After revisiting the past with a former colleague of mine, I feel unsure of myself once more. Our entire conversation wasn't centered around me but the politics surrounding my exit from a graduate program I was once in. Clearly, I do not want to go into details, but I need to articulate how I've come to view the situation and that is this...
WHAT DID I DO? WHAT DID I EVER DO TO DESERVE BEING TREATED LIKE THIS?
I'm a reserved and quite shy person. Only once, when it was clear I was being arbitrarily torn to shreds, did I have the nerve to raise my voice to a 'superior'--and that really is saying something that me yelling at an 'authority figure' ever came to pass. Otherwise, I did nothing to step on anyone's toes. In fact, I avoided it at all costs.
I feel, that was part of the problem. There was no confidence on my end to approach anyone--professors that is--because I didn't feel I could trust them. Speaking to other friends--who left by the way--I knew to step carefully around these individuals. It takes a lot to trust another individual, especially one with power. I want to be able to relate on a level deeper than professionalism. A level where I can be myself, yet still be supported as a scholar with ideas. I couldn't detect a space where this would be possible, so I stayed silent until I forced myself into a relationship with faculty as a means of survival. I couldn't get my Master's without a committee after all. And that's when things gradually went south.
On both counts my failure to act on my intuition cost me dearly. I worry about the new program I will be starting this fall. I want to be myself yet be empowered as well. I don't think these things should be contradictory. I know I need to be confident and assertive. I hope I've ended up in an environment that supports me as a person, which will lend to my comfort and thus my confidence.
I do intend to get my Ph.D. and begin making good on my desire to do right by others, supporting those who need it most by being where I am needed most. I know this is a rather vague desire that is by no means a concrete plan, but I am open to moving towards the direction of how this desire materializes.
I know this post was a bit scattered but I thought I'd at least get this off my brain. Thanks for 'listening'.
Until next time...
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Shoes
And now for another light-hearted materialistic post...
So, my feet are busted. By that I mean, they swell for no apparent reason (it cost over 700 dollars in tests, x-rays and ultrasounds for doctors to say "I don't know why your feet are swelling"). This has been going on for 3+ years. Now, I'm a size 12 pant size, and have been for over 5 years so, I don't think my size has anything to do with it.
Any how, 'girly' shoes like Mary-Janes, or ballet flats are no longer an option. For a while, I even gave up on wearing shorts and skirts in the summer time. Now I figure, life is too short (no pun intended) to limit my clothing options to pants for the rest of my life. The problem with my new-found resolve is the limited spectrum in shoes available for my perpetually swollen feet and ankles. Firstly, I do not know how noticeable this problem is for others. Still, the only thing I can get away with wearing with shorts and skirts (and even pants) are sneakers and flip-flops. Girly flip-flops still abide by the dainty foot principle so with dressier models and their thin straps, its easy to see flesh bulging around them. So I've been relying on the male versions, which are much more foot friendly when it comes to comfort.
In fact, as of late, I've favored male versions of sneakers for quite some time. I like that men's feet are not expected to be dainty, which means I can by the size I wear and not have to worry about discomfort. Yes, I suppose, I do favor men's (and unisex) shoes for this reason. If only I could find some that I could wear with shorts, skirts and pants. For now, the only shoes I can wear regularly with shorts and mini-skirts are my really old and dingy Rod Lavers. With longer skirts, my Payless version Converses seem to do the trick (except when the shoes look oddly pointy and misshapen around my swollen feet).
Slacks are becoming an issue too. I want to have a sense of finesse when I dress--especially for my upcoming jobs, but the casual shoes available do not favor my feet. I miss the 'bowling' style shoes that were around in the 2002-2004-ish era. You know the one that seemed to go with jeans and slacks and just seemed so cool in general? Anyone remember those? I wish those type of shoes still existed. Now that they've gone the way of being ultra-feminine, I just can't seem to win. Unless someone knows something I don't--please, please share if so; I don't internet shop on the regular so any word on cool shoes would help. Otherwise, I don't see what's wrong with wearing Converses with slacks, especially for slighltly laid-back atmospheres.
Any suggestions for shoe choices are welcome. As you might have guessed, I'm not all that 'fem' when it comes to shoes. Heck, I don't even wear make-up and I have a bit of a nail-biting problem (a holdover from childhood). I like to be 'fem' in my own way I guess, which means I say no to shoes that are supposed to make feet look small. What can I say, I'm a sucker for comfort (but a sucker for style too)!
Well thanks for 'listening'. Until next time...
So, my feet are busted. By that I mean, they swell for no apparent reason (it cost over 700 dollars in tests, x-rays and ultrasounds for doctors to say "I don't know why your feet are swelling"). This has been going on for 3+ years. Now, I'm a size 12 pant size, and have been for over 5 years so, I don't think my size has anything to do with it.
Any how, 'girly' shoes like Mary-Janes, or ballet flats are no longer an option. For a while, I even gave up on wearing shorts and skirts in the summer time. Now I figure, life is too short (no pun intended) to limit my clothing options to pants for the rest of my life. The problem with my new-found resolve is the limited spectrum in shoes available for my perpetually swollen feet and ankles. Firstly, I do not know how noticeable this problem is for others. Still, the only thing I can get away with wearing with shorts and skirts (and even pants) are sneakers and flip-flops. Girly flip-flops still abide by the dainty foot principle so with dressier models and their thin straps, its easy to see flesh bulging around them. So I've been relying on the male versions, which are much more foot friendly when it comes to comfort.
In fact, as of late, I've favored male versions of sneakers for quite some time. I like that men's feet are not expected to be dainty, which means I can by the size I wear and not have to worry about discomfort. Yes, I suppose, I do favor men's (and unisex) shoes for this reason. If only I could find some that I could wear with shorts, skirts and pants. For now, the only shoes I can wear regularly with shorts and mini-skirts are my really old and dingy Rod Lavers. With longer skirts, my Payless version Converses seem to do the trick (except when the shoes look oddly pointy and misshapen around my swollen feet).
Slacks are becoming an issue too. I want to have a sense of finesse when I dress--especially for my upcoming jobs, but the casual shoes available do not favor my feet. I miss the 'bowling' style shoes that were around in the 2002-2004-ish era. You know the one that seemed to go with jeans and slacks and just seemed so cool in general? Anyone remember those? I wish those type of shoes still existed. Now that they've gone the way of being ultra-feminine, I just can't seem to win. Unless someone knows something I don't--please, please share if so; I don't internet shop on the regular so any word on cool shoes would help. Otherwise, I don't see what's wrong with wearing Converses with slacks, especially for slighltly laid-back atmospheres.
Any suggestions for shoe choices are welcome. As you might have guessed, I'm not all that 'fem' when it comes to shoes. Heck, I don't even wear make-up and I have a bit of a nail-biting problem (a holdover from childhood). I like to be 'fem' in my own way I guess, which means I say no to shoes that are supposed to make feet look small. What can I say, I'm a sucker for comfort (but a sucker for style too)!
Well thanks for 'listening'. Until next time...
Friday, July 29, 2011
Views on Drinkin' (and general Inebriation)
So, often times I feel the need to defend my drinking preferences. Why? Because I don't drink beer, "real" wine, or other alcoholic beverages that, in my mind, taste like poison. Most of these beverages are too bitter in taste. I like for my experiences to be aesthetically pleasing, and that goes for all the senses involved. If I'm gonna drink, I'm going to enjoy it! And what do I enjoy? Sugar of course! I like drinks that are sweet and emulate juices and other tasty treats (Jolly Rancher anyone?). So when I do buy wine, I'm pickin' up some Arbor Mist. If Ocean Spray starts making alcoholic beverages I could be in danger of becoming an alcoholic (an exaggeration of course since I have a good hold on my self-control). Sure these types of drinks are considered foofy and girly, but what does this mean about 'acceptable' drinking choices? They're considered manly firstly , and just plain status-quo as a result. But really, if something that tastes like poison is an 'acquired' taste what is someone forcing themselves to do? Like poison? Believe the purpose of drinking is to get drunk as fast as possible? Well count me out! I like my fruity drinks because I want to enjoy the experience of inebriation (yep, I'm what you'd call a 'happy' drunk).
Besides I feel that the preference of taste in alcoholic drinks (and maybe the type of 'drunk' one gets) says something about one's outlook on life. For me, regardless of what has happened so far, I believe life is good and sweet (and I want to continue believing this). Being someone who becomes super happy (and even lovey though in private) when tipsy, I think represents my deep desire to be this kind of happy, joyful and carefree more of the time than I am and do at present.
This doesn't mean that I try to get drunk as quickly as possible. In fact, I've had one hangover in my life and do not wish to repeat this experience. I was 25, hanging out with friends and no immediate responsibilities in Hawaii. Needless to say, the next day no amount of water and aspirin could relieve me of the horrible headache that lasted all day. In any case, I'm a lightweight as it is so it doesn't take long for me to get tipsy, and I know how to navigate my limits.
In any case, I do not drink that often, maybe once every few months. When it comes to life in general, my take on it is to experience it as cleanly as possible. I suppose I just like knowing that most of what I've felt and experienced in life is real and on my own terms. So, I'm not one to give into the hype of trying things for the sake of trying them--it's never been something I've been interested in. This makes me a rather boring person compared to my friends, but I don't care. No judgments on my end, that's just my outlook on how I would like to experience my life in general.
Well that's it for now. Up next, yet another trivial topic...SHOES!
Until next time...
Besides I feel that the preference of taste in alcoholic drinks (and maybe the type of 'drunk' one gets) says something about one's outlook on life. For me, regardless of what has happened so far, I believe life is good and sweet (and I want to continue believing this). Being someone who becomes super happy (and even lovey though in private) when tipsy, I think represents my deep desire to be this kind of happy, joyful and carefree more of the time than I am and do at present.
This doesn't mean that I try to get drunk as quickly as possible. In fact, I've had one hangover in my life and do not wish to repeat this experience. I was 25, hanging out with friends and no immediate responsibilities in Hawaii. Needless to say, the next day no amount of water and aspirin could relieve me of the horrible headache that lasted all day. In any case, I'm a lightweight as it is so it doesn't take long for me to get tipsy, and I know how to navigate my limits.
In any case, I do not drink that often, maybe once every few months. When it comes to life in general, my take on it is to experience it as cleanly as possible. I suppose I just like knowing that most of what I've felt and experienced in life is real and on my own terms. So, I'm not one to give into the hype of trying things for the sake of trying them--it's never been something I've been interested in. This makes me a rather boring person compared to my friends, but I don't care. No judgments on my end, that's just my outlook on how I would like to experience my life in general.
Well that's it for now. Up next, yet another trivial topic...SHOES!
Until next time...
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Ways of Seeing and Understanding
In a few of my posts, I've made references to little and great understanding. This post is an attempt at rectifying the mistake of not explaining what any of this means. My thoughts on this subject are derived from "Provoked by Astonishment: Seeing and Understanding in Inquiry" by Allan Neilsen in the book Provoked by Art: Theorizing Arts-informed Research and edited volume. Related thoughts will likely refer to The Eternal Smile by Derek Kirk Kim and Gene Luen Yang. I hope this ramble is accessible to everyone even though it's origins come from my encounters with academia...
When it comes to thinking about how things are understood and how this understanding is communicated, in American academia and culture in general, understanding is done in a way that leaves little room for alternatives. For example, when I teach my four-year-old to do something, from that point on, unless told otherwise, that is the only way it can be done. Adults, I've observed, are the same way it seems; closed to alternatives once one way of understanding something has been communicated.
I find this way of being to be quite oppressive, especially when it comes to expressing myself or attempting to express knowledge in general. There is more than one way to know and understand. Why should I be punished because I do not do it exactly your way (and by your I mean the status-quo--the way of doing and being considered to be mainstream)?
Well, thank goodness I am not the only one who feels this way. Books have been written challenging and--for me--presenting differing ways to look at and understand things that have offered a bit of hope and happiness for me as a continual learner. This was especially the case after reading A.Neilsen's "Provoked by Astonishment...". This piece emphasizes the importance of being open to astonishment since it "creates opportunity for insight and understanding by disrupting the busyness and unmindfulness of everyday existence" (56). By being open to the unexpected we are also open to all sorts of possibilities when it comes to knowing and understanding something, we are able to break free of stifling conventions. Which brings me to "little" and "great" understanding.
The state of "Little Understanding" is one that consists of the "constricted awareness and discriminatory thinking" that is a part of standardized modes of doing and being. Additionally, this state is mandated by thoughts of how things should or ought to be and apprehensions of what could be and are thus limiting and restrictive (56-57).
The state of "Great Understanding" is one that consists of being in "a contemplative state that allows us to be in the moment, to be knocked to the ground in astonishment, to see with new eyes" (57).
This brings me to observe a theme I found in D.K.Kim & G.L.Yang's The Eternal Smile. First off I highly recommend this book 'cause it's awesome! Apologies for the spoiler but--and maybe those of you who have read this saw other things--I found the theme of this piece (yes I know it's three stories) to be that of ways of seeing. For these three stories this was presented via fantasy and its role in allowing the characters in each tale to see or maybe examine their lives--summed up well in the third story "Urgent Request" when proposing that fantasy is not simply a means of escape but a way in which one can see (so cool!). I see certain tales of fantasy like this much of the time and am often astonished by the messages and their relation to real-life. Sometimes I think people tell stories for this very reason. No wonder I like stuff like FMA so much!
Ahem...back to the rest of the post...
Despite the attractiveness of states of Great Understanding, valuing the importance of both states is necessary (although sometimes I do wonder). This means not forsaking one for the other but being able to "preserve and transcend" states of Little Understanding as a means of becoming "whole"(57). This is important to understanding which requires being "in the moment" and being able to "apprehend experience holistically," and to "connect" (58).This is what I want my travels in academia and life in general to be about.
I couldn't be happier to have stumbled across this nugget of understanding and can hope that along my journey I am able to attain states of Great Understanding while not treating Little Understanding as a nemesis of sorts. I hope reading the books mentioned in this post will be as helpful to you as it has been for me. Please feel free to add, challenge, expand, or whatever about this topic. Any related book, movie or show suggestions would also be nice!
Recommended reading:
American Born Chinese
Level Up
Three Day Road
Days of War, Nights of Love
Until next time...
When it comes to thinking about how things are understood and how this understanding is communicated, in American academia and culture in general, understanding is done in a way that leaves little room for alternatives. For example, when I teach my four-year-old to do something, from that point on, unless told otherwise, that is the only way it can be done. Adults, I've observed, are the same way it seems; closed to alternatives once one way of understanding something has been communicated.
I find this way of being to be quite oppressive, especially when it comes to expressing myself or attempting to express knowledge in general. There is more than one way to know and understand. Why should I be punished because I do not do it exactly your way (and by your I mean the status-quo--the way of doing and being considered to be mainstream)?
Well, thank goodness I am not the only one who feels this way. Books have been written challenging and--for me--presenting differing ways to look at and understand things that have offered a bit of hope and happiness for me as a continual learner. This was especially the case after reading A.Neilsen's "Provoked by Astonishment...". This piece emphasizes the importance of being open to astonishment since it "creates opportunity for insight and understanding by disrupting the busyness and unmindfulness of everyday existence" (56). By being open to the unexpected we are also open to all sorts of possibilities when it comes to knowing and understanding something, we are able to break free of stifling conventions. Which brings me to "little" and "great" understanding.
The state of "Little Understanding" is one that consists of the "constricted awareness and discriminatory thinking" that is a part of standardized modes of doing and being. Additionally, this state is mandated by thoughts of how things should or ought to be and apprehensions of what could be and are thus limiting and restrictive (56-57).
The state of "Great Understanding" is one that consists of being in "a contemplative state that allows us to be in the moment, to be knocked to the ground in astonishment, to see with new eyes" (57).
This brings me to observe a theme I found in D.K.Kim & G.L.Yang's The Eternal Smile. First off I highly recommend this book 'cause it's awesome! Apologies for the spoiler but--and maybe those of you who have read this saw other things--I found the theme of this piece (yes I know it's three stories) to be that of ways of seeing. For these three stories this was presented via fantasy and its role in allowing the characters in each tale to see or maybe examine their lives--summed up well in the third story "Urgent Request" when proposing that fantasy is not simply a means of escape but a way in which one can see (so cool!). I see certain tales of fantasy like this much of the time and am often astonished by the messages and their relation to real-life. Sometimes I think people tell stories for this very reason. No wonder I like stuff like FMA so much!
Ahem...back to the rest of the post...
Despite the attractiveness of states of Great Understanding, valuing the importance of both states is necessary (although sometimes I do wonder). This means not forsaking one for the other but being able to "preserve and transcend" states of Little Understanding as a means of becoming "whole"(57). This is important to understanding which requires being "in the moment" and being able to "apprehend experience holistically," and to "connect" (58).This is what I want my travels in academia and life in general to be about.
I couldn't be happier to have stumbled across this nugget of understanding and can hope that along my journey I am able to attain states of Great Understanding while not treating Little Understanding as a nemesis of sorts. I hope reading the books mentioned in this post will be as helpful to you as it has been for me. Please feel free to add, challenge, expand, or whatever about this topic. Any related book, movie or show suggestions would also be nice!
Recommended reading:
American Born Chinese
Level Up
Three Day Road
Days of War, Nights of Love
Until next time...
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Relationships
After a conversation with my Sis the other day, I figured I should attempt to better articulate my thoughts about relationships and how they function--or maybe how people within them function.
In any case, I found myself ranting about how ill-prepared individuals are for not only understanding what love is and how it works but how relationships based on faulty notions of love work. I am not speaking as an expert on love or relationships--my first post says as much--I am speaking as someone who has observed the hold individualism has on American culture (overly generalized I know). Despite our upbringings, as adults, especially newly independent ones, we understand--through interactions with one another, and especially media and marketing of products that project what the 'ideal' person should look like, do, dress and be like in general--what it means to live for ourselves. With no one to answer to, its easy to relish in this sense of 'freedom' and with it we understand that we don't have to compromise what we believe to be part of our identities--even though the people and situations we interact with prove these identities are forever growing and changing.
It seems the only moments we are willing to compromise ourselves is in situations that we want to look 'good' in. A lot goes into looking good in relationships, especially at the beginning. Things are overlooked in our quest for acceptance and throughout a 'courtship' failure to be 'true' to oneself runs rampant. Once committed to this other person, love is often stereotyped as the magic elixir that will guide the way and make everything work out. Some even understand that work is involved in relationships--work in keeping it together. But for what purpose? And beyond initial commitment that 'true self' that has been neglected is longed for as situations that led to initial denials of self repeat themselves--which only leads to future insecurities and misery. On top of this, that sense of individuality has never really been abandoned despite the attempts at togetherness.
We never are taught what love is, how relationships should work or function, or our individual roles in making future relationships a livable reality. We were never taught how to accept our true selves, how to truly accept others for who they are, how to live in intimate settings where the two can peacefully coincide without false understandings of compromise, and belief in 'no pain, no gain'. (And maybe figuring out if it is worth committing to someone we truly do understand to some extent--especially when it comes to deeply inherent flaws that might be near impossible to overcome?) Most importantly it seems, we have never learned how to live without the individualism that places ourselves at the center of our own universe. Or maybe its learning to balance out this sense of self with one that is adept at communalism as well (individualism shouldn't necessarily be demonized right?). Despite all of this, we are somehow expected to know how to flourish in relationships and the pressure to do so is great.
In any case, these sets of knowledge have all but been abandoned and replaced by faulty magical love--the kind of desire for instant gratification that seems so much a part of American culture at least. This is the real work that needs to be realized about relationships and our ability to really relate and coincide with one another. Often it seems the weight and pressure that crumbles relationships is the weight surrounding the ignorance of these things. Not to mention not knowing or being ourselves, operating under faulty masks of acceptance that was never there and other things all out of the greed that comes from wanting and continuing what is/was believed to be a wonderful occurrence--love.
What I have observed about relationships and love in this day and age, is that there is a lot that has not been acknowledged about them and is difficult to learn (how can you learn something that isn't and hasn't been spoken about in your--and other--lifetime(s)?). As such relationships and love have been fused with consumerist and instantly gratifying ways of being that are part of a culture of individualism. These things happen and are maintained by magic. Efforts put into sustaining this magic are misunderstood and misplaced, never addressing the issues at hand.
At this rate, it seems if one were to actively engage in learning about these things, one wouldn't be ready to pursue a decent relationship until...well later than her/his 30s ( an exaggeration of course since I have no idea how long such a journey would take). As for me, like I might have mentioned in my first post, understanding myself, love, relationships and my choice of commitment is a personal journey I'm taking on solo. I have a lot to learn in each of the areas mentioned above, especially balancing out the desire for individualism with learning to live in a deeply communal sense. Personal issues abound as well since I did not have the best (in fact it was likely the worst) model to work from when it comes to understanding love, relationships and most of all, acceptance of self and others (since being highly critical in a negative sense was a skill I learned from the best, yet loathe to no end). Based on this and other posts, I should (and almost have at times) run off my Mate long ago. Yeah, I have a lot I need to work out in trying to pursue a better self and relationship.
In any case, this is but a one, maybe two-dimensional way of looking at the workings and understandings of love and relationships. This and many of the other spouty posts aren't likely to be followed up by research that would add meaning or depth any time soon. As always, I am open to other angles left unexplored, unimagined and etcetera about this topic. Despite my tones of factual-ness (blasted academia!) I have a lot to learn and think about in my journey towards becoming a better human being --something I have learned I cannot simply rely on others to bring about in myself. I hope others have thoughts and experiences they would like to contribute nonetheless. Is this a realistic take on love and relationships? What is missing? Too much negativity and cynicism? What are more positive outlooks? (Maybe I'll engage some of these questions in later posts who knows?)
Thanks again for 'listening'
Until next time...
In any case, I found myself ranting about how ill-prepared individuals are for not only understanding what love is and how it works but how relationships based on faulty notions of love work. I am not speaking as an expert on love or relationships--my first post says as much--I am speaking as someone who has observed the hold individualism has on American culture (overly generalized I know). Despite our upbringings, as adults, especially newly independent ones, we understand--through interactions with one another, and especially media and marketing of products that project what the 'ideal' person should look like, do, dress and be like in general--what it means to live for ourselves. With no one to answer to, its easy to relish in this sense of 'freedom' and with it we understand that we don't have to compromise what we believe to be part of our identities--even though the people and situations we interact with prove these identities are forever growing and changing.
It seems the only moments we are willing to compromise ourselves is in situations that we want to look 'good' in. A lot goes into looking good in relationships, especially at the beginning. Things are overlooked in our quest for acceptance and throughout a 'courtship' failure to be 'true' to oneself runs rampant. Once committed to this other person, love is often stereotyped as the magic elixir that will guide the way and make everything work out. Some even understand that work is involved in relationships--work in keeping it together. But for what purpose? And beyond initial commitment that 'true self' that has been neglected is longed for as situations that led to initial denials of self repeat themselves--which only leads to future insecurities and misery. On top of this, that sense of individuality has never really been abandoned despite the attempts at togetherness.
We never are taught what love is, how relationships should work or function, or our individual roles in making future relationships a livable reality. We were never taught how to accept our true selves, how to truly accept others for who they are, how to live in intimate settings where the two can peacefully coincide without false understandings of compromise, and belief in 'no pain, no gain'. (And maybe figuring out if it is worth committing to someone we truly do understand to some extent--especially when it comes to deeply inherent flaws that might be near impossible to overcome?) Most importantly it seems, we have never learned how to live without the individualism that places ourselves at the center of our own universe. Or maybe its learning to balance out this sense of self with one that is adept at communalism as well (individualism shouldn't necessarily be demonized right?). Despite all of this, we are somehow expected to know how to flourish in relationships and the pressure to do so is great.
In any case, these sets of knowledge have all but been abandoned and replaced by faulty magical love--the kind of desire for instant gratification that seems so much a part of American culture at least. This is the real work that needs to be realized about relationships and our ability to really relate and coincide with one another. Often it seems the weight and pressure that crumbles relationships is the weight surrounding the ignorance of these things. Not to mention not knowing or being ourselves, operating under faulty masks of acceptance that was never there and other things all out of the greed that comes from wanting and continuing what is/was believed to be a wonderful occurrence--love.
What I have observed about relationships and love in this day and age, is that there is a lot that has not been acknowledged about them and is difficult to learn (how can you learn something that isn't and hasn't been spoken about in your--and other--lifetime(s)?). As such relationships and love have been fused with consumerist and instantly gratifying ways of being that are part of a culture of individualism. These things happen and are maintained by magic. Efforts put into sustaining this magic are misunderstood and misplaced, never addressing the issues at hand.
At this rate, it seems if one were to actively engage in learning about these things, one wouldn't be ready to pursue a decent relationship until...well later than her/his 30s ( an exaggeration of course since I have no idea how long such a journey would take). As for me, like I might have mentioned in my first post, understanding myself, love, relationships and my choice of commitment is a personal journey I'm taking on solo. I have a lot to learn in each of the areas mentioned above, especially balancing out the desire for individualism with learning to live in a deeply communal sense. Personal issues abound as well since I did not have the best (in fact it was likely the worst) model to work from when it comes to understanding love, relationships and most of all, acceptance of self and others (since being highly critical in a negative sense was a skill I learned from the best, yet loathe to no end). Based on this and other posts, I should (and almost have at times) run off my Mate long ago. Yeah, I have a lot I need to work out in trying to pursue a better self and relationship.
In any case, this is but a one, maybe two-dimensional way of looking at the workings and understandings of love and relationships. This and many of the other spouty posts aren't likely to be followed up by research that would add meaning or depth any time soon. As always, I am open to other angles left unexplored, unimagined and etcetera about this topic. Despite my tones of factual-ness (blasted academia!) I have a lot to learn and think about in my journey towards becoming a better human being --something I have learned I cannot simply rely on others to bring about in myself. I hope others have thoughts and experiences they would like to contribute nonetheless. Is this a realistic take on love and relationships? What is missing? Too much negativity and cynicism? What are more positive outlooks? (Maybe I'll engage some of these questions in later posts who knows?)
Thanks again for 'listening'
Until next time...
Monday, July 25, 2011
Research Ideas: Comic related pt.2
So, here is another idea I've been trying to work out in my mind. I'm not sure if it should be classified as research since it is more of a story proposal regarding the mutant side of the Marvel Universe.
The notion of this proposal is the theorizing of the origins of mutant kind. I derived the idea from the Truth: Red White and Black book that tells of the origins of Captain America which was discussed briefly in the last post. I thought it would be interesting if it were discovered that mutant kind was actually created by human hands. The explanation for this coming from the decades that humanity has lived with chemicals and pollutants that have come to be disastrous for the surrounding environment. I realize this takes the mutant timeline only as far back as maybe the industrial revolution, but there are already a million alternate universes in Marvel, one more wouldn't hurt. As I was saying, this explanation would also chronicle large scale global environmental disasters like Hiroshima, Chernobyl and conflicts using chemical warfare among others. Long standing nuclear experiments and the proximity within which groups have lived by factories would also be taken into account along with increased reliance on medications, food additives, pesticides, bug sprays and so on. Any and everything humanity has lived with for the sake of an 'improved' standard of life.
Wouldn't it be interesting to ponder the extent to which this reality affects humanity. What if it genetically altered humans to the extent that another 'race' of humans emerged. Sure it would be tough to make a leap as drastic as having powers but in the realm of fiction, what isn't possible? Perhaps it could be seen as a far too late cautionary tale or one that further complicates what would then be an arbitrary rift between humans and mutants.
Research or just stories or both or neither? What do you think of such ideas?
I realize in both ideas that I am likely quite naive about what goes on in the Marvel Universe. Maybe someday when I actually have time and resources to, I can begin to get a better grasp on Marvel and the stories told. Until then, I'll be a naively idealistic fan who sees some of what Marvel has done as endeavors of social justice. If there are insights on any of these research ideas or perspectives please share them. I definitely have a lot to read and learn about the comics world and thus appreciate your thoughts.
Until next time...
The notion of this proposal is the theorizing of the origins of mutant kind. I derived the idea from the Truth: Red White and Black book that tells of the origins of Captain America which was discussed briefly in the last post. I thought it would be interesting if it were discovered that mutant kind was actually created by human hands. The explanation for this coming from the decades that humanity has lived with chemicals and pollutants that have come to be disastrous for the surrounding environment. I realize this takes the mutant timeline only as far back as maybe the industrial revolution, but there are already a million alternate universes in Marvel, one more wouldn't hurt. As I was saying, this explanation would also chronicle large scale global environmental disasters like Hiroshima, Chernobyl and conflicts using chemical warfare among others. Long standing nuclear experiments and the proximity within which groups have lived by factories would also be taken into account along with increased reliance on medications, food additives, pesticides, bug sprays and so on. Any and everything humanity has lived with for the sake of an 'improved' standard of life.
Wouldn't it be interesting to ponder the extent to which this reality affects humanity. What if it genetically altered humans to the extent that another 'race' of humans emerged. Sure it would be tough to make a leap as drastic as having powers but in the realm of fiction, what isn't possible? Perhaps it could be seen as a far too late cautionary tale or one that further complicates what would then be an arbitrary rift between humans and mutants.
Research or just stories or both or neither? What do you think of such ideas?
I realize in both ideas that I am likely quite naive about what goes on in the Marvel Universe. Maybe someday when I actually have time and resources to, I can begin to get a better grasp on Marvel and the stories told. Until then, I'll be a naively idealistic fan who sees some of what Marvel has done as endeavors of social justice. If there are insights on any of these research ideas or perspectives please share them. I definitely have a lot to read and learn about the comics world and thus appreciate your thoughts.
Until next time...
Sunday, July 24, 2011
What is the Meaning of Living Without?
I've heard it and heard myself say it time and time again. That there is that something I cannot live without. Sleep seems to be tops on this list, yet I cannot make it past 7:30 a.m. most days. Regardless many other things of this sort--the things I cannot live without--have come to pass and I have simply learned to do without them. Which leaves me wondering why I was so caught up over that in the first place? (I have yet to say this about sleeping in however.)
There are other more serious things in our social environments and societies where at one point we've said we can't live without it and yet--much later on--we can't remember why that thing was such a big deal as we have adapted and moved on. Maybe things like the ozone layer, clean air in general, 'real' food, and lack of violent encounters might be examples. I can't seem to think of any better ones at the moment--a little help would be nice.
I just wonder if we have learned to live without things both great and small that should have been appreciated or at least were truly necessary to our lives after all--despite our failure to notice these things once they are no more? For instance, does it mean that I'm okay with somehow poisoning myself should I truly learn to live without sleeping in? Does it mean that we are shortening the futures of others as well as our own by not understanding what it is to truly live without conflict--violent and non-violent? Sure it might not be a good way to live being attached to 'worldly possessions' but what if, while they are here they serve a purpose that should not be forgotten? An example for me is my mother's side of my family line and their ability to talk stories. It's something I cherish about my family and other's families, yet not having grown up around it myself, I do not have the ability to do the same and crave this ability and these kinds of stories all the time. Surely there is a purpose to the ability to tell stories--even if they are heavily embellished.
I wonder what other things we have forgotten about that are as necessary as they are seemingly unnecessary. Any feedback, insights or stories on this matter are welcome.
There are other more serious things in our social environments and societies where at one point we've said we can't live without it and yet--much later on--we can't remember why that thing was such a big deal as we have adapted and moved on. Maybe things like the ozone layer, clean air in general, 'real' food, and lack of violent encounters might be examples. I can't seem to think of any better ones at the moment--a little help would be nice.
I just wonder if we have learned to live without things both great and small that should have been appreciated or at least were truly necessary to our lives after all--despite our failure to notice these things once they are no more? For instance, does it mean that I'm okay with somehow poisoning myself should I truly learn to live without sleeping in? Does it mean that we are shortening the futures of others as well as our own by not understanding what it is to truly live without conflict--violent and non-violent? Sure it might not be a good way to live being attached to 'worldly possessions' but what if, while they are here they serve a purpose that should not be forgotten? An example for me is my mother's side of my family line and their ability to talk stories. It's something I cherish about my family and other's families, yet not having grown up around it myself, I do not have the ability to do the same and crave this ability and these kinds of stories all the time. Surely there is a purpose to the ability to tell stories--even if they are heavily embellished.
I wonder what other things we have forgotten about that are as necessary as they are seemingly unnecessary. Any feedback, insights or stories on this matter are welcome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)