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...
Showing posts with label life. Show all posts
Showing posts with label life. Show all posts
Saturday, February 25, 2012
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
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
Monday, December 5, 2011
Reviewing/Revising(?) the "Relationships" post
After reading The Art of Loving (again with that book? I know, I know) I realized part of what I was trying to articulate with my post on relationships (in which clarity is a major issue). This articulation is prefaced by a question asked by Fromm:
"is the social structure of western civilization," and the "spirit resulting from it...conducive to the development of love?"
I would replace civilization with society, but other than that, when considering the love described by Fromm and bell hooks posited on a previous post, this question applies to the functioning of relationships as well. When considering, as Fromm does, that the social structures of western society are rooted in capitalism, and all the characteristics implied (I'll get to that in a second), it is not hard to come to the conclusion that the way western society functions, and the ideas, values, norms, and beliefs that stem from it, which are instilled in its people, is incompatible to the development, let alone imagining of love or the relationships that can result from it.
What characteristics of a society rooted in capitalism do I mean?
For one, consumption. I've observed love to be a major act of consumption, not just of things but of one another which lends itself to another characteristic, ownership. As I mentioned in my first take on relationships, we do all sorts of things to make ourselves worthy of consumption, which alienates us from ourselves (alienation is another characteristic). We've been trained to live a life where we are complacent with alienation from ourselves and others, from the work we end up doing, so its easy for many of us to do so in many situations, even relationships. It is as if knowing ourselves and being sure of ourselves is less important when it comes to establishing a relationship. At the same time we are highly individualistic and self-centered; taught to believe that we should live for the moment, which amounts to living for ourselves. While teamwork is prized, it is hardly a training ground for the sense of communalism needed to relate well and for a sustained amount of time with Others. Indeed I think "teamwork" is an activity that is conjoined in alienation when the goal is the production of some thing or another--getting the job done. Contradictory they may be, but we function with characteristics like these pretty well.
All we learn about love and relationships it seems is from areas steeped in consumerism, especially the media. Love is this prize to be won in the form of an individual. We want to be accepted for who and what we are without understanding who or what that is too clearly ourselves. Love is that thing to be put on a shelf with the rest of our possessions, to be controlled and shaped just how we want it to be, forgetting, that we are dealing with another person the whole time.
It is difficult to imagine transcending the very social structures we live in, especially when we know the negative sanctions hurled our way for even trying. Yet questing for the love that transcends ourselves, and perhaps, begins with ourselves (which isn't selfish by any means) requires thinking and acting outside of the box.
This has led me to books like The Art of Loving, which gives the point of view of love being viewed as an art form to be understood and practiced meaningfully. I've decided that this practice begins with me before I can be confident and competent with doing the same for others (I'm sure my Mate would appreciate that). This is a slow and difficult process (especially in confronting my roots as an individual), but worth engaging in so I can better understand where I am coming from and where I want to go to: a place or at least a state of being structured by care, respect, responsibility, knowledge, and supported by commitment, trust, and open honest communication.
Next up for reading on this topic:
Strength to Love MLK jr.(need to finish)
Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community MLK jr
Pedagogy of the Heart Paulo Freire
Communion bell hooks (maybe)
other suggestions?
general feedback?
Until next time...
"is the social structure of western civilization," and the "spirit resulting from it...conducive to the development of love?"
I would replace civilization with society, but other than that, when considering the love described by Fromm and bell hooks posited on a previous post, this question applies to the functioning of relationships as well. When considering, as Fromm does, that the social structures of western society are rooted in capitalism, and all the characteristics implied (I'll get to that in a second), it is not hard to come to the conclusion that the way western society functions, and the ideas, values, norms, and beliefs that stem from it, which are instilled in its people, is incompatible to the development, let alone imagining of love or the relationships that can result from it.
What characteristics of a society rooted in capitalism do I mean?
For one, consumption. I've observed love to be a major act of consumption, not just of things but of one another which lends itself to another characteristic, ownership. As I mentioned in my first take on relationships, we do all sorts of things to make ourselves worthy of consumption, which alienates us from ourselves (alienation is another characteristic). We've been trained to live a life where we are complacent with alienation from ourselves and others, from the work we end up doing, so its easy for many of us to do so in many situations, even relationships. It is as if knowing ourselves and being sure of ourselves is less important when it comes to establishing a relationship. At the same time we are highly individualistic and self-centered; taught to believe that we should live for the moment, which amounts to living for ourselves. While teamwork is prized, it is hardly a training ground for the sense of communalism needed to relate well and for a sustained amount of time with Others. Indeed I think "teamwork" is an activity that is conjoined in alienation when the goal is the production of some thing or another--getting the job done. Contradictory they may be, but we function with characteristics like these pretty well.
All we learn about love and relationships it seems is from areas steeped in consumerism, especially the media. Love is this prize to be won in the form of an individual. We want to be accepted for who and what we are without understanding who or what that is too clearly ourselves. Love is that thing to be put on a shelf with the rest of our possessions, to be controlled and shaped just how we want it to be, forgetting, that we are dealing with another person the whole time.
It is difficult to imagine transcending the very social structures we live in, especially when we know the negative sanctions hurled our way for even trying. Yet questing for the love that transcends ourselves, and perhaps, begins with ourselves (which isn't selfish by any means) requires thinking and acting outside of the box.
This has led me to books like The Art of Loving, which gives the point of view of love being viewed as an art form to be understood and practiced meaningfully. I've decided that this practice begins with me before I can be confident and competent with doing the same for others (I'm sure my Mate would appreciate that). This is a slow and difficult process (especially in confronting my roots as an individual), but worth engaging in so I can better understand where I am coming from and where I want to go to: a place or at least a state of being structured by care, respect, responsibility, knowledge, and supported by commitment, trust, and open honest communication.
Next up for reading on this topic:
Strength to Love MLK jr.(need to finish)
Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community MLK jr
Pedagogy of the Heart Paulo Freire
Communion bell hooks (maybe)
other suggestions?
general feedback?
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...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)