![]() |
Not for the faint of art. |
Complex Numbers A complex number is expressed in the standard form a + bi, where a and b are real numbers and i is defined by i^2 = -1 (that is, i is the square root of -1). For example, 3 + 2i is a complex number. The bi term is often referred to as an imaginary number (though this may be misleading, as it is no more "imaginary" than the symbolic abstractions we know as the "real" numbers). Thus, every complex number has a real part, a, and an imaginary part, bi. Complex numbers are often represented on a graph known as the "complex plane," where the horizontal axis represents the infinity of real numbers, and the vertical axis represents the infinity of imaginary numbers. Thus, each complex number has a unique representation on the complex plane: some closer to real; others, more imaginary. If a = b, the number is equal parts real and imaginary. Very simple transformations applied to numbers in the complex plane can lead to fractal structures of enormous intricacy and astonishing beauty. |
Tomorrow, I'll resume posting links to discuss, and sometimes entries into "Journalistic Intentions" ![]() Interesting word, "holiday." In British English, it means "vacation." Here in the US, it's usually some sort of observance, commemoration, official day off for some people (but obviously not everyone). The word itself is, as one might guess, derived from words meaning "holy day." As I've noted here too many times to count, words change over time, but I find it useful to know their origins sometimes. I urged yesterday, "Tell us about your Memorial Day plans!" So it's only fair, I suppose, that I do the same. Memorial Day is, by most definitions of the word, a holiday, a secular one observed in the US (though of course different religions can interpret it as they see fit) to commemorate primarily those who have died in the service of the Armed Forces of the US. We have other days for honoring those who have served, or will serve. In practice, it's a day for cookouts, going to a beach, setting off fireworks (really, we Yanks don't need much excuse for that), or getting together with friends. It's the unofficial start of the summer season here, so summer, outdoor activities predominate. Some find this disrespectful of the purpose of the holiday, I suppose. I'm not going to take sides either way, but I will point out that such activities fall under the nebulous heading of "freedom," which is what they say service members fought for. Me? I hate crowds even when there's not a pandemic going on (and make no mistake, there still is), so I generally stay home and drink. Coincidentally, that's what I do most days, but when I drink on Memorial Day, I remember my dad and my uncle (not his brother, but my mom's). Neither of them died in battle, but both served in WW2. And I say they didn't die in battle, but with my uncle, that's a technicality. I knew him, growing up, as a big, scary, ominous presence who wasn't entirely sane. Not that he was dangerous. I mean, sure, he had been a soldier, but when we got into that war, it's not like he had much of a choice. He had been a gentle man (that space between those words is entirely intentional), and remained so. He was just... not all there. Unpredictable. My aunt, his sister, had to take care of him while running a business, and she did her duty, too. They called it "shell-shock" then, but I suppose he had what would be called PTSD now. That's what happens when you're a Jewish American soldier marching through Germany, seeing your comrades die in battle, and learning the first-hand truth about what was going on at Dachau. I know from his letters home, which I've read but shan't quote here, that he did, indeed, die in that war, even though his body lasted another 45 years. So that's what I remember on Memorial Day. Take it as you will. I won't shame anyone for grasping what enjoyment they can from the holiday, or for doing the opposite and commemorating it in silent solemnity, or anything in between. Like I said... freedom. It comes at a high price, and it's not only the soldiers who pay it. ![]() ![]() ![]() Mini-Contest Results Thanks for all the comments! I couldn't be arsed, after all that above, to use the Virtual Dice, so you'll just have to take my word that the choice is random. A LeJenD' at 49 ![]() ![]() Just a couple of quick notes: SandraLynn, Victoria Day is the "first official weekend of non-winter" in Canada? I didn't know there was a "non-winter" in Canada. Okay, I exaggerate. I've been to Toronto and Vancouver (different years) in July, though, and they were complaining about 80F being a heat wave. That's not a heat wave. That's a mild spring day. Don't get me wrong; I love Canada. Beautiful country, when it's not covered by s**w. Happy birthday to Elisa the Bunny Stik! Soldier_Mike, you honor your friend. Everyone else, again, thanks for your comments, and however you observe the day (or not), have a good one. |
Fly. No, I don't mean go over to the airfield and take piloting lessons. I could have done that before, given enough time and money. I just couldn't be arsed. I'm talking about whooshing through the atmosphere, like Superman or whatever. I mean, if I can't fail, that mans I'd be able to soar under my own power, right? There are levels of failing. Trying to fly and failing could, depending on the circumstances, be fatal. "Oh, I'll just jump off this cliff and trust that I'll miss the ground below entirely." Trying to get a pilot's license, on the other hand, like I said, just takes time and money... along with a visual acuity that I no longer have, so that's right out at the moment. But even absent the vision problems, the thing stopping me has not been fear of failing (or crashing), or lack of funds (it's really not much more of an investment than many other lessons, unless you actually buy an airplane), or even lack of time. No, it's that I have no purpose for it other than being able to say "I can fly an airplane." And that's not enough for me. I need at least two reasons to do something before I do it, preferably more. Funny enough, that doesn't apply to sitting on my ass and doing nothing. I don't need any reason to do that. But I digress. Levels of failing. Something could be fatal, but so what? You could trip in your bathtub. Or you could fail by getting bored and giving up. That happens to me a lot, because squirrel. Or it could turn out that you're just no good at it, as is the case with me and musical instruments. None of these possibilities ever stopped me from trying something, though. One thing that does stop me is the amount of work involved for a certain level of reward. Brewing is like that. I have no interest in brewing my own beer, because a cursory examination of what is required told me that it's 1% enjoying the fruits of your labor, 2% actual brewing, and 98% cleaning. And yes, I'm aware that adds up to more than 100%. Not worth it, not with thousands of breweries operating in the US alone, the products of which I could spend the rest of my life sampling with almost no effort on my part. In other words, I have to believe that I'm going to enjoy the process, not just the end result. Now, if I were assured that I couldn't fail at brewing -- meaning not only producing drinkable beer, but not getting bored with the process or finding out I have no talent for it after all -- I'd do it. It's not flying, but it's close enough. ![]() ![]() ![]() As I've mentioned before, I'm trying to see at least one movie a week at the cinema. Yesterday was the last chance for me to see Raya and the Last Dragon, so I opted for it over newer releases such as A Quiet Place Part II and Cruella, both of which I hope to see eventually but should be in the theater for the next few weeks. So hopefully I can continue to do brief reviews, because condensing a movie review into one sentence is as much a writing exercise for me as anything. One-sentence movie review: Raya and the Last Dragon This solidly-plotted, excellently-animated, and beautifully-voiced fantasy action movie from Disney succeeds in telling a compelling story; however, I question the appropriateness of the movie's central lesson (which seems to boil down to "trust your enemies;" a hell of a thing to teach a kid), and besides, I couldn't stop thinking that the movie's multi-pastel-colored dragons closely resemble My Little Ponies. Rating: 4/5 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() PROMPT May 27th Write about your first _______. (You fill in the blank. Ex: first car, first job, first crush, first week at college, etc) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() It's not like I'd never had a taste of an adult beverage before. My parents operated on the theory that if it's not seen as The Forbidden Fruit, I wouldn't be as tempted to overdo it when it was finally legal to drink it. So they let me have sips here and there, mostly of wine or beer. That worked out well. To be fair, it probably would have been worse if they'd completely forbidden it. Or if my first beer hadn't been such a disastrous experience. Like I said, I knew what beer tasted like, but I count my "first beer" as the one I chose for myself, the first one I didn't get parental permission for, the first one I drank in its entirety as the gods intended. I was 16, and it was a boat party. The other kids there were around my age. Some had their drivers' licenses, like me. Some did not. The boat's owner made it clear that if we drank, we weren't driving, period, end of story, give him your keys. He was still breaking the law, of course, just by having us there, but he wasn't about to be responsible for drunk kids driving on the roads. I respected that. Still do, actually, though I wouldn't have had the kids on my boat to begin with. If I had a boat. If I knew any kids. And just to be clear, it was a big boat. I wouldn't call it a yacht; nothing about it was luxurious, but it was a nice roomy houseboat with plenty of places for drunk teens to sleep it off. More to the point, it was too big to sway much in the dinky little waves of the estuary. This is important, because the only thing worse than someone unused to alcohol getting sick, it's someone unused to alcohol getting seasick. So that's where I had my first beer. Well, I called it beer at the time. I'm embarrassed to admit that the name on the can was: Red White & Blue. Kids these days will never know the glory of the RWB. This is probably a good thing. No, this is definitely a good thing. Objectively, there is little difference between RWB and water. But, at 16, what do you care? It's beer. It's illegal. It's edgy. Nowadays, if that piss were still around, one can of it wouldn't even register to me as alcoholic, assuming you could get me to drink it in the first place, which is a really bad assumption. In any case, they don't make it anymore. ![]() But after that one can, there I was, hanging off the side of this giant houseboat, emptying the contents of my stomach into the murky waters of the calm estuary. Yes, I swore off beer after that until I got to college, where peer pressure forced me to drink nearly-as-bad examples of the brewing "art." It wasn't until years later that I discovered the wonders of craft beer. And yet, every once in a while, I remember that first beer. It was great. ![]() ![]() ![]() Oh, hey, some of you were wondering about one of my goals from yesterday: "Maybe write fiction again?" Well, I got to thinking about it a few hours ago, and decided there's no time like the present. So I wrote a story for "The Writer's Cramp" ![]()
No promises that I'll write more anytime soon. But there it is. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() PROMPT May 24th Write about a movie or television show you watched recently that blew you away. What lessons can you learn from the show and incorporate into your own writing? ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Hm. Well. I might be too cynical these days to really get "blown away" by movies or TV. I go in to all of them from the point of view of a writer: What works? What doesn't? Why does what works, work? Even bad movies or shows can teach me something, but my time is as limited as anyone's, so I don't often deliberately seek out bad ones. Still, if I happen to come across one, I approach it from a writer's point of view so as to learn what doesn't work. I've mentioned before, in here and in a recent Fantasy newsletter editorial, that I enjoyed Godzilla vs. Kong. While I can't say I was in any way transported by it, the movie was very enjoyable. But what can you learn from it as a writer, besides "have giant monsters fight each other while wrecking an entire city?" Well, I covered another aspect in the newsletter; if you haven't seen it, you can view the editorial here: "Giant Monsters" ![]() Besides, city-destroying kaiju battles don't usually translate well to fiction writing. Their impact is solidly visual. My TV show consumption nowadays consists of two main interests: comic book shows, and Star Trek. The latter is mostly new stuff; it's rare that I want to revisit them, because there are so many that I just don't have the time. With Trek, again as I've noted in here before, I'm on a quest to (re)watch every episode (and movie) in that franchise, in chronological order. As I write this, I just wrapped up Season 4 of DS9 and Season 2 of Voyager, both of which I mostly missed when they first came out in the mid-90s. A lot of Trek is objectively silly. But it's popular for good reasons, and I've been trying to, as I mentioned above, figure out what works and what doesn't. To me, it comes down to a few basic ingredients. Characters. Say what you will about Trek, but they have memorable characters. Everyone is aware of Spock, for instance. Or Worf. There's a huge advantage in having characters like them in stories, because they can provide contrast to the absurdity of some human behaviors and customs, by virtue of being outsiders. It's a trick as old as science fiction itself, and it works. But even setting aside the alien characters, the humans in Star Trek generally have well-defined personalities, inner conflicts, likes and dislikes, strengths and flaws. Plot. Unless you're setting up a cliffhanger at the end of a season or something, wrap things up. In life, things rarely resolve themselves in 45 minutes, but we don't watch SF shows for the realism. It's very satisfying to a viewer (or reader) to provide a firm conclusion to whatever conflict has gone on in the episode, be it a plague that only the ship's doctor can cure, an alien attack on a colony that needs to be resolved by a starship captain, or a malfunctioning transporter that requires engineering expertise. Or whatever. Wrap it up. Sometimes Trek shows don't do this very well, and it sticks out when that happens. Subplot. Often there's more than one plot involved, because we can only take so much tech gobbledygook before someone does a miracle and fixes everything, so maybe you have a different character bemoaning her love life, or dealing with a personal crisis. This is fine, and it keeps the actors who may be unnecessary for the main plot busy in accordance with their contracts. But from a viewer's perspective, it can be used to create suspense as the subplot unfolds at critical moments in the main plot, or vice versa. But for Kahless' sake, give the plots some parallelism, if only on a metaphorical level, or we start losing patience with the whole thing. Humor. Okay, maybe I'm biased about this because I consider myself a comedy writer (whether other people consider me a comedy writer is something the jury's still out on). But inserting a bit of comedy into an otherwise tense situation is a very effective technique for keeping the audience engaged. It's basic writing: any emotion can only be sustained for a limited amount of time. That's why they call it "comic relief;" you get relief from the relentless problems the cast are dealing with. The trick is in finding the appropriate level of comedy for the situation. If a bunch of characters are dying all around you, you don't necessarily want a Vaudeville act unless you're going for farce in the first place. But a well-placed one-liner here and there can make the difference between a good plot and a great one, while also illuminating character. And then, once in a while, you get a whole show about tribbles. Above all, though, what I learned from Star Trek is: don't put space hippies in your show. That was cringeworthy enough in the late 60s, and today, it just comes across as silly. |
Superlatives can be tricky. Most embarrassing moment? Greatest fear overcome? Worst mistake? Biggest challenge? All of these things depend on elapsed time since the incident, current situation, and a memory that's inherently faulty. It's entirely possible that my biggest challenge was learning to walk, a thing that almost all of us have accomplished, but I have only the vaguest memories of that period of my life. Or perhaps it was the opposite: my parents, like I suspect most parents, spent the first three years of my life teaching me to walk and talk, and the next 15 telling me to sit down and shut up. Doing so is a challenge for a kid. Some time after that, though, I went to college. Now, as you know, I'm a supergenius, so you'd think college would have been easy for me. It was not. Intelligence (I might be overstating mine to some degree) isn't correlated with the drive to do the necessary work to develop it. In other words, I was too busy playing video games learning to drink (not simultaneously; I still suck at that combined skill) to concentrate on coursework. I passed. Eventually. Just barely. But I did learn one important thing, which was how to focus on learning stuff so I could pass exams. One might argue that this is a relatively unnecessary skill after college, but this is not the case for engineers. So several years later, I had to take the professional engineering (PE) exam, which is not an easy test. Well, I suppose it is for some people, but given a choice between anything resembling work, and playing a video game, I'll play a video game because I'm inherently lazy. Okay, I didn't "have to" take the exam, but having that certification meant more money which I could then use to buy video games and booze. So when it came time to schedule my PE exam, I buckled down and (mostly) resisted the urge to play video games or drink beer when I should be studying. This gave me skills that the social atmosphere of university never did, which was to find ways to enjoy learning, and to focus on a goal, not my immediate satisfaction. And so I did, and I passed the exam on the first try. To this day, I enjoy learning almost as much as I enjoy those other things. Giving up instant gratification for future rewards, well, I'm still not very good at that. And then, once it was over, but before I found out the results, I spent a week doing nothing but playing video games in my spare time. Not drinking. Like I said, for me the two are mutually exclusive. Right now, I'd call that my biggest challenge thus far. Ask me tomorrow, though, and I'd probably pick "losing weight" or "putting the video game on pause long enough to do my taxes." I don't know; I'm not big on remembering the challenge, only the results. It's also entirely possible that, in the right mood, I would admit that my greatest challenges were ones that I did not end up overcoming. But I'm not in that mood right now. Maybe another time. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() PROMPT May 20th What does happiness mean to you? Reflect back on a specific moment when you felt unconditionally happy. What circumstances made you feel that way? ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() So, yeah, I've ranted about happiness as a concept in here before, so some of this might be a rehash. Perhaps because of the infamous meme posted on the internet by noted rapper DJ TJ, "the pursuit of happiness" has become enshrined in the actual (okay, the figurative) DNA of the US, along with discrimination and the benefits of working yourself to death. A couple of notes on that, though: 1) Word meanings change over time. I mentioned here not too long ago that the meaning of "nice," for example, once meant something much closer to the sarcastic version today, as in "well, that's a nice pickle you've gotten yourself into." This is especially true for abstractions such as "liberty," or, indeed, "happiness." We -- well, I, anyway -- tend to think of it as people walking around with big smiles on their faces (assuming they're unmasked), probably without a care in the world, likely not very bright. But in its 18th-century meaning, the connotation was closer to prosperity, thriving, wellbeing ![]() 2) The same happy people walking around maskless and smiling without a care in the world tend to forget about the "pursuit of" part. The DoI never claimed happiness as a right, only the pursuit thereof. Consequently, "the pursuit of happiness" can be more precisely interpreted as the right to self-determination, to follow one's own chosen path in life to the extent that a person is mentally and physically able, and not be, say, limited by one's parent's profession or, to extend it into more modern terms, being shackled by traditional gender roles. By the way, I don't want to hear about Jefferson's apparent hypocrisy in penning those words while owning actual slaves with no self-determination. I live in Charlottesville, so I'm fully aware; and we've all seen Hamilton. Or if you haven't, there's a video of it on Disney+; go watch it already. So. Happiness. Modern connotation. I think it's only meaningful in contrast to its opposite, kind of like how it feels so good when you stop banging your head against a brick wall. Thus it is inherently a fleeting state. Some people like to pretend they're happy in order to fit in. Others pretty much have to pretend they're happy, even if they're working a shit retail job and having to deal with ignorant assholes. Quitting such a job, provided one has an alternative means of support, is, incidentally, practically guaranteed to produce feelings of true happiness -- for a few hours, anyway. As for discussing happiness on a personal level, I've already mentioned in here - several times - the sensation I call beerenity Last time, I think I described it as utter calm, but utter calm makes me happy, so it fits here as well. And I'm pretty sure I talked about the time I scored some Pappy van Winkle bourbon. Man, that was a good night. But since I've already told those stories, and because I don't want to describe things of a particularly adult nature, things that used to occasionally induce happiness, in here, how about the time I quit my job (even though it wasn't a shit retail job) and started my own company? Sure, I knew co-running a company would be a massive source of a different kind of stress, but in that moment, I felt freedom because my destiny wasn't tied to a boss. It's like I said above with self-determination. That only lasted a couple of hours, though. Then I had to fill out forms and meet with an accountant, both of which inevitably give me a headache. And headaches are anathema to happiness. In any case, I don't see happiness -- modern connotation -- as a goal. No, it can be the result of achieving a goal, but in my experience, chasing happiness for its own sake is counterproductive. It only comes as a result of something else. And even then, trying to hold onto it beyond its natural life often leads to despair. But without the despair, how do you know you were actually happy? |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() PROMPT May 17th “Nothing of me is original. I am the combined effort of everyone I’ve ever known.” — Chuck Palahniuk Read this article ![]() “They’ve all helped me grow, become more resilient, and many supporting me when I most needed it. I’ve learned, matured, and became wiser thanks to my interactions with them.” https://medium.com/change-your-mind/we-are-a-mosaic-of-everyone-weve-ever-loved-... ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Okay, well, that Palahniuk quote is trivially true. I'm usually quick to side with "nurture" in the "nature vs. nurture" debate -- meaning that our lived experience is far more important than genetics in determining who we are. That's probably because my "lived experience" comes from having been adopted as an infant, so take that for what it's worth. The article, however, quickly delves into territory that would make it great blog fodder, had I found it first during a time when I'm not doing a blog challenge. I generally have two main categories of blog fodder: articles I like because they explain things better than I ever could, and articles that I like because I get to snark on them. This is one of the latter, so buckle up. Indeed, nothing is original. For various definitions of original, okay. We’ve inherited everything that defines us as individuals. Our genetic makeup determines a great deal of who we are; the rest deriving from our interactions with others and our environment. Yet the combination of these traits is what makes each person unique. I'd turn that around (though probably genetics has a greater impact on appearance). But I see what the author's doing: making a distinction between "original" and "unique." This is, in my view, a distinction without a difference. Each of us is unique. Each of us is original. But each of us is also part of a continuum; a process that started with the Big Bang, proceeded through the formation of the solar system and the first life, and continues in an unbroken chain. This, too, is profound but trivial. Your parents (or primary caregivers) had the largest and most significant impact on the person you are today. Typically, they’re our first encounter with the opposite sex, heavily influencing the romantic partners we unconsciously seek later on. And? By the time I encountered females other than my mother, I still hadn't internalized what sex differences really were. I suspect most people are the same in that regard. Incidentally, I just saw an article about a monk who died, at a ripe old age, supposedly having never encountered a female person. He was abandoned at the monastery at an early age, and they (officially) didn't let women in. Somehow, this is presented so as to show how holy he was. A myriad of mental illnesses and personality disorders can also be traced down to how we related to our caregivers during our first years of life. That sounds Freudian. Almost everything Freud said or believed has been shown to be, at best, misguided. Today I’m doing the inner work; embracing the positive, cherishing the memories, forgiving what hurt me, and releasing what no longer serves my highest good. After reading that sentence, my inner work involves swallowing some Pepto-Bismol to counteract the gorge that's starting to rise. This, I think, is one thing that Elisa the Bunny Stik ![]() Siblings Siblings play a huge role in our lives. Raised within the same household, they can comprehend our trials and tribulations far more profoundly than others. And I am eternally grateful that I never had any. Extended Family As my genetic background is, by my choice, almost entirely unknown (I mean, it's pretty obvious my genes come from northern Europe, but other than that, who knows), I consider the world my extended family. My Friends “Friends are the family we chose for ourselves” — Edna Buchanan Friends are the family that we're socially allowed to distance ourselves from when they become assholes. Romantic Partners and Interests Intimate partners usually mirror plenty of aspects buried deep within us, causing unresolved issues to surface and pushing us to evolve. Thus, romantic relationships are immense learning experiences. As all of these have ended badly, I no longer pursue such things. However, we cannot solely blame the other person for how things turned out. It takes two to tango, and we must assume responsibility for our own shortcomings. I do. That's why I stopped. Neighbors, Coworkers, Roommates Believe it or not, for the better or the worse, many of them have somehow marked my life. Um... DUH. Often these are people we don't choose (with the possible exception of roommates). Some of them become friends. Either way, they're going to have an effect on your life. There's no "believe it or not" involved; they're people we interact with. Strangers “No one is sent by accident to anyone” — A Course in Miracles Oh, man, I wish she'd led with that quote. It would have saved me a lot of time and effort, 45 minutes that I could have spent watching Star Trek, playing a video game, masturbating, or sending internet memes to friends -- all of which are FAR more productive uses of time than even contemplating that stupid fucking book. But since I'm here anyway, allow me to deconstruct. "No one is sent..." Passive voice. Sent by whom? Knowing what I know about ACIM, it's "the Universe," or the New Age conception of God. This goes against every fiber of my belief. No one "is sent," period. End of sentence. We may not truly have free will, but nor does some Uber-consciousness direct our actions. More importantly, you are not the purpose of the Universe. Neither am I. I realize other people disagree with this, but it is a big part of why ACIM is anathema to me. (Though I have to admit that one of my great epiphanies in life was triggered by ACIM -- but not in a way the book intended.) "...by accident..." This is a philosophical distinction, but to me, pretty much everything is an accident at base. "...to anyone." In a backwards-looking sense, everything that has ever happened to you leads up to the present moment. People have gazed upon this simple truth in wide-eyed wonder. "If I hadn't turned right instead of left, I never would have run over your dog, and we would have never met, and we wouldn't be getting married right now." Big whoop. You'd meet someone else, or learn to live in comfort with yourself, and then you'd contemplate all the accidents that led you to that moment in wide-eyed wonder. This does not mean we're fated. This means we're adaptable to many different situations. Anyway, once I encounter a quote from ACIM (or "The Secret,") I Stop Reading Right There. (Exception: when someone is ragging on it, like I'm doing right now.) So instead I'll expand on the "one of my great epiphanies in life" comment above. It's my understanding that ACIM boils all human emotion down to two categories: love and fear. Well, I think that's reductionist and oversimplistic, but far be it from me to reject something without at least considering its worth. So I got to thinking: If all emotions are "really" either love or fear, what is fear but an emotional reaction to a real or imagined threat to something that you love? So if you go with the flow, here, you have to follow it to its logical conclusion, which is that the only emotion is love. But believing so denies us our complexity, thus throwing the entire new-age positivity movement into shadow. To sum up, yes, I agree with the main premise: that everyone, everything, is interconnected. Again, this is trivial. There's nothing mystical about it. No person is an island, to paraphrase a famous quote. And even if we were, we'd be defined by the ocean around us. “A certain man once lost a diamond cuff-link in the wide blue sea, and twenty years later, on the exact day, a Friday apparently, he was eating a large fish - but there was no diamond inside. That’s what I like about coincidence.” ― Vladimir Nabokov Edit: You know, I was too busy being disgusted by the relentless positivity and New Age gooeyness (and subsequently drinking copious amounts of alcohol to counteract it) that I completely overlooked that the author made a really big, huge, glaring omission in the piece. I don't see a single word about teachers, who are, after one's parents, the people who... well... teach us the most. Yeah, this was an oversight on my part, but like I said, it's an enormous gaping void in the article. Obviously, we have good teachers and bad teachers, but in the end, they all help to make us what we are. |
What, my mere existence isn't enough? Seriously, though, I'm no judge of that. "Better" is a subjective quality. Sometimes what's good for one person or group is worse for another. We can't always know the full ramifications of our words or actions. As with the classic butterfly effect ![]() Most times, though, the effects tend to dampen out and the end result is indistinguishable from random noise. So, I don't know. I mean, I don't actively try to make the world a worse place. But when I think of anything I do to proactively improve things, I find my brain skittering away from the mere possibility of mentioning them. I would prefer not to shout virtue to the world. In fact, I take great pains to project an image of a selfish drunk who's only in it for himself. Not that I haven't touted my own good deeds in the past, sometimes even in here. But I just never feel right about it afterward. I guess I just feel like I'm often annoyed by the people who are like "Look at me! I give money to poor people! I help old ladies across the street! I only eat hyperlocal, organic, cruelty-free food! I'm so virtuous I make demons gnash their teeth in frustration and angels weep in jealousy!" And I don't ever want to be one of those people. Everyone has vices and virtues, and to proclaim one's virtues can make other people think you're hiding something horrid. There are none so evil as those who claim to be virtuous. There's another thing, too. Like, a lot of people, when they need to reference someone who is a Good Person™, they invoke the name of Mother Teresa. Mother Teresa was objectively a horrible person ![]() So I prefer to keep such things to myself. People will spin anything I say or do the way they want to, anyway, and I'm not going to sit here and justify myself to others. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() PROMPT May 15th Many fairy tales are often based in truth. Research the true story behind your favorite fairy tale and share it with your readers. What lesson or warning was the tale trying to impart? ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() I don't really have a favorite fairy tale. All the ones I can think of have stupid moral messages, like "don't be curious" or "wives should be submissive" or "never try to rise above your station in life." And the line between fairy tale, myth, and religious text is, as far as I'm concerned, so faint as to be nonexistent, but I'm not interested in offending anyone. I wrote about fairy tales in general in here about a month ago: "Wagging Tales" ![]() As for lessons or warnings, I have a habit of finding the "wrong" meaning in a lot of stories. It's kind of a hobby of mine. Why, just yesterday, Annette ![]() So, okay, actual fairy tales. I suppose Little Red Riding Hood qualifies. There are a bunch of different versions, though. In some of them, Red has agency; in others, not so much. This likely reflects different cultures' ideas about how passive little girls should be. The one I generally remember has a woodsman (aka a Mighty Male Hero) coming to her rescue. Thing is, though, I could never find any allusion to that tale having its roots in a true story. Likely, it's more allegorical - which is fine, because often, allegories illuminate deeper truths. My favored interpretation is that, as with the one about the frog-kissing princess, it's about the transition from the innocence of childhood to the realities of adulthood. There's also some talk about it being a repurposed Norse myth, which of course involved Loki pulling one of his usual trickster god tricks. Myths, of course, often also come from true stories, but again, those stories tend to get lost in time. If I were rebooting the LRRH story today, though, I'd change the ending. No woodsman, or if there is one, he's the actual bad guy, and the Wolf would turn the tables on him and maybe wear his skin as a trophy. Turns out the Wolf only killed Grandma because Grandma was plotting to drink Red's blood in an attempt to gain immortality, and the whole façade of Wolf scaring the hell out of Red is a lesson for Red in not trusting people simply because they look like sweet, innocent old ladies. And then Red and the Wolf trot off into the woods together to live happily ever after. The better to eat you with, my dear. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() PROMPT May 13th What does it mean to be a “grown up”? What do you do regularly as an adult that you dreaded having to do when you were a child? Have you found ways to maintain a sense of childhood wonder or curiosity? If so, how? ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() People think that I must be a very strange person. This is not correct. I have the heart of a small boy. It is in a glass jar on my desk. --Stephen King What does it mean to be a “grown up”? Having to pay taxes. I mean, really, there's probably more, but it all has to do with other boring shit like "taking responsibility" and "being considerate of others." What do you do regularly as an adult that you dreaded having to do when you were a child? Pay taxes. And take pills. Sometimes I even clean my room without being threatened or bribed. Have you found ways to maintain a sense of childhood wonder or curiosity? Have you read my blog? If so, how? The defining feature of childhood, for me, was going from knowing basically nothing to knowing a few things. Some of those things turned out to be wrong, so I learned new things. Some of those will probably turn out to be wrong, too, so I keep an open mind and look for new evidence, whether it supports or contradicts what I already think I know. Certainly, the things I learn about now are different, but it's all in the same vein. One of my earliest memories was my dad wrapping me up in a blanket and taking me out of the warm house on a cold, clear winter's night. The atmosphere is denser when it's cold, you know, with less haze, so you can see so many stars if you have the eyesight of a child. I have never stopped being fascinated by astronomy. See, although the stars in the sky seem limitless, when it comes to viewing with "the naked eye" (a source of great amusement to Kid Me), we can "only" see about 5,000 points of light. ![]() 2,500 is, of course, a tiny, tiny fraction of the total number of stars in the universe. Not even a rounding error. Going back to the article I just linked, there are probably about one septillion stars in the observable universe, the vast majority of them residing in other galaxies. That number is just mind-bendingly huge, way too big for our simple minds to comprehend, let alone be able to catalog them all. And so it is, to delve into analogy, with knowledge itself. We know some stuff. The amount left to learn is huge. I object to a term I've seen bandied about, "near-infinite." There's no such thing as near-infinite. But there are things that might as well be infinite, for all that we will ever be able to list them all. So that's how I stay curious, and how I maintain my sense of wonder: by periodically reminding myself that neither I personally, nor humanity in general, have done more than just put a tiny scratch into the surface of possible knowledge, and that there's always going to be more to learn because the other immutable law of the universe -- besides taxes -- is that it's going to keep changing, even as we study it. Part of me regrets that I won't be around to watch us learn more of it. But another part rejoices, knowing that there will always be another star for someone to gaze at in wonder. Well. Until entropy stops and the universe itself dies. But that's a really long ways away. |