Again with the End of things. Naturally, this is a time to stop and reflect on the changes that occurred this year as well as praise the stability of those things which stood for another year. It has been a year of arrivals and departures. Those that have left us make us grateful for those that are still with us.
This was suppose to be a year of significant change, and for the most part things went on as they always have. One of the biggest things that happened for Americans is that we have a new man in the White House, driving the country to the tune of compromise. Yes We Can Compromise on everything. That is the most ironic aspect of the Obama administration in comparison to the former Bush administration: The Bush administration was so uncompromising, so unbelievably stubborn to perform "his way," that the new administration has been criticized for being TOO compromising. People are upset because they aren't getting the kind of change they were hoping for--like a new American Revolution--except no one was willing to sacrifice their butter for guns, and as a result they are unhappy with the actions of the president. But that is the nature of high-population political offices like Federal Government: Only a little over half of the people actually wanted to see the winner in office. At least I haven't been seeing any spoil-sport John McCain '08 bumper stickers. It also seems like those who were still sporting their Kerry/Adams '04 stickers finally took the remnants of that fiasco down.
And that's kind of my point about the News Years: people invest themselves in these large events in which one person doesn't really make a difference, and fight passionately for what they believe in for exactly the duration of the large event. When that ends, they find something else. The event itself is not actually of any importance, but the way it makes a person feel about their involvement is what is significant. The end of a year has no inherent significance, except for what we choose to attach to it. I'm sure there are things that really were special that we can't recall at moments of epoch shift that we should keep in mind, but because our attention is cluttered with things that don't really matter--we just thing they do--we carry those things in our hearts for way to long. We're just waiting for the next set of distraction to come along and remind us that what we were hung up on is really not important to us, we just have nothing better to cling to.
But it was a good year. I made it through without any serious mental or emotional stalls. And I learned a valuable thing about human rationality: it is an illusion. Putting faith in Human Reason is just as dangerous is placing one's faith in any religion, because it is not the principles of the ideology that have the power, it is the effect those principles have when put into practice by an irrational human being who naturally can't follow them through to their logical conclusion. Why not? Because we are not governed by Reason. We are govern by the push and pull of emotion against the artifice of logic. As hard as we try to solve problems logically, it is only wishful thinking that the rest of the world will draw the same conclusion let alone act upon it. Hopefully by 2011 I will know what to do with this information, but just acknowledging its existence feels like an achievement.
So here's to healing wounds, faithful friends, and more drugs than time allows for. Happy New Year to all, except those who won't celebrate the new year for a couple more months. Let us enjoy the company of our loved ones, and forget our troubles until we show up for work the next morning.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
How much does size matter, really?
I just finished reading a book by Kurt Vonnegut called Breakfast of Champions. I've had it for a few years, but I haven't ever had time to read it. It was perhaps one of the quickest reads I've ever encountered. Almost three hundred pages and I burned through it in a couple sittings. One of the most interesting aspects of the novel was the way it described the penis size and diameter when errect of every male character. It made me wonder, when I learned that it is five inches, how much size really matters, not just to women, but in the male self-conception.
I guess the more obvious question is, why would it matter if it is not an obvious characteristic? Most people cover up the genital areas and the majority of their pubic regions for more or less the entirety of their lives. There are some exceptions, but those aside, why would ones ego and self esteem hang on the size of one's dong? I guess to the partner such matters could be important, but I honestly doubt that true love can be hung on penis size. A man could have a larger than average penis, and still be an unsatisfying lover. So, the point I'm trying to make is that the full height of one's John Thomas is not his defining characteristic.. because the difference is in inches.. centimeters really.
It is truly amazing how we have a tendency to choose our mates based on their sexual appearance because above all when it comes to entering a committed relationship, this is the only person whom which you will be being intimate with unless you cheat or break up. Some guys don't have a problem with cheating. It isn't that they don't love the person they are with, it's just that they want both--or all women. It is unfortunate that we live in a consumer culture where we are able to select the objects we want, and with enough currency, can purchase these items to be used at our disposal. We treat the people we desire the same way. We see them, in bars, class, at work, in the store, etc, and we use what ever currency we have at our disposal to try and win these people. The larger the amount of whatever kind of (social or monetary) currency we have at our disposal, not only does the quality of our obtainment increase, but also the quantity.
But we have driven ourselves crazy by adopting the desires of those who we desire. This causes us to torture ourselves over the happiness of others who are probably also adopting the desires of someone whom they desire. After all, it is often the case that the people who you desire will not want you, but an entire other group who they desire.. who also have the same affectation. This cycle most likely loops ad infinitum, and it is ironic because someone who I want probably wants someone, [...], who wants someone, who wants me. I also find it odd how I can never seem to find one person. Either I can't find anyone--or I find two (or sometimes three) people who want to be with me, but I can't make up my mind. When it rains it pours. But if I didn't treat women as objects--but as people.. then I wouldn't feel so conflicted every time I find myself in the situation again. If we were allowed to have intimate relationships with as many people as we wanted, however, then that might reduce a lot of the anxiety. That would never work though because people would get jealous and so would still find themselves making promises not to fuck other people. Then they either cheat, or they stick to the promise and are miserable because the sex phase of the relationship fades and then it feels more like a marriage than anything else. I made a decision not to cheat anymore because I can't stand the thought of someone I care about fucking someone else. But those feelings of possession over my loved-ones vagina only betray me to my consumerist nature. I can't win. We can't win. We are damned if we do, and damned if we don't.
I guess the best thing to do is what my parents have done.. make your life about the life of your partner. Many people try to have lives separate of their partner, or suddenly wake up and realize that they don't have a life of their own and freak out, get divorced, and start fucking around.. only to realize that the person that knows them best is the one who've they created an entire life with. Perhaps people spend so much time doing what they don't want to be doing that it obscures what they think they want.. so what they think they want isn't really what they want.. but what they think they need to be happy.. but happiness is as illusive as--well--something that is hard to find... like Jesus or something. Not to mention there is some fluidity involved in the process to achieving happiness.. that is.. the definition will always be changing slightly as what it is you are seeking defines it's self through a long and self-awakening journey.
I keep reading these guides to finding a PhD program, and I keep finding messages like "the means is the end" which to me sounds like a way of saying "enjoy the abuse." Schadenfreude is the word psychologists use I think, which is German word that means something like "joyful sadness." I think Masochism is the behavior that people interested in these words are trying to describe. So PhD programs are masochism. But many things that yield something good have long and painful processes.. so maybe I will enjoy it. How much education is enough though? Or put it better, how long do I need to continue being a student before I can start getting paid for sharing what I know with other fertile, young minds? Brainmeal. Tasty.
I guess the more obvious question is, why would it matter if it is not an obvious characteristic? Most people cover up the genital areas and the majority of their pubic regions for more or less the entirety of their lives. There are some exceptions, but those aside, why would ones ego and self esteem hang on the size of one's dong? I guess to the partner such matters could be important, but I honestly doubt that true love can be hung on penis size. A man could have a larger than average penis, and still be an unsatisfying lover. So, the point I'm trying to make is that the full height of one's John Thomas is not his defining characteristic.. because the difference is in inches.. centimeters really.
It is truly amazing how we have a tendency to choose our mates based on their sexual appearance because above all when it comes to entering a committed relationship, this is the only person whom which you will be being intimate with unless you cheat or break up. Some guys don't have a problem with cheating. It isn't that they don't love the person they are with, it's just that they want both--or all women. It is unfortunate that we live in a consumer culture where we are able to select the objects we want, and with enough currency, can purchase these items to be used at our disposal. We treat the people we desire the same way. We see them, in bars, class, at work, in the store, etc, and we use what ever currency we have at our disposal to try and win these people. The larger the amount of whatever kind of (social or monetary) currency we have at our disposal, not only does the quality of our obtainment increase, but also the quantity.
But we have driven ourselves crazy by adopting the desires of those who we desire. This causes us to torture ourselves over the happiness of others who are probably also adopting the desires of someone whom they desire. After all, it is often the case that the people who you desire will not want you, but an entire other group who they desire.. who also have the same affectation. This cycle most likely loops ad infinitum, and it is ironic because someone who I want probably wants someone, [...], who wants someone, who wants me. I also find it odd how I can never seem to find one person. Either I can't find anyone--or I find two (or sometimes three) people who want to be with me, but I can't make up my mind. When it rains it pours. But if I didn't treat women as objects--but as people.. then I wouldn't feel so conflicted every time I find myself in the situation again. If we were allowed to have intimate relationships with as many people as we wanted, however, then that might reduce a lot of the anxiety. That would never work though because people would get jealous and so would still find themselves making promises not to fuck other people. Then they either cheat, or they stick to the promise and are miserable because the sex phase of the relationship fades and then it feels more like a marriage than anything else. I made a decision not to cheat anymore because I can't stand the thought of someone I care about fucking someone else. But those feelings of possession over my loved-ones vagina only betray me to my consumerist nature. I can't win. We can't win. We are damned if we do, and damned if we don't.
I guess the best thing to do is what my parents have done.. make your life about the life of your partner. Many people try to have lives separate of their partner, or suddenly wake up and realize that they don't have a life of their own and freak out, get divorced, and start fucking around.. only to realize that the person that knows them best is the one who've they created an entire life with. Perhaps people spend so much time doing what they don't want to be doing that it obscures what they think they want.. so what they think they want isn't really what they want.. but what they think they need to be happy.. but happiness is as illusive as--well--something that is hard to find... like Jesus or something. Not to mention there is some fluidity involved in the process to achieving happiness.. that is.. the definition will always be changing slightly as what it is you are seeking defines it's self through a long and self-awakening journey.
I keep reading these guides to finding a PhD program, and I keep finding messages like "the means is the end" which to me sounds like a way of saying "enjoy the abuse." Schadenfreude is the word psychologists use I think, which is German word that means something like "joyful sadness." I think Masochism is the behavior that people interested in these words are trying to describe. So PhD programs are masochism. But many things that yield something good have long and painful processes.. so maybe I will enjoy it. How much education is enough though? Or put it better, how long do I need to continue being a student before I can start getting paid for sharing what I know with other fertile, young minds? Brainmeal. Tasty.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
So much to say...
In a KMFDM song called "Dogma," Nicole Blackman speaks the line:
"...you're terrified you have nothing to offer this world--
nothing to say, and no way to say it, but you can say it in three languages." (from XTORT)
My biggest fear is not that I have nothing to say, but that I have no one to tell what I'm thinking. Sure, there are people I can talk to now, but what happens when I have another little meltdown, leading to further (and perhaps more permanent?) isolation. I've been trying really hard to keep company with people, but perhaps some of the society that I desire is still not right for me. I do have my friends though, and I am grateful for them. Sometimes, however, I feel as though they don't understand me. It's like we really are speaking different languages--playing what Lyotard described as language games.
Many people feel stupid--or they get to a certain point in their lives when they realize they could be much smarter than they believe themselves to be, and so start trying to read more. This happened to me when I was 17, and I've begun reading a lot more ever since. A problem I find is that many people don't what they should be reading, so they turn to what they consider to be more reliable sources of information (i.e. internet, television).
Here is my speculation:
So many people watch the History Channel or the Discovery Channel in order to alleviate the oppressing plague of idiocy that seems to have ravaged our culture. What they don't realize is that these are outlets designed to focus their desires. Foucault explored this idea of Subject-Power relationships, and discussed how people are subjugated to the powers that control them. People, then, don't get the Truth, but a version of the truth that shape their perception of reality. This is why people who talk about World War II only really think about Nazis and Hitler. It never occurs to them what else was at stake.. socially, economically, globally.. not to mention the consequences and repercussions that occurred in the aftermath of the War.
There is simply too much to know, and I understand and take this into consideration. What I am unimpressed by is the people who aren't really interested in learning as a way to better themselves, but desire knowledge as power--and social currency. But perhaps they are the intelligent ones: power lies in the one who controls the many. I would always be right if I had a group of people behind me who always agreed with what I said; majority rules, and in our culture the "wrong" one is the one who stands alone. Ironically, history paints a picture of the reverse being true: great scientific breakthroughs are made by a single person who stands up and says "everything we know is wrong.. or at least not quite correct."
Would anyone argue, since we can't know everything, there is no point in knowing anything? Or, if all pictures sketched are removed from the truth, does that mean that nothing is real? This kind of pseudo-idealization is exactly the kind of shit that drove the modernist crazy.. and underlines the need to faith to fill in the gaps left by negative capability to borrow a term from Keats.
What is the difference between a delusion and faith in an ideal? Technically, they belong to two completely categories of discourse--two different genres of speech--so they are mutually agreeable, and yet incommensurable. Incommensurable is a fifty-cent word for don't go together. It is like trying to speak German to someone who only knows Spanish. But that is quite dichotomous: mutually agreeable and incommensurable. A delusion is used in the language (or discourse) of psychology to describe a person who talks to people who aren't really there. The phrase "faith in an ideal" though is a slightly skeptical--almost optimistic--objective view of the language of religion. Religion and Psychology are two aspects of culture that seek to describe the way reality works.. sometimes making their own speculations, dictating the way they believe reality should work.
Now back to my original point: I fear that no one will be able to understand what I mean when I say all this. This is what I have to say, and there is more, too.. a lot more. Everyone I talk to usually gets lost when I start throwing around words like "discourse" and "speech genre" because no one I know has read Foucault or Bahktin. They are too busy reading stuff about World War II, or the da Vinci Code, or some other literary fad. I should be careful because the education I purchased is the only reason I know of the things that I do.. and I am lacking the same autonomy that I crucify others for not possessing. But somehow I am able to overlook these similarities in character, and condemn others in spite of the fact that I am equally damnable. Like Balthamos in The Subtle Knife, I would be much happier if I could love others in spite of their shortcomings. The Subtle Knife is the second volume in the His Dark Materials trilogy by Philip Pullman. It is a good read if you ever get tired of reading about World War II.
"...you're terrified you have nothing to offer this world--
nothing to say, and no way to say it, but you can say it in three languages." (from XTORT)
My biggest fear is not that I have nothing to say, but that I have no one to tell what I'm thinking. Sure, there are people I can talk to now, but what happens when I have another little meltdown, leading to further (and perhaps more permanent?) isolation. I've been trying really hard to keep company with people, but perhaps some of the society that I desire is still not right for me. I do have my friends though, and I am grateful for them. Sometimes, however, I feel as though they don't understand me. It's like we really are speaking different languages--playing what Lyotard described as language games.
Many people feel stupid--or they get to a certain point in their lives when they realize they could be much smarter than they believe themselves to be, and so start trying to read more. This happened to me when I was 17, and I've begun reading a lot more ever since. A problem I find is that many people don't what they should be reading, so they turn to what they consider to be more reliable sources of information (i.e. internet, television).
Here is my speculation:
So many people watch the History Channel or the Discovery Channel in order to alleviate the oppressing plague of idiocy that seems to have ravaged our culture. What they don't realize is that these are outlets designed to focus their desires. Foucault explored this idea of Subject-Power relationships, and discussed how people are subjugated to the powers that control them. People, then, don't get the Truth, but a version of the truth that shape their perception of reality. This is why people who talk about World War II only really think about Nazis and Hitler. It never occurs to them what else was at stake.. socially, economically, globally.. not to mention the consequences and repercussions that occurred in the aftermath of the War.
There is simply too much to know, and I understand and take this into consideration. What I am unimpressed by is the people who aren't really interested in learning as a way to better themselves, but desire knowledge as power--and social currency. But perhaps they are the intelligent ones: power lies in the one who controls the many. I would always be right if I had a group of people behind me who always agreed with what I said; majority rules, and in our culture the "wrong" one is the one who stands alone. Ironically, history paints a picture of the reverse being true: great scientific breakthroughs are made by a single person who stands up and says "everything we know is wrong.. or at least not quite correct."
Would anyone argue, since we can't know everything, there is no point in knowing anything? Or, if all pictures sketched are removed from the truth, does that mean that nothing is real? This kind of pseudo-idealization is exactly the kind of shit that drove the modernist crazy.. and underlines the need to faith to fill in the gaps left by negative capability to borrow a term from Keats.
What is the difference between a delusion and faith in an ideal? Technically, they belong to two completely categories of discourse--two different genres of speech--so they are mutually agreeable, and yet incommensurable. Incommensurable is a fifty-cent word for don't go together. It is like trying to speak German to someone who only knows Spanish. But that is quite dichotomous: mutually agreeable and incommensurable. A delusion is used in the language (or discourse) of psychology to describe a person who talks to people who aren't really there. The phrase "faith in an ideal" though is a slightly skeptical--almost optimistic--objective view of the language of religion. Religion and Psychology are two aspects of culture that seek to describe the way reality works.. sometimes making their own speculations, dictating the way they believe reality should work.
Now back to my original point: I fear that no one will be able to understand what I mean when I say all this. This is what I have to say, and there is more, too.. a lot more. Everyone I talk to usually gets lost when I start throwing around words like "discourse" and "speech genre" because no one I know has read Foucault or Bahktin. They are too busy reading stuff about World War II, or the da Vinci Code, or some other literary fad. I should be careful because the education I purchased is the only reason I know of the things that I do.. and I am lacking the same autonomy that I crucify others for not possessing. But somehow I am able to overlook these similarities in character, and condemn others in spite of the fact that I am equally damnable. Like Balthamos in The Subtle Knife, I would be much happier if I could love others in spite of their shortcomings. The Subtle Knife is the second volume in the His Dark Materials trilogy by Philip Pullman. It is a good read if you ever get tired of reading about World War II.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Christmas 2009
Merry Christmas!
Interestingly, I find myself more in the spirit of Christmas now than I have been in the past few years. Each year around Christmas I find little reason to celebrate. While this year ought to be no different, I really don't have any reason not to celebrate. I haven't been feeling as depressed this year (which I mainly attribute to Cymbalta), I have found myself in the company of some truly wonderful friends, and my successes as a student outweigh my failures as a human being, so guess that is reason enough to be happy.. if only for a single day.
People have a tendency, I think, to over complicate the holiday. Some simply refuse to enjoy the music, the festivities, etc, and others want to reconsider everything as being different from the status quo conceptualization. I've heard people this year both trying to put the "Christ" back in Christmas, and I've heard people adamantly claim that Christmas is really a pagan holiday that has nothing to do with Christianity. Both sides have got it wrong as far as I'm concerned.
I don't really consider myself a Christian. But unlike many non-Christians, I am not resistant to the faithful, I do not try to subvert the status of religion in relation to my own beliefs--anymore than I try and understand how the beliefs of Christianity function within my life. We are not living in a purely Christian society, but we are not living in a society absent of Christianity, and even so, it would seem that many people who believe in "being a good person" or "doing good" believe in some sort of universal balance that is determined by the collective actions of humanity. But this is also inconsistent, because without some sort of object (God or other) to contrast "bad" from, "being a good person" is meaningless. Babies aren't good people: they put their mothers through unimaginable suffering during birth, and then are completely selfish until they develop cognitive awareness that allows them to objectively reflect on their lives.
The other belief, that Christmas has nothing to do with Christianity is also a staunch falsehood, and exactly the kind of mentality I expect a pompous pseudo-intellectual with a partially complete college education to believe in. Christmas, at least before it was swallowed by middle-class consumerism, was supposed to be about celebrating the birth of Christ. Whether or not this event, the Nativity, actually took place--whether or not it is fact--is quite irrelevant to me. What is more relevant is what "the birth of Christ" symbolizes or means. For one, a child's birth is a symbol of hope for the future. Second, Christ is a symbol of both salvation and forgiveness, both which are built into the Christian belief to offer not only absolution, but also comforts the guilty.
I think much of the anxiety, or angst, towards Christianity from non-Christians is reactionary, and fueled by the actions carried out by Christians with good intentions and ill results. This is no reason to through the baby out with the bathwater. I'm not saying that it is necessarily the "right" answer to blindly follow any faith. What I am saying is that roundly rejecting a belief paradigm because of the actions of others is not the right answer either. The reason is because people in their irrationality are driven to do illogical things that disgrace the names of the institutions they represent. People never represent only themselves, but every ideal they stand for, and if they appear foolish--the ideal appears foolish. Why is that?
So, whether or not you believe in Christianity, take the day to enjoy the Christmas season with people who are important to you, or people who you are important to. Being so contemptuous of such a superficial issue is a waste of time, and becoming emotional invested (albeit negatively) is just as energy consuming, if not more so, than indifference.
Interestingly, I find myself more in the spirit of Christmas now than I have been in the past few years. Each year around Christmas I find little reason to celebrate. While this year ought to be no different, I really don't have any reason not to celebrate. I haven't been feeling as depressed this year (which I mainly attribute to Cymbalta), I have found myself in the company of some truly wonderful friends, and my successes as a student outweigh my failures as a human being, so guess that is reason enough to be happy.. if only for a single day.
People have a tendency, I think, to over complicate the holiday. Some simply refuse to enjoy the music, the festivities, etc, and others want to reconsider everything as being different from the status quo conceptualization. I've heard people this year both trying to put the "Christ" back in Christmas, and I've heard people adamantly claim that Christmas is really a pagan holiday that has nothing to do with Christianity. Both sides have got it wrong as far as I'm concerned.
I don't really consider myself a Christian. But unlike many non-Christians, I am not resistant to the faithful, I do not try to subvert the status of religion in relation to my own beliefs--anymore than I try and understand how the beliefs of Christianity function within my life. We are not living in a purely Christian society, but we are not living in a society absent of Christianity, and even so, it would seem that many people who believe in "being a good person" or "doing good" believe in some sort of universal balance that is determined by the collective actions of humanity. But this is also inconsistent, because without some sort of object (God or other) to contrast "bad" from, "being a good person" is meaningless. Babies aren't good people: they put their mothers through unimaginable suffering during birth, and then are completely selfish until they develop cognitive awareness that allows them to objectively reflect on their lives.
The other belief, that Christmas has nothing to do with Christianity is also a staunch falsehood, and exactly the kind of mentality I expect a pompous pseudo-intellectual with a partially complete college education to believe in. Christmas, at least before it was swallowed by middle-class consumerism, was supposed to be about celebrating the birth of Christ. Whether or not this event, the Nativity, actually took place--whether or not it is fact--is quite irrelevant to me. What is more relevant is what "the birth of Christ" symbolizes or means. For one, a child's birth is a symbol of hope for the future. Second, Christ is a symbol of both salvation and forgiveness, both which are built into the Christian belief to offer not only absolution, but also comforts the guilty.
I think much of the anxiety, or angst, towards Christianity from non-Christians is reactionary, and fueled by the actions carried out by Christians with good intentions and ill results. This is no reason to through the baby out with the bathwater. I'm not saying that it is necessarily the "right" answer to blindly follow any faith. What I am saying is that roundly rejecting a belief paradigm because of the actions of others is not the right answer either. The reason is because people in their irrationality are driven to do illogical things that disgrace the names of the institutions they represent. People never represent only themselves, but every ideal they stand for, and if they appear foolish--the ideal appears foolish. Why is that?
So, whether or not you believe in Christianity, take the day to enjoy the Christmas season with people who are important to you, or people who you are important to. Being so contemptuous of such a superficial issue is a waste of time, and becoming emotional invested (albeit negatively) is just as energy consuming, if not more so, than indifference.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Holiday Season 2009
Tomorrow is thanksgiving. Again. Years seem to pass even faster than before, and I used to think they were going fast. I suppose I should only expect it to get faster. This is the first time in a long time that I am more or less content with my life upon reflecting back on it.
I am working on this essay for Old English. It is supposed to be about the theme of exile in the poetry. I have the hardest times lately writing academically. I wonder if that means that I am approaching a writer's block. I try to keep pushing through, but everything feels the same--as though I've said it all before. I feel like I am simply repeating myself ad infinitum. I don't know if this means I need to read more, or if I simply need to spend more time practicing my writing. Either way, I know that I need to focus on my craft of writing before I enter into the PhD level.
This is the season in which I do the majority of my writing. I will probably write more than a hundred pages over the next three weeks. That is enough to publish a small collection of works. I keep thinking about getting my essays bound into one collection, and do this from now on. Each semester I will make a collection of all my works, so that I can throw away everything else, and I know exactly which pieces will be worth saving. There is so much paper at the end of each semester in both notes and drafts that I end up just throwing it all in a box for it to pile up. I have boxes upon boxes stored up in my closet.
How is it that I can just dump my thoughts, and I'm always thinking about something, yet when I try to write an academic essay lately it has been rough writing. I think that if I start blogging daily then I will exercise my writing "muscle" and will be able to write as freely when it comes to writing for school, but I don't know how well this will work out.
I am working on this essay for Old English. It is supposed to be about the theme of exile in the poetry. I have the hardest times lately writing academically. I wonder if that means that I am approaching a writer's block. I try to keep pushing through, but everything feels the same--as though I've said it all before. I feel like I am simply repeating myself ad infinitum. I don't know if this means I need to read more, or if I simply need to spend more time practicing my writing. Either way, I know that I need to focus on my craft of writing before I enter into the PhD level.
This is the season in which I do the majority of my writing. I will probably write more than a hundred pages over the next three weeks. That is enough to publish a small collection of works. I keep thinking about getting my essays bound into one collection, and do this from now on. Each semester I will make a collection of all my works, so that I can throw away everything else, and I know exactly which pieces will be worth saving. There is so much paper at the end of each semester in both notes and drafts that I end up just throwing it all in a box for it to pile up. I have boxes upon boxes stored up in my closet.
How is it that I can just dump my thoughts, and I'm always thinking about something, yet when I try to write an academic essay lately it has been rough writing. I think that if I start blogging daily then I will exercise my writing "muscle" and will be able to write as freely when it comes to writing for school, but I don't know how well this will work out.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Somewhere Between Love and Reason (cont.)
I made some minor edits to the new tracks, and uploaded them as well as the updated album artwork to Last.fm. There is a short review period, and hopefully the tracks will be available for streaming as well as download very, very soon.
I admit that I am very satisfied with the work I've done on these tracks--the whole album really. It took longer to put this album together than any of the releases I ever did for Hogle Lab, mainly because I am far busier than I used to be. SBLR is an album that I can't stop listening to even after hundreds of listens--and I have heard it more than a hundred times, easily.
Thanks for listening, and I hope you enjoy listening to Somewhere Between Love and Reason!
I admit that I am very satisfied with the work I've done on these tracks--the whole album really. It took longer to put this album together than any of the releases I ever did for Hogle Lab, mainly because I am far busier than I used to be. SBLR is an album that I can't stop listening to even after hundreds of listens--and I have heard it more than a hundred times, easily.
Thanks for listening, and I hope you enjoy listening to Somewhere Between Love and Reason!
Monday, September 14, 2009
Somewhere Between Love and Reason
Although I can no longer do work on the tracks on the debut album "Love and Reason," there are some very cool songs that I've produced in the last year that would fit really well on the tracklist. Because of this, I'm putting together a new release for Last.fm called "Somewhere Between Love and Reason." Technically it is a hybrid of the debut and the completed tracks from the album I've been working on, tentatively called "Somewhere Between Sound and Silence," but with my academic schedule, I find myself stretched quite thin on time, and it would be nice to have a little musical output. So, in the coming weeks, I'm going to update the artwork, and issue the revised debut by nosneb, complete with new tracks, including: Keep it Inside, I'll Take You, and Recognize.
In other news, I've begun a new focus in my Master's degree program. I'm actually considering doing a Ph.D. in Musicology, starting next Fall, and furthering my research on the Genealogy, History and Development of Industrial Music, which is the focus of much of my graduate work right now. My devotion to passion for electronic music has led me to make a career out of the scholarship of it, rather than focusing on participating in the production/performance of it. Hence, I make all of my albums, tracks, etc, available for free.
In other news, I've begun a new focus in my Master's degree program. I'm actually considering doing a Ph.D. in Musicology, starting next Fall, and furthering my research on the Genealogy, History and Development of Industrial Music, which is the focus of much of my graduate work right now. My devotion to passion for electronic music has led me to make a career out of the scholarship of it, rather than focusing on participating in the production/performance of it. Hence, I make all of my albums, tracks, etc, available for free.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Keep it Inside
I have posted a demo version of a new track called 'Keep it Inside.' This is the first nosneb track to feature vocals, and being that I am very pleased with the progress I'm making on it, I thought I would share it with the interweb. To listen to this new song, check out the nosneb myspace page.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Love and Reason
I finally got around to updating my artist page on Last.fm, and uploaded the album "Love and Reason." I began writing it in the fall of 2005, and the fall of 2008 was the last time I was able to collect tracks remaining from those writing sessions. The hard drive used to keep the original (and backup) of my work was erased, leaving me with only master copies. Therefore, I arranged the tracks and placed them on the Internet as cultural artifacts of my milieu.
Now to go somewhere silent.
Now to go somewhere silent.
Monday, January 5, 2009
When the time to let go has long passed...
From time to time, in spite of the medication I take to control my mood, I still feel pangs of regret for a past flame I let die out. To be more accurate, I killed it. I treated someone who cared for me so horribly, and I think I may have fucked them up irrevocably. Guilt is a powerful teaching tool, and it has done much to make me afraid to reach out to others, both because I don't want to hurt anyone or get hurt by anyone. To take it all back, rewind the time.. but I know it is best to simply move on. More and more the visage of this person appears in my mind, and her image causes an old wound to reopen. So much time has passed, and yet I doubt it is enough to even fantasize about our paths crossing again, successfully. In fact, it would probably be a gift to her if I let more than a year pass without any contact. I want to be redeemed. I want to be forgiven, and for things to be reconciled, even though hope has long since died out. A fool I've been, and will continue to be until I forgive myself. And that is precisely what needs to happen.. which also may be impossible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)