Featured

Today’s Selection of Ruskin

I have hardly kept my promise. The reader has decorated but little for himself as yet; but I have not, at least, attempted to bias his judgment. Of the simple forms of decoration which have been set before him, he has always been left free to choose; and the stated restrictions in the methods of applying them have been only those which followed on the necessities of construction previously determined. These having been now defined, I do indeed leave my reader free to build; and with what a freedom!

All the lovely forms of the universe set before him, whence to choose, and all the lovely lines that bound their substance or guide their motion; and of all these lines,—and there are myriads of myriads in every bank of grass and every tuft of forest; and groups of them divinely harmonized, in the bell of every flower, and in every several member of bird and beast,—of all these lines, for the principal forms of the most important members of architecture, I have used but Three! What, therefore, must be the infinity of the treasure in them all! There is material enough in a single flower for the ornament of a score of cathedrals, but suppose we were satisfied with less exhaustive appliance, and built a score of cathedrals, each to illustrate a single flower? that would be better than trying to invent new styles, I think. There is quite difference of style enough, between a violet and a harebell, for all reasonable purposes.

Perhaps, however, even more strange than the struggle of our architects to invent new styles, is the way they commonly speak of this treasure of natural infinity. Let us take our patience to us for an instant, and hear one of them, not among the least intelligent:—

“It is not true that all natural forms are beautiful. We may hardly be able to detect this in Nature herself; but when the forms are separated from the things, and exhibited alone (by sculpture or carving), we then see that they are not all fitted for ornamental purposes; and indeed that very few, perhaps none, are so fitted without correction. Yes, I say correction, for though it is the highest aim of every art to imitate nature, this is not to be done by imitating any natural form, but by criticising and correcting it,—criticising it by Nature’s rules gathered from all her works, but never completely carried out by her in any one work; correcting it, by rendering it more natural, i.e. more conformable to the general tendency of Nature, according to that noble maxim recorded of Raffaelle, ‘that the artist’s object was to make things not as Nature makes them, but as she WOULD make them;’ as she ever tries to make them, but never succeeds, though her aim may be deduced from a comparison of her efforts; just as if a number of archers had aimed unsuccessfully at a mark upon a wall, and this mark were then removed, we could by the examination of their arrow marks point out the most probable position of the spot aimed at, with a certainty of being nearer to it than any of their shots.”92

I had thought that, by this time, we had done with that stale, second-hand, one-sided, and misunderstood saying of Raffaelle’s; or that at least, in these days of purer Christian light, men might have begun to get some insight into the meaning of it: Raffaelle was a painter of humanity, and assuredly there is something the matter with humanity, a few dovrebbe’s, more or less, wanting in it. We have most of us heard of original sin, and may perhaps, in our modest moments, conjecture that we are not quite what God, or nature, would have us to be. Raffaelle had something to mend in Humanity: I should have liked to have seen him mending a daisy!—or a pease-blossom, or a moth, or a mustard seed, or any other of God’s slightest works. If he had accomplished that, one might have found for him more respectable employment,—to set the stars in better order, perhaps (they seem grievously scattered as they are, and to be of all manner of shapes and sizes,—except the ideal shape, and the proper size); or to give us a corrected view of the ocean; that, at least, seems a very irregular and improveable thing; the very fishermen do not know, this day, how far it will reach, driven up before the west wind:—perhaps Some One else does, but that is not our business. Let us go down and stand by the beach of it,—of the great irregular sea, and count whether the thunder of it is not out of time. One,—two:—here comes a well-formed wave at last, trembling a little at the top, but, on the whole, orderly. So, crash among the shingle, and up as far as this grey pebble; now stand by and watch! Another:—Ah, careless wave! why couldn’t you have kept your crest on? it is all gone away into spray, striking up against the cliffs there—I thought as much—missed the mark by a couple of feet! Another:—How now, impatient one! couldn’t you have waited till your friend’s reflux was done with, instead of rolling yourself up with it in that unseemly manner? You go for nothing. A fourth, and a goodly one at last. What think we of yonder slow rise, and crystalline hollow, without a flaw? Steady, good wave; not so fast; not so fast; where are you coming to?—By our architectural word, this is too bad; two yards over the mark, and ever so much of you in our face besides; and a wave which we had some hope of, behind there, broken all to pieces out at sea, and laying a great white table-cloth of foam all the way to the shore, as if the marine gods were to dine off it! Alas, for these unhappy arrow shots of Nature; she will never hit her mark with those unruly waves of hers, nor get one of them, into the ideal shape, if we wait for a thousand years. Let us send for a Greek architect to do it for her. He comes—the great Greek architect, with measure and rule. Will he not also make the weight for the winds? and weigh out the waters by measure? and make a decree for the rain, and a way for the lightning of the thunder? He sets himself orderly to his work, and behold! this is the mark of nature, and this is the thing into which the great Greek architect improves the sea—

Θάλαττα Θάλαττα: Was it this, then, that they wept to see from the sacred mountain—those wearied ones?

§ IV. But the sea was meant to be irregular! Yes, and were not also the leaves, and the blades of grass; and, in a sort, as far as may be without mark of sin, even the countenance of man? Or would it be pleasanter and better to have us all alike, and numbered on our foreheads, that we might be known one from the other?

The selection is over now. This is Joshua speaking. The one point I want to make here is that Ruskin is a classic European when he believes so strongly that Humanity is the only part of God’s work that is “flawed” in some way. He states that we are “not quite what God, or nature, would have us be.” This is pathetic to me. Are we not just as “perfect” as the lilies? What does that “perfect” even mean for us humans to be missing the mark, to be God’s only failure, if even only a partial one. It’s so pathetic to invent a “failure” for God and to then put yourself into it just because you don’t love yourself or anyone else enough to believe that Humanity is as much a part of God’s perfection as the lowliest blade of grass.

Featured

Today’s Selection of Ruskin

For, clearly, as the sculptor of the concave profile must leave masses of rough stone prepared for his outer ornament, and cannot finish them at once, but must complete the cutting of the smooth bell beneath first, and then return to the projecting masses (for if he were to finish these latter first, they would assuredly, if delicate or sharp, be broken as he worked on; since, I say, he must work in this foreseeing and predetermined method, he is sure to reduce the system of his ornaments to some definite symmetrical order before he begins); and the habit of conceiving beforehand all that he has to do, will probably render him not only more orderly in its arrangement, but more skilful and accurate in its execution, than if he could finish all as he worked on.

On the other hand, the sculptor of the convex profile has its smooth surface laid before him, as a piece of paper on which he can sketch at his pleasure; the incisions he makes in it are like touches of a dark pencil; and he is at liberty to roam over the surface in perfect freedom, with light incisions or with deep; finishing here, suggesting there, or perhaps in places leaving the surface altogether smooth.

It is ten to one, therefore, but that, if he yield to the temptation, he becomes irregular in design, and rude in handling; and we shall assuredly find the two families of capitals distinguished, the one by its symmetrical, thoroughly organised, and exquisitely executed ornament, the other by its rambling, confused, and rudely chiselled ornament: But, on the other hand, while we shall often have to admire the disciplined precision of the one, and as often to regret the irregular rudeness of the other, we shall not fail to find balancing qualities in both.

The severity of the disciplinarian capital represses the power of the imagination; it gradually degenerates into Formalism; and the indolence which cannot escape from its stern demand of accurate workmanship, seeks refuge in copyism of established forms, and loses itself at last in lifeless mechanism. The license of the other, though often abused, permits full exercise to the imagination: the mind of the sculptor, unshackled by the niceties of chiselling, wanders over its orbed field in endless fantasy; and, when generous as well as powerful, repays the liberty which has been granted to it with interest, by developing through the utmost wildness and fulness of its thoughts, an order as much more noble than the mechanical symmetry of the opponent school, as the domain which it regulates is vaster.

Featured

Josh: 2022: Day 1

Let’s be honest; 2021 was not a very active year for this blog. I spent more time on my Twitter account. The main development there is that I have become more open about my poetic tendencies.

However, this post should not really be about 2021. I mean, it was a very important year and all that but I believe that 2021, if it is to be described at all, deserves a more complete, focused, and detailed piece of writing than a simple diary post.

It’s been so long since I’ve written anything that I need to go back to my basic rules. It is better to be writing than trying to find something interesting to write about, so fuck it. That’s a good rule.

I’m trying to think of what my goals might be for 2022. Hmm…

It’s hard for me. I have a pretty solid ability to recognize what is “good” when I see it. The conclusion I’ve come to, from a very countable number of years using that ability, is that Reality is inevitably more fascinating and yes, even more good. I understand that, to some people, that conclusion actually displays a very weak ability to recognize “good”. I have no counter to that position, negative though it may be, and I simply bow out of any initiated argument in the matter.

What the hell was I even talking about in that last block? Part of me would enjoy going through the block and rewording things to be at least slightly coherent. Another part of my thinks that it’s hilarious to leave it incoherent. If coherence was the true heart of expression than War would be the optimal choice. Does that make any sense? I don’t know.

Right about now, you’re probably questioning my “Basic Rule” that I mentioned earlier. Is this really better writing than the alternatives? Who knows. I’m just trying to get back into the groove here. It’s been a while.

By the end of January I will have finished my book.

“Whoa!” you say. “A book? That sounds a lot like a goal for 2022.”

You’re right, of course. This book is a collection of my two main forms of writing: a selection of my blog posts of passable writing quality, and the vast majority of my Twitter account posts. Again, I have quite a few Twitter accounts. The regular types of tweets, those typical for the website, are posted in one account. That account will not contribute anything to this book. My “Serious” Twitter account, where I put real effort into the quality and writing of the posts, is the one that will be included in the book. I will be printing about 25 copies, the minimum amount of copies that this publishing website will produce. I plan to give most of the copies away to people; my family members and close friends.

I imagine I’ll have a few copies left over but I have no idea what I’ll do with them. If anyone reading this (unlikely) wants a copy, I’ll send you one if I have any left over. Good luck contacting me, I’m pretty terrible at keeping tabs on any notifications I may or may not be getting from whatever websites.

I’m done now. I would like to write at least one of these little diary posts every day but I know, for certain, that I will not keep up my Day Streak for very long. If I could go 10 days in a row writing something, even once this whole year, I’ll be happy with that.

Happy New Year, BTW. We, the Collective, are doing an admirable job dealing with ourselves, at least in my opinion.

As soon as I start making sense, let me know.

Featured

Tea Review #1: an Experience in Hedging

Ok, I’m starting my tea review series with one called “Spiced Honey” from “Green Leaf Tea Company” in Lincoln Nebraska. From now on I’m gonna shorten, “‘Green Leaf Tea Company’ in Lincoln Nebraska” to just, “GLTco”. I’m doing that because this is only my third time ever tasting real Tea, the kind of Tea actually worth reviewing. I don’t want to sound Hoity-Toity by saying that, it’s just that those were the cheap boxes off the grocery store shelf that I can’t remember anything about. Also, basically every single tea I try for a while are gonna be from there and I don’t wanna type that much.

So, “Spiced Honey” from GLTco. 

Wait, sorry. I have to hedge again. I remind you that this is only my third Tea tasted. Even the two before this were brewed hesitantly, and therefore I can hold no real confidence in my recalled memory of their flavors. I have only just now dipped my toes into the Tea Experience to a depth greater than Snapple and Sleepy Time Chamomile. 

Spiced Honey is relatively subdued. Well, I can’t really say that, I think. So far, none of these Teas have been particularly strong. My Father and Brother are huge into Craft Beer and, by proxy, my tongue has become used to the insane amount of sensation that happens when that stuff hits the tongue. Craft Beer, however, only exacerbates the greater cause of my Tongue’s expectations. I’m an American.

There is a stereotype I’ve heard from multiple sources. Basically, Americans eat so much bland food that their tongues can’t handle the crazy spices and true flavors of “Ethnic” foods, especially Indian food. I think this stereotype is extremely true BUT, only in the context of actual Meals of Respectable Substance. 

Here is a list of things that are NOT Meals of Respectable Substance:

  • Coffee
  • French Fries
  • Cereal
  • Buttered Noodles
  • Ice Cream
  • McDonalds
  • Potato Chips
  • Yogurt

Here’s a list of some actual Ms of RS

  • Homemade Lasagna
  • Thanksgiving Dinner
  • Curry
  • Shepherd’s Pie
  • Chicken n’ Broccoli Casserole

For Ms of RS American food is very low on powerful flavors, aside from Sweet that is. We are disgustingly sweet. Unfortunately for our children, that heavy addiction to sugar is placed on our shoulders starting around age 2. The important thing to note, however, is that American drinks are the Indian food of Drinks. The main difference is that Indian food is actually good in its power. American drinks are just extreme, usually on sugar.

All of this is to explain why I am uncertain about this Tea’s subtlety, especially in comparison to other Teas. So far, in just 3 real Teas, I have gotten a lot of evidence in favor of the notion that Tea is simply a subtle drink. I don’t think it’s significantly subtle but, compared to my more common drinks; such as 100% Cranberry Juice, Tea is much less overbearing. I think I will enjoy that about Tea but for now, it is something I need to learn.

Anyway, enough hedging. Let’s get to the review.

“Spiced Honey” was not as sweet as I was expecting when I saw the word “Honey”.

EDIT:
Ok. So, I posted this a few hours ago. In those few hours since, I have gained a perfect little anecdote to explain to you, exactly, how much of an idiot I am.

These Teas have measurement recommendations on them. Most of them say to use “1 Tsp” for 6-8 oz of water. For the last week, my first week of Tea, I’ve been using a “1/2 Tsp” litte measuring spoon, thinking the whole time that it was a “1 Tsp”. This explains things even more.

God, I’m adorable…

…and dumb.

Featured

Things that Aren’t Real (Unfinished?)

These are some things that often, but not always, are “Real” or “True” from the perspective of “Relative Truth” but they lack “Reality” from the perspective of “Absolute Truth”. The definitions of these two particular terms, “Absolute Truth” and “Relative Truth”, are being borrowed here, by me, from the Buddhist concept of The Two Truths. Those definitions are being invariably, involuntarily, transmuted by me just by the simple fact that I’m now the one using them.

Relative Truths are typically very useful. They can serve some sort of civil or educational purpose. On a general level I would say that Relative Truths provide more graspable introductions to the more nebulous difficult, paradoxical, and universally-interbeing nature of Absolute Truths.

One possibly useful example we could use to better convey our meaning is the example of a Traffic Light. In the sense of the Absolute Truth, the traffic light carries out only 2 actions: it consumes electricity and emits light. The traffic light has no control, whatsoever, of your car’s braking systems. From the Relative Perspective however, the traffic light provides an incredibly valuable service to both you and the other drivers around you. All drivers, hopefully, agree on what the traffic light’s emissions mean and, again hopefully, they make every effort to heed those meanings. If the light turns red, you have to stop. There is a multitude of psychological and sociological systems at play here but, when boiled down all the way, the signs and traffic lights control a significant portion of what your car does.

We all stop at Red Lights, hopefully, and I would never suggest to anyone that they should alter that reactionary behavior toward the Traffic Light. I bring it up only to illustrate the incredible usefulness and necessity of any concept, regardless of how Relatively, or Absolutely, “True” it is. Life is full of things like Traffic Lights; undeniably wonderful creations that are still, essentially, symbolic in nature.

Everything I’ve said so far is just a poorly-veiled attempt, by me, to preemptively curtail any offense you may take during the rest of what I say here. Essentially, I don’t trust in your ability to control your own subconscious urges to become upset, defensive, self-righteous, insulted, or other wise perturbed. I make here Zero statements regarding any particular thing’s value, ethics, beauty, &c. If you feel perturbed, you will have to decide if you trust me when I say; the source of that perturbation resides within yourself only. Your own uncertainties and fear are not necessary. I love you. I love the things you’re in to. The “Reality” of those things we are into is relatively meaningless.

Now, let’s get to the list. To reiterate quickly: these are things that hold either Zero Absolute Truth, a very small amount of Absolute Truth, or some amount that is especially less than the Sociologically standard “beliefs”.

#1: Math

Featured

11PM: When 7AM Meds Weren’t Taken Till 1PM

Chapter 1: How I May See

I’d like to begin by describing to you a recurring psychological… um… let’s call it a “process”, for now. As I describe this process, that is relentlessly occurring in my subconscious, you may feel a sense of familiarity. We, all of us, have fathers and this process revolves around that most impactful of relationships. Of course, this may all seem to you as the gibberish of a madman sitting alone, in his bed, with no qualifications or accomplishments to his name.

There is a version of my father’s face in my mind. This face is not in my father’s image. Rather, it is a grotesquery, a conglomeration of a whole host of things that all, in a strange and discordant sort of harmony, raised me. Of course, my father is a part of that but so is my brother, my mother, my best friend in kindergarten, and everyone else that has ever interacted with me. “Society”, as you would call it, likely makes up a significant portion of “What Raised Me”. What the face exactly is is not easy to say. The important thing to remember here is that this Face analogy I’m describing is, in reality, a weak, insufficient metaphor for a complex psychological experience. The Face does not speak for anyone but itself. If you are a part of society, as you surely are, the Society aspect of the Face does not reflect you or even Society. It’s subconscious, ok?

Ok, the face, for the most part, asks questions. It asks me questions in a demeanor unreachable in reality; a manner achievable only by each human to themself. The gist of that manner is, among other things; derisive, dismissive, unfaithful, loving, laced with contempt, and unassailable.

It asks me to explain myself.
It asks me why I’m doing what I’m doing.
It asks me if what I’m doing is what I should be doing.
It asks, unceasingly, why I’m failing to live up to my potential.
It asks, as if no answer can ever satisfy, where my life is headed.
It asks, “Please, Josh, explain to me how this thing you’re doing is Productive. Please, tell me again why we should be proud of you. Tell me, right now, why your life is worthy of love. Explain to me again, how this thing your doing has any value, because your last thousand answers made no sense either. How could this be of value? I love you. We only want for you to be happy. How, the fuck, could anyone in your current state of existence be happy? There’s no way you could be! Where’s your six figure salary? Where’s your wife and children? Where is the strength necessary to survive this fucked up world? I have failed you. All humans fail. You must explain to me why, the fuck, you are NOT the failure I’m so incredibly terrified that you are. You could never be a failure to me. We love you more than anything in the world. Why do you so consistently cause me pain? Please, convince me, again and again, choice after choice, why your decisions should not cause me pain through their foolish naivete.”

This is a glimpse into how that face speaks. I have become, through constant and involuntary attempts to answer, an expert in explaining things. I used that skill to teach both myself and the people around me. The Truth is always the victor in argument because only The Truth exists. What exists is The Truth. My belief in this truth aspect of The Truth has been the motion of my legs as I walk blindly, as blindly as all others, through life. Lies, half-truths, and incomplete truths all glance weakly, pathetically, off this Face. It knows what I know. When I feel the disconnection between my answer and The Truth there is no hiding it, like a man hiding his fear on an All-In-Bluff. The face feels it as well.

When that happens, it asks coolly, “Why does the answer you just gave me feel wrong to you? Hmm…? I’m not really anyone but you yourself. If I’m not convinced I know damn well that you aren’t either.”

When, my attempts to assuage the unceasingly gluttonous face fail to satisfy, I know why.

These attempts fail due to only one reason. They are not The Truth, at least not fully. I know that this is the cause of failure because I lied to you, just then. This face can be satisfied. Its gluttony does cease. When my answers fail to be The Truth I clearly cannot know what is missing from them since if I knew the Truth I’d use it. When the answers do satisfy, I take the time to look at them clearly. I see only one universal characteristic that, when measured, always correlates with it’s amount satisfaction. That dimension to measure, with invisible rulers, with Babylonian markings, is “How True it Felt when I said it”.

No other aspect of them is universally present in the satisfactory. No other aspect of them is universally absent from those answers that lack any sustenance. This face can only be satiated with that one fruit that is the easiest of all to obtain only when it is impossible to obtain; Understanding.

I capitalize Understanding to mark the separation of the word from your, or society’s, or even my own connotations. Research, the readings of texts, the taking of lessons, the acquisition of experiences; these are all gains in knowledge. Knowledge alone has much less to do with Understanding than might be expected. Understanding includes, among other things; emotional content, the embrace of paradox, rejection of the self, love, faith in the self, freedom, discipline, allowance, mystery, faith outside of the self, and love again.

This is the process that has led me to where I am in life. It has not been an easy path to walk but, it is easily the easiest path possible. It has been simultaneously colored with struggle and pain, doubt and frustration, joy and freedom, ease and fortune, happiness and despair.

The results of this process have been complex beyond my incredibly meagre, pathetic, and adorable abilities to comprehend. However, the one result that is most pertinent at the moment is the acquisition of an idea; an idea of what The Truth is. My goal here is to describe that truth, my personal, possibly incorrect version of The Truth, in words, as vividly as I can. Actually being vivid, or even coherent, is not my goal. I have no aspirations to greatness. I have no sense of self respect that I could ever disappoint with weak metaphor, with incorrect word, or with disconnected concept. Whatever description I, or anyone, may give is enough to be worth giving.

So, now begins that description. Please, have patience with me.

Chapter 2: The Vision Described

The Truth, is good.

Chapter 3: Conclusion

For now, that’s the best I can do. Maybe, words fail me. Maybe, I fail words. Maybe, but assuredly not, we were able to succeed.

Featured

Random Thoughts: 8/19/21: Back Log

Books take flipping forever to read. I’ve always been a slow reader, I like to take my time and make sure I’m actually reading the words. I know that “speed reading” is a thing that people do. I could try to increase my speed but, to be honest, I don’t think that appeals to me as a solution. To me, Speed Reading seems like a tool to be used when reading poorly written books. I have little interest in reading poorly written books.

A friend of mine once read the entire 5th Harry Potter book in a single night, at least according to her. I think I can understand how that works. I mean, Harry Potter is not exactly poetic with it’s wordings. There’s nothing of real value in making sure you read every word, right? You could probably skip at least 50% of the total book without missing a single important thing. The problem for me is that I ain’t trying to read no flippin’ Harry Potter books.

Here’s my Back Log that has been building up.

  • I need to finish Seven Pillars of Wisdom
  • Actually make progress on Plato’s Republic
  • See what I think of The Seven Lamps of Architecture
  • Read Tao of Jeet Kune Do
  • Read Shakespeare’s Hamlet so I can better understand Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
  • I promised my parents I’d read Tattoos on the Heart
  • I wanna read Stephen King’s The Running Man
  • I’ve been wanting to read some poetry, starting with Whitman’s Leaves of Grass and Song of Myself
  • And lastly, I have a book on The Buddha that I want to read.

Now, you tell me where Speed Reading would make the experience of any of these better? To be fair, I might be wrong about what “speed reading” is. Maybe, it would be perfect for me but, I have my own idea of what it is and I refuse to take the time to google it and see if I’m right.

I’m actually getting slower at reading. You’re probably wondering how that’s possible. Well, it’s all about my resurging fondness for taking notes. You see, I, like most people, took notes in College classes but I hadn’t realized until more recently how much I actually enjoyed it. That’s not to say that I’m obsessed with it or that it’s my favorite thing to do. When I say that I enjoy it I mean that it feels like a powerful supplement to any experience.

When I read Seven Pillars of Wisdom I make sure I have Google Docs open on my laptop or something. I’ve been using it to take notes while I read. I make sure to write down any particularly good quotes. Through 435 pages of the book I have 7 pages of quotes; my favorite passages, especially poetic lines, important ideas.

I’m keeping a list of every word I need to look up the definition of. I have 89 words that I’ve had to look up because I had either never seen them before or because they were being used in a way that I didn’t understand. I’m not exactly the most well read guy on the planet but my vocabulary isn’t exactly lacking. It says alot about this book that I have that many words written down. That’s an average of 1 new and separate word that I need to look up every 5 pages. Words like:

  • Usufruct
  • Bathos
  • Propitious
  • Prevaricate
  • Noesis
  • Internecine

I do all this for two reasons, I think. One, is that it makes sure I never have to read the book a second time. I have no problem watching the same movie a bunch of times, if it’s a good movie, and I’ll notice new things quite often. I’m sure I could read the same book again and see new things I didn’t see the first time but, holy heck, I don’t want to. I don’t have the free time, and considering how much free time I have (a shit load) that’s saying alot.

I think I’m gonna start taking notes all the time. Have I said all this stuff already in a different blog post? Shit, did I just repeat a topic? I gotta check to see. Give me a sec. OK, so I did talk about taking notes on things but I didn’t talk about how that makes my reading take longer. That’s not too bad, I guess. Whatever, the content of the post doesn’t matter.

A couple posts ago I talked about Spider Solitaire and I found out then that the Two Suits version I had been playing was not the real deal, hard core, version of the game that I thought it was. I’ve been playing 4 suited, random deal, Spider Solitaire. Needless to say, it has taken up alot of my time. Not a crazy amount but it’s addictive. It’s one of the lesser reasons I have such a back log of books to read. The primary reason is that I haven’t really wanted to read books in a long time so I’m trying to get used to it again.

OH! That gives me a good idea for my next Feature Blog Post. I have this very detailed idea of the “Perfect” reading conditions. It’s my theory that if I could put myself in this position consistently I’d get through my Back Log in a matter of days. I’ll have to write down that Blog Post idea somewhere so I remember it.

Ok, well, I guess I’m done writing this. I usually like what I’ve written more than I do with this particular post but there’s nothing I can do about that. I promise, I’ll finish Seven Pillars of Wisdom by the end of the week, write a Book Club post on it, and get back into Plato. I’ve made promises like that before on this blog and based on how those went it’ll probably be another few months before I actually do anything. Maybe my saying that will change things.

Featured

Random Thoughts: 8/9/21

I haven’t done a “Book Club” post in a while but I’m working on it. I’m reading Seven Pillars of Wisdom, by T.E. Lawrence. In fact, I told myself that I was gonna marathon read it last week to finish it quick. Hey! Guess what!? That didn’t happen. I’m not beat up about it. I actually kind of realized that this book was actually just another piece of media for me to consume. I think I’ve backed myself into enough corners now so that explaining what this first idiotic paragraph meant will carry me to content.

I, like every one else in existence, have things I like that aren’t really constructive. I used to play alot of video games, as an example. Now, Seven Pillars of Wisdom is no video game. It’s super high high level literature. I feel self-conscious telling people that I’m reading it because it sounds like I’m bragging, like; ‘Oh, I’m reading Plato’s Republic for fun. I’m so smart n’ smarmy’. For most of my life I would have to avoid telling people what I’m doing because it would be things like watching anime or some other terribly humiliating activity.

The problem arises then that I begin to think of reading Seven Pillars of Wisdom as a “constructive” thing. Like, other things I want to do are distractions away from the goal I have that seems more responsible. It’s weird but I have to realize that no matter how hoity-toity the book is it’s fulfilling the same purpose as those old video games did. It’s my for fun, get-distracted-away-from-life-for-a-while, activity. Yes, I feel much better about that activity for me being high end literature than I did about video games or bad TV. I’m definitely on the next level but, I need to not get down on myself from a lack of follow through on reading quotas. Reading these books is not my job, I get to do it whenever I want and however I want.

I do think of this blog as something akin to “job” but only in the sense that I put real effort into it. I do feel less successful on the day if I haven’t written at least a “Random Thoughts” post but I like that dynamic. I should however realize that my “Book Club” posts would not be my main product even if this blog was a full on job. My rantings about complicated books are great, in that I like them and enjoy them, but they aren’t as… as much “Me” as these more off the cuff posts. I am the main selling point of my blog, not what I choose to write about. Maybe that sounds weird but it makes sense in my head.

I find that my “Book Club” posts are actually more for my own benefit than for the Blog’s benefit. By “the blog’s benefit” I mean improvement to the overall quality of the blog in the non-reality where this blog pays my bills, or even just gets mediocre levels of traffic. My “Book Club” posts are like notes I might take during a college class. I don’t want to ever read Plato’s Republic a second time. I really like the book but fuck that. I’ve been “reading” it for almost 2 years and I’ve only read 4 chapters. I put “reading” in quotes cause I haven’t actually picked up the book in ages but, I am still in the process of reading it.

If I write down all my thoughts and analysis it facilitates better understanding. I’m a massive weirdo who is starting to realize, as I get older, that Taking Notes is actually dope. I wanna Take Notes on everything. Those Book Club posts are just more intentional notes and they have a surprising but happy lack of further purpose.

These Random Thoughts posts actually feel more like “The Point” of it all to me. These, off the cuff, not proof-read, unguided rants are the posts that most express who I am and how I think and, like I said, I am the main selling point here.

Also, I say I get almost no traffic but I gotta give a shout out to “Sebastian”, who gives my posts “likes”. It would be hilarious if “Sebastian” was actually like some version of “Tom” from MySpace that is just a trick. WordPress sees unread Blogs and manufactures “likes” to keep customers thinking people read their babblings. That’s my little conspiracy theory that I don’t believe in but pretend to sometimes because it makes me laugh.

What else was I gonna say? I thought of something to talk about a couple paragraphs ago. I told myself at the time that I would just remember it and start in on it when I finished the other stuff but, as is almost always the case, I can’t remember it.

See!? This is why writing stuff down is a good idea. I need to take more notes. I’m gonna start taking notepads with me wherever I go, the same way the women folk carry around their very convenient looking purses. I’ll be trying to get into the Club, which I pronounce as “Da Cloughb”, and every bouncer will know me as the notepad guy who’ll stop mid breakdance move to take some notes on some random shit nobody else would think is interesting. I’ll be famous for it! I’ll be a famous Note Taker!

Featured

Random Thoughts: 8/5/2021

2 days in a row? Damn, I’ve really got my life figured out. No more questions about the future, no more worries, no more trying to decide between a career in Male Modeling or High Finance. I’ve mastered this “blogging” thing.

All of that was a joke obviously but sometimes I start these “Random thoughts” things and instead of trying to think up something interesting to start typing about I just remind myself that my strategy is to just type about literally anything. I think I once started one, probably unpublished from a long time ago, and just started describing the things I saw in the room; table, lamp, toaster oven, a lack of parents. That last part was also a joke. Call backs are good things.

I’ve been addicted to playing Spider Solitaire recently and I have mixed feeling about it. First off, I don’t play no baby version with only one suit and the computer making sure each deal is actually possible. Nah bro, I’m an adult. I play with two suits and random deals. Due to the fact that I don’t have any reference points I don’t know if my 30% completion percentage, out of 333 total games, is impressive or not. I think it is but how could I know. Ok, I just opened the app to check my statistics and apparently there is a 4 suit version of spider solitaire and I’m screwed man.

My Grandpa played alot of Spider Solitaire but I never payed any attention, not that I regret that or anything; it’s just solitaire. I wonder how much of an old man game it is. To be completely honest with you there are alot of aspects of my personality that seem like an old codger type. I get very angry when technology malfunctions around me and I also have no idea how to fix any of it. I am pretty skilled at using Google so that definitely helps me fix some of the more easy stuff.

How else am I old? I’m cheap as hell. I don’t know. My 30th birthday is coming up and while you don’t have to remind me that 30 is not very old it is still kinda weird turning 30. I think keeping track of your age might be one of those things that doesn’t really matter at all. I mean, it doesn’t really hurt anything unless we’re gonna get real deep into a sociological impact of the normalization of numerical designations but after yesterday I feel like writing about something a little lighter than religions, Thesues, and killer toasters.

Anyway, my Spider Solitaire addiction hasn’t hurt me too much I think. It’s entirely possible that it’s actually helping me in some unseen way, like making my brain better at problem solving or something but that kind of immaterial benefit is always hard to judge. That’s probably why our society puts no credence in that kind of skill/strength. I mean how do you quantify wisdom in a way that satisfies people into thinking it’s of value over things like money? Didn’t I say I wanted to avoid sociology?

My 30’s are gonna be great I think. Obviously, I can’t see the future so I’m just guessing. Plus, I’m 30 years old with no job, no money, no girlfriend, very little ambition (or maybe I should say ‘very focused ambition’), no house, basically not much at all. Maybe that’s the way it should be. Maybe starting with nothing of “value”, expect for my own damn self, is a good thing? Nah, I mean, the only reason having lots of possessions is a bad thing is if you’re particularly attached to those things. I’m pretty good at not getting attached to things, sometimes maybe too good, so I think I’d be mostly immune to the trapping of material possessions. I wouldn’t let them limit my choices or options.

But, on the other hand, it may be exactly because I have nothing, that I’ve built up such an immunity to that particular poison, materialism I mean. It’s a powerful poison but I doubt that’s something Blog readers need to be told that much. Maybe I’m making some broad assumptions about Blog readers and maybe there are some completely capitalistic, materialistic, nihilist blog readers out there. I doubt they’d read my blog at all so I guess I don’t have to worry about offending them. Even if they might read my blog what’s the chances that any of my 5 “followers” fall into their group?

Whatever. I wonder how long these posts need to be for me to feel like I’ve written a full length post? I mean, I would let myself end it after one paragraph if that’s something I felt like doing but I definitely think there’s some length that I could use as a landmark, though not one I place any importance on reaching, just one I can use to locate myself.

Mountains are badass. I mean, the Sun is obviously the best landmark there is but it is hurt by it’s pervasiveness. People always take things they’re used to having for granted and forget how amazing it is, like smoke detectors, but I’m pretty good at not letting that effect my judgment. No matter how good I really am at that though, it is a thing I have to deal with and the Sun is pretty much the most “always there” thing in the world. Don’t give me some nonsense about night time either, ‘”Oh but the sun is really only something you have half the time cause night time.” Shut up with that bro. Night is the absence of the sun. That means that night time is still dictated by the sun.

That reminds me of a quote I really like. It’s not on my list of great quotes because it’s more a lesson but maybe it should be. Anyway, there was a character in a TV show who was going to college and he asked his friend for advice. He was conflicted on whether or not to wear his Highschool Letterman Jacket. You know what, instead of describing it to you I’m gonna figure out how to post the clip right here on this blog. I know I’ve done this before but it was a while back. Let’s see…

Wow, that was easy. Took me like 5 seconds.

Anyway, I’ve always liked that little conversation. I’m not sure how much that relates to the phenomenon of Night and Day but whatever.

I’m think I’m done now.

Featured

Random Thoughts: 8/4/21

After writing this I feel the need to make a warning paragraph here. This post is of the type I used to write and is closer to stream of consciousness. I’ve made no effort to make any point or any sense. I’m only writing this warning because I have like 5 “followers” on this blog now, whatever “follower” means, and this isn’t much like my recent stuff. I’m gonna be doing more of these though.

How long has it been since I did one of these? When I first got this blog I would do a “Random Thoughts” post almost everyday. I mean, yeah, that only lasted for a few weeks or something but it was still alot different than what I do here now. Part of me wants to go back to just doing these “Random Thoughts” type posts more often but I think I could just do both. Actually, now that I think about it, I’ll just keep doing whatever I want to do with it.

So what am I gonna write about today? What am I thinking about? To be clear, I’m asking myself that question right now, not you, any possible reader.

This year has been kinda crazy for me. The key part of that sentence is “for me”. At the end of 2019 I was adamant that the 2020’s would be an incredible decade. What does incredible mean? I’m not 100% sure but it doesn’t mean the “happiest” or the “easiest”. I’m trying to figure out how to define “incredible” in a specific way that let’s me stand by the original prediction. Obviously, 2020 was not a “Happy” year and 2021 hasn’t been all that much better but “Happy” and “Good” are not the same thing.

Ok, I gotta cool it with the quotation marks. Honestly, my entire approach to punctuation is currently in a state of flux. Like I said in my post about nightmares my life has had a constant struggle, among other struggles, to reconcile what other people say and do with what makes sense to me. I keep finding that things I felt alot of apathy toward in my youth were things I simply didn’t see the importance of.

Wow. As I look at that last sentence I’m thinking, “Fucking duh.” Like, obviously apathy is just another way to suggest a lack of importance being placed on a thing. It’s crazy how often you realize something and then marvel at how you never realized that super obvious thing before. Is that made worse by bias? I mean, does the fact that I’m now cognizant of whatever that connection is actually trick me into thinking I should always have been cognizant? Does the word “Cognizant” have a Z in it? That seems wrong.

Anyway, English classes in grade school always tried to teach me how and when to use punctuation; where to use commas, what to capitalize, what a semi-colon meant. Even in college when I wrote a short story for a writing class I had points taken off my grade because I used commas in some wrong spots. What the heck is that!? My new policy, which I’ve realized has always been my policy, if unconsciously, is to not give a hoot when I use punctuation. A comma, to me, indicates a small pause in my speech patterns. It’s just a little separation, a change in enunciation to signal to the listener that these words I’m using now are separate in some small way from the previous words.

When listening to people talk they sometimes will start a new sentence or a new thought and I’ll not notice. So, my brain will be trying to attach these new words to whatever the old phrase was about and while normally my brain realizes its mistake quickly it is still an imperfection. I’m a big fan of imperfections in general so don’t think I need everything to be “perfect”. All’s I’m saying is that this particular issue is very easily solved. All you need do is add a change to provide a signal. You can use a change to anything; to tempo, tone, pitch, timbre, fortissimo, etc. Yeah, I know fortissimo doesn’t fit there but I thought it was funny. I’m not gonna explain why so just ignore it.

Point is, I might be a Modernist. Of course, the Modernist side of me that wants freedom from the oppression of any sociological, or even grammatical expectations, is recalcitrant to attach a defining title like “Modernist” to myself. God, that’s so Modernist of me. To be honest I only have a very vague understanding of what “Modernist” even means so don’t hold me to that. Philosophical schools like “Modernism” that appear, to my very poor knowledge, to be all about separation from the established order, of what to use and where to use it, for a more prominent focus on the free use of all options, somehow do end up falling into the classification of a “school”. I mean, as soon as you put this title on it, give it leaders like Eliot and Pound to study, and attach a system of rules around what it means, aren’t you kind of making sure that you aren’t actually in the same group as them? They count themselves as outside of groups. If you put them in a group, for whatever reason, you do so against their intentions.

It’s a currently big cultural issue in my thoughts. Religious figures make the best examples of what I’m talking about. Of course, the mere mention of any religious term, let alone a Key Name, often turns people’s brain from one base-line setting to another, less open minded setting. It’s like, in a regular, undefined and open conversation your brain is in a certain type of state. In this state you aren’t using any concrete self imposed limitations of connotation. The metaphor I see in my mind is of one of those little kids toys that you can look through and it has all these different color lenses that you can flip down. You can look through the toy with no lenses down and see things normally, then you would flip down blue, and a blue piece of plastic would come down and give everything you see a blue hue. You then flip down yellow and everything turns green and your little kid brain is like, “Woah! What just happened?”

Anyway, that toy, and it’s effect, are what I’m reminded of when I think of the way people sometimes react to hearing a religious term. I know that the connections between those two things may be hard to see but it works in my head so whatever. The point I’m trying to make is that alot of people have these kinds of “trigger” topics, and whenever their brain senses one of these topics being approached it unconsciously and reflexively throws down a corresponding lens over their mind and the entire conversation that follows is now defined by this false hue that their brain is seeing things in.

I still feel like I’m not being 100% clear so I’ll give an example. That’s all the work I’m willing to do on this; I gotta get back to whatever the hell I was talking about before. Imagine you have a friend who’s parents were murdered by a toaster oven. Yeah, I bet you were expecting more clarity from me but nah bro. Anyway, this friend obviously has a very complex and negative relationship with the idea of toaster ovens; he attends group meeting with other people biggoted against toaster ovens and everything. Now, you are having a conversation with him about a date you went on. Your friend isn’t thinking about toaster ovens and, at the moment, his eyesight is clear: there are no lenses for you to have to work around.

You tell him that you took your date to the county fair. You talk about going on the Ferris wheel and being in that little room together way up there. You talk about playing those little games at the booths to try to win a prize. After many failed attempts you had to sheepishly give up; you didn’t manage to win any prizes for your girl. You friend calls you a sucker for trying to win those obviously rigged games. You laugh and start to talk about the food booths. Your friend reminisces about the last time he had funnel cake. You tell him about how amazing the Teriyaki Chicken Pineapple Boats were (or any of the other inane foods that could only be considered ethical to create at a fair) and how you wanted to try and make your own at home. You were nervous since the recipe seems complicated but your Girlfriend’s toaster oven worked better than you could have hoped and your Hot Pineapple Boat piece of nonsense food turned out pretty good.

Obviously, things change for your friend. He’s used to this type of thing so it’s not a big deal but he now has a red lens in front of his eyes. You aren’t thinking about the ethics of toaster ovens but, as you give praise to your Girlfriend’s oven because it heats things up like it’s supposed to, you and your friend are operating with very different mentalities. Yours is relatively clear, only tinted lightly with shades of hunger and nostalgia, but your friend’s is straight-up-red and while the conversation might go on as it normally would the separation of the two people is clearly a potential source of miscommunication. Now whenever your friend hears about Teriyaki Chicken Pineapple Boats the image he sees in his head will be a little more red than everyone else’s .

What the fuck am I talking about? Uh… let me scroll up real quick. Ah yes, religion. Wait, no, that’s not right. I was gonna use religion as an example to explain the harmful effects of time on “schools of thought”. Actually, I was trying to explain why having to follow a set of rules thought of as “Modernism” to be a “modernist” is funny to me because it seems antithetical.

I’m just gonna pretend I never got sidetracked.

Every big idea Humanity has tried to spread has suffered by the passage of time, from the “sources” of the ideas into the future. New communication inventions like grammar, tools of thought, sets of rules, ethics, ideologies, philosophies, and everything else immaterial, but important, passes from one generation to the next like an unimaginable game of telephone. Simple passage through only 10 children, sitting right next to each other, can turn any phrase into something unrecognizable. Religions and “schools of thought” sail for millennia as the Ship of Theseus through the impossibly turbulent waters of human thought and come out on the other side always more complicated, more restrictive, and more nonsensical.

To heck with your idea of a what a comma should do. I’m just gonna take the Ship we have now and ignore the idea that Theseus ever existed. It’s a boat. That’s the only thing it ever has been. It actually didn’t change at all. It sails from one place to another. I’ll use it how I want.

Featured

The Imaginary Planets of 4 Year Olds

In case I haven’t said it on this blog before, I used to be a Preschool Teacher. In my 5 years there I typically avoided coming up with lesson plans or coming up with projects. Allow me to brag here. This is one project I did lead.

The kids would draw a picture of a planet, they could make the planet look however they wanted. They had total freedom to do what they wanted with it. When they were done I called them over one at a time for them to describe their planet to me and give it a name. Again, they had total freedom to say whatever they wanted. I mean, I seem to remember one or two might have said they didn’t care to describe their planet at all so I guess they didn’t have total freedom.

I brought my computer to class that day, which you might be able to tell because some of them mention computers, so that I could note down everything they said and exactly how they said it. I didn’t want to just get the gist of what they imagined and then rewrite it myself. So, these descriptions they told me are direct quotes. A few descriptions have small footnotes by me and these are marked with an asterisk. The footnotes were included in the final products that were posted up on the walls outside class and later sent home.

Annie
Planet Mr. Josh
“Uh… Mr. Josh and me live in it. The planet has a head and it’s always so cold and it always has signs and it has glasses and there is a tv on the glasses and it has a nose and it has a shark and it has a jacket. And my family lives there. Um… we play Mr. Josh is an alien and Mrs. Cindy is an alien and everybody’s an alien and there are people-aliens and there’s so much computers nobody can write and it has a table on its head and it has…”

*She went on for a while, giggling and just saying “and it has this and it has that and it…”

Morgan
Planet peanut
“Its named that since my other name is peanut. People eat pancakes. people eat peanuts in their pancakes and stuff and all of their food they have peanuts in the food. Animals only eat peanuts I guess. All the houses are made out of peanuts. We throw peanut balls and play peanut ball games. A whole lot of people live there and my peanut family lives there.”

Harris
Planet X-treme
“Maybe I want a wolf on top of it and the wolf is goin’ to be maybe Harris. Another wolf is named sun and I live there. Me and the wolves walk around the planet and look at stuff like sun, animals, zebras and just that. That’s it.”

Margaret
Planet Allison, thats my moms name
“Hmmm… a flowers everyday, they grow. I live there. My best friend too and my other friend and you (Mr. Josh) live there cause you’re my best friend. Mr. Joshy you’re there and Mrs. Cindy is there and there’s like a bunch of people who live there. An ice cream shop is there next to my house. It has free ice cream. A popsicle shop too. And my neighbor is gonna be you and my other best friend and we have a treasure chest in my house that I keep in my room and… and a popcorn shop. You have crystaly rocks in your house and I’m done now.”

Sebastian
Pluto, actually Earth
*He points to places on the planet.

“I live there like right here and that’s earth. Well this will be the zebras cause the zebras are kind of white and that will be the ocean and this is the ocean and there’s kind of a little purple right there. I think that will be dirt. Oh, that will be dirt too and that red thing could be lava so that one and that one right there. My brother is Alex and my other brother is a little baby and his name is Zachary and he lives in Texas and my cousin lives in… I don’t know. He has a sister.”

Luke
Planet Texas
“I live there. I live there live and that’s a good part. It’s the best planet. There are lions, zebras, bears, and cheetahs. The meat eaters fight. My family lives there and there are no aliens. There’s nothing else I want to tell you about it.”

Juliana
Mr. Josh Planet
*At first Juliana names it Saturn but Annie comes up and tells her that she named her planet “Mr. Josh” so Juliana changes it to Mr. Josh planet. 

“There are aliens there. I live there. Annie, Harper, and Mr. Josh and Harper lives there again and Annie lives there again and then a zero lives there again. There’s lambs there and that’s the only animal. We play in the backyard. It’s a pretty planet and it’s beautiful and that’s all. And there’s another Annie and another Mr. Josh and a Harper and another Harper and another Mr. Josh and another Annie and another glasses and another lights and another table and another…”

*This lasted a while and there were alot of Harpers and Annies

Selah
Planet Franken-eye
“It called that because it has a eye. In the eye is uh… is smushy. The planets pretty and there’s an animal there and it’s… the animal is uh… is rabbit robot and um… there’s a zero in the rabbit eye and there’s a pocket in the rabbit’s head. that’s it. Nobody else lives there. Its an “ickin spickin” robot. That means it’s pretty but it still lives on the planet by itself.”

Oliver
Planet Harris
“The Planet Harris has Oliver and Harris, Hamilton, and Annie. They live in the thing we do. Well we do fun is that we play Ninjago tickets. Wait think Boris lives on it too. Boris lives there too. And there’s cows, horses, and we live in a house and then and um… my… who’s my Mom and Dad are scissors. My Mom and Dad are scissors because my Mimi is paper. It has a toilet on the planet. That’s it.”

Boris
Sonic the Planet
“Sonic lives there with other friends with people and i live there and some bad guys always live here and that way they attack sonic and his friends and sonic always wins and sometimes sonic finds all the gems and he turns gold and that means he’s more powerful. And then there was someone destroying Christmas. It was the Grinch he was attacking and he stole all the presents ad destroying them and then sonic wins again. And then another bud guy showed up and then it was Dr. Robotnik and he had the robots and monsters and they…”

*Many stories about sonic beating bad guys followed. Sonic and friends fought many enemies including a bucket monster, aliens from space that made everything turn super weird, and monster robots with things on their feet. Finally at the end Sonic made new friends.

Brayden
Earth
“Its a different earth than our earth. There’s grass there. There’s a zoo that has like um a zebra one and um… some giraffes and normal animals and some ant eaters. That’s where i go for fun. I live there with some um… people are there, my family, Sebastian, Mrs. Cindy, Boris, and that’s all the people.”

Harper
Twilight sparkles crystal flower jewel
“Harper, me and my friend Harper. And my mom lives there dad lives there. Brother lives there. Both of my dogs live there Layla, Bexley. And my friends. We go to the zoo with normal animals and houses dinosaurs. Girl dinosaurs only. And cats and dogs they live there and they’re friends and their families are there. There are rabbits, queens and princesses, kings, princes, unicorns and horses. And there’s a learning station how to ride unicorns and horses. There’s cookies that are alive and jelly beans that are alive cause it’s gonna be Candyland. It’s gonna be Candyland twilight sparkle with suckers, lollipops, ice cream that’s alive and we don’t eat them we just make friends with them. The dogs and cats can talk. All the animals can talk. Walruses, zebras, yaks, turtle, horse, giraffe. It pretty with flowers.”

Jack
Coostar
“Um.. there’s sonic there. There’s a aliens there and there’s Mario and Batman and there’s lego guys. They have tackle cause one of them… the zombies are mean. It’s a happy planet. There’s a house on the planet and there’s fishies and there’s a computer on the planet and there’s cars and hair on the planet. I live on the planet with my family and there’s beds and lovies and there’s 10,000 dogs. There’s 10,000 rocks and 10,000 cars and there’s 1 body guy and 1 talking sun and there’s hats and books. I read the books and video games and numbers and heads and healthy food and candy, candy, candy and healthy food. There’s 10 seconds and everybody in the world lives there and there’s lego and there’s legoland.”

Gavin
Earth
“It’s our earth. Animals live there. Not alien animals but normal animals. There’s turtles, pies, zebras, snakes, Everybody lives there. We play video games.”

Hamilton
Milky Way
“So there was a little little Mr. Josh and then Hamilton came up and said there’s a flower and then the flower talked and then it said, “shoo” and then the planet come and splashed over the whole city and then Mr. Josh came back and say hello. That’s all.”

Riggs
Planet yawn
“I think it’s just an empty planet. There’s nothing there I think.”

Featured

Book Club: Somnium

How much of a “book” is this? The “Book Club” title seems to be getting vague. Isaac Asimov and Carl Sagan both have referred to Somnium as one of the earliest works of science fiction and I guess it just depends on your definition of “Science Fiction”. However, saying that Somnium is not so much a book is not to say that it’s uninteresting. This post is very weird but so is the book. I’m kind of combining a plot summary with a commentary on its purpose and reflection on what it says about the mind of its author.

I guess the true purpose of this post is that I can use it as an excuse to get a post out since I’m trying to write more. I mean, I read an entire book. It would be a shame to not get a blog post out of it. Yes, the “book” is only 71 pages long but shut up. I read a whole book and I deserve cheap content even if it is confusing.

Ok, I need to give some context now about Somnium because most people probably don’t know anything about the book. Somnium was written by a man who’s name might be familiar to you, Johannes Kepler. Kepler is one of those old timey space watching types like Galileo and Newton. While he might be slightly less famous than them he’s similar to them in contributions to science. That distinction alone makes anything he wrote worth reading. However, I, like most people, am not cool enough to read scientific papers from the early 1600’s about the laws of planetary motions in my free time. But, if that’s true what’s different about Somnium and why did I read it?

I’m kind of on a weird kick of reading books that don’t fit into any genre. The Mint, by T.E. Lawrence is one of those types. So, when I hear of a “book” by Kepler that Asimov and Sagan call the first piece of Science fiction my attention is grabbed. Additionally, when I hear that Somnium was used as evidence when Kepler’s mother was put on trial for witchcraft, what else am I gonna be but intrigued. I mean, you’re probably a little intrigued right now so the next question is obviously, what is Somnium.

From what I can tell, Kepler was sleeping one day and had a dream about a boy who, through a meeting with a spirit, learns about the moon, the people living on it, and more specifically how the motions of the heavens look from the moon’s perspective. This dream was one of those types that you wake up from and you immediately want to write it down so that’s what Kepler does. According to wikipedia, Somnium was written for this purpose or for that purpose or whatever but after I read it I don’t really see any purpose other than to record his dream. I think the story itself supports my interpretation of Somnium as a direct retelling of a dream. It feels very much like a dream in the way it moves from one topic to the next, from one premise to the next.

Kepler, in his real life, was raised by his mother and studied under a man named Brahe, another famous space guy. In Somnium there is a boy who is raised by his slightly witch-like mother and ends up going to study, in a foreign land, under a man named Brahe. So far it seems like a normal dream; he’s the main character but the ways Kepler psychologically feels disconnected from the other students is more prominent. Then, as usually happens in dreams, things get weirder. Him and his mother move back to their homeland, a more isolated nation, and when they get there his mother tells him she can convene with spirits or deamons or something. She summons one and this spirit starts to tell Kepler about life on the moon.

Now, we know Kepler spends his life in study of the heavenly bodies in space and that he’s a huge nerd so instead of this next section of his dream being about the women of the moon or the music of the moon people the spirit spends pages and pages describing the cycles of the stars in the Moon’s sky. He describes the way eclipses would look from the moon’s perspective and how the Earth’s entirely locked position in the Moon’s sky would effect the ways calendars and years are defined on the moon. He even talks about how to motions of other planets would look from the moon’s perspective.

This is the stuff that I think wikipedia uses to make the argument that Somnium is a conscious attempt to reimagine the planetary motions from the the moon’s perspective in order to provide a new model to facilitate understanding. While Somnium does accomplish that goal I think it’s important to remember that Kepler’s brain is probably doing that kind of thing all the time. It only makes sense for one of Kepler’s dream to be about how the planetary motions look form the moon because he’s essentially doing that 24/7. His mind is trying to understand the planets from a level entirely independent of his Earthly perspective so why would his dreams be constrained to that Earthly perspective?

Anyway, what happens next? The spirit starts talking about actual life on the moon. He talks about how the physiology of the plants and animals are different from Earth’s directly due to the impact of the Moon’s different relationships to the sun and the Earth. This, to me, is the most interesting part of the dream since the geography and astronomy go over my head. He talks about the differences in living on the side of the moon facing the Earth vs the other side and also living on the sort of prime meridian of the moon that separates those two halves. Ah yes, this stuff I like. I enjoy exploring the way all things are connected and how a change of something over here radically effects every part of life.

But, as it always seems to be with dreams, Kepler wakes up right at the most interesting part. Maybe though, his most interesting part was already over. Somnium then ends with Kepler saying that this is when he woke up from his dream, in bed, in Frankfurt. Now, it probably seems obvious to you that Somnium is simply Kepler writing down a particularly interesting dream he had but somehow that’s not really what I thought it was going to be when I started reading it. Based on what I’d read about Somnium I was expecting an actual story with a beginning, middle, and end. Having been wrong about what the book was is not any actual bother to me. I enjoy the unexpected as much as the next guy, but is this Science Fiction and does it fit into the category of “Book”?

I just now looked up the definition of “Book” and it’s probably something I should have done right at the freaking start. Am I a moron? Yes. Is Somnium fully a book? Well it’s words printed on pages that are glued together so yeah, it’s a book. Now I want to write a blog post on why I associated the word “Book” with… I don’t know, “Novel” maybe. Focus Josh! We answered the question of how much of a book it is and the implications of that answer are for another time. Pretend I never asked if it’s a book. I’m better at questions that are hard to answer because my real skill is bullshitting my way through things.

Is Somnium science fiction? In my opinion… Wait. Let me look up the actual definition of science fiction. God Damnit, I’ve found a rabbit hole to fall down. Are dreams fiction or non-fiction?

What do I do now? I guess I’ll write a separate post on that question, cause I have alot of points to bring up. For now I’ll say that, in my current opinion, Somnium is not Science Fiction or even fiction.

You know what, after reading Somnium I was kind of disappointed because it didn’t really have any impact on me. I guess I ended up getting what I wanted out of Somnium after all. I wanted to be lead to new questions and ideas I hadn’t asked or heard before and in all my years I’ve never really considered the level of reality dreams, their experiences, and even the retelling of them, occupy.

Featured

Nightmares and Fears

So, I wanna do something I don’t normally do. For some reason today, don’t ask me what that reason is cause I don’t know, I wanna talk about dreams. Now, not only do I not normally talk about dreams, I actively avoid doing it. Hearing someone tell me about their dreams just… I don’t know, I just don’t like it. I could probably sit here and try to analyze my feelings, (“search your feelings Luke”) but nah. I wanna talk about nightmares and, sort of, wonder aloud at mine.

Nightmares as a concept are obviously incredibly undefined, nuanced, and specifically personal. However, when I think of nightmares that other people tell me about they always feel like they would fit into a horror film. There are lots of different types of horror films so I guess I’m failing to combat that undefined aspect. The point is that they just consistently have that feeling. Here’s an example, a nightmare I heard someone tell recently, “I had a dream where I was looking at my dog and she turned to the side and suddenly she was a like a half centipede half dog thing. She started scuttling up the walls and I just started screaming. I woke up all tense.”

I guess I didn’t do anywhere near a good job describing what I think of when I think “Nightmares.” Let me instead try to approach it from the other side. I don’t think I really have nightmares like that. You see, I’m never falling from a great height, being hunted, attacked, tortured, or humiliated. I’m never being made fun of by my peers or flubbing some presentation at work. I’m never having these moments where something great is happening and then suddenly the people I with turn into monsters. My loved ones don’t die in my dreams, they never even appear to be honest. All the things that normally happen in other people’s nightmares don’t happen in my dreams.

But, am I saying I don’t have nightmares at all? No, I think I might have them but let me describe them to you and I guess you’ll have to decide for yourself how nightmarish these dreams are. Before I do I want make clear that while I think these are my own versions of nightmares they could never be described as emotionally painful or anything. I have dreams like this maybe a couple times a year and they don’t bother me when I have them but these dreams are the closest I come to “nightmares”, in my opinion.

So, in these dreams I’m always in a public place but I’m never the focus of attention or anything like that. For example I might be walking around a college campus, a normal, everyday college campus with normal people walking around doing normal things. I’m simply walking from one class to another. Now the weird stuff comes in when I’m put in a situation that everyone else around me thinks is normal but gives me a problem. So, for example, I’ll be walking up some stairs and for some reason the ceiling of the stairwell starts to get really low, like, I have to take off my backpack to squeeze through the ample but confusing gap. The gap never snaps shut on me. I never get stuck. I just approach it, don’t understand it, and look around to see everyone else being slightly inconvenienced by my hesitation. Then I go through and I just try to finish my walk to class without worrying too much about that one thing that was obviously really weird to me but normal to everyone else.

Another example might be that I have to use the restroom but the restroom is weird. There’s no blood flowing from the walls or serial killers anywhere. I don’t walk in and suddenly everyone else stares at me the whole time. It’s just that the bathroom is a little weird. Maybe the bathroom is really big with lots of stalls, or the little divider walls between urinals are in weird positions, or there’s some weird kind of fancy urinal I’ve never seen before and everyone else is using normally. I just kind of awkwardly try to suss my way through whatever quirky thing is going on, take care of my business and leave.

These are the closest things to nightmares I have. I mean, i think the meaning of them is pretty obvious. It’s a common experience for me to see the world around me in a way that everyone else doesn’t see. It’s also very common, and honestly troubling, for the thing alone notice to make next to no sense to me. There are many aspects of society and life that feel off putting and wrong to me that everyone else just seem completely accustomed to. These moments make me feel abnormal but they also give me a little bit of hopelessness or confusion because I feel like if I turned to the person next to me and said, “Hey, this stairwell is really weird right?” they would just look at me as if I was the only weird thing around.

So, there’s no real question about what these dreams mean or why I might have them. The question is, are these nightmares? I mean, no matter how weird the situation is nothing actually “bad” ever happens. Nobody dies, I don’t get yelled at, there’s a happy lack of centipede-dog hybrids scuttling on walls. Do these fit into the classification of nightmare? Or, maybe some other classification.

The theory I’m currently choosing is that the “bad” things happening in the dream are that I’m the only one that notices. I’m the kind of person that isn’t very scared of getting hit by a car, or sharks, or killer clowns or something like that. My fears in my life typically stem from what I fear for others and my biggest fear for others is that they’ve normalized in their lives something that, if looked at objectively, or even just anew, would be obvious as unhealthy or bad.

Maybe, what I’m most afraid of is that there are people who are so normalized to something obviously terrible or idiotic that if I was ever to turn to them and say, “Hey, why are you doing that? Why do you care about that? Why is no one doing something about this thing?” they would simply look back at me with a complete lack of understanding of what I was talking about. At best they would just walk on due to apathy. I mean at least if they’re apathetic it makes sense for them to just not look at what I see.

At worst they start to try to help me, as if I’m the one who needs to hear, “Why do you think this way?” I mean, that would mean they’re trying to do what makes sense, they’re trying to look at things objectively the way I think I am. Apathy towards the truth is easy to deal with and even easier to understand but full belief and rationalization of what’s false is only a half step away from conflict, especially in our day and age where being incorrect is seen as a weakness or a failure. That type of encounter takes some small amount of hope away from me as it reinforces the sheer scope of people’s distance from the truth.

Maybe the much more important possibility for why that conflict scares me is because it means that people being completely incorrect in their concept of the truth is just a normal thing and the more normal it is then the more possible it is for me to be one of those people. After all, I’m a human being just like everyone else and if I’m the only one seeing the world in a certain way then, from the all powerful Empirical Perspective, I’m the one that’s wrong. Now, I’m well aware that the empirical truth is significantly over praised in today’s world. I’m not as worried as I might make it sound that I’m the one that’s wrong but it still might be my biggest fear.

Or maybe the truth isn’t that it’s my biggest fear. Optimistically, there’s a chance it’s just my only fear.

Featured

The Values of Commercials

Everyone knows that commercials on TV are a bajillion dollar industry and, at the same time, the Anti-Commercial industry has been doing the lords work, and profitable work, to keep pace. What do I mean by “Anti-Commercial” industry? I guess the real start, as far as I can tell, of Anti-Commercial was TiVo. For the low, low price of simply waiting a little bit of time before watching your favorite show you could skip through the commercials. This war, one of millions of Industry Wars taking place constantly all around us, has grown and with it so to has grown its impact.

However, this article (is it pretentious for me to call my own blog post an article?) is not about the details of that war or about who’s side I’m on. The most common position to have on commercials is that, at any time that isn’t the Super Bowl, commercials range from mild inconvenience to cause of considerable frustration, according to each person’s preferences. Honestly, I don’t care much either way. I’ve got AdBlock on my web browser and I’m not ashamed of it but this article is about what exactly I’ve gained from commercials. First, let’s get the minor gains out of the way. These are real benefits to be sure but not close to The Big Two.

  • Commercials keep me up to date on how technology is advancing
  • They give me a general idea of the current fashion trends
  • They let me know exactly how outdated my phone is, the more the better
  • They introduce me to new and popular music quite often
  • They keep me up to date on movies coming out soon

The first of the large benefits isn’t to hard to understand. You see, commercials are specifically designed to be appealing to as many people as possible. That much is obvious to everyone; if you’re trying to sell as many units as possible try to be appealing to as many people as possible. This goal is why Disney movies feel more like big commercials than other movies do. They’re top priority is selling units, in this case tickets, and therefore anything in the movie that could possibly be unappealing to anyone, which is always alot of things, is removed. But, Disney movies alone are just one company selling one product. The beauty of regular commercials is that they come from a bajillion of companies selling a bajillion products.

The realization to make here is that because of this goal to appeal to the maximum combined with the shear multitude and variety of products that leave no part of society untargeted you end up with a shockingly educational result. If someone from the future wanted to study our society, it’s values, how those values change over time, and how those values are expressed, I would say that watching our commercials is a great way of doing so. Obviously, you’d have to be able to separate the intention of the commercial from the contextual value of its contents but if you can do that you can learn alot.

Let me give you an example. Let’s say there’s a commercial for a toy, or diapers, or a vacuum, or any commercial where there might be parents in the commercial. The commercial begins with a crying baby and while the mom is off screen everyone else in the family looks pissed at each other because they can’t focus on whatever they’re doing. The husband is trying to do taxes or something and the other kids are doing homework or playing but the baby is just won’t shut up. Then the mom appears on screen heroically and changes its diaper, the baby stops crying and everyone’s happy and the mom and dad warmly hug each other. Diaper brand’s name appears and it ends.

Ok, now, what do you think that family looks like? Well, they’re white, that’s for damn sure. They look upper middle class with a suburban house. They’re clearly husband and wife, and probably have another kid or two in the background. The interior of the house is just the right amount of nice looking. You want the kitchen to look the way all the suburban moms watching the commercial would realistically want their own kitchen to look if they redid it. The other kids are probably a cute little blonde 5 year old and a slightly older boy who looks like a child version of the red power ranger. The wife is attractive with a modest hair style, not too attractive as to be resented but attractive enough to be just a tiny bit envied. The husband is more typical looking for a suburban dad. Is there anything else? Oh they might have a dog, probably a Labrador. We’ve all seen commercials that are basically exactly like this.

Now, let’s describe a diaper commercial for 2021 and see if maybe the differences could reflect the change in society, or at least what massive corporations think about how society has changed. We open on a dad who is already changing his kid’s diaper, he’s making some slightly comical faces to show that he’s focused and that he’s tackling this intimidating task with pride. The baby girl is so impressed that it just lies there and adorably watches daddy get the job done. Dad finishes with a proud look on his face, picks up his happy baby, as he holds her and smiles his spouse walks in from work and is happy to see that dad has everything under control. The brand name appears as they kiss and smile and it ends.

Now, what does this family look like? Well, they’re probably African-American, that’s for sure. It looks like they’re living in a relatively nice city apartment, probably painted walls rather than trendy exposed brick. The dad is “manly” looking in that he works out and looks mature. Probably not any other kids in the background. The spouse who comes home is definitely coming home from work and could be a man or woman. If it’s a man he’s probably not African-American himself. If it’s a woman she’s definitely African-American and she’s wearing obvious business attire that is also smartly fashionable. Is that it? No pets, no other kids, the commercial started mid diaper change… I guess that’s it.

It’s already blatantly obvious how different both commercials are and, at least in my opinion, how they represent broader changes in the values and ideologies of our society. To go over all of them would take too long; race, gender, sexuality, type of home, and gender roles are all different in obvious ways. Just as an example, in the 90’s commercial is not just that mom is the one that changes the diaper, but also that the rest of the family does nothing about the crying baby even though they’re all in the living room. They’re upset that mom isn’t doing what she’s supposed to. It’s mom’s job to make sure the family is comfortable. In the 2021 commercial it’s a man changing the diaper and, at least from our perspective, no hesitation about him doing it. The wife is apparently the bread winner and when she gets home from work she’s happy with her husband.

I think I’ve sufficiently shown how commercials can be educational on the topic of societal norms and ideals. I hear you ask the next question though. You ask, “Why exactly are commercials doing such a good job at this?” Well, that brings me to the main point in this article (again that feels lame). You see, these companies are all attempting the same thing. They are trying their darndest to emotionally manipulate you and this fact is the source of the greatest value commercials offer us.

If your capable, and willing, commercials can do a fantastic job of teaching you so much about emotional manipulation. Honestly, I feel like all the attention I paid to commercials growing up have actually provided substantial return on investment. I’m not gonna sit here and praise myself for being a savvy investor since my A.D.D. kinda forced me to pay attention but I’ve reaped the rewards all the same. I can’t imagine a better course on how to recognize, interpret, and subsequently resist the strategies institutions use to emotionally manipulate us than the television commercial. Let’s take the same two commercials we used to show social norm changes and see how they emotionally manipulate us. To be clear, I don’t think the 90’s commercial manipulates more and I’m not trying to make a statement about the ethics of these commercials. That’s a topic for another time.

First the 90’s commercial. The corporation is making a mistake here and limiting themselves with the idea that the only person worth advertising to is Mothers so there’s not much here in the way of manipulation of the father or anyone else. The first thing they show is something all mothers have experienced and that all mothers wish to not experience. They show an unhappy family and play one of the most emotionally impactful sounds in existence, a crying baby. Mom’s everywhere are already subconsciously looking for a solution. In walks the commercial mom and she’s everything your basic suburban mom wants to relate to; she’s attractive, taking action, solving this relatable problem, she’s even needed, albeit in kind of an unhealthy way. She picks up her crying baby and solves the problem as only a really good mother like this one can, by using this particular brand of diaper. With ease she does her job and now not only is the baby quiet but her kids are happier, better able to do homework, and her husband is suddenly affectionate and physical.

The 90’s commercial is saying, “You guys all have this problem! Well, look at this lady! Not only does she have the life you want, the kitchen you as a woman invariably want, but she’s also an expert at pleasing her family. Don’t you want to be her? Let’s see how the woman you could be does the job of being a mom. Oh my goodness, that was incredible! By using our product ALL of her problems have been solved, not just the baby! Don’t you want to be like this woman? Her kids are happy and well behaved. Her husband shows affection. She has no problems. Everyone loves her. If you use our product everyone will love you.” It’s not even hard to see the emotional manipulation and if you can see something you can understand it and to understand it is to have resistance to it.

What about the 2021 commercial? This commercial is saying something very different but still manipulative. It’s saying, “Hey fellas! Are you intimidated by, or bad at, the task of changing diapers? Are you tired looking incapable in front of your spouse? We believe in you! You see this big black guy who’s healthier than you, stronger than you, probably has a bigger penis than you and, because of all those things, is more manly than you are? He’s doing a great job! A real man who’s hot and cool doesn’t let something like changing a diaper defeat him! Hey ladies! Our diapers easy enough for even your husband to use. That’s right buy from us and your husband won’t be so lazy any more. More importantly than that though, we respect you and understand you. Even if you aren’t the one bringing home the bacon we know that mom’s are the real bread winners of any family. Not only is our product great, but we aren’t one of those faceless mega corporations that don’t care about you at all. We practically are you! We love you!”

Am I exaggerating these things? Personally, I really believe that I’m not but I also don’t take that much issue with it. Even if I am exaggerating my main point remains made. Commercials are a fantastic teaching tool in how to spot the ways corporations try to emotionally manipulate you and I’m thankful that I paid enough attention to them to learn something, to become immune to them, to realize what was going on and to use that information to improve my ability to spot, and resist all sources of emotional manipulation.

Does this mean I’m rooting for Commercials to win the war vs Anti-Commercial? No, but I think this is an interesting opportunity to show how even mundane and annoying things can be used as tools to learn from. As I apply this amount of examination to everything, not just commercials, I find that nothing is mundane or even truly annoying.

I’ll leave you with the worst commercial I’ve ever seen. This is the most disgustingly emotionally manipulative commercial I’m aware of. This commercial disgusts me.

Featured

Book Club: The Mint; 1:1-4

Last night I read 4 “chapters” of The Mint by T.E. Lawrence. I put chapters in quotes because those 4 sections amount to only about 8 total pages of reading. It’s obvious to me that this book is going to be fascinating both in subject and in diction. I honestly don’t know how well this book might translate into a one of my “Book Club” blog posts or even if trying to would lessen the experience of reading it. Content may be the product of the internet but if the most engaging way for me to read a book is to simply read it myself then I should obviously forgo the potential content of clickable blog posts in pursuit of that better experience. I don’t just say that because my blog posts get zero clicks anyway so I might as well look cool in a sort of, “Well, as long as I’m hooked I might as well volunteer” attitude. Basically what I’m trying to say is that I might not post this that I am currently typing out but I’ll instead just use this to write down anything I feel like and afterwards I’ll see how it looks and if I can make anything out of it.

Is there anything I want to say about the first 4 sections? First off, I gotta figure out a better way to refer to each section rather than switching awkwardly from “chapter” to “section”. So, the book itself is divided into “Parts” which are further divided into separately numbered and titled chapters. I guess I’ll format references this way, “Part: chapter number; and then possibly chapter title”. Don’t ask me why I’m using that punctuation because I don’t have a good answer and I don’t care. Is that how the they do bible versus? Like, 3:6?

Anyway, the three things that stood out in 1:1-4, were the writing itself, as in the word choice and sentence structures, the simply unique nature of the book’s existence as something that is unlike all others, and my own new experience of reading someone else’s diary.

When I say diary I don’t mean to imply that this book’s purpose was simply a diary. Clearly it’s more than that but I don’t read much non-fiction. I can’t remember ever reading an autobiographical work or even a regular non-fiction book. Have I ever even read a legit book on history? Basically it’s weird for me to know that the things being described in words actually happened and that the characters are real people that the author has zero control over. I mean, they’re obviously being represented by Lawrence so he does have some control but not in the way a Director has control over how a famous historical figure, such as Lawrence himself, is portrayed, the words he chooses and the overall personality of each character. It’s new for me to read dialogue without considering why the author is making each word choice for each character.

The second of the three “things” actually compounds on top of the newness of the third. This book is incredibly unusual. While T.E. Lawrence himself is obviously unusual the book itself is essentially impossible to categorize or equate with. Maybe I could best show this with a list, a list of aspects of rarity.

  • The author is a hugely famous war hero of WW1.
  • Those heroics were extremely different from typical war heroics.
  • The man himself was extremely unique. A quote on the cover is from Winston Churchill, “I deem him one of the greatest beings alive… we shall never see his like again.”
  • This war hero decided to re-enlist, twice, into the military under fake name with an idea to turn his experiences and journals into some sort of novel. That’s a premise I’ve never seen the like of even in fiction.
  • So far, it seems the experiences are not edited into some sort of narrative directed towards a goal but rather the intermittent journaling of whatever this unusual man felt was important to write down. That’s way I referred to it as a diary rather than a book because it’s more of a direct look into the soul of the man himself without the potentially opaque window of the novel.
  • The author died before being completely “finished” with the work and even before his death he wanted the book to not be released until 1950.

These two “things” compound because this isn’t the “Commentarii de Bello Gallico” or some other autobiographical or non-fiction work that is meant to describe events so that people know what happened or, maybe in Caesar’s case, what the author want’s us to think happened. The Mint is more of a mix between expose, poetry, self-exploration, journal, and uncertainty. Obviously, whatever kind of book it is, it is unusual to at least me.

The first of the three “things” that stand out is the writing itself. The way Lawrence writes is… well… I guess the word I would use is “free”. There seems to be no notion of adherence to any normal writing rulesets. This type of writing, regardless of my complete inability to define the ‘type’, is exactly the type that appeals to me. Really, I think “Free” might be the best word for it. Not free in the sense that it is without control but free in the sense that brilliant, extensive, and clear amount of control is all coming from the authors commitment to only his desire to express. Even a direct rebellion against the established rules of expression is still entirely slave to those rules. This type of writing feels free in that rebellion or adherence or conformity are hardly even considered.

I guess I wrote a whole blog post instead of just reading the freaking book.

Featured

Book Club: Plato’s Republic: Book 4: Part 1 of 2

At the end of Book 3 Socrates had just finished describing the overall, macro level, organizational systems of his Hypothetical “Perfect” City. The reason I’m preemptively separating this section into 2 parts is because I think Book 4 has alot to say. I think that’s fine since I basically broke down Book 3 into multiple parts as well since I felt like I needed to clarify and explain some things.

To recap, and probably over simplify, he has the citizenry separated into three groups; the Rulers, the Guardians, and the regular citizenry. The Rulers haven’t been discussed much but their essentially the “best” of men in that they are honest, wise, and care about the well being of the city over everything else. The Guardians seem to be a mix of the Military, Police, and generally people in charge of watching over and maintaining the health of society. I’m not sure if Socrates is including teachers into the Guardian group but he clearly places great importance on education. Lastly, the Citizenry are the only people allowed to hold private property at all and should be encouraged to pursuing a single craft that they are best suited to.

So, Book 4 begins with Adeimantus, the man Socrates is talking to, asking how these Guardians could possibly be happy in this city if they aren’t allowed to own anything at all, even the homes the sleep in. As a side note, I want to point out how smart this format for writing is. Instead of your typical philosophical text of just positing concepts for 1,000 pages Plato has given himself so many tools to work with. Multiple characters allow for Plato to let the conversation go the way he wants it but also have it feel organic. Plato wants to talk about how the Guardians can be happy since he thinks that the argument his society would use to poke a whole in the concept. To do this he just has Adeimantus bring it up. By having a character represent the society Plato is critiquing he can give that critique a voice to get behind while still having total control of both sides of the argument. On top of that, as Adeimantus is convinced of things it gives us, or at least me, more of a feeling of being convinced myself.

Anyway, the question is, how can the Guardians be happy without material gains. Socrates, as he often does, first reinforces Adeimantus’ argument to make himself seem more objective and honest before leading the argument towards his own counter point. Socrates quickly clarifies that if the Guardians, or any group at all, is unhappy then this city is clearly not a just city and is therefore a failure. With this statement he accomplishes three things.

First, he makes sure that the goal of the conversation is focused on finding “justice”. Second, he implants into Adeimantus’ head the idea that a the best way to find a flaw in this hypothetical is to find a place where justice is missing. This actually works to convince Adeimantus towards Socrates side of the argument since the original point Socrates was trying to argue against was the idea that Justice is not worth striving for. By setting up a lack of justice as the potential target for his debate opponent to attack he is subtly getting Adeimantus into the state of mind that Justice is the true sign of quality.

Lastly, Socrates is subtly criticizing any real city that ignores the happiness of any citizen or group of citizens. A city where any part is being exploited or ignored is an unjust city where the ruling class is failing. These are the kinds of criticisms that led the the real life ruling class to sentence Socrates to death.

Socrates argues that if you were to give a farmer or craftsman material wealth it would clearly lead to a drop in productivity and work quality from that farmer. It takes away incentive he might have to do work, especially quality work, and distracts him with other pursuits that are detrimental to his craft. Adeimantus agrees with that idea. Socrates then says that while having shoddy farmers is not that big a deal for the city having shoddy Guardians would be terrible and because of this the kind of material happiness Adeimantus describes is clearly not a healthy thing for anyone in the city. His exact quote is, “But surely you see that men who are not guardians of the laws and the city, but seem to be, utterly destroy an entire city.”

After discussing how wealth has a negative effect on people he makes the same claim about poverty. If a craftsmen is too poor to afford tools then not only will his work drop in quality but he will also make worse craftsmen of anyone he teaches. For these reasons one of the primary tasks of the Guardians will be to make sure that both wealth and poverty never exist in the city. Oddly, when Socrates is listing the negative effects of wealth and poverty, such as idleness and illiberality, he lists as both being sources of “innovation”. Innovation is the only product the two have in common and it feels unintuitive to list it as a negative. I get the feeling innovation will be discussed in more detail later.

Adeimantus’ next question is about how this City, which I will refer to from now on as The Republic, can possibly defend itself or win wars if it has no money. Socrates once again uses his ideas on the negative effects of money to counter Adeimantus’ criticism. Because wealth leads to complacency then the Guardians would be able to defeat a wealthy army twice its size. There would also be no incentive for a nation to declare war on The Republic . If wealth is universally frowned upon, then The Republic wouldn’t antagonize any neighbors and wouldn’t have enough wealth to be worth going to war with, especially since the Guardians would be so formidable in battle. In fact, The Republic would actually be flush with potential allies. Any ally would get the lion’s share of the loot while fighting alongside the Guardians who are the most powerful warriors.

Another reason The Republic needn’t worry about other cities is that other cities are not actually cities at all. This is an interesting point he makes. He basically claims that any real city is actually a multitude of much smaller cities that are regularly at war with each other. He says that two of these cities that exist, and are constantly at war, are the rich and the poor and even within those groups there are many cities fighting between each other. Socrates argues that The Republic, no matter how small it is, will always be the largest of all cities because no other city is actually a fully unified and therefore aren’t even cities at all.

I like this argument in particular. It eloquently states one of the major weaknesses of an unified city and points the blame mostly on the society’s obsession with wealth and power. A sociological emphasis on competition, or even just a lack of equality in the city, creates a system where the people compete for a goal, that goal being wealth and power, that in actuality is unhealthy for them in every way.

Socrates adds to the Guardian’s growing list of tasks by assigning them the duty of ensuring that the Republic never grows past a particular boundary. He defines that boundary as “Up to that point in its growth at which it’s willing to be one, let it grow, and not beyond.” If the Republic grows too large then it will start to divide itself into more, smaller cities and once that start’s than the Republic is basically already dead. Adeimantus then points out that the Guardians are being given quite alot of tasks. Socrates argues that all of these tasks that seem separate from each other are, in reality, easy to do as long as the Guardians keep vigilant guard of the truly “sufficient” task, which is education and rearing. Sufficient is a word Socrates seems to choose very carefully here. The actual quote is this, “if they guard the one great- or, rather than great, sufficient- thing.”

This is just one of many moments that very clearly show how important Socrates believes education is. He consistently makes it clear that all the good aspects of this Republic can only exist with quality education and rearing. If we could provide an entire population with a truly good, Capital-E, Education, in every aspect of life, in “gymnastics” and “music”, in ethics and intuition, then the people will know the obvious truths that so many people fail to see. Those truths being that kindness, compassion, respect, etc, or in other words, leading a life of “Justice” is the most rewarding choice. As Socrates puts it, “The regime, once well started, will roll on like a circle in its growth. For sound rearing and education, when they are preserved, produce good natures; and sound natures, in their turn receiving such an education, grow up still better than those before them.” Or, another quote just on the next page “The starting point of a man’s education sets the course of what follows.”

Socrates reinforces that belief in the next section when he talks about other matters of society. Socrates states that putting social norms into laws is the wrong, and counter-productive, choice. By laws of social norms I mean in the sense that certain types of behaviors, or styles or things like clothing, cloud be outlawed. Socrates claims that a good education leads to the people naturally finding what is good. Even rules in matters of business such as contracts, legal complaints, appointment of judges, assessment of taxes, or anything else like that, should not be put into law because if the people are raised to be truly just, in a society that puts no value on wealth, they will naturally find the correct courses themselves.

Now, obviously achieving that sort of universal quality Education isn’t something that’s really possible, in the opinion of most people, but I think Socrates understands that simply stating the power potential in education has value in itself. A discussion about the possibility of that type of education is for another time and its mentions in this work are, to me, more there to communicate education’s importance, influence, and value. Socrates isn’t actually making any attempts to clearly describe that perfect education. He doesn’t deign to have that knowledge. He just says things like, a fine a lawful beginning leads to more law-abiding adults, or that competition over money is for children be normalized to.

This post is already pretty long and is only covering half the Book so this’ll be the last section I go over. Do you remember in one of the previous books where Socrates made some less respectable claims about how people should respond to disease? He talked about someone suffering from a disease of the kind that if they wanted to fight it it would consume the rest of their lives while never actually improving their lives. He argued that instead of giving up your life to instead fight that disease you should try to live your true life as best you can while you can. This may sound odd but I think part of why this might make sense to Socrates is that he believes that people shouldn’t live their lives in fear of death.

Here in Book 4 Socrates brings up that same example to describe the type of people who rule societies in the real world who constantly try to find the perfect set of laws. Adeimantus says, “They’ll spend their entire lives continually setting down many such rules and correcting them, thinking they’ll get hold of what’s best.”

Socrates responds, “Such men will live like those who are sick but, due to licentiousness, aren’t willing to quit their worthless way of life. For all their treatment, they get nowhere, except, of course, to make their illnesses more complicated and bigger, always hoping that if someone would just recommend a drug, they will be- thanks to it- healthy. Isn’t it charming in them that they believe the greatest enemy of all is the man who tells the truth- namely, that until one gives up drinking, stuffing oneself, sex, and idleness, there will be no help for one in drugs, cutting, charms or pendants.”

To me, and this is just one interpretation, it feels like Socrates brought up that idea of the sick man earlier on with the same goal in mind that he had when he supported Adeimantus’ argument earlier on in the Book. The type of people who believe in Adeimantus’ darker idea of society and the type of people who should be respected will agree with Socrates statement and grasp on to that metaphor. Socrates then expertly uses that exact example they liked to then lead them to a state of mind to agree with a more radical claim that they might have more violently disagreed with.

Regardless of your opinion on Socrates’ philosophical ideas reading this book is still valuable in that it is absolutely expert use of rhetoric that we can learn from.

Josh: 2022: Day 9

Today, I kinda want to make a list of the fictional characters that I relate to most. Anytime anyone interacts with a story they naturally gravitate towards some characters more than others. This gravitation can be for any number of reasons, not necessarily personally relating to the characters, but, it is a reason and I’m interested to more thoroughly consider, off the top of my head since I haven’t done this before, a list of characters that I do find myself relating to. This list isn’t in any order at all and, as I’ve said, is off the top of my head, for the most part. If I have some reasonings, thought out enough, or succinct enough, to be able to say, I’ll say them.

Truman Burbank, The Truman Show. Truman is the hero of the story. This is NOT why I relate to him. In fact, the people around him are not portrayed as psychological symbols or representations of Truman’s inner confusion. They are human beings. The movie shows interviews with them being actors and real people. The “Wife” crosses her fingers when they get married and that’s a huge example of humanity. I possibly relate most to the paradox that he can’t seem to unravel. He knows the people around him enough to know that they are, indeed, real human beings and not evil entities, not machines. At the same time, he is acutely aware that something about them isn’t what it seems. He can feel the unreal nature of so many of the interactions he has on a day to day basis. People so rarely let their masks down and actually say, or do, what they want. That can make it difficult for a person like Truman to truly connected to the people around him.

Maria, The Sound of Music. This one isn’t so complicated to explain. I’m an educator by trade, and by nature. I’m great with kids, especially ones who have been deprived of nothing except freedom, playfulness, empathetic attentiveness, and fun, throughout their family lives. I’m apathetic about wealth and appealing to people who, due to their occupation or societal circles, have come to find sincerity to be surprisingly refreshing.

Andy Dufresne, Shawshank Redemption. Andy is a personally, fictional, hero of mine. His level of restriction is not one that I would compare my life to. It would be to far from the truth. However, it is extremely relatable, I think for lots of people, to feel like you are stuck in a System that limits your ability to act and express for arbitrary, unhealthy, ineffective, unsound, and unethical reasonings. Additionally, I relate to, but maybe cannot match, his ability to, throughout his struggles, maintain his identity and his hope.

Harold Crick, Stranger Than Fiction.

Chuckie, Good Will Hunting. Now, you may expect for me to say that either the troubled genius or the honest therapist before saying Chuckie. Who even is Chuckie? Chuckie is Will’s friend, the one who picks him up each morning. He’s Ben Affleck’s character. I think I relate to him more because I’m not a therapist. Even if I entered into the career of Therapy I don’t think I would consider myself as a Therapist. I’m me. I’m not any other title, or term. I’m me. Other people look at my life, my bank account, my career, my lack of a wife and kids, and they use that as a reason to look down on me and to discount my advice. Even Will, in the movie, discredits Chuckie’s advice because Chuckie and Will have the same shit job. I relate to Chuckie here because Will is the only one who isn’t at peace with their current place in life. Chuckie thinks it a shit job as well but he’s not pissed off or terrified of where he is, like Will is.

Captain Willard, Apocalypse Now. Let me start here by addressing the elephant in the room. I am not a soldier or a veteran of war or experienced with anything close to that level of brutality and violence. Just had to get that stipulation out of the way. I relate to Willard’s primary internal conflict: what is man? Willard, like his predecessor Marlow, is on a journey deep into the unvarnished side of human existence. He volunteers to be thrown into the deep end of our darkness and, consciously or not, foolishly or not, at least tries to understand it. I am not in that particular deep end of humanity, War, but I think people don’t realize how much of the human soul is out there, at the tips of your fingers, for free consumption. You must not avert your eyes from the darkness. People who know me might believe that I’m constantly hiding from pain. Even my own mother told me recently that like 40% of my life choices are motivated primarily by fear. People see my choices and translate them into evidence of fear. They’re wrong but I, like Willard am too busy to do the needless things necessary to convince her, or other people, that I am not afraid. I look into the hearts of darkness and light, and grey and every other color. Willard is afraid, yes, but I’m not him. I don’t relate to everything or nothing.

Ray Kinsella, Field of Dreams. The aspect of Ray that I feel most people relate to is his relationship to his father. That relationship is, by far, the focal point of the story. However, my relationship with my father is incredibly unlike Ray’s. Ray regretted running away from the relationship. It’s safe to say that I run towards. The part of Ray that I relate to is is relationship with Faith. When I say “faith” I don’t refer to the more clearly defined notions of “Christian Faith”. Ray displays faith when he hears his heart and his soul, via the narrative tools of the film, and instead of discounting them immediately, as the real people so often do, he has faith in them. I can’t tell you how much of my life was my Reasoning-Self being at odds with my Feeling-Self. It is very difficult, as a human being on Earth, surrounded by other “reasoning” Human beings, to have faith in yourself. My life, like other, was planned for me. Obviously, I had the choice to do whatever I wanted. I could have skipped college, even dropped out of high-school, and done whatever I wanted. I don’t mean that I was a slave to a plan, I mean that any other plan was heavily unsupported. Get good grades, go to college, get a job, get married, have kids, provide for my family, grow old, and then die happy. This type of control is often equated as part of the Father-Son relationship but I believe it is far more accurate to say it is part of the Human-Society relationship. In Field of Dreams, Ray’s ability to act on faith, despite his inability to explain to Society, is what I admire in him, and, one of the things I admire in myself.

Cool Hand Luke, Cool Hand Luke. This is another character who has it far more rough than I do, but again, that’s irrelevant. There is a chance that you may want to harp on that, on my lack of incredible pain. If you want to, as people often do, turn Struggle into a competition, where the person with the most struggle wins the game, is the most wise, deserves the most compassion, and earns domination over “The Conch”, then I will remind you of two things. One; Andy Dufresne, Captain Willard, and Cool Hand Luke have actually experienced far less pain than me because they aren’t actually real. Even if this was a competition, I’d win. I’d win with a gimmick technicality but you chose the game. I told from the start it was stupid, you can’t really complain if I prove myself correct. Two; I don’t care. We all have struggles in life. I make no claims of accomplishment and praise worthiness. Anyway, What I relate to about Luke is not his Poker playing skill, or his prison, or his eating ability. I relate to his unbreakable spirit. Yes, spoilers, he dies at the end of the movie, but everyone dies. Death is not a loss or a failure. The scene where Luke convinces the walking gang to finish their road work in a rush, that is the scene where Luke’s self-actualization shines brightest. It is that understanding of choice, in all moments of the present, that I admire in both he and I.

That’s my list. The only one I knew I was gonna say, before starting to write this, was Truman and Maria. I left Harold Crick without an explanation cause I got bored and didn’t feel the need to go through it.

Josh: 2022: Day 8

So I started the year off with a “Writing Every Day” streak of 1 day. This is the kind of thing where I walk myself into a corner. I know that having goals and having schedules are good. I know that if I was to actually hold myself to writing every day I’d be proud of myself. Knowing these things, I set myself up. I make some sort of rule or claim to try and quantify my level of failure / accomplishment.

For example; it’s easy to write about nothing in particular so I should be able to do that every day, at least a little. So, that will be our goal. I say “our” to myself because whenever I do this it isn’t really Me having this idea of Set Goal – Follow Through. I repeat mistakes made a million times, thinking that, eventually, I will reach a point where I can finally accomplish my Goal and then I’ll be able to trust myself or be able to be… happy, I guess.

That strategy, Goal-Follow, has NEVER worked for me. Strategies that are similar have worked in the past, sometimes, but, if analyzed deeply, I recognize that the heart of the strategies are quite different, even when the language is similar. The main reason for error, or at least my best guess, is that this strategy that have been tried on me, among plenty of other strategies, by parents and society and bosses, from birth to present, fail to embrace the reality of who I am, what I am, and what world I live in.

It happens all the time where I tell myself that I must do something the next day, or at a certain point, and when I do it right, it works. The interesting thing is that even before I get to that part of the day where I have to follow through on my commitment, even before that happens I know if I did “do it right”. I know, before it happens, that it will happen. This is not because I can predict the future. This is because… well… it’s obvious.

I want you to imagine that you are watching basketball players going for three point jump-shots over the course of a basketball game. No shot is ever exactly identical. Sometimes they step back before shooting. Sometimes, they catch a pass, from one angel or another, and they have to shoot right away, before the defender can get there. Sometimes, they are wide open and they can take as much time as they want. Sometimes, they decide to heave the ball up from the mid court logo.

Now, as you watch you start to pay more attention to the motion of their bodies as they go through the shot. You watch the ways their feet move. You take note of how much lateral momentum they had before pulling up and shooting. You feel the rhythms of their motions and their decision making. Every player is slightly different but there are some things you start to look for, some indicators of how good of a shot it is might be.

When a player is falling to the ground, off balance, and they still somehow manage to make the shot, there is a reason everyone freaks out about that. We instinctively know that when the body is off balance, it becomes more difficult to maintain the level of fine-motor control necessary to make the shot. One lesson to learn from that impressiveness is that being stable, or in-balance, is gonna increase the chances of the shot going in.

It’s incredibly easy to tell, visually, when a person is off balance but, when looking at the three point jump-shot, it can be harder to recognize the visual indicators of balance. As you watch more three pointers you start to notice some of these indicators. Obviously, there is one huge indicator that everyone notices all the time. Even a child recognizes this visual cue that suggests the quality of a shot. What is this incredibly obvious and simple Quality-Cue that am I talking about? Well here it is: Did the ball go through the hoop? This is level one of Balance recognition. From now on I will use the word “Balance” instead of quality, because I feel like it’s better. Anyway, let’s try to make it past level one, shall we? We keep watching. You’re no expert on basketball but you start to make some connections in your head. You start with the basic “key moments” of the shot.

These “key moments” can essentially be thought of like chapter breaks in a book. The whole action of the shot is all one, comprehensive piece of work but some key moments are obvious: Getting away from the defender, The Jump, The Release, and The Results. We’re still new to basketball so we don’t fully comprehend what happens in each chapter but, clearly, these are tent-pole moments in this sequence we are trying to analyze. Maybe, a pro basketball analyzer has a bunch more little chapters in between but we’re trying to start from square one here.

  • Chapter 1: Getting Open tells us how difficult of a shot this should be. We can see how many different variables that the player will need to maintain balance over. If the player is wide open and has all day we know the shot should be easy. If the player is falling over backwards when he decides to shoot, we know the shot will be hard.
  • Chapter 2: The Jump is when the player actually attempts to compensate for whatever momentums and forces that were acting on him during Chapter 1. If the player over compensates in one direction, they will not be correctly balanced when they actually make the shot. The more balanced a player in his jump, the easier Chapter 3 will be.
  • In Chapter 3: The Shot, the player makes the shot. This is his last chance to affect the ball, his last chance to compensate for any “mistakes” in his jump. If he feels that he is unbalanced slightly any way, he can try to compensate with tiny changes in the motions of his arms, hands, and fingers.
  • Chapter 4: Results is, by far, the “loudest” part of the sequence. Most people are so reliant on that simple binary source of information that they don’t even remember to read the other 3 chapters. They simply watch the game, see a player shoot, and wait, with baited breath, as the ball soars through the air. This is the most obviously hype part of basketball. You see the ball in flight and you know it will either go in or it won’t. The shooting player has done his best but that necessitates surrender. He committed to his choices, and, hopefully, trusted himself. Now, he, along with everyone else on the court, must simply wait, together, unified in anticipation, unified with a singular shared question; is it gonna go in?

These structures help us to analyze and understand the action as a whole. We can now more easily realize those Quality-Cue moments. Feeling, understanding, and using, all those moments can give us an idea, before the ball ever makes it to the basket, of what will happen.

Most people fail to see past the most obvious Moments of Information. The Results are the most obvious moment that a viewer can use for his goal. To be clear, the goal of the viewer is to be provided with emotional stimulant, to be entertained. The binary nature of this moment makes it incredibly easy to understand. People, myself included of course, have a hard time dealing with things we don’t understand.

It may not seem important, especially in watching basketball, to pay attention to all those little details in Chapters 1-3. Modern sports are, in my opinion, among the most incessantly binary parts of culture. At the end of the day, one team’s number on the left side of the “-” goes up by one and the other team’s right side number goes up by one and even the most unobservant person in the world can pretend to understand what happened and, more importantly, to know how to feel.

What was I talking about at the start of this? Oh yeah, how the strategy of Set Goal-Follow Through is ineffective for me.

This strategy is, like a team’s Win-Loss number, is extremely binary. You set some goal, arbitrarily, and as a result, all of your choices in the day, can be understood to be either “contributing”, or to not be “contributing”. In this way, you always know the truth of when to feel good, when to feel bad, and, most importantly, why.

  • No further consideration necessary.
  • No annoying discussions to be had.
  • No meddlesome questions to be asked.
  • None of that terrible thing known as confusion.

One of the most dangerous things in any society is a universally agreed upon Goal. The lack of confused questioning necessary in order to adhere to a sociologically agreed upon “goal” is far too powerful, far too infallible, far too dependable, far too irreproachable.
It becomes a religious text.
Its binary nature infects your surroundings.
You are either correctly adherent or,

You are incorrect,
Creating fear in us that love you,
Requiring guidance,
Necessitating further “lessons”,
Willing or unwilling,
For your own good,
No matter how painful,
Provided out of Love.

When I hurt you, I do it because I love you. I love you so powerfully that I’m willing to sacrifice, to sacrifice anything, to sacrifice happiness, always my own, even yours, if I must. Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. You are my life. That’s what love is.

I, pride in conviction, lay our sanities down at the foot of Mount Moriah.