Wednesday, February 29, 2012

leap day!

and what a day!
why is february only 28/9 days again?
i need more time!
so much work to do it's ridiculous!

back to work!

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

the jung typology test

according to the above test, i am considered infp! that is:


cool beans, but what does this mean? i like what this site had to say:

Healers present a calm and serene face to the world, and can seem shy, even distant around others. But inside they're anything but serene, having a capacity for personal caring rarely found in the other types. Healers care deeply about the inner life of a few special persons, or about a favorite cause in the world at large. And their great passion is to heal the conflicts that trouble individuals, or that divide groups, and thus to bring wholeness, or health, to themselves, their loved ones, and their community.

Healers have a profound sense of idealism that comes from a strong personal sense of right and wrong. They conceive of the world as an ethical, honorable place, full of wondrous possibilities and potential goods. In fact, to understand Healers, we must understand that their deep commitment to the positive and the good is almost boundless and selfless, inspiring them to make extraordinary sacrifices for someone or something they believe in. Set off from the rest of humanity by their privacy and scarcity, Healers can often feel even more isolated in the purity of their idealism.

Also, Healers might well feel a sense of separation because of their often misunderstood childhood. Healers live a fantasy-filled childhood-they are the prince or princess of fairy tales-an attitude which, sadly, is frowned upon, or even punished, by many parents. With parents who want them to get their head out of the clouds, Healers begin to believe they are bad to be so fanciful, so dreamy, and can come to see themselves as ugly ducklings. In truth, they are quite OK just as they are, only different from most others-swans reared in a family of ducks.

At work, Healers are adaptable, welcome new ideas and new information, are patient with complicated situations, but impatient with routine details. Healers are keenly aware of people and their feelings, and relate well with most others. Because of their deep-seated reserve, however, they can work quite happily alone. When making decisions, Healers follow their heart not their head, which means they can make errors of fact, but seldom of feeling. They have a natural interest in scholarly activities and demonstrate, like the other Idealists, a remarkable facility with language. They have a gift for interpreting stories, as well as for creating them, and thus often write in lyric, poetic fashion. Frequently they hear a call to go forth into the world and help others, a call they seem ready to answer, even if they must sacrifice their own comfort.

Not to say all of this pertains to me 100 %--i do strive to eventually follow through with the last part for instance. most of it resonates with me quite well in any case. 

any one else want to give it a shot? what  are you and do you agree with the assessment?

until next time...

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Unwelcome visit from an old friend pt. 2: conference blues

after a visit in conference-land, my self-esteem plummeted to a familiar low.
i held a workshop oriented session that discussed love and social justice. i made sure to inform the participants that i was by no means an expert on anything and was basing the workshop on three books i read on the matter: The Art of Loving, All About Love, and Strength to Love. i'm not sure how well things went. there was positive affirmations from my friends, but the one individual from another university who did attend presented her card to one of my friends...a participant...and walked off.

the thing about this friend is that he is way smart, brilliant even. i tend to befriend people i admire for their positive vibes and smarts. i know i can learn something from them and grow with them as a result (i have yet to figure out what it is i give to such awesome people). any who, sensitivity set in and needless to say i began to have massive doubts.

with most (probably all) of the people i consider friends, i find myself to be not exactly their equal. in retrospect of hanging out with most of them, i see myself as the "ugly friend". not as smart, not as articulate, not as hip, not nearly as cool. from time to time a few will tell me what they see in me (not from prompting mind you) and i wonder why i can't see these things for myself.

what else could it mean that i am not acknowledged for the workshop given, but my friend is? yes, he made some good thought provoking points and does not hold back on positing an issue that implicates authority figures (we're both graduate students in the same program). like i said he's brilliant.

my purpose was not necessarily to be an expert on the areas of love and social justice, simply to facilitate discussion on what we know and a fragment of the literature that discusses love and social justice. in the end it seems that the pleasure in intellectual masturbation must be satisfied and i did not do it for this particular professor. cue song this moment reminds me of!

still i feel as though i'm always coming up short. why is it so important to be one of the cool kids? as much as my friend shies away from these modes of being, if he choose to, he could totally be in like flynn (whatever that means but you get the point i hope). i on the other hand would have to undergo a radical transformation for this to happen. this would include, being smarter than everyone, being cooler than everyone (which involves having traveled the world, being dressed to the nines, being a few degrees of separation from some celebrity, having a clique, having an air of awesomeness about me, charisma, beauty and grace, and impeccable timing and taste. the ability to go out with folks on a whim is a necessary facet as well.), and somehow just being plain worthy of acknowledgement whenever i speak. a previous post on the matter touches on why this isn't already the case

i don't know. affirmation is nice, but it would also be nice to be able to see what others claim to see. i just don't get it. here i am feeling like i'm in eternal high school, and i hated high school! that's why i did a high school/college credit program that allowed me to do community college--to hang out with adults who could care less about that stuff (the classes were pretty cool too). having a positive attitude only gets me so far when stuff like being excluded continually happens. makes me wonder if i left, if my absence would be noticed?

oh well, at least my son still likes hanging out with me, which makes me dread the teenage years.

when i feel this low, only one thing left to do, chant like crazy and reconnect myself and the universe around me. that and walk it off...hit it rj and aaron!

until next time...

Monday, February 20, 2012

Why? Being wrong about something so volatile

I just finished reading Jazz by Toni Morrison and before talking to others and getting a clearer interpretation of it, I could not hold my tongue in disgust about the path some of the characters had taken towards growth and becoming. One of the major juxtapositions in this book (in my mind anyway) has to do with violence and love. I have always had trouble believing that from violent acts comes the potential for more loving acts, making violence a necessity in order for the emergence of love to be a possibility. Sure I've seen it happen. Non-violent movements are a testament to this idea.

 I cannot ignore the fact that from violence, lives and souls have been desecrated, destroyed, and brutalized by such senselessness. Sure, philosophers that discuss the movement of civilization toward 'rationality'(and the Enlightenment as a testament of that) say that such senselessness was necessary in order for us to be where we are today. But was/is is really necessary that Others be devastated by atrocities of the Dominant in order for the possibility of agency and subjectivity to arise? Did person/group a have to die or experience such violent acts in order for person/group b to become their subjective selves?Or for the possibility of others in group a to become their subjective selves? Should it really be considered that such things were done out of love? Or that love emerges from this?

Of course being on the receiving end of such acts has not helped with the trouble I've had and perhaps refusal in accepting this to be the case.

However, thanks to a friend another view of the violence/love juxtaposition is apparent (and I really need to read this book again). That of giving birth. Which brings forth the argument that what goes on with the characters of the book that took the needlessly violent route was meant as a cautionary tale. Considering one's becoming, instead, as the act of giving birth is one that conjoins the violence and pain brought on by the act and the emergence of love that results. Presumably the creation of this new life that is being given birth to is/was also an act of love.

I'll admit, it's difficult to see the emergence of agency/self-hood/subjectivity in this way; viewing a violent yet beautiful act, in such a positive light (which is easy enough to imagine having given birth) when the violent aspect is something one has been subjected to from external dominating forces (did that make any sense?). Maybe because my journey has been a painful one, filled with violence at times (as I'm certain Jazz points out  about its characters). The work of striving toward self-hood, toward the use of agency, toward becoming a subjective being is difficult because of this historical pain and violence. Overcoming this is also painful, and efforts to do so can and often are misguided and misinterpret what it means to overcome (something Jazz also points out rather well).

This is one of the many things I am trying to figure out on this journey. Having encountered such a powerful piece has shown me that I have a lot to learn about what I am trying to do for myself. Growth, understanding, becoming who I am meant to be without needlessly bring harm to others, all the while trying to become infused with love so I can act in loving ways, it's a tough task that can seem vague at times given the directions I've gone and continue to go. I cannot seem to get away from the fact that it's going to be painful and perhaps violent, but if I imagine this as part of the process of giving birth...well it will take a while for this point of view to become my own given my experiences, but I'm willing to learn, whatever that may mean. It's not the first time I've been wrong about how I understand something...

Until next time