Subject : The Six Chords I Strummed While We Lived
Posted Date: : Jul 30, 2008 6:31 AM
You, a monolith of Grecian manliness, tuned by an athletic ear both formidable in its endowments & remorseless in its tasks, whose shadow could no longer accommodate my pluck & pithiness.
Anticlimaxes flow like sex in a tub brimming with insecurity. That was the last thought in my mind as we fought, you, bare to the hips, & me, just bare as I conjoined our skulls in a final pathetic head butt.
"Pounds of force, how many?" Drunken calculus flew between us, under-armored bombers, spotlighted, on night raids over Berlin as we closed our eyes & leapt, scalps punching dual holes in the drywall ceiling.
What was I to do with a red box of 2200 bright orange Cheez-Its? I don't know. Who could with half a 30 rack under their belt? Going out your 2nd story window with them, just to spite you, was not my best idea.
I watched you fuck her; granted we all wanted a piece of Chang that year. I never waxed prolific as I did that night, but the problem with having a Crayola heart is that the best colors tend to run out first.
"Quick! Eat all the tangerines before they open the door!" Wednesdays were the best; do you remember those as clearly as I do? Clear as Sunday's sun breaching Saturday's tented & rain washed scrap metal?
///Vangelis - "Song of White" timeless vangelis at his usual best. thin synth and a drum line that is minimal in its composure, but collected in its execution make this a very tight track with little room for wild variation. there's more to life than drinking the entire liquor cabinet.
Clean with alcohol only. Do not attempt to replace blown fuses. Do not remove access panels. Return to certified mechanic for regular maintenance. Made in the USA.
7/30/08
7/28/08
its all SHIT
first of all... this has nothing to do with the graphic novel. second of all... i dont hate post modernism. third of all... the term post modernism has been severely abused. fourthly... why did i have to born into the post modern world?
good job paul auster. youve written a novel that is ambiguous enough to generate 8 million interpretations and garnish all kinds of praise and at the same time be uncategorized or unable to be categorized. the only surprising part? oh wait there is nothing surprising.
it cant be categorized: is it detective fiction? is it meta-fiction? is it poorly written? is it masterfully written to appear poorly written? do you have to be high minded to get it? are you an idiot for thinking its pointless? is the meaning hidden? or is the meaning just not there? does it challenge conventions? ignore them? or create new ones? is it a study of authorship? is it tongue in cheek? hmmm... finding yourself unable to answer any of those questions definitively? well clearly the only thing to do is say its so good you would have to be (insert negative categorical descriptor) to want to put it in a box... cuz thats how people who are not in touch with the post modern era must think. to resist it is to resist the asking of questions. and thats what post modernism does right? it asks questions? or does it challenge conventions? no it does that too, right? or does it explore humanistic themes? yeah, sure it does, right? or does it do all of those things? well, it would have to, because post modern things do that. to be post modern you have to question what isness is, right? or is it that to be post modern you have to ask questions without answers? or is it that you have to question the questions to be post modern?
the praise: everyone from professors to students to "regular people" (?) to scholar/model/athletes to the people who say what is and isn't worth praising have all (or at least a lot of them) come to the conclusion that this book is the shiznite. But is it really? So we've established that the book asks a lot of questions both directly and indirectly. check. and thats the end of the checklist. so from the morass of questions we come to conclusions. these conclusions are that its: supremely thought provoking, amazing and unexpected, convention defying, food for the brain, breathes new life into fiction, a pointless exercise in fiction, lays bare the framework of fiction, achieves new awareness, and so on and so forth. so what? anyone can ask a million questions of anything or anyone. children can be thought provoking in their stupidity. defying conventions can and does lead to incoherence. the framework of fiction can be explored in other ways. and on and on we could go. but of course at the same time we could go on and on in a positive way too. we could say the novel exposes the fear that drives convention. we could say the novel edifies through questioning. we could say the novel makes the reader aware of what they once took for granted. so duality == praise worthy. dividing the audience along fundamental lines == praise worthy. or is it that challenging what is traditionally praise worthy == praise worthy? or is it that post modernism == praise worthy? or (it follows) that generating thousands of miles of analytical and argumentative mileage (fodder for critics, prize judges, scholars) == praise worthy to the people that count == praise worthy for everyone else who wants to be counted as a person that counts in a world that is governed by the post modern measuring rod? or is that even enough removes to capture what's going on? or is it praise worthy because it can draw questions like that out of us? does that make it "the shit"? last question here: is it really all that surprising that it has drawn praise? not really. >_< 8 million interpretations: do i really need to describe them? really? well im not going to. just take my word for it... theyre there. see above. read the back cover. combine with post modern definition (wiki it if you have trouble just taking the known definition and flipping it inside out) of reality/individualism/perception/language/whateverelseyouwanttobetickledorfrustratedorchallengedabout. shake vigorously. consume as quickly as possible. vomit it all up. stir for ten minutes. then interpret. therell be no right answer to what you see. youll feel bad for not caring after doing so much work. and then youll feel bad for feeling bad at all. and then youll feel good that you noticed that you felt bad about feeling bad. and then youll feel smart because you recognized that the good feeling was a response to the convention of feeling bad which was a rejection of the initial convention of feeling bad which was a response to the rorschach blob and the convention of seeking meaning. and then youll feel like post modernism is so intriguing because, by feeling smart and recognizing that the good feeling was a response to the bad was a response to the bad was a response to conventions, you've raised yourself to an awareness you didn't have before. from that day forward youll see everything and question everything and becoming a contributing member of post modern society by creating new interpretations of everything. congratulations. give yourself an award, a fellowship, quit your day job, go on a signing tour, shake the right hands, and retire to an edgy artistically rich community, but no so edgy that you have to be near the lesser hands that keep societies wheels greased, and not too rich either, because you have to be post modern now which means you have to raise questions about what wealth is, and you cant do that by obeying conventions. or is it that by obeying conventions your really challenging the convention of challenging conventions? if you're feeling really good about it, kill yourself and leave your wealth to someone undeserving of anything positive, or better yet, leave it to a foundation that will confer it upon later generations of post modernists to forever seal your legacy and legend that the world never really understood your work to begin with. god damn i am sick of that word. post modernism is a garbage catch all. cant describe it? must be post modern. doesnt fit in its category? must be post modern. different from what came before? must be post modern. unconvetional? no, post modern. raises lots of questions? duh, post modern. muddles boundaries? one word. post-modern-ism. questions the questions? post modern. questions the question's questioning the answers to questions that questioned other questions? post modern. seriously: "?" might as well equal post modern. and what do you think comes after post modernism? post post modernism? questioning the structure of questioning? does the tide really have to swing: formalism > rebellion > anarchy > new formalism> next rebellion > new anarchy? who the fuck can seriously care in the current climate of near unreality?
if you care then you have to question why you care, right? its really getting out of hand. or is it?
i dont hate post modernism as a thing. it was inevitable as a thing. of late it has been horribly abused in its implications, diluted in its meaning, and misused as a metric. just because something can raise questions does not make it praise worthy or a masterfully concocted introspection. just because something can be interpreted 12 different ways does not make it a masterpiece. just because something can dissect forms and fudge boundaries does not make it justified.
but at the end of today, if it means winning fellowships, putting food on my plate, gaining fame and fortune, and retiring a fat bastard carried on the backs of the wheel greasers, guess what kind of writing im going to do? the kind that puts money in my hand, thats what kind. fuck you paul. I couldve written that book.
good job paul auster. youve written a novel that is ambiguous enough to generate 8 million interpretations and garnish all kinds of praise and at the same time be uncategorized or unable to be categorized. the only surprising part? oh wait there is nothing surprising.
it cant be categorized: is it detective fiction? is it meta-fiction? is it poorly written? is it masterfully written to appear poorly written? do you have to be high minded to get it? are you an idiot for thinking its pointless? is the meaning hidden? or is the meaning just not there? does it challenge conventions? ignore them? or create new ones? is it a study of authorship? is it tongue in cheek? hmmm... finding yourself unable to answer any of those questions definitively? well clearly the only thing to do is say its so good you would have to be (insert negative categorical descriptor) to want to put it in a box... cuz thats how people who are not in touch with the post modern era must think. to resist it is to resist the asking of questions. and thats what post modernism does right? it asks questions? or does it challenge conventions? no it does that too, right? or does it explore humanistic themes? yeah, sure it does, right? or does it do all of those things? well, it would have to, because post modern things do that. to be post modern you have to question what isness is, right? or is it that to be post modern you have to ask questions without answers? or is it that you have to question the questions to be post modern?
the praise: everyone from professors to students to "regular people" (?) to scholar/model/athletes to the people who say what is and isn't worth praising have all (or at least a lot of them) come to the conclusion that this book is the shiznite. But is it really? So we've established that the book asks a lot of questions both directly and indirectly. check. and thats the end of the checklist. so from the morass of questions we come to conclusions. these conclusions are that its: supremely thought provoking, amazing and unexpected, convention defying, food for the brain, breathes new life into fiction, a pointless exercise in fiction, lays bare the framework of fiction, achieves new awareness, and so on and so forth. so what? anyone can ask a million questions of anything or anyone. children can be thought provoking in their stupidity. defying conventions can and does lead to incoherence. the framework of fiction can be explored in other ways. and on and on we could go. but of course at the same time we could go on and on in a positive way too. we could say the novel exposes the fear that drives convention. we could say the novel edifies through questioning. we could say the novel makes the reader aware of what they once took for granted. so duality == praise worthy. dividing the audience along fundamental lines == praise worthy. or is it that challenging what is traditionally praise worthy == praise worthy? or is it that post modernism == praise worthy? or (it follows) that generating thousands of miles of analytical and argumentative mileage (fodder for critics, prize judges, scholars) == praise worthy to the people that count == praise worthy for everyone else who wants to be counted as a person that counts in a world that is governed by the post modern measuring rod? or is that even enough removes to capture what's going on? or is it praise worthy because it can draw questions like that out of us? does that make it "the shit"? last question here: is it really all that surprising that it has drawn praise? not really. >_< 8 million interpretations: do i really need to describe them? really? well im not going to. just take my word for it... theyre there. see above. read the back cover. combine with post modern definition (wiki it if you have trouble just taking the known definition and flipping it inside out) of reality/individualism/perception/language/whateverelseyouwanttobetickledorfrustratedorchallengedabout. shake vigorously. consume as quickly as possible. vomit it all up. stir for ten minutes. then interpret. therell be no right answer to what you see. youll feel bad for not caring after doing so much work. and then youll feel bad for feeling bad at all. and then youll feel good that you noticed that you felt bad about feeling bad. and then youll feel smart because you recognized that the good feeling was a response to the convention of feeling bad which was a rejection of the initial convention of feeling bad which was a response to the rorschach blob and the convention of seeking meaning. and then youll feel like post modernism is so intriguing because, by feeling smart and recognizing that the good feeling was a response to the bad was a response to the bad was a response to conventions, you've raised yourself to an awareness you didn't have before. from that day forward youll see everything and question everything and becoming a contributing member of post modern society by creating new interpretations of everything. congratulations. give yourself an award, a fellowship, quit your day job, go on a signing tour, shake the right hands, and retire to an edgy artistically rich community, but no so edgy that you have to be near the lesser hands that keep societies wheels greased, and not too rich either, because you have to be post modern now which means you have to raise questions about what wealth is, and you cant do that by obeying conventions. or is it that by obeying conventions your really challenging the convention of challenging conventions? if you're feeling really good about it, kill yourself and leave your wealth to someone undeserving of anything positive, or better yet, leave it to a foundation that will confer it upon later generations of post modernists to forever seal your legacy and legend that the world never really understood your work to begin with. god damn i am sick of that word. post modernism is a garbage catch all. cant describe it? must be post modern. doesnt fit in its category? must be post modern. different from what came before? must be post modern. unconvetional? no, post modern. raises lots of questions? duh, post modern. muddles boundaries? one word. post-modern-ism. questions the questions? post modern. questions the question's questioning the answers to questions that questioned other questions? post modern. seriously: "?" might as well equal post modern. and what do you think comes after post modernism? post post modernism? questioning the structure of questioning? does the tide really have to swing: formalism > rebellion > anarchy > new formalism> next rebellion > new anarchy? who the fuck can seriously care in the current climate of near unreality?
if you care then you have to question why you care, right? its really getting out of hand. or is it?
i dont hate post modernism as a thing. it was inevitable as a thing. of late it has been horribly abused in its implications, diluted in its meaning, and misused as a metric. just because something can raise questions does not make it praise worthy or a masterfully concocted introspection. just because something can be interpreted 12 different ways does not make it a masterpiece. just because something can dissect forms and fudge boundaries does not make it justified.
but at the end of today, if it means winning fellowships, putting food on my plate, gaining fame and fortune, and retiring a fat bastard carried on the backs of the wheel greasers, guess what kind of writing im going to do? the kind that puts money in my hand, thats what kind. fuck you paul. I couldve written that book.
7/21/08
muthafuckinassholes 07/21/08
Subject : MuthaFuckinAssholes
Posted Date: : Jul 21, 2008 8:02 PM
I'm going to get my MFA.
its decided. next fall. not this fall. but the next.
i dont have money now. i cant get a job in the industry i've chosen without my BA. its just an unreal expectation. im going to work at a grocery store. im okay with that! im happy. because im choosing to be.
so fuck you. and fuck me. but not for trying. i dont know where i came under the impression that i would somehow magically break into writing/publishing/editing without putting in time to at least get a BA or an internship first. Actually... i take that back
i came under that impression because i've been at the whole college game for five years now... going on six. ive already put it in a lot of time, and i feel like ive paid some of my dues... some of my maturity debt... but apparently i havent paid enough to the mfa-s that run things.
which kind of sucks... but its what keeps the world turning so i have to do more time on the bottom before i can get a taste of that middle crust. i dont even want a lick of the top yet. im going to get it though.
i wont say if it kills me. not that desparate yet. but im getting there. here's to hoping that my plans don't continue to collapse on themselves. just imagining the rebuilding operation already required of me is enough to give me a headache. im working overtime just to keep the rubble already on site from crushing the life out of what's left- let alone from catching fire again.
oh well...
no song for today... maybe tomorrow.
Posted Date: : Jul 21, 2008 8:02 PM
I'm going to get my MFA.
its decided. next fall. not this fall. but the next.
i dont have money now. i cant get a job in the industry i've chosen without my BA. its just an unreal expectation. im going to work at a grocery store. im okay with that! im happy. because im choosing to be.
so fuck you. and fuck me. but not for trying. i dont know where i came under the impression that i would somehow magically break into writing/publishing/editing without putting in time to at least get a BA or an internship first. Actually... i take that back
i came under that impression because i've been at the whole college game for five years now... going on six. ive already put it in a lot of time, and i feel like ive paid some of my dues... some of my maturity debt... but apparently i havent paid enough to the mfa-s that run things.
which kind of sucks... but its what keeps the world turning so i have to do more time on the bottom before i can get a taste of that middle crust. i dont even want a lick of the top yet. im going to get it though.
i wont say if it kills me. not that desparate yet. but im getting there. here's to hoping that my plans don't continue to collapse on themselves. just imagining the rebuilding operation already required of me is enough to give me a headache. im working overtime just to keep the rubble already on site from crushing the life out of what's left- let alone from catching fire again.
oh well...
no song for today... maybe tomorrow.
7/20/08
notes to self 07/20/08
Subject : notes to self
Posted Date: : Jul 20, 2008 7:48 PM
things not to forget in this late hour:
the arts are still largely the realm of the landed gentry... for those with the liesure time (read ain't gotta work all day everyday for a penny to pay their landlords & lenders) to indulge in the creative work it takes to become successful in a lasting impactful way. of course there are exceptions. classism in america is built on accentuating those exceptions so everyone can feel better about their meddling and dabbling. sure some people work at it for years and make it but they are the mutha f kin minority.
the problem with starting from a now state is that all the reference to the past is lost at the blocks. so retreading, albeit in grand and eye popping fashion to some, is still a retread for the ones that were there before the now. should that matter to the starter? probably not. it might be harder to find fresh ground to break. it might take longer. it might never happen. but then again a lot of things might never happen. so let the critics place the position where ever it may fall and keep walking.
being put in a box. to be feared? flaunted? or simply ignored? should a person be worried that the work they are doing is like the work someone else halfway around the globe is doing and that when held up to the general standard, if there is one (i think there has to be), they might get lumped in with people that are not as great as they think they should be considered? i mean, is c.d. wright an elliptical poet? should someone care if they're considered part of a "school" of thought and action or be concerned when they are left free floating and unaffiliated by anyone to any greater human art project? well, it shouldn't make the project any less worthwhile. but maybe it does...
the problem with education in creative writing is that its taught through emulation. if you don't succeed at emulation you must be failing at understanding where the art has come from. i dont like that. historical orientation should not be the function of- there has to be a better way to learn forms. i agree that you cant break rules till you learn them, but god damn it. for fucks sake.
carnegie mellon was recently praised for its "strict disciplinary structure" that somehow, through the magic of perspective and self righteous justification, unites the woefully disparate schools. i dont agree with that. im an example of what inflexible disciplinary structures can do to anyone who doesnt fit the prototypical student mold. you fail. at all classes. despite your knowledge, despite your growth, despite your ability to demonstrate said knowledge, synthesize your own ideas from said knowledge, and create new ones of your own design, its all for nothing because you missed four classes out of the entire semester. its all for nothing because you changed majors and none of the units transferred. its all for nothing because you had to work a part time job to support yourself and it cut in to your ability to produce a paper that regurgitated information from another paper that had nothing to do with your final project (which you subsequently aced) anyway. f l ustration.
take more notes. i lost two ideas today that held promise because i didnt write them down. thats two things i could have added to my co activated knowledge that now leads to dead end neurons.
get more sleep. lack of sleep is where it all starts... you dont want to be back on pills, do you? no. i dont.
Posted Date: : Jul 20, 2008 7:48 PM
things not to forget in this late hour:
the arts are still largely the realm of the landed gentry... for those with the liesure time (read ain't gotta work all day everyday for a penny to pay their landlords & lenders) to indulge in the creative work it takes to become successful in a lasting impactful way. of course there are exceptions. classism in america is built on accentuating those exceptions so everyone can feel better about their meddling and dabbling. sure some people work at it for years and make it but they are the mutha f kin minority.
the problem with starting from a now state is that all the reference to the past is lost at the blocks. so retreading, albeit in grand and eye popping fashion to some, is still a retread for the ones that were there before the now. should that matter to the starter? probably not. it might be harder to find fresh ground to break. it might take longer. it might never happen. but then again a lot of things might never happen. so let the critics place the position where ever it may fall and keep walking.
being put in a box. to be feared? flaunted? or simply ignored? should a person be worried that the work they are doing is like the work someone else halfway around the globe is doing and that when held up to the general standard, if there is one (i think there has to be), they might get lumped in with people that are not as great as they think they should be considered? i mean, is c.d. wright an elliptical poet? should someone care if they're considered part of a "school" of thought and action or be concerned when they are left free floating and unaffiliated by anyone to any greater human art project? well, it shouldn't make the project any less worthwhile. but maybe it does...
the problem with education in creative writing is that its taught through emulation. if you don't succeed at emulation you must be failing at understanding where the art has come from. i dont like that. historical orientation should not be the function of- there has to be a better way to learn forms. i agree that you cant break rules till you learn them, but god damn it. for fucks sake.
carnegie mellon was recently praised for its "strict disciplinary structure" that somehow, through the magic of perspective and self righteous justification, unites the woefully disparate schools. i dont agree with that. im an example of what inflexible disciplinary structures can do to anyone who doesnt fit the prototypical student mold. you fail. at all classes. despite your knowledge, despite your growth, despite your ability to demonstrate said knowledge, synthesize your own ideas from said knowledge, and create new ones of your own design, its all for nothing because you missed four classes out of the entire semester. its all for nothing because you changed majors and none of the units transferred. its all for nothing because you had to work a part time job to support yourself and it cut in to your ability to produce a paper that regurgitated information from another paper that had nothing to do with your final project (which you subsequently aced) anyway. f l ustration.
take more notes. i lost two ideas today that held promise because i didnt write them down. thats two things i could have added to my co activated knowledge that now leads to dead end neurons.
get more sleep. lack of sleep is where it all starts... you dont want to be back on pills, do you? no. i dont.
7/17/08
sunrise? maybe 07/17/08
Subject : sunrise? maybe
Posted Date: : Jul 17, 2008 3:56 AM
I've been thinking about this entry for quite some time. Not this entry, the one before it. Well the one before and also this one since this entry has everything to do with what came before, in most respects.
I'm not going to degrade the concept of perfect and true happiness. Well actually just in saying that I believe everyone can recognize that there is a difference between perfect happiness and true happiness: the former stemming largely from circumstances and the latter being born exclusively from within the self. What I want to point up is that you are right. Life is not about scrounging for happiness or at least it shouldn't be.
Human's are meant to adapt to their circumstances. Adaptations don't occur in a vacuum. Stimulus is imposed on the static situation of existence and adaptation happens. What happens when the stimulus occurs is what we read as happiness, sadness, pain, insecurity, etc. What we do in respsone, how we adapt is what causes us to change, to remain happy, to lift our spirits, to alleviate pain, to frustrate insecurity etc. No person is static. If they are static then they are in affect dead within... a virtual non-person (as far as im concerned). We are always performing to either maintain our emotional levels against stimulus or to change them.
Life is not /about/ scrounging for happiness. it is about survival over varying spans of time. survival through unremitting waves of stimulus and change. stimulus that may last a moment or that may last decades. change that is destructive or constructive. sometimes it's easier to survive... sometimes it's more difficult.
the sunset moment can be easy for some to survive because it can generate happiness and contentment. but it is also a very short spanning moment. perfect happiness is easy to accept and live in and live through. but to be truly happy in such a short spanning moment one would have to be able to adapt to the stimulus of the coming night... or fall into the possible depression that nightfall may precipitate with the loss of perfect circumstantial happiness.
happiness should not be exogenously determined, but when it is it can be easier to feel true happiness. when life's stimuli are definitively negative it takes a strong sense of self to generate truthful and positive responses to adapt to them.
take me for example. not looking for any pity here, but just for examples sake consider the following:
my stimuli in life are (but are not limited to):
75k of loan debt-
joblessness-
a healthy relationship+
some self esteem+
horrible wardrobe-
satisfying location (chicago)+
hobbies+
and the list goes on. these stimuli act with varying strength over varying spans of time. debt is hugely negative and will haunt me for decades. self esteem is a little positive and comes and goes. i live in a nice city everyday. my interest in hobbies comes and goes. my clothing sucks and i have to face that everyday. and there are other things that come and go for varying spans of time... things like sunsets, a particularyly enjoyable commute to school, a nice long vacation, a visit home, a stubbed toe, a reprimand from a professor that lingers on the mind, etc. All of these things are acting on me from the outside and it is up to me to produce countervailing forces or complimentary forces from within myself to survive the ebb and flow over varying time spans.
so its (in my opinion) correct to say that life isnt about scrounging for happiness, but scrounging for happiness within one's self is a necessary part of human survival and maintenance of the self. if that makes any sense at all.
///mum - "weeping rock" probably the best track on their album summer make good. granted the whole album is a departure from the dream states of their previous work... and that sucks cuz their old stuff was damn good... but i cant fault them for change. who wants to here the same shit 90 times in a row. who even plays songs 90 times these days?
Posted Date: : Jul 17, 2008 3:56 AM
I've been thinking about this entry for quite some time. Not this entry, the one before it. Well the one before and also this one since this entry has everything to do with what came before, in most respects.
I'm not going to degrade the concept of perfect and true happiness. Well actually just in saying that I believe everyone can recognize that there is a difference between perfect happiness and true happiness: the former stemming largely from circumstances and the latter being born exclusively from within the self. What I want to point up is that you are right. Life is not about scrounging for happiness or at least it shouldn't be.
Human's are meant to adapt to their circumstances. Adaptations don't occur in a vacuum. Stimulus is imposed on the static situation of existence and adaptation happens. What happens when the stimulus occurs is what we read as happiness, sadness, pain, insecurity, etc. What we do in respsone, how we adapt is what causes us to change, to remain happy, to lift our spirits, to alleviate pain, to frustrate insecurity etc. No person is static. If they are static then they are in affect dead within... a virtual non-person (as far as im concerned). We are always performing to either maintain our emotional levels against stimulus or to change them.
Life is not /about/ scrounging for happiness. it is about survival over varying spans of time. survival through unremitting waves of stimulus and change. stimulus that may last a moment or that may last decades. change that is destructive or constructive. sometimes it's easier to survive... sometimes it's more difficult.
the sunset moment can be easy for some to survive because it can generate happiness and contentment. but it is also a very short spanning moment. perfect happiness is easy to accept and live in and live through. but to be truly happy in such a short spanning moment one would have to be able to adapt to the stimulus of the coming night... or fall into the possible depression that nightfall may precipitate with the loss of perfect circumstantial happiness.
happiness should not be exogenously determined, but when it is it can be easier to feel true happiness. when life's stimuli are definitively negative it takes a strong sense of self to generate truthful and positive responses to adapt to them.
take me for example. not looking for any pity here, but just for examples sake consider the following:
my stimuli in life are (but are not limited to):
75k of loan debt-
joblessness-
a healthy relationship+
some self esteem+
horrible wardrobe-
satisfying location (chicago)+
hobbies+
and the list goes on. these stimuli act with varying strength over varying spans of time. debt is hugely negative and will haunt me for decades. self esteem is a little positive and comes and goes. i live in a nice city everyday. my interest in hobbies comes and goes. my clothing sucks and i have to face that everyday. and there are other things that come and go for varying spans of time... things like sunsets, a particularyly enjoyable commute to school, a nice long vacation, a visit home, a stubbed toe, a reprimand from a professor that lingers on the mind, etc. All of these things are acting on me from the outside and it is up to me to produce countervailing forces or complimentary forces from within myself to survive the ebb and flow over varying time spans.
so its (in my opinion) correct to say that life isnt about scrounging for happiness, but scrounging for happiness within one's self is a necessary part of human survival and maintenance of the self. if that makes any sense at all.
///mum - "weeping rock" probably the best track on their album summer make good. granted the whole album is a departure from the dream states of their previous work... and that sucks cuz their old stuff was damn good... but i cant fault them for change. who wants to here the same shit 90 times in a row. who even plays songs 90 times these days?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)