Let Them Go.

 

This have I done for thee

Now what dost thou for me?

 

And do you feel down on yourself

For being unable to see

Into the heart of Elliott’s pain?

 

Nine Inch Nails running through his elbow veins

 

And was Kurt’s sacrifice in vain?

 

Only the ones who have it worst

Complain.

 

But don’t you know?

Not all is lost

The holocaust survivors say

 

It never matters what the cost

It will get to you anyway

 

However small the hole,

The gas will get through to you, so know

 

You suffer just as much as they

 

So for the Christ Within You,

Let them go.

I'm siding with the galaxy

If you admit something
embarassing, I'll admit
something embarassing.

My heart has been
bleeding
since the day it started
beating

If you want to know what
dogs me
it is my own sincerity

Trying to keep an open eye
to the Universe's clarity

If you want to know what
scares me
it's the unbearable burden
wondering, 'Are they aware
of me?'
and never being certain.

And if you want to know the cold
hard truth
I'll parrot your own frankness
I can't bear it should I ever see
the world in your own blankness.

For a mind that's been refined
Like a lens in the galaxy
seems never to mind
when the brain commits a fallacy

If you want to know how callously
I overestimate this Universe
in every human gesture
Everything
as though it's been rehearsed.

If you want me to make clear
The girl that sat down right
beside me
with only you so near
it seemed to coincide so

that I wondered if you had been so
sincere

as to inform her
-- in passing, as she'd come
to me in passing --
I had feelings for her.

But that I would admit
only embarassedly
and in verse
that seems, as people seem
to agree
Much better and not worse

than writing a letter
for a poem even as a lie
is so rehearsed that all the words
together
could make anybody cry.

How many see a child is harmed
but wouldn't think to change it?
Despite being wholly alarmed
And yet I find it strange that

To be immersed in such a fantasy
and of such adolescent zeal
although the very galaxy
seemed to make it appear so real

It is embarassing only
this life that we've selected

Although we sing at night, lonely
we never once respect it.

At least sing for the dying child
it is no more or less a fallacy
Although the sentiment seems wild,
I'm siding with the galaxy.


And also I'll say in post-scriptum
Though I originally thought
that I had fallen victim
to your optimistic plot

Although I'm standing by my theory
I will append that it was flawed
Although you, too were sitting near me
All the credit goes to God.

Science overstepping itself.

Forcing anything when it comes to emotional matters is effectively corrupting the evidence.

I am not opposed to science in favour of feeling, but one would not measure density with a microscope, so why measure feeling with logic?

It is unscientific.

If you are staging an experiment, you would measure each variable separately.

Logic where logical matters are concerned. Emotion where emotional matters are concerned.

One does not learn, scientifically, about the dark side of the moon by only noting the light side's characteristics.

Psychology is the study of subjectivity. Anecdotal evidence is overwhelming; objective evidence is secondary.

Where is the line between science and pseudo-science? Is it the line between what we know and do not?

In observing a phenomenon, we alter it. This, unless I am mistaken, was Heisenberg's finding.

Careful not to murder the object you are studying by pressing the probe too hard.

Soft facts are as much a constant in nature as hard facts. Where humanity is concerned, it is a matter of knowing when to stop.

dm.A.A.

Y&*Y&*(Y&*Y&*)

1. Sometimes it's a matter of knowing when to stop; others of knowing when to keep going.
2. Don't be afraid to make a mistake. Keep making them!
3. The wise man can pick the right blade of grass in a field because he doesn't care. The unwise will try too hard to because he does care.

Dmitry's Modern Taoist wisdom. Night.

Freud fucked us all in the ass. True story.

post scriptum I've surmised the Electra complex does not exist. Freud just used to to compensate the Oedipus complex, which he based his theory of upon one dream that he had of his mother, involving parrots. Since there was a German slang term for a blowjob that involved parrots, he presumed that he had been attracted to his mother, who was dead. Yes, we tend to develop attachents for our parents and to project them onto lovers, but this does not mean we are attracted to our parents.


dm.A.A.

Mitchell Freedman and Stephen Foster.

Although Mitchell Freedman asserts the necessity of education and information in writing a novel, I will assert that the most inspiring art by my personal standards is the artless kind: Simple, mostly ripped off, but with its characteristic quirks.

This may not make for a good living, but it is necessary, I think, for every true artist to at one point jump off the cliff upon which the fortification that is "public opinion" is built, loving the fall.

Stephen Foster died broke, John told me today. The lead singer of the Melvins tried once, for comedic effect, to buy a mansion of off street cred, using a lunchbox that contained a newspaper clipping citing Kurt Cobain's indebtedness to the Melvins. He failed with spectacular miserableness.

Tom Waits made a living off of being a "bum", or at least impersonating one for decades.

I admire poverty like the Taoists did. The scholar learns something new everyday; the wise man unlearns something.

And Kurt ripped off a lot of bands. Including Stephen Foster.

dm.A.A.

?((((0*0))))+

The ego does not exist. (complete.)

It is not uncommon for people who become involved in mysticism, usually imported from a culture foreign to them or made readily accessible through the advent of drugs, to speak of this vague ontological entity regarded as the “ego”.

What is it?

From my experience, it is not so much a physical phenomenon as a catch-all phrase including but not limited to the following definitions:

1. Conscious intent.
2. The sum of one’s conscious processes.
3. Self-image.
4. Aggression.
5. Ignorance.
6. Fear.
7. Social tact.
8. Restraint.
9. Ambition. (See 1)
10. Integrity.
11. Introversion.
12. Extraversion.
13. Self-respect.

Clearly, the phrase may be dispensed with entirely, and social communication would not suffer. Not only are these and others such disparate definitions that one phrase should be absurd and inadequate to apply to them, but also the definitions themselves stand: If I want to call someone ignorant, fearful, or well-mannered, I can use the words “ignorant”, “fearful”, or “well-mannered”. I need not reference some spooky, non-existent entity to criticize the other’s action, delivering the utmost ad hominem and personal attack, summing that individual in that moment up by my “informed” disapproval of his/her action or thought.

“Conscious intent” seems the most appropriate definition, at any rate. In this regard, should we use “ego” in that context solely, it should represent connotatively a Glorious phenomenon: Free Will, fortitude, and the temerity to break with tradition and find one’s own voice in the midst of a crowd of imitation. It is, at its most precious and most vulnerable, the focus of attention upon something so particular to one’s own being that it almost becomes one’s duty to the world, should one Choose it, to bring it to fruition.

Yes, we are all beautiful and unique snow flakes. Some might say this marginalizes the point of being beautiful and unique. Others agree with me that we are all unique, but that few of us realize it. Many of them, however, seem to feel that, should we all become Aware of ourselves as snow flakes and choose to make our unique patterns shine, we should lead to even greater trouble.

But I disagree, simply by virtue of my introversion.

Everyone I meet is inescapably a strange and stunning specimen, if you will. Not one person does not surprise me, even if it is by being totally ordinary. I have no problems with individuals, for I encounter each one at a time, and at the end of the day individual #1 is myself.

This seems to invert the prejudice that introverts are more self-absorbed (definition #14) than extraverts. We are concerned for people’s growth, and find no threat to our Worldview (or to the world) in people following their bliss and taking a Hero’s (ie Ego’s) Journey.

I compel all I encounter, gently or hardly, to take that long and painful road.

At the end of the day, I stand by my feeling that the word “ego” is merely one used, predominantly in a spirit of laziness and resolve in one’s own pompousness (#15), to attack those whose motives one does not fully understand, but may claim to. Disapproving of others’ motives is often misguided, if it involves the necessity to attack the person personally.

Conversely, godliness is attributed towards those whose motives we overestimate, to whom we attribute reverence that is not reciprocated. Cultists are good at this. They also tend to condemn people who do not agree with them as “egoists”. They do not reciprocate love, respect, or compassion. They are parasites.

But God is that entity which one experiences whilst encountering another human being. It is the feeling of freshness and overwhelming insight that novelty and true listening always yield, and it cannot be emulated, despite having the potential to be perfected.

And God is always between two people in a reciprocal way. If you see God, (as an experience, not a belief or a personified diety towards which one attributes the experience) in another, then, given that it is in fact God and not Godliness, you can bet, as difficult as it may be to believe, that the other is seeing God, not ego, in the unique and novel entity that you are.

There is nothing that is inherently egotistical. There are intelligent things and ignorant things, but all things are better understood than misunderstood.

Dm.A.A.