — a "spoilsport," a resistant case, a pathology.
"Reverend Sho'Nuff" is doing more than comic work. The name evokes the villain of the 1985 martial-arts film "The Last Dragon," a figure of theatrical self-proclaimed authority — "the master" — whose power depends entirely on others' willingness to recognize it. Applied to the Pentecostal revival context, the name quietly argues that the revival's spiritual authority and the villain's martial authority operate by the same logic: both require the crowd's performed submission to sustain the performance of power. The speaker who does not drop is not failing spiritually; they are declining to participate in a theater that requires their body as a prop.
The mall hypnotist comparison is the poem's most democratizing move. By placing the psychoanalyst in a sequence that runs through a Pentecostal revival to a mall hypnotist, the poem performs a deliberate bathos — a descent in cultural register that is also an argument about structural equivalence. The psychoanalyst operates in the most credentialed and theoretically elaborated of the three frameworks; the mall hypnotist operates in the least. But the demand each makes on the subject is identical: surrender your autonomous interpretive authority, perform the response the system requires, and thereby validate the system's power. The poem does not argue that psychoanalysis is as intellectually thin as mall hypnosis. It argues that the specific demand for compliance, and the specific penalty for non-compliance, are structurally the same across all three.
The poem's punchline — "and so / the notepad scribble: 'sev antisoc.'" — is where the argument lands with its full weight. The abbreviation performs the excommunication: "severe antisocial" rendered in the shorthand of clinical documentation, a notation made not because the speaker has displayed antisocial behavior in any meaningful sense but because they have declined to provide the responses that the framework requires. The "notepad scribble" is the clinical equivalent of the excommunication document — the formal record of failed compliance, converted into a diagnosis. That it is a scribble matters: this is not careful clinical observation but the quick notation of professional irritation, the diagnostic category deployed as punishment for the subject's refusal to be legible in the expected way.
The title's "excommunication" holds the poem's deepest irony. Excommunication is supposed to name a genuine breach — a heresy, a departure from the community's essential doctrine. What the poem exposes is that the breach here is not doctrinal but procedural: the speaker has not denied the validity of psychology or the existence of childhood influence, has simply declined to produce the expected narrative on demand. The clinical framework, like the religious one, cannot distinguish between genuine dissent and the refusal to perform. Both get the same notation.
Formally, the three tercets mirror the three analogies with elegant economy. Each tercet introduces a figure of institutional authority and the specific performance that figure demands, building a cumulative case before the final tercet delivers the verdict. The enjambment is precise — "and so" at the opening of the final tercet functions as a logical connective, the conclusion of an argument the poem has been building, before "the notepad scribble" arrives as the punchline that is also a diagnosis. The colon before the quoted notation gives it the weight of evidence — this is the record, the document, the excommunication made legible in four characters of clinical abbreviation.
Meta Description
A poem about the coercive compliance structures of psychoanalysis, Pentecostal revival, and mall hypnosis — arguing that each demands the subject's performed surrender as proof of the system's validity, and converts non-compliance not into evidence of the system's limits but into a diagnostic category, rendering clinical notation as a form of institutional excommunication.
Keywords
Clinical Excommunication, psychoanalysis critique, institutional compliance, antisocial diagnosis, Pentecostal revival poetry, mall hypnotist, therapeutic framework, diagnostic coercion, excommunication metaphor, contemporary American poetry, comic poetry, tercet form, clinical notation, performed surrender, heresy and diagnosis
blog
FAQ
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?

