So, in the last few months, I've read more fiction on a weekly basis than I think I ever have in my entire life. Who has time for fiction when academia is hounding you to read painfully boring stuff--and I mean wanting to spoon out my eyeballs and burn them so I have an excuse as to why I can't read, cause they couldn't have possibly published all those academic articles in braille right?
Any who, thanks to an American postmodern fiction class I took, I've finally had the chance to read stuff classified as academic that expanded on my thinking about certain things. The class was like a book club for academic nerds. I certainly was able to re-examine theories I came across previously through novels like Jazz by Toni Morrison, Neuromancer by William Gibson, Woman Warrior by Maxine Hong Kingston, The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven by Sherman Alexie, and Maus by Art Spiegelman (which I haven't touched since third grade).These are books I would not have touched otherwise and was glad I forced myself into a situation where I had to. Being able to think about things like identity formation and becoming,and the role of history, culture, environment etc., in all of this, through works of fiction of the most truthful sort, is a nice alternative to all theory all the time, which is at times the blandest way to encounter knowledge. Needless to say, I've enjoyed my time in the world of fiction almost as much as I enjoy my time watching thought-provoking anime/Japanese animated shows/movies. I now desire to communicate my findings in the world of theory in similar ways--except maybe in graphic novel form, and no not the academic ones that are actually paper tranquilizers with pictures.
It's been a while since I've read these books but the ideas communicated still pop up from time to time. I wonder how effective it would be to take notes from these novels, like I would my academic texts...Would I be academizing an artform and thus rendering it boring? Who knows, but I've gotta keep better track of what I read sand my mind isn't the most reliable place at the moment.
Oh yeah, so a friend of mine lent me a few books I consumed rather quickly and would like to incorporate into my understanding of love/ loving practice, becoming, and the place of violence in all of this. I'm still grappling with the necessity of violence in the process of becoming and rethinking what this means. The books are Parable of the Sower and Parable of the Talents by Octavia Butler. As with the previously mentioned novels and authors--except Spiegelman--I have never read any of her work but have always heard about how amazing she is and have now seen for myself. I enjoyed Parable of the Sower more (I don't know, it just seemed more impactful in its messaging) because it made me revisit my wanderings in attempting to understand alchemy--read The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho a while back among other brief texts about alchemy and everything. Now I just have to revisit and synthesize everything in an attempt to come to my own understanding of all of this complicated stuff! But who has time for that? I've gotta learn some new learning software for a class I'm teaching in a few weeks!
For now I'll take what I can get. I kinda wish I had more friends who read cool books they could loan me, or at least had a suggestion or two. I really don't have time to but if it's juicy, I'll make time dammit! I mean fiction of course, and am beginning to favor postmodern styles more and more, which includes graphic novels too! Reminds me to include The Eternal Smile by Gene Luen Yang in my attempted synthesis. Good stuff.
So yeah, any suggestions for what to read that is related to anything mentioned here or elsewhere in this bloggy-blog is welcome. No guarantees I'll read it, but will try if you really want me to. I also wish I could discuss these books with someone and not just internet paper...
Oh well, until next time...
Showing posts with label alchemy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alchemy. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Theme of current path of study
Lately, I've been thinking, reading, and writing about love (for example....). I've learned that self-love is important to being able to act lovingly towards others. When talking about love, I mean to abide by lenses provided by Erich Fromm (2000) and bell hooks (2000) on the matter. Specifically, that love is an action that involves care, respect, responsibility, and knowledge, which is aided by commitment, trust, and open honest communication. I've come to the temporary conclusion that in order to do this effectively, it is necessary to begin with self-love, which requires critical self-examination. How can I consider myself capable of acting out of love for others through my endeavors when I cannot do the same for myself? This is how I've arrived at the conclusion that acting confidently in and out of love requires that I am able to do this with myself first. But maybe this is a journey that makes acting on self-love and love of humanity simultaneously more possible than I realize. Or maybe it is a necessity that I treat my endeavors in this way.
In any case, I realize how estranged I am from myself--mind, body, and spirit--and how necessary it is to critically examine who I am and what guides my actions, good, bad, and everything in between. Acknowledging all aspects that make me who I am, I've determined, will allow me to comfortably do the same for others regardless of who they are. I am currently grappling with the more negative aspects of myself--the stuff I feel I could do without--and what it would mean to accept these things instead of reject and sever them from my being. After pondering about this in relation to Full Metal Alchemist (did I mention I love that show? Both of them?) I know I should be intentional about accepting all of who I am and working with what I have, not matter how detestable my negative elements may seem. I'm still not sure if this means finding the positive in these not-so-desirable attributes but maybe accepting them is all that matters.
Wanting to recognize and accept this wholeness that is myself so that I can do the same for others brings me to this song, which I find to be about the desire for human connection be it with the self, with others, or with the self and others simultaneously.
At the moment, I find this song to be about opening up and transcending isolation by acknowledging those aspects that are essential to making us living human beings and all that implies (again, whether this occurs on an individual or group level).
(not the video I was going for but it's the song that matters here!)
This is the kind of elation I feel when I connect with others in meaningful ways, and when I find those things, be it books, music, etc. that connect with something within myself. This is the type of elation I'd like to continue to encounter as I move forward.
Thoughts?
Recommended readings?
Well, until next time...
In any case, I realize how estranged I am from myself--mind, body, and spirit--and how necessary it is to critically examine who I am and what guides my actions, good, bad, and everything in between. Acknowledging all aspects that make me who I am, I've determined, will allow me to comfortably do the same for others regardless of who they are. I am currently grappling with the more negative aspects of myself--the stuff I feel I could do without--and what it would mean to accept these things instead of reject and sever them from my being. After pondering about this in relation to Full Metal Alchemist (did I mention I love that show? Both of them?) I know I should be intentional about accepting all of who I am and working with what I have, not matter how detestable my negative elements may seem. I'm still not sure if this means finding the positive in these not-so-desirable attributes but maybe accepting them is all that matters.
Wanting to recognize and accept this wholeness that is myself so that I can do the same for others brings me to this song, which I find to be about the desire for human connection be it with the self, with others, or with the self and others simultaneously.
At the moment, I find this song to be about opening up and transcending isolation by acknowledging those aspects that are essential to making us living human beings and all that implies (again, whether this occurs on an individual or group level).
(not the video I was going for but it's the song that matters here!)
This is the kind of elation I feel when I connect with others in meaningful ways, and when I find those things, be it books, music, etc. that connect with something within myself. This is the type of elation I'd like to continue to encounter as I move forward.
Thoughts?
Recommended readings?
Well, until next time...
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Hip hop as musical alchemy
After talking with sis about it, it seems I must articulate my thoughts on why hip hop is/was awesome musically speaking. In either case, I love hip hop.
Lyrically, I enjoy the individuals/groups that pour their soul into discussing issues both personal and social. While by definition, I am not a connoisseur of the genre, I am quite sensitive to the occurrence of this outpouring in hip hop songs. When combined with awesome music, these songs are taken to a new height and can never be forgotten. This isn't to say I shy away from songs with an awesome beat but lacking in substance lyrically (it makes me want to dance, I can't help it).
Example:
Awesome!
So is this if you ignore the words (not that I know them all)!
What makes these songs great on a musical level, and what made hip hop so cool in the beginning was the use of samples. When done well, sampling is an art form for which deejays are usually responsible. Listening to the source material of some notables says as much.
Songs produced in this manner reminds me of alchemy. When considering alchemy as the deconstructing and reconstructing of something in order to understand it, it makes sense to think of the art of sampling in this way--which further elevates the individuals that are able to do this. It is likely they know and understand the music being used in some way or another--usually in a deep way (this goes for music from other corners of the world regardless of language). The de and reconstruction that results in the tracks that envelop the songs they create is therefore usually incredible and very artistic. Though the resulting song is one in its own right because it is so different from its source material(s), the feel of the song is not that much different from its source material(s). Take for instance:
and it's de/reconstruction into this:
The theme connecting the two is that of love for another/others(?)--at least in my mind.
Because this art form is usually associated with hip hop, I have begun to theorize that the people--creators and consumers--associated have qualities that allow for this awesomeness to occur in ways that vary from music creation to the collection of music one has.
So far, I've come up with this list:
Any thoughts on this topic are welcome. I realize there are shortcomings to this pondering, especially when it comes to universalizing people and not knowing enough about hip hop and sampling and the people who do it. Still this is something I've noticed and pondered for a while now and had to establish some initial thoughts.
Until next time...
Lyrically, I enjoy the individuals/groups that pour their soul into discussing issues both personal and social. While by definition, I am not a connoisseur of the genre, I am quite sensitive to the occurrence of this outpouring in hip hop songs. When combined with awesome music, these songs are taken to a new height and can never be forgotten. This isn't to say I shy away from songs with an awesome beat but lacking in substance lyrically (it makes me want to dance, I can't help it).
Example:
Awesome!
So is this if you ignore the words (not that I know them all)!
What makes these songs great on a musical level, and what made hip hop so cool in the beginning was the use of samples. When done well, sampling is an art form for which deejays are usually responsible. Listening to the source material of some notables says as much.
Songs produced in this manner reminds me of alchemy. When considering alchemy as the deconstructing and reconstructing of something in order to understand it, it makes sense to think of the art of sampling in this way--which further elevates the individuals that are able to do this. It is likely they know and understand the music being used in some way or another--usually in a deep way (this goes for music from other corners of the world regardless of language). The de and reconstruction that results in the tracks that envelop the songs they create is therefore usually incredible and very artistic. Though the resulting song is one in its own right because it is so different from its source material(s), the feel of the song is not that much different from its source material(s). Take for instance:
and it's de/reconstruction into this:
The theme connecting the two is that of love for another/others(?)--at least in my mind.
Because this art form is usually associated with hip hop, I have begun to theorize that the people--creators and consumers--associated have qualities that allow for this awesomeness to occur in ways that vary from music creation to the collection of music one has.
So far, I've come up with this list:
- they exist (musically at least) in a perpetual state of great understanding. This means they are open to a variety of forms of music--even forms they generally dislike. Individuals are open to moments in a song that catch their attention in profound ways (this is the stuff that gets sampled).
- they are usually non-conformists when it comes to musical tastes--another reason why the samples themselves end up being so awesome!
- they see musical styles and genres as diverse, yet interconnected--which may be where the non-conformity comes into play
- their music (created and/or collected) is a conduit through which they express themselves and communicate to others
Any thoughts on this topic are welcome. I realize there are shortcomings to this pondering, especially when it comes to universalizing people and not knowing enough about hip hop and sampling and the people who do it. Still this is something I've noticed and pondered for a while now and had to establish some initial thoughts.
Until next time...
Monday, September 12, 2011
Full Metal Alchemist ponderings pt. 3: The Quest for Greatness
***Disclaimer: It's been more than a few months since I've seen this series. I might not be remembering things as correctly as I should. Please, offer scrutiny but be kind about mis-stated events.***
To start off, I love the idea this show has communicated about alchemy; that it is the act of breaking something down to its elements and using those elements to create something seemingly completely different...
So, after having dinner with a few friends, and speaking with one who had seen the show with her children, I was thrown back into pondering aspects of the show that seemed poignant. When this "Wannabe Nerd" (according to her child the "Real Nerd") started speaking about the role of the homunculi as the seven deadly sins, I was reminded once more of my love for this show.
You see the character "Father" is an artificial being, a homunculus who takes on human qualities after making contact with human blood. "Father" is a brilliant being, even before taking on physical qualities of "humanity". Despite "his" brilliance, "Father" quests for the status of Godliness--going so far as to consume it--and believes that doing so requires the purging of "his" flaws; from which the homunculi--each carrying the name and quality of one of the seven deadly sins--are "created".
This purging, however, proved to be "Father's" downfall since "he" failed to acknowledge that these "flaws" are what make "him" whole and are thus necessary components of "his" being. The status of deity could never be realized because "Father" never saw "himself"--as "he" was originally--as great. "Father" only noticed "flaws" and while purging "himself" of them, neglected to realize that "his" quest was one that was saturated by these very "flaws" "he" chose to deny about "himself". Apologies for the redundance and/or lack of clarity.
All of this makes me wonder about who our "Fathers" are in our lives or society? These artificial beings or entities on a quest for perfection--even God-like status--but wrought with unacknowledged contradictions. Entities ultimately responsible for the loss of billions of lives because of this quest (it was "Father" who had the knowledge of how to create a philosopher's stone and used others to help "him" bring it to reality). Entities that attempt to rid themselves of perceived flaws that are actually necessary aspects of their beings.
For me these artificial beings--or homunculi--take many forms: religions, knowledge, progress, myths, other social constructions... Social things that might not have started off as evil in their intentions but because of the lack of inward recognition of what makes them whole, became oppressive and therefore evil.
Inside of ourselves even, we are taught to purge ourselves of "flaws" because they limit us, when perhaps it is the act of doing this that is limiting in its counterproductivity. Why not understand these aspects of ourselves and our worlds since they are what make us whole?
I think of the idea stated about alchemy stated earlier and think about how we try to do this with ourselves; trying to create a greater element, a greater person or world, but when the essential elements--things we might not realize are essential--are taken out of the mix, how can it be expected that the result will be "golden" when those key ingredients have been taken out? It should be expected that nothing short of disaster results in not valuing what was already there.
So in seeing ourselves as we are, and seeing the greatness in that, we are acknowledging our Godliness though we appear not to be in that form? Perhaps that's what I've taken from this aspect of the show. If lead can be turned to gold--assuming the same elemental ingredients are involved--we should see ourselves as beings that possess similar qualities right? This then confuses me when it comes to the concept of equivalent exchange--which is a concept that is scrutinized yet valued when it comes to Ed giving up a part of himself for his brother Al (and others along the way). Ah I'm not exactly sure how this fits into my musing. Maybe it doesn't.
Well now all I need to do is figure out what this looks like for myself and how I engage my social worlds...
What would it look like for you?
Thoughts are welcome and appreciated as usual.
Until next time...
To start off, I love the idea this show has communicated about alchemy; that it is the act of breaking something down to its elements and using those elements to create something seemingly completely different...
So, after having dinner with a few friends, and speaking with one who had seen the show with her children, I was thrown back into pondering aspects of the show that seemed poignant. When this "Wannabe Nerd" (according to her child the "Real Nerd") started speaking about the role of the homunculi as the seven deadly sins, I was reminded once more of my love for this show.
You see the character "Father" is an artificial being, a homunculus who takes on human qualities after making contact with human blood. "Father" is a brilliant being, even before taking on physical qualities of "humanity". Despite "his" brilliance, "Father" quests for the status of Godliness--going so far as to consume it--and believes that doing so requires the purging of "his" flaws; from which the homunculi--each carrying the name and quality of one of the seven deadly sins--are "created".
This purging, however, proved to be "Father's" downfall since "he" failed to acknowledge that these "flaws" are what make "him" whole and are thus necessary components of "his" being. The status of deity could never be realized because "Father" never saw "himself"--as "he" was originally--as great. "Father" only noticed "flaws" and while purging "himself" of them, neglected to realize that "his" quest was one that was saturated by these very "flaws" "he" chose to deny about "himself". Apologies for the redundance and/or lack of clarity.
All of this makes me wonder about who our "Fathers" are in our lives or society? These artificial beings or entities on a quest for perfection--even God-like status--but wrought with unacknowledged contradictions. Entities ultimately responsible for the loss of billions of lives because of this quest (it was "Father" who had the knowledge of how to create a philosopher's stone and used others to help "him" bring it to reality). Entities that attempt to rid themselves of perceived flaws that are actually necessary aspects of their beings.
For me these artificial beings--or homunculi--take many forms: religions, knowledge, progress, myths, other social constructions... Social things that might not have started off as evil in their intentions but because of the lack of inward recognition of what makes them whole, became oppressive and therefore evil.
Inside of ourselves even, we are taught to purge ourselves of "flaws" because they limit us, when perhaps it is the act of doing this that is limiting in its counterproductivity. Why not understand these aspects of ourselves and our worlds since they are what make us whole?
I think of the idea stated about alchemy stated earlier and think about how we try to do this with ourselves; trying to create a greater element, a greater person or world, but when the essential elements--things we might not realize are essential--are taken out of the mix, how can it be expected that the result will be "golden" when those key ingredients have been taken out? It should be expected that nothing short of disaster results in not valuing what was already there.
So in seeing ourselves as we are, and seeing the greatness in that, we are acknowledging our Godliness though we appear not to be in that form? Perhaps that's what I've taken from this aspect of the show. If lead can be turned to gold--assuming the same elemental ingredients are involved--we should see ourselves as beings that possess similar qualities right? This then confuses me when it comes to the concept of equivalent exchange--which is a concept that is scrutinized yet valued when it comes to Ed giving up a part of himself for his brother Al (and others along the way). Ah I'm not exactly sure how this fits into my musing. Maybe it doesn't.
Well now all I need to do is figure out what this looks like for myself and how I engage my social worlds...
What would it look like for you?
Thoughts are welcome and appreciated as usual.
Until next time...
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Full Metal Alchemist ponderings pt. 2: the Gate
Once again, here are my thoughts about aspects of the series Full Metal Alchemist (both of them) that have inspired much thought. Since I can't talk about it coherently with any one that I know has watched the show (which is one person and I don't wan't to sound like a total idiot in front of him), I figure this is a good space to fully lay them out. So again, there are spoilers but I encourage any one that can to watch the show and form their own thoughts about the events that come to pass.
So, the another element of the show I've thought about from time to time has to do with 'the Gate'. It is often described as the gateway to 'the Truth'. Those that use alchemy appear to be only ones that possess it and it appears to be accessed only when the impossible attempt at (re)creating a human life is engaged. With the law of equivalent exchange as the basis of alchemy, there is nothing of equivalence that can be exchanged for a human soul. Not even a philosopher's stone can challenge this 'fact'. As such, those that have dared are exposed briefly to 'the Truth'; a maddening experience because of the myriad of 'knowledge' one soaks in (of which I imagine only a fraction is maintained).
In addition to accessing this gate (I'll call it a gate of knowledge), one comes face to face with 'the Truth' which is self-described as the individual facing them (by stating 'I am you')and in so many words, God (let me know if I'm wrong about this). This all-knowing being has a brief conversation with the transgressor--one who attempts human transmutation that results in creation of a human life--before sending her/him away. It has been a while since I've seen any of the scenes in which this occurs but I think this being whom goes by many names, tries to give the transgressor something to think about before sending her/him off.
Although only alchemists are made aware of the existence of their Gate, which happens to be what allows them to use alchemy, I wonder if this Gate could have been something that was a part of everyone in this tale and that certain individuals were more in tune with it than others? I thought it was interesting near the end of the second series that, in realizing he still had friends and family who cared about him regardless, Edward chooses to give up his Gate and thus his ability to use alchemy (and perhaps converse with the God within him? or maybe it was just that he believed in himself so greatly that he no longer needed to have this option available to him) in order to bring back his brother. I wonder about the significance of this.
Indeed there is selflessness involved to a degree. After all, the ability to use alchemy in itself holds a great deal of power for the individual in question. It can be used to bring about as much harm as good. I imagine this would be a hard thing to realize, let alone want to give up. After taking into account equivalent exchange, alchemy is a mode of great power allowing individuals to create as well as destroy at will in the FMA world.
It makes me think of the equivalence of this in society as well. Part of this having simply to do with the Gate and its various meanings and translations in the real world. What might our inner source of knowledge/truth be that allows for us to have a great deal of power in a particular area or as a particular aspect of our lives? (did that make sense?) Is this source of power something that also includes the ability to create and destroy at will, keeping in mind the various 'laws' that are part of this particular realm?
I'm not trying to say that we all are alchemists but maybe that this concept can be applied to multiple realms and aspects of our livelihoods in which we could be alchemists. That we have an inherent power that we can control--once learned--at will and that this power or ability becomes taken for granted to the point that it is hard to imagine life without it. It may cloud our judgement about what is important or that what seems simple to us, because of this ability and the insights that come with it, is in fact a lot of work without it. What it would mean to give that piece of ourselves up for a cause greater than ourselves knowing what we know? Knowing that there are more positives than negatives that will come of it? What might this Gate translate to in our lives?
I can't really think of anything amazing within myself that this might translate to at the moment, but maybe it is a sign of how I take this/these internal attributes for granted. Maybe it takes knowing others on a deep enough level to spark awareness of what this might be. Maybe it is another part of the journey I must go on to figure myself out. Or I could just need a different way of thinking about this. I wonder what the author and creator of this series would have to say on the matter?
In any case, another part of the notion of the Gate makes me think about my limited encounters with Buddhist thought. Specifically Niciren Daishonin's style of Buddhist thought. How chanting puts us in tune with the greater universe that we are a part of and that is within us. That we are engaging in a practice that further opens us to our potential of attaining the Buddha-hood that has always existed within us. I guess I think of this as a practice where we are accessing and trying to open our inner Gates beyond which lies our Truth, the God within us. This changes our relationship with our surrounding reality in that our infinite potentials are gradually realized, though there is just as much potential to instantaneously travel back and forth between any of the ten worlds (hell, hunger, animality, anger, humanity, heaven, learning, realization, Bodhisattva and Buddha-hood) and their accompanying manifestations making the journey an imperfect one (at least that's how I understand it at the moment). If the Gate were to be understood in relation to this, would it be wise to want to give up such an essential part of ourselves? To cast away the God within us knowing that it connects us to the rest of the world, universe and God? Maybe if this aspect of ourselves was well understood the idea of doing this would be thought of differently.
Any insights or thoughts on any of these notions discussed are welcome. I have yet to full wrap my mind on any of this stuff but would enjoy the conversation and act of trying . Otherwise, at least my thoughts have been somewhat organized in some manner of articulation. Maybe reading the manga will help too. Or watching the show fifty more times--like I need an excuse ;}
So, the another element of the show I've thought about from time to time has to do with 'the Gate'. It is often described as the gateway to 'the Truth'. Those that use alchemy appear to be only ones that possess it and it appears to be accessed only when the impossible attempt at (re)creating a human life is engaged. With the law of equivalent exchange as the basis of alchemy, there is nothing of equivalence that can be exchanged for a human soul. Not even a philosopher's stone can challenge this 'fact'. As such, those that have dared are exposed briefly to 'the Truth'; a maddening experience because of the myriad of 'knowledge' one soaks in (of which I imagine only a fraction is maintained).
In addition to accessing this gate (I'll call it a gate of knowledge), one comes face to face with 'the Truth' which is self-described as the individual facing them (by stating 'I am you')and in so many words, God (let me know if I'm wrong about this). This all-knowing being has a brief conversation with the transgressor--one who attempts human transmutation that results in creation of a human life--before sending her/him away. It has been a while since I've seen any of the scenes in which this occurs but I think this being whom goes by many names, tries to give the transgressor something to think about before sending her/him off.
Although only alchemists are made aware of the existence of their Gate, which happens to be what allows them to use alchemy, I wonder if this Gate could have been something that was a part of everyone in this tale and that certain individuals were more in tune with it than others? I thought it was interesting near the end of the second series that, in realizing he still had friends and family who cared about him regardless, Edward chooses to give up his Gate and thus his ability to use alchemy (and perhaps converse with the God within him? or maybe it was just that he believed in himself so greatly that he no longer needed to have this option available to him) in order to bring back his brother. I wonder about the significance of this.
Indeed there is selflessness involved to a degree. After all, the ability to use alchemy in itself holds a great deal of power for the individual in question. It can be used to bring about as much harm as good. I imagine this would be a hard thing to realize, let alone want to give up. After taking into account equivalent exchange, alchemy is a mode of great power allowing individuals to create as well as destroy at will in the FMA world.
It makes me think of the equivalence of this in society as well. Part of this having simply to do with the Gate and its various meanings and translations in the real world. What might our inner source of knowledge/truth be that allows for us to have a great deal of power in a particular area or as a particular aspect of our lives? (did that make sense?) Is this source of power something that also includes the ability to create and destroy at will, keeping in mind the various 'laws' that are part of this particular realm?
I'm not trying to say that we all are alchemists but maybe that this concept can be applied to multiple realms and aspects of our livelihoods in which we could be alchemists. That we have an inherent power that we can control--once learned--at will and that this power or ability becomes taken for granted to the point that it is hard to imagine life without it. It may cloud our judgement about what is important or that what seems simple to us, because of this ability and the insights that come with it, is in fact a lot of work without it. What it would mean to give that piece of ourselves up for a cause greater than ourselves knowing what we know? Knowing that there are more positives than negatives that will come of it? What might this Gate translate to in our lives?
I can't really think of anything amazing within myself that this might translate to at the moment, but maybe it is a sign of how I take this/these internal attributes for granted. Maybe it takes knowing others on a deep enough level to spark awareness of what this might be. Maybe it is another part of the journey I must go on to figure myself out. Or I could just need a different way of thinking about this. I wonder what the author and creator of this series would have to say on the matter?
In any case, another part of the notion of the Gate makes me think about my limited encounters with Buddhist thought. Specifically Niciren Daishonin's style of Buddhist thought. How chanting puts us in tune with the greater universe that we are a part of and that is within us. That we are engaging in a practice that further opens us to our potential of attaining the Buddha-hood that has always existed within us. I guess I think of this as a practice where we are accessing and trying to open our inner Gates beyond which lies our Truth, the God within us. This changes our relationship with our surrounding reality in that our infinite potentials are gradually realized, though there is just as much potential to instantaneously travel back and forth between any of the ten worlds (hell, hunger, animality, anger, humanity, heaven, learning, realization, Bodhisattva and Buddha-hood) and their accompanying manifestations making the journey an imperfect one (at least that's how I understand it at the moment). If the Gate were to be understood in relation to this, would it be wise to want to give up such an essential part of ourselves? To cast away the God within us knowing that it connects us to the rest of the world, universe and God? Maybe if this aspect of ourselves was well understood the idea of doing this would be thought of differently.
Any insights or thoughts on any of these notions discussed are welcome. I have yet to full wrap my mind on any of this stuff but would enjoy the conversation and act of trying . Otherwise, at least my thoughts have been somewhat organized in some manner of articulation. Maybe reading the manga will help too. Or watching the show fifty more times--like I need an excuse ;}
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Full Metal Alchemist ponderings pt. 1
Disclaimer: The following concerns a show I have already seen and thus might have spoilers. If you haven't seen the show I highly recommend it. What I have to say shouldn't influence what you may or may not have seen in the show. These are just my thoughts.
Recently I had the pleasure of watching both versions of Full Metal Alchemist (the second version was watched mostly in Japanese with subs so I eagerly await access to English dubs). The main thing I like about this series and most Japanese animation series I've gotten into in the past is the ability to promote extensive thought about the notions and ideals communicated. For instance,while I enjoyed both versions, I liked how the first actively questioned or at least was critical of the taken for granted notion of 'equivalent exchange'; where in order to receive something, something of equal value must be given. I have my own issues with this notion that is very much a part of how daily life is encountered, especially when it comes to the justness of such thought when it comes to the less fortunate and downtrodden.
Another thing I like about both series and have been thinking about surrounds the 'philosopher's stone', its creation and its use. The main thing about the philosopher's stone is that it can be used without adhering to the 'first law of alchemy', equivalent exchange. This stone has a great deal of power to do whatever the beholder desires, giving that individual a great sense of being powerful. Often the stone is used to gain and maintain power and is seen as a grantor of wishes in a sense. Its creation however might be problematic to some--especially those that are social justice oriented--in that human souls are needed. The stone is essentially human lives/souls and relies on them for its power.
As such throughout human history as it exists in FMA, this knowledge has lead to large scale massacres and even genocides of various groups i.e races of people with made-up names (but minorities nonetheless) that have resided within or around the fictional dominant nation Amestris.All of this appears to have been done at the behest of the state military strictly for the creation of philosopher's stones which serve a myriad of purposes I wont go into but all of which have to do with gaining and maintaining power and authority. Interestingly, until the present story line of FMA, the philosopher's stone was/is treated largely as a myth and seekers are warned of death and peril to those that pursue it.
I mention all of this because after watching the show, I have been wondering about the equivalent of the philosopher's stone in our current reality. What is the thing or things that ensure the power of a nation or group of people? What is the object or objects that have cost thousands, millions, billions of human lives in order to obtain it/them for our own use or livelihoods? On the unacknowledged backs/souls of whom do we stand as we proceed with the quality of life we have? What is it that allows for the dismissal of the concept of equivalent exchange on micro and macro levels by the powerful? What are the true intentions of such senseless murder and destruction?
I hope the answer that surrounds these queries isn't as simple as power. Or maybe its resources that were or still are symbols exchanged for power and domination. Those are just some guesses I have on the matter. Often I think about the near elimination of American Indians, the Holocaust, Hiroshima, Middle Eastern conflicts the U.S. is or isn't directly involved in and a lot of the movement toward genocide that has taken place in various African countries as real world examples of human atrocities for the sake of many things I do not fully understand but might equate to a purpose similar to the acquiring of a philosopher's stone like substance. It is interesting how minorities are made to suffer the most for such lofty aims, though we all suffer just the same despite the differences in which it occurs.
There is so much I am unaware of in regards to these issues yet I am not sure how I would take responsibility or begin to act responsively to the knowledge that surrounds these issues. Like the Elrich brothers, is it too naive or idealistic to think I could live and achieve my goals without use--known and unknown--of a philosopher's stone, whatever that happens to represent in reality? Though they manage without it (at least in the first series), the paths they discover are arduous and painful at times yet alternatives to using the stone are ever present. However those that do use it with a conscience acknowledge the souls/lives within the stone to the point where it is believed they are willing participants in the use intended for the stone (hope that made sense). At the very least, gratitude is expressed towards the souls/lives that make use of the stone possible.
I wonder what that would mean for us in reality? At the moment I can't even begin to imagine the vast amount of people, besides my ancestors and American Indians, to give gratitude to for the life I currently live here in America. And this is only one aspect of the show that I've dwelled on in my head--which is why I like it so much. I wonder what others think about this? Any insights into this or FMA in general are welcome.
Oh and thanks to The Coolest Brother Ever for introducing me to this show!
Up next...pt2: the Gate
Recently I had the pleasure of watching both versions of Full Metal Alchemist (the second version was watched mostly in Japanese with subs so I eagerly await access to English dubs). The main thing I like about this series and most Japanese animation series I've gotten into in the past is the ability to promote extensive thought about the notions and ideals communicated. For instance,while I enjoyed both versions, I liked how the first actively questioned or at least was critical of the taken for granted notion of 'equivalent exchange'; where in order to receive something, something of equal value must be given. I have my own issues with this notion that is very much a part of how daily life is encountered, especially when it comes to the justness of such thought when it comes to the less fortunate and downtrodden.
Another thing I like about both series and have been thinking about surrounds the 'philosopher's stone', its creation and its use. The main thing about the philosopher's stone is that it can be used without adhering to the 'first law of alchemy', equivalent exchange. This stone has a great deal of power to do whatever the beholder desires, giving that individual a great sense of being powerful. Often the stone is used to gain and maintain power and is seen as a grantor of wishes in a sense. Its creation however might be problematic to some--especially those that are social justice oriented--in that human souls are needed. The stone is essentially human lives/souls and relies on them for its power.
As such throughout human history as it exists in FMA, this knowledge has lead to large scale massacres and even genocides of various groups i.e races of people with made-up names (but minorities nonetheless) that have resided within or around the fictional dominant nation Amestris.All of this appears to have been done at the behest of the state military strictly for the creation of philosopher's stones which serve a myriad of purposes I wont go into but all of which have to do with gaining and maintaining power and authority. Interestingly, until the present story line of FMA, the philosopher's stone was/is treated largely as a myth and seekers are warned of death and peril to those that pursue it.
I mention all of this because after watching the show, I have been wondering about the equivalent of the philosopher's stone in our current reality. What is the thing or things that ensure the power of a nation or group of people? What is the object or objects that have cost thousands, millions, billions of human lives in order to obtain it/them for our own use or livelihoods? On the unacknowledged backs/souls of whom do we stand as we proceed with the quality of life we have? What is it that allows for the dismissal of the concept of equivalent exchange on micro and macro levels by the powerful? What are the true intentions of such senseless murder and destruction?
I hope the answer that surrounds these queries isn't as simple as power. Or maybe its resources that were or still are symbols exchanged for power and domination. Those are just some guesses I have on the matter. Often I think about the near elimination of American Indians, the Holocaust, Hiroshima, Middle Eastern conflicts the U.S. is or isn't directly involved in and a lot of the movement toward genocide that has taken place in various African countries as real world examples of human atrocities for the sake of many things I do not fully understand but might equate to a purpose similar to the acquiring of a philosopher's stone like substance. It is interesting how minorities are made to suffer the most for such lofty aims, though we all suffer just the same despite the differences in which it occurs.
There is so much I am unaware of in regards to these issues yet I am not sure how I would take responsibility or begin to act responsively to the knowledge that surrounds these issues. Like the Elrich brothers, is it too naive or idealistic to think I could live and achieve my goals without use--known and unknown--of a philosopher's stone, whatever that happens to represent in reality? Though they manage without it (at least in the first series), the paths they discover are arduous and painful at times yet alternatives to using the stone are ever present. However those that do use it with a conscience acknowledge the souls/lives within the stone to the point where it is believed they are willing participants in the use intended for the stone (hope that made sense). At the very least, gratitude is expressed towards the souls/lives that make use of the stone possible.
I wonder what that would mean for us in reality? At the moment I can't even begin to imagine the vast amount of people, besides my ancestors and American Indians, to give gratitude to for the life I currently live here in America. And this is only one aspect of the show that I've dwelled on in my head--which is why I like it so much. I wonder what others think about this? Any insights into this or FMA in general are welcome.
Oh and thanks to The Coolest Brother Ever for introducing me to this show!
Up next...pt2: the Gate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)