A wild ride precipitated by an unplanned break in traditional consciousness.
Left with a sense that it was all very very important but it's uncertain if the collateral damage was worth having.
But it touches a nerve that sort of grows unsteadily around the entire opus of the individual experience... we're not really in charge of the show.
Attempts to become more participatory rather than reactionary is to be commended. It's possibly the natural progression of a mind or a soul or a spirit or a consciousness. These words even invoke a sort of reaction in my psyche that I have very little in the way of a map with which to explain how these things are mechanically different from one another, outside of within a more specific context.
In some ways this blog has been an outlet for trying to harness the intense break-down that began just before this blog was created. It is written to be impersonal but all work of writing is essentially personal. The subject/object of the writing somewhat dictates how the flow of thought to textual retelling influences the context of personal or impersonal. Or something. No expertise is claimed or expected here.
The only real intention is that there may be something in all this mess that was or is meaningful beyond my immediate comprehension. So if it worked, I'll probably only realize it several years from now.. And if it didn't, I'll forget about it entirely and move on. Which has been the usual case in the past.
So what does that mean, exactly?
There's a sense that a kind of deep unlearning and re-orientation is occurring. Insight is only as useful as it is timely. And getting the timing of impersonal and personal forces and perceptions to congeal into something tangible and meaningful is a monumental task. We can wrap it up in ribbons and interlace casual aphorisms and wisdom into what's already been said a billion times before. Making it look something like a delicious cake. But the cake is a recipe made with well-known ingredients in almost every configuration.
It's startlingly obvious that almost everything that we work with as humans, as artists, as thinkers, etc.. is already extant. We build castles out of rock and sand but fail to register that the castle is the lie.
NV's introduction into the mystery of life can be summed up as: 'Can walking into a natural disaster have a profound effect on the individual?' 'Yes. Obviously.'
And that's about right. Coming to terms with the ebb and flow of reality that hasn't already been well documented and over-examined down to the smallest detail has basically been an education in how little actual power we ever had over our personal experience, yet also a strange sense that this is also an illusion. That the power to overcome hardship is actually more valuable than whatever the hardship itself seemed to represent.
Untangling the sense of narrative presumption from the pattern recognition of socialization from the actual details of the experiences took a lot more subtlety than was expected. A certain amount of humility in the face of unknown can be a good thing. But even as that is written it sounds like the wisdom of aging in general towards any other given topic about growing as a human being.
Does that take away from it's importance? Is the logo stamped on the life-raft you've clung to as important as whether or not it got you to where you were going? Even from a technical standpoint?
Note: Being exhausted as an individual is far more of a subjective call than I ever thought possible in the past. Sink or swim may not be a choice in any real case. It may just be a narrative device highlighting the illusion of choice.
The inherent nastiness of an individual moment can be subverted by the pressing understanding that no one can really be prepared for the inevitable. That doesn't mean we get to avoid the consequences, however. Don't panic, basically. Easier said than done, naturally.
Left with a sense that it was all very very important but it's uncertain if the collateral damage was worth having.
But it touches a nerve that sort of grows unsteadily around the entire opus of the individual experience... we're not really in charge of the show.
Attempts to become more participatory rather than reactionary is to be commended. It's possibly the natural progression of a mind or a soul or a spirit or a consciousness. These words even invoke a sort of reaction in my psyche that I have very little in the way of a map with which to explain how these things are mechanically different from one another, outside of within a more specific context.
In some ways this blog has been an outlet for trying to harness the intense break-down that began just before this blog was created. It is written to be impersonal but all work of writing is essentially personal. The subject/object of the writing somewhat dictates how the flow of thought to textual retelling influences the context of personal or impersonal. Or something. No expertise is claimed or expected here.
The only real intention is that there may be something in all this mess that was or is meaningful beyond my immediate comprehension. So if it worked, I'll probably only realize it several years from now.. And if it didn't, I'll forget about it entirely and move on. Which has been the usual case in the past.
So what does that mean, exactly?
There's a sense that a kind of deep unlearning and re-orientation is occurring. Insight is only as useful as it is timely. And getting the timing of impersonal and personal forces and perceptions to congeal into something tangible and meaningful is a monumental task. We can wrap it up in ribbons and interlace casual aphorisms and wisdom into what's already been said a billion times before. Making it look something like a delicious cake. But the cake is a recipe made with well-known ingredients in almost every configuration.
It's startlingly obvious that almost everything that we work with as humans, as artists, as thinkers, etc.. is already extant. We build castles out of rock and sand but fail to register that the castle is the lie.
NV's introduction into the mystery of life can be summed up as: 'Can walking into a natural disaster have a profound effect on the individual?' 'Yes. Obviously.'
And that's about right. Coming to terms with the ebb and flow of reality that hasn't already been well documented and over-examined down to the smallest detail has basically been an education in how little actual power we ever had over our personal experience, yet also a strange sense that this is also an illusion. That the power to overcome hardship is actually more valuable than whatever the hardship itself seemed to represent.
Untangling the sense of narrative presumption from the pattern recognition of socialization from the actual details of the experiences took a lot more subtlety than was expected. A certain amount of humility in the face of unknown can be a good thing. But even as that is written it sounds like the wisdom of aging in general towards any other given topic about growing as a human being.
Does that take away from it's importance? Is the logo stamped on the life-raft you've clung to as important as whether or not it got you to where you were going? Even from a technical standpoint?
Note: Being exhausted as an individual is far more of a subjective call than I ever thought possible in the past. Sink or swim may not be a choice in any real case. It may just be a narrative device highlighting the illusion of choice.
The inherent nastiness of an individual moment can be subverted by the pressing understanding that no one can really be prepared for the inevitable. That doesn't mean we get to avoid the consequences, however. Don't panic, basically. Easier said than done, naturally.
