Rowan Lipkovits ([info]reluctance) wrote,
@ 2007-10-27 06:01:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Why talk about now when I can reminisce?
Perhaps it's something about the climate or light quality of this time of year that inspires a penchant for nocturnal nostalgia (and the consumption of cheese). (Or perhaps it's something about my procrastinating rustling up the Rasputin ensemble for one more tired trot around the track for tomorrow's bombastic Outlaw Band Hallowe'en show in Quesnel.) In any case, a sum of recent experiences have been putting me in mind of a certain critical but largely undocumented transition period in my life spanning the end of the honeymoon with everything2 and the final "regular" adoption of livejournal use, running from roughly 2001 through 2003 -- and tellingly encompassing my final rejection of poetry (hum, and post-secondary education, along with one of my two changes of house) and glacial baby steps into accordion fluency. Also, perhaps the period in which my hold-over adolescent optimism in regards to my personal life finally gave up the ghost; I was not only interested in girls, but had not yet adopted what I concluded to be the fair, cool and civilized abstract approach of not treating people any differently regardless of whether I secretly thrilled at the remote prospect of someday possibly engaging in mutual physical gratification with them. (For lack of ability to stop actually objectifying them, I figured the decent thing to do was to at least not treat them like objects, ie to not subject them to any special or extraordinary treatment at all -- I will act as though you are all monkeys to me! It's a pity that this approach, while motivated by some twisted distortion of respect, is so easily mistaken for disinterest. It was easier while I laboured beneath the (proven erroneous) assumption that my generative organs were defunct -- since of course there's no point in longing after what you (think you) can't have, a good case of that old attachment leads to suffering chestnut.)

In any case, recently-exhumed memories from this period reminded me of my ultimate conception of the callowly selfish nature of immature lust and fear of the plainly anti-social behavior passion could drive one to. My blithe intensity frightened me and ultimately I concluded it was probably for the good of all that we put these feelings aside where they could do no harm to others. (What? Repressed emotions, harmful? Only to one's self! And who's the one trying to eschew selfish tendencies here?) Thinking back now, these were probably an extension of self-imposed behavior censures I clamped on myself after observing how making a big fuss of someone's public self-harm in the late '90s likely contributed to further harm; I must have resolved on some level to only acknowledge and respond to positive bids for attention. I dubbed my emotionless selfless ideology "post-humanism" and proceeded around the turn of the century to play a part in breaking up an engagement between two people I'd never met. (Still had some bugs to work out.) This may not all follow because hey, it was after all a turbulent period of transition in which some secret and apparently unrelated (if not outright self-contradictory) truths revealed themselves fully-formed; I don't need to explain this because I know it to be self-evident! Also, I may not be giving them the clearest voice at 5 am. (But with pickup in four hours, what else am I gonna do?)

I suppose I am beginning to reveal why the period was so undocumented; some thoughts are just too big (or amorphous at least) to gather until reflection and life experience endow the thinker with a basket large and tenacious enough to hold them. Curiously, what documents remain from the period are vague and elusive; was I preserving the identities of the innocent or merely trying to appear more intriguing through the omission of key details?

...

Over the Columbus Day / Thanksgiving weekend en route south with the Planks (a tale still awaiting processing; perhaps you'll get an "October in review" photoblog) I was struck with vivid memories of an earlier trip to the Peace Arch crossing, starting with a sighting of the closest bus stop to the border crossing and side-stepping with discussion of the continuous public transportation coverage from Horseshoe Bay to Portland, Oregon for eight dollars, providing you have three days to spend doing it and a good friend in Olympia to put you up for the night. (Particulars fudged from memory; qous can surely dig up his original research, however outdated now. Someday I still hope to put the hypothesis to the test.) But when I began pointing out where I had camped out for two nights fasting in a tent next to a floral display, I suppose there was no getting around vaguely invoking the bizarre circumstances that had led me there. (And why did I not make back-ups of that entry's photos? While I know that hotlinking is inelegant at best I suppose I never felt I had many alternatives at my disposal.)

The rest of the month was spent more making memories than looking back to existing ones; Thursday night Conrad was showing prospective partners a potential underground arts venue, which resonated deafeningly with the Church of Pointless Hysteria, a onetime studio / gallery across the street from the onetime Woodwards' building, where I first took up Living Closet reins before some years later dismounting from the overworked and expired steed, eyes X'd out and gaseous clouds in the shape of skull-and-crossbones emerging from its ears. Have I learned anything in the past eight years, I asked myself, that would keep me from plunging back into the same activity and making the same glorious mistakes? (The Butchershop was a suite of similar but different mistakes.)

Today I'm able to make the first visit to the library in months, strike finally "resolved" however satisfactorily, and anticipate setting back into motion my lifestyle plan of living well provided I take out my library card more frequently than my bank card. From there I proceed to Media Democracy Day, an annual outburst in this, possibly the world's most concentrated area of consolidated media ownership, and one that I have previously attended as a visitor and as a journalist. This time I was sitting in at a table on behalf of my father's newspaper, the Columbia Journal, but remarking to myself that for lack of it I could do as much good for other organizations there playing far greater parts in my life, Co-op radio or Spartacus Books or even FreeGeek (a gut nearly busts when I remark that when thinking of media democracy, e-waste recycling is one of the first subjects to my mind also!) I am assigned a table to share with a lady from the SFPIRG and gradually (through my casual vocal characterisation of Conrad, proclaiming the natural relatedness of cycling, nudism and anti-consumerism since, after all, they are all things that interest him) determine that she's been a part of "the rest of the story" of threads I'd long since set aside. And so I tell her of the founding of the Work Less Party, its roots in anti-war protest, and strong ties to Vancouver's Critical Mass community, first having catastrophically launched from that very (SFU Harbour Centre) site 9 years prior at the Free U teach-in event.

Then a stranger came to our table to inquire regarding our various causes and asked me how the last few years had gone. Egad, I must know this person but from where? Turns out that upon dropoff at the airport en route to my New Year's Eve 2003 party in New York City, I made sure before catching my flight to put a rock-paper-scissors-by-mail move into the post box there for her to mull over while I met a cognizant and various and sundry (for cultish reasons that are no longer entirely clear) in Kansas. That was to be my postcardx year of mail art but things (and my burgeoning scrivener's palsy) got in the way. If you are going to send love letters it should be clear that that's what they are, but I was not cool enough to sustain coy flirtation and eventually, playing games with myself unrelated to the one I was playing with her, I experienced a bit of an emotional meltdown, my last great desperate flaring of want before settling into a stable sort of resignation (very occasionally punctuated with stabs of surprise and disbelief.)

What astounded me was the way this person who for a time consumed all my idle thoughts (last in a long line of relationships largely conducted safely in my head) and dismissed as lost forever (last known sighting: Trieste) now went completely unrecognized by me! Have I so thoroughly dismantled my desire that it can no longer even identify its own remains? I found this failure to identify her so astounding it shocked and rocked me in a fashion even more profound than the news of my (phrase omitted for privacy reasons, then compared for totally relevant reasons to how little kissing I do) but I suppose that won't happen accidentally, however bizarrely lightning struck twice four years ago. I probably shouldn't follow the model of that farmer who, once observing a rabbit running against a stump and breaking its neck, starves to death waiting for another rabbit to come by and do the same.)

I suppose if her very appearance could be banished from my mind (but what is mine still doing in hers? well, sticking -- it seems to be good at that), I could be said to have gotten over her. (But were that truly the case, would I be waxing on at such great length?) In any event, if that were so, the record seems to indicate that would be a first. After all, my journal appears to suggest that any event in my past, no matter how seemingly trivial or inane at the time, is more significant to me than than right now. Right?

(Guess it's time to pull that costume together. I'd like to think that over four hours I would have come up with something a bit more coherent. Who knows, with eight hours of editing something focused might emerge. A sonnet perhaps, or (with a further eight hours) a haiku.)



(Post a new comment)

not treating people any differently regardless of whether I secretly thrilled
[info]reluctance
2007-10-27 01:15 pm UTC (link)
or otherwise put by lovemotionstory:

"i wish you could take two seconds to get to know me, to respect me as i am - not as you'd like to think i am or expect me to be - before you start daydreaming about sticking your tongue in my mouth."

But thrills and daydreams come unbidden and aren't necessarily cultivated. I have excellent impulse control, but that's not the same as not having the impulse in the first place. (And then there is the concern that when the impulses finally stop, one will in some way have died a little bit inside -- at which point they ARE just all monkeys to me. And yet that hints at a profound misanthropy!) (Well, I suppose no less so than dividing them all up into two categories: monkeys and monkeys with tasty-looking mouths.)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: not treating people any differently regardless of whether I secretly thrilled
[info]radlab0
2007-10-27 03:59 pm UTC (link)
I think perhaps it would also be acceptable to get to know someone, to respect them as they are, while sticking your tongue into their mouth. Or perhaps not into their mouth (as such an act complicates communication in a rather significant way), but instead whispering questions into the nape of their neck, entwining fingers. After all, the we that we are comes as a function of navigating a body through a complex environment, and there is something to be said for acknowledging that embodiment.

Which is all to say that getting to know someone and making them feel all tingly needn't be mutually exclusive.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

it would also be acceptable to get to know someone, to respect them as they are, while ...
[info]reluctance
2008-02-01 04:36 pm UTC (link)
Coincidentally I've had this thread open in my browser for a few weeks now, feeling bad about having carried on at great length with just about all other participants but not even having acknowledged your comment. My intent was not to be dismissive of your input; rather, I would just kind of end up with an internal error of sorts reading through every time I attempted to respond. Sometimes I would disagree with the premises, sometimes with the conclusion; I think this is just because your world (where, for instance, touching occurs) and my world are so very different: acknowledging the embodiment? But my personal philosophy casts everyone as disembodied, interchangeable consciousnesses at the wheel of this generation's monkey-mobiles!

Human attraction being what it is (if you can't be with the one you love...) I think that that tingly business is all incredibly distracting from getting to know someone: I don't need to get to know you because I already know that I love what you do for me! If you don't feel a need to get under the surface because your hormones combine to make a potent six-month chemistry cocktail, then at the end of that time once your receptors have acclimatized you're stuck with a stranger who you may or may not have any interest in being around! (It may just be that everyone else has come to terms with this and I still see it as a fundamental problem, one I to my detriment have avoided engaging.)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

If you don't feel a need to get under the surface because your hormones combine
[info]radlab0
2008-02-17 08:46 pm UTC (link)
It sounds like we're both having "does not compute" moments here, you because of a focus on disembodiment (though I would contend that to the degree that a chunk of meat does our thinking for us, disembodiment seems a bit difficult), and me, because I simply cannot fathom the idea that wanting to have some physical contact with someone would ever interfere with my desire to have some mental contact with them. If anything, I find that physical contact facilitates the getting-to-know-you process. You can learn a lot about a person from the way they move, the things they do with their hands when they aren't paying attention, the ways they like to touch and be touched. Moreover, physical contact sometimes makes it easier to overcome internal barriers to talking. You can tell someone, "I'm here, I am listening," without interrupting them by reaching to hold their hand, or leaning your head on their shoulder. You can relax someone by rubbing their back so that they feel more ready and willing to share their ideas. Body language often seems to be crucial to disambiguating the intent behind a misinterpretable verbal signal.

In my mind, it works roughly like this:
(touch)
"I like you. Don't stop talking."

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

to the degree that a chunk of meat does our thinking for us, disembodiment seems a bit difficult
[info]reluctance
2008-02-18 08:47 am UTC (link)
Hey, I never claimed disembrainiment 8)

I simply cannot fathom the idea that wanting to have some physical contact with someone would ever interfere with my desire to have some mental contact with them. If anything, I find that physical contact facilitates the getting-to-know-you process.

Admittedly they can work in concert, but I feel they can also compete with each other to exclusion. Touching me will definitely get my attention, but my focus will shift to how to prolong and perpetuate that touching. Sure, I will also be keen on the mental contact front, at least just enough so as not to consciously say that wrong thing that will terminate the touching. Just because I'm staring intently at your mouth doesn't mean that I'm reading the words as your lips shape them.

It may be the case that as a touch-hungry wire-mama rhesus monkey, I'm not in a good state to reflect on what is normal behavior (I don't know how unusual this is, but I feel pretty pathological... which I figure is pretty typical.) It's a bit like the lady holding forth at great length with the intense unbeknownst-to-her-alcoholic man sitting across from her, never realising that what he is devotedly fixed on is not her cogent analysis but rather the half-full bottle of scotch behind her.

You can learn a lot about a person from the way they move, the things they do with their hands when they aren't paying attention, the ways they like to touch and be touched.

I spend a lot of time twisted into anxious and uptight tense contortions and most of that time I'm too body-illiterate to even read myself. Really I figured that if I cannot distinguish between a girl who likes me and a girl who is nice, then I had no business even being in the girlbrary. (It may be the case that the distinction between them is one of such subtle nuance that extreme fluency is required to disambiguate + that by having thrown my hands up at the Dick and Jane level I will never proceed to Tropic of Cancer.)

Moreover, physical contact sometimes makes it easier to overcome internal barriers to talking. You can tell someone, "I'm here, I am listening," without interrupting them by reaching to hold their hand, or leaning your head on their shoulder. You can relax someone by rubbing their back so that they feel more ready and willing to share their ideas.

And here is where our worlds diverge. I can't contest that these actions might produce these effects, but conducting such an action on a person with whom I wasn't already on touching terms would be an insurmountably big deal to me. You can say "you can" this and "you can" that, but really... I'm sure you can, but I can't. As much as I would like to be casual and blasé about it, the closest I get is crippled and paralysed. The starving man is overwhelmed when he crests a dune and stumbles upon a wedding feast.

I've really conjured into existence an arbitrary tautological catch-22 pedestal for these matters that I will eventually have to either come to terms with or else turn black, shrivel up and fall off the world. (Aiee! The upper atmosphere, it burns!)

I've derailed the initial premise of our dispute a bit with an unscheduled pity party, but this may be the emergence of underlying issues informing my position. (Or am I just selfishly entrenching myself? "I'm so unhappy in my current state that I'm proclaiming myself incapable of extracting myself from it; what I need is for someone to come in and carry me out. But not her, she's fat.")

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: not treating people any differently regardless of whether I secretly thrilled
[info]bluebear2
2007-10-27 05:48 pm UTC (link)
This is interesting. I think I've been doing the same approach too. Respecting people as people including the ones that I have an interest in thinking that it's the proper way and the respectful way, meanwhile some jerk comes along and sweeps them away in a minute.
Maybe I got the wrong approach.

Four years? It's been a less for me but a similar thing. Maybe it's just Vancouver. A frontier town on the west coast. People come here to be all they can be or to escape winter or something, not to connect with others.
Do you have any theories about Vancouver based on your observations when it comes to people and their interactions? (Not just in regards to romance but also to any sociall interaction.)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Respecting people as people including the ones that I have an interest in
[info]reluctance
2007-10-29 11:11 pm UTC (link)
I guess that sometimes people want to be treated as people and sometimes they want to be treated as objects; while they can drop hints you can't know for sure which mood they're in without taking a gamble, and if your timing is off they'll think you're an asshole. The bright side is that I've been very good at people not thinking that I'm an asshole.

thinking that it's the proper way and the respectful way, meanwhile some jerk comes along and sweeps them away in a minute. Maybe I got the wrong approach.

Turns out it's the classic "nice guy" approach, generally written off as the "passive-aggressive" approach. It helps you avoid a series of small failures as long as you don't mind resigning for a large overbearing milder (but perhaps ultimately more self-damaging?) failure. (Of course, where relationships are concerned, successes can still be big mistakes, though ideally they can be treated as learning experiences. Settling for the large gentle failure deprives you of so many life lessons!)

I like to think that the nice guy approach at least helps you make friends if not intimate ones, but observation suggests that when that "some jerk" comes around, nice guy friends are one of the first lifestyle elements left by the wayside. "It's been fun, nice guys, I'll come back for support when I'm single again!" If you don't mind superficial and short-term friendships, it's a pleasant enough way to kill the time.

Four years? It's been a less for me but a similar thing.

That isn't four years without kissing (just one), but rather four years since being in a position to resume kissing on a regular basis.

Do you have any theories about Vancouver based on your observations when it comes to people and their interactions?

It's hard to make claims about Vancouver without having lived anywhere else; when you invoke the winter escape and the west coast frontier it's difficult to avoid thinking of Portland, which is set in such similar circumstances but where everybody seems to get along relating like gangbusters. Certainly the adage about Canadians being more polite seems to be the case, though actually it is a diplomatic way of saying we are far more reserved -- less likely to give you the finger in traffic, and less likely to take you home for dinner with the folks after meeting you at the bus stop. (I wouldn't necessarily presume this to be the case in Winnipeg, Montreal or Halifax; I think Vancouver is just trying so hard to out-cool Toronto that it forgets that ostentatious displays of wealth don't actually in and of themselves constitute fun.)

Someone remarked recently that as a city of emigres, Vancouver is a city full of broken people with baggage, people who were fleeing something back home and are tentatively, hesitantly trying to start over. It might be projecting too much (and unnecessarily invoking one of my more favorite metaphors) to describe us as a pack of beaten dogs.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

heh
[info]lovemotionstory
2007-10-30 04:55 am UTC (link)
that entry has been quite controversial and contemplated, it seems. i kind of wrote that while feeling bitter and angsty... i've defended it, but i am also a terrible hypocrite, guilty of what i condemned in that entry.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Curiously, what documents remain from the period are vague and elusive;
[info]th3k1d
2007-10-27 08:24 pm UTC (link)
Nothing has changed, you know. :)


Are you going to the Parade of Lost Souls tonight? If so, see you there!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Nothing has changed, you know. :)
[info]reluctance
2007-10-29 12:35 pm UTC (link)
You tell me. There's obscure and there's impassable 8)

Are you going to the Parade of Lost Souls tonight?

All that talk about Quesnel wasn't just hot air... but had I not been up there, Lost Souls is certainly where I would have been.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]icecreamemperor
2007-10-28 11:42 am UTC (link)

That was nice to read. It's much more rewarding to throw myself into the increasingly tangled spiderweb of language when you're talking about yourself, rather than an endless list of events you have attended. Even if you only ever emerge in your own writings in the past tense (maybe this has something to do with giving up on poetry.)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

talking about yourself, rather than an endless list of events you have attended
[info]reluctance
2007-10-29 10:54 pm UTC (link)
What's with this pernicious theory about me being more than the sum of my activities? In any case, this was a similar list; only the activities were of years past rather than last month -- perhaps I've just been given enough time to confabulate a hazy narrative (the story of: what contributed to my turning out the way I did?) and construct meaning out of what were essentially unrelated + meaningless activities. (Unrelated save for the Conrad sense, that is.) Maybe in five years I'll be making reference to all these 57 Varieties and Creaking Planks shows and how hugely formative they were on mellowing my philosophy... me, I doubt it, suspecting that it's just the latest extension of the same drive that led me to volunteer for the Living Closet, itself just a settling for the next best milieu following the collapse of Mistigris. (And that only really entered into in some attempt to ensure access to free video games!) When I say I haven't really changed, grown or developed in the past 10 years this is the sort of thing I mean: my core drives are still those I adopted at age 15 (... to the extent that I still have the same haircut!)

the increasingly tangled spiderweb of language when you're talking about yourself

Hey, we are complicated people; wouldn't the use of straightforward language to describe us be misleading? (I guess the trick is in clearly communicating the precise ways in which we are complicated. DSM manuals can encapsulate huge disorders in single words!)

Even if you only ever emerge in your own writings in the past tense

I am not the protagonist in the story of my life; I guess I prefer to be the old man who dispenses wisdom to the young would-be hero at the start of the story. I suppose it might at least make for a better story were I to adopt a little more focus and direction. (And don't we at least owe ourselves interesting stories? After walking away from a car crash you can say "At least we got a story out of it." I don't know about angling things to maximise crashes, however; this is rapidly becoming the setting up of one of those peaks-and-valleys vs. flatline false dichotomies.)

(maybe this has something to do with giving up on poetry.)

Ehh, I figured once I experienced a second emotional state I would write a second poem; the one of foreboding discontent I wrote and re-wrote endlessly was interesting but wearing thin.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: talking about yourself, rather than an endless list of events you have attended
[info]icecreamemperor
2007-10-30 03:53 am UTC (link)
I would write a second poem

I liked the one you read when you were randomly drafted for that team slam a few years ago. In fact I thought of it the other day and meant to ask if you remembered it/had it written down. It was about waking up next to Dominique and ruminating on your ugliness, etc.

perhaps I've just been given enough time to confabulate a hazy narrative (the story of: what contributed to my turning out the way I did?)

Yes that's what I meant by 'talking about yourself', exactly. I don't care at all that your actions may actually be meaningless -- that doesn't make the meaning you make out of them any less important or interesting.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

It was about waking up next to Dominique and ruminating on your ugliness, etc.
[info]reluctance
2007-10-30 08:12 am UTC (link)
Ah, that was my first, greatest piece of postcard fiction! An interesting interlude, unfortunately hampered by (and doubtlessly exacerbating) the writers' cramp.

It was written for one Jessica Pierce before I'd ever met Jhayne who would eventually introduce me to Dominique; the girl in it was entirely confabulated (I understand that if I only ever appear in public with one girl and then refer to a girl in a poem, there may be assumptions) and would prefer, I think, to remain anonymous. (I must disclaim that my observations of her shifting sleep states were entirely wholesome in nature.)
Last night I had an out-of-body experience. Rising buoyantly among coils of my silver cord, I looked down upon us in placid sleep, curled around each other like common weeds choking a garden path. It was then that the profound tragedy of it all struck me - My God, what is she doing with such an ugly, ugly man?

But then something changed. You made a bestial noise, my darling, and a convulsion racked your prone form. Your tongue protruded gracelessly and your eyelids fluttered, revealing intently crossed eyes. So it was that I saw that perhaps you were as ugly as I.

Satisfied by this resolution of the perceived inequity, I smiled and sank down back into my body. Some hours later, as dawn singed the edges of the sky, you rolled over and farted at me.
I'm not convinced that it really is a second work; it just wears its sardonic self-deprecation at a rakish angle of the grotesque.

I don't care at all that your actions may actually be meaningless

Oh, surely as a friend you care at least a little 8)

that doesn't make the meaning you make out of them any less important or interesting.

For someone who spends as much time looking backwards as I do you'd think the reflection would come through the pipe faster than it does. A few years later, I get to find out how I was.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: It was about waking up next to Dominique and ruminating on your ugliness, etc.
[info]icecreamemperor
2007-10-30 11:16 am UTC (link)
the girl in it was entirely confabulated

Biography gets in the way again. Anyways, nice to read it. I didn't mean to suggest it was the elusive 'second work', the conversation just reminded me that I wanted to ask after it.

Oh, surely as a friend you care at least a little

Well, since I believe all our actions are meaningless outside of the stories we construct out of them... nope?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

the parentheses get in the way again!
[info]reluctance
2007-11-01 08:31 pm UTC (link)
the girl in it was entirely confabulated ... and would prefer, I think, to remain anonymous.

Imaginary people and their desire for privacy! Huff! Forgotten in the 4 am fogs was a note that her inspiration was real.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]1is_many
2007-10-30 08:38 pm UTC (link)
A current model, theory, confabulation, half-assed excuse (I like that one best-that any theorem about the supposed nature of reality functions quite nicely as an excuse.) outright lie, that I prefer, for myself: Obviously, I can only determine the value of a very small sliver of the spectrum that my pink and grey jello mold can sort out-value being of what use it is to me, and this invalidates any suppositions I may have on the overall nature of a much larger spectrum-so, instead, as a sort of guidance system, I have decided that while there may be no overall inherent meaning to exterior consensus reality, I reserve the right to make up my own, and apply it at will. my judgement sensors do not demand proof of operation, only proof of happiness.

This allows me to careen around quite nicely, if occasionally bumping into things. As well, it rather joyfully ignores the rather sodden, at this point in history, attempts to divine at least minimally, the very nature of exterior consensus reality. Like, deciding whether there is life after death-Lyall Watson, in The Romeo Error, pointed out that first, we must define both 'life', and 'death', to even bother having the argument. And to date, we, the human specie, have not successfully divined either of those. Rendering further arguments moot. I watched a scientist, in some argument, bemaoning the fact that she could not prove she existed. I laughed. I don't need any proof. Not because I already have any, but because such inanity adds little, if anything, to any kind of event / reality / relationship of events / the great whatchamacallit. One of those can't see the forest for the weeds things.

Should you, then, adopt such a belief / ignorance? Nope. My illusory, unprovable, unsupportable probable misperception of the Great Whatever-good a name as any-depends only on my definition of what makes me happy-within certain biological constraints, of course.

By the way, I had made up this personal ah, guidance doohickey, which could be reduced to "well see", at a time in my life of overwhelmingly nasty bad, utter crap. And I had asked the question why, and then stopped myself-with my own answer-"what the hell kind of a question is that? That's just so...stupid!" So the question, and it's answer, became "what do I want to do about this?" which lead to make it up as I go along-Bertrand Russell, I believe, and I could be wrong, had a break with the idea of God, because of WWII-"How could God allow such an atrocity?" Hmn-so, he gets bitter about life, because some great unprovable and undefineable whatever, allowed a nasty thing to happen? Man, that's nutty-like deciding that life sucks, because "Bob" 'allowed' some atrocity to happen-or, to refine that-a great unknown, not proven to exist in any defineable sense, nor proven to not exist, somehow had a hand in the affairs of the world?

I decided such questions were ultimately unecessary. Meaning be damned. Meaning appears to have no referents. So I chucked it. And slowly realized that what we define as pain-and I've experience a lot of both kinds-mental and physical-can be, if not exactly controlled, at least can be simply viewed as a sensation. Such as when I broke a bone-very painful-and had an amzing experience in the waiting room-two hour wait-of observing the sensation itself. when I paid attention to the pain, as pain, ow. when I observed it as a sensation, it would vacillate between no pain at all, and pain as pure sensation. One can be argued to be production of body's own morphines and opiates, but not the sensation one.

All this is a roundabout way of saying that I find various arguments that allegedly learned scientists make about about the nature of exterior consensus reality, and maybe the inner stuff, to be lacking in a common sense approach-that of the decision of the participant in reality. I could care less what anyone, anywhere, decides what is what-if my personal illusions can be made to work, then I am happy.

uh, I have waxed oververbosical. Plus, I gotta walk Minny for her daily pee and poop. whose reality is deifned by eating, and what smells interest her.

(Reply to this)


[info]1is_many
2007-10-30 09:37 pm UTC (link)
dang-that's 'we'll see' and 'led', not 'lead'.

(Reply to this)

once observing a rabbit running against a stump and breaking its neck, starves to death waiting
[info]reluctance
2007-12-18 12:50 am UTC (link)
for another

I was reminded of this last night hearing an account of a bird who flew out of a bush right into the mouth of a surprised cat.

(Reply to this)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…