Overheard at Trader Joe’s October 26, 2008
Posted by admin in : Discourse, Irrelevant, Lies, Narrative, Psycho/Spirit , 3commentsSo I’m in line at checkout. A vaguely foreign looking, fashionably dressed lady is checking out. Clerk is energetic, friendly, dutifully cheerful young man, making chit chat with the customers as he works. He notices her unusual blouse, and says, “I like your blouse.”
She says, “Thank you. It’s my design. I am fashion-designer.” Her accent confirms she’s foreign, but I could not identify it, perhaps Russian, but she’s dark, could be eastern European or Turkish, Iranian or something else. I look more closely at the blouse and it’s got silk-screened images of a photograph of the very woman’s own face, cut and arranged into an abstract geometric design.
Clerk continues admiring the design as he bags, and them says, “Well, it looks like you’re doing what you should be doing.”
To which the woman replies. “I am. Are you?”
The clerk is obviously taken aback, and continues bagging her groceries as he searches for a reply, which he eventually comes up with, a half-hearted, insincere-sounding, “I hope not.”
The woman offers a vague sounding inspirational message about keeping your dreams.
She leaves and the clerk greets me. I want to say, “Jeez, you try to give someone a compliment.” But I don’t say that and just say the minimum, “How are you?” “I’m fine”. “Thank you.” And I leave.
Does her reply sound as unkind to other people as it did to me? Would my offer of solidarity to the clerk have been welcome, or reinforced a message that he should feel bad about what he is doing? What kind of person takes a compliment like that and turns it around to insult the complimenter? Why should a fashion-designer feel like her accomplishments need to be recognized as greater than those of the shop clerk? A fashion-designer can be an awful, unhappy person, and a young grocery store clerk can be a happy, cool, spiritually evolved person. Why the need to define one’s self and others by their occupation? What other accomplishments has the clerk made in his young life that could easily be seem as remarkable that totally transcend his occupation?
I know there is a cultural aspect to this that I have not quite figured out. Maybe the woman is conscious of her class and was somehow offended by the person of lower social status presuming to be so forward and friendly (even though that’s typical of this culture, and especially characteristic of this store). Maybe her desire to encourage the young man was totally sincere if awkward, and only came across as an insult as a translation loss.
I recognized this pattern of conversational exchange. I have been on the wrong end of it before.
I remember once chatting with an old high-school friend who was enjoying some success in a local theatrical pursuit. I said how impressed I was, and how glad I was for her and congratulations and all that. Her response was, “What about you? Are you writing? Have you published? What’s stopping you? I am a success and so can you…” In other words, for her to be successful, it meant I had to be viewed as a failure. Words of encouragement which were rooted in one-upmanship. I had not said anything about feeling like a failure or that I was somehow in need of such encouragement. It was gloating.
I also remember another time when I was friendly with a group of born again Christians in college. They seemed so beautiful, happy. Their apartment was so warm and comfortable. They were smart and like to laugh, and they made me laugh which was why I liked them. I felt like was being all open minded. I was kind of a punk in those days — but even though my taste in music was the Clash I was open-minded enough to express appreciation for my hosts soft, easy, jazzy, Christian instrumental stuff (I think it was called “Fresh Air” but I’m having trouble finding info on it, maybe this). Point being I was trying to be a good guest by complimenting them on the stuff of their lives they were sharing with me. Which they immediately saw as an opportunity for some Christian evangelizing (what did I expect?): “We’re blessed. And so can you, if you accept Jesus… You can have all of this and more…” basically was their message. They immediately assumed that because I was being a cordial guest paying them a compliment, that meant I was somehow expressing regrets for my own sorry life. I was far too well behaved (some punk, I know) to do what I should have done, something like piss on the record collection.
But Jesus Christ, can’t people take a compliment?
This makes me realize a bias I have. To me, evidently, the only proper way to accept a compliment is with humility. To not express humility in the face of a compliment, and worse, to express pride in that which is being complimented on, seems to offend me enough to want to piss on people’s records, or at least blog about it. Maybe this is not the only or even best way to receive a compliment, but it’s where I come from. (Some Christians my hosts were.)
I’ve over-thought it, I know. But I would welcome any other aspects to this dynamic or this anecdote if anyone has anything to share. I’m sure I’m missing something, and I grant that this story reveals as much about my own prejudices and insecurities as it reveals about anyone else.
Anyway, that happened.
BTW, try the lemon crisp cookies from TJ’s!
What you know, and what you don’t know. April 1, 2008
Posted by admin in : Discourse, Lies, Psycho/Spirit , 1 comment so farThere’s what you know, and what you don’t know, and how you feel about it.
I feel pretty good about what I know. I know a lot of stuff. Tons of stuff I’ve learned or observed or memorized, almost all of it basically or potentially useful. Of course, it happens that something you think you know turns out to be wrong, or flawed or incomplete. Often the discovery that you were wrong about something sucks, or is embarrassing or whatever. But for me, most of the time, I’m pretty OK with revising my knowledge. It’s a pleasure to learn. And being open minded about correcting one’s errors makes you smarter and wiser and more confident in what you do know, or think you know. It’s been vetted, through this continual process of discovery and revision. Stubborn mindedness is a problem not only because it’s unpleasant for other people to deal with, but also because it means the compendium of knowledge you’ve acquired is highly suspect. It has not been vetted, so you’re likely to have incorrect, unchallenged propositions resting upon other incorrect propositions, resulting a really skewed and probably stupid world view.
So, hurray for the curious, and onions to the stubborn and stupid.
Then there’s what you don’t know. I feel really, really bad about what I don’t know. I hate feeling ignorant. I hate it when my ignorance is perceptible by others. I hate that struggling sensation when you try to understand something but it’s just beyond your ability. Like when you’re learning a new skill — a foreign language or a programming language or how to fix your plumbing. I hate when I find myself dependent on others to do something I feel I ought to be able to do myself (like hiring a plumber or asking a friend how to tune your computer). This problem is the bane of my career. I know a lot of shit, but no matter how much you know, there’s so much more to learn that other people already have. I spend a lot of time researching, preparing, planning so I will go to meetings ready. I can wing it a lot of the time because a lot of the time I’m in my area of expertise. But it often happens there’s overlap, and there’s all that stuff I know plus one thing I don’t that the other people do. I often feel like I didn’t get the memo. Frustrating.
I suppose it would probably be better to be more OK with what I don’t know, seeing as there’s a whole universe of stuff I don’t know and never will. Maybe other people are aware of what they don’t know and are OK with it. I could learn from them. But I’m suspicious of people who go too easy on themselves in this department.
Atonement January 11, 2008
Posted by admin in : Irrelevant, Psycho/Spirit, Reading , add a commentSo a few years ago, I was given a copy of the Ian McEwan novel, Atonement. I placed it on my bedside and started reading it. One paragraph into it, I fell asleep. Each night, I tried to read more, but all reclined like that, I can hardly get one paragraph before I fall asleep.
So since that time, a whole lot of other people also read that book, and some of them got the bright idea to make a movie based on it. More people got involved and now there’s a movie in the theaters now.
I can’t tell you how strange that makes me feel. I feel a bit like Rumpelstiltskin Rip Van Winkle. Like all you people are a frenetic blur, racing around me, while I’m in this temporal slowdown, disjoined, frozen, metabolic hibernation.
Somewhere out there, right now, a novel is waiting to be written by someone, whose first three paragraphs will put me to sleep, some future sleep, from which I will awaken again, to find a movie about the novel will have been produced, and it will already be in my Netflix queue.
Bagged Glacier Point October 22, 2007
Posted by admin in : Environment, Irrelevant, Lies, Outdoors/Travel, Photos, Psycho/Spirit, Wild Animals , add a commentThis weekend I bagged Glacier Point. By “bagged” of course I mean I rode the bus up to the top and hiked down the four mile trail.
[ Earlier this summer, Terry and I bagged Mt. Hoffman. We were on a seven day high country loop and we stayed at the May lake High Sierra Camp on day 4. The evening after dinner, many of the campers were hanging out on a ridge watching the sunset, sipping hot cocoa. I was completely fatigued, and although hiking to the summit of Mt. Hoffman was on the itinerary for the next morning, I was secretly thinking I might not make it. Terry later revealed that he was also feeling a little intimidated by that peak, given how exhausted he was feeling. This guy was standing nearby with his party, a little older than us I think. He was staring longingly at the summit and said, "There's another peak I'd like to bag." After a short pause, his wife lets him off the hook saying, "Yeah, but maybe on another trip." "Yeah," the dude says. I wonder how many other peaks he'd like to "bag", but doesn't. Why would he say it, but not do it? It's like a 2-3 hour hike up from May Lake, and we're all staying the night there. If you're ever going to "bag" it, now would be the right time. By claiming to want to but being let off the hook like that, it's almost like he gets credit without actually earning it. Kind of annoyed me. So Terry and I the next morning felt a lot better and decided not to be that guy, and went ahead and did the hike. Mt. Hoffman is in the bag.]
October is a wonderful month to go to Yosemite. There are lots of fall colors going on — yellow maples and red dogwoods. Even the evergreens were browning (I guess from the drought). The temps were cool and comfortable. There are no crowds. I’ve hiked hundreds of miles of trails in Yosemite, although my least favorites are the valley ones. I’m not a big fan of staircase switchbacks, whether up or down. But I only had a few free hours (we took some out of town guests up for a quick visit and they weren’t hikers). I had never done this trail so it seemed like a good candidate for a quickee.
Glacier Point is such an awesome view. I love being high up like that. The Valley is cool, but I prefer looking down on it than up from it. And I loved seeing all the peaks I really did “bag” (hopefully this term will become meaningless soon): Half Dome, Cloud’s Rest, Sunrise Mountain, Mt. Hoffman. I did not bag Echo Peaks, but I sort of humped it once. I took some sunset shots the evening prior and now got some morning video before slogging down the trail.
No bears, although a big grey squirrel scared me.
After the week I had workwise, Yosemite is such fantastic therapy.
Why We Go To Lake Fausse, and What We Do There October 19, 2007
Posted by admin in : Irrelevant, Lies, Outdoors/Travel, Psycho/Spirit, Wild Animals , 1 comment so farBoatmen May 19, 2007
Posted by admin in : Art, Irrelevant, Psycho/Spirit, Web Tech , add a commentI still love this image of Ken’s. He drew it and I animated back when animated gifs were the thing of the future, and Web 2.0 was but a sparkle in your mother’s eye.
Who are they? Where are they going? Who’s that guy up front? What is that precious cargo?
No love, no joy, just snuff videos, 24 hours a day. April 5, 2007
Posted by admin in : Political/Editorial, Psycho/Spirit , add a commentShit, Stupidity, War, Hell, Cute YouTube video! Crap, lies, horror, cute YouTube video! Bullshit, new all-time lows, just when it can’t get worse, it gets worse, but have you seen the cute YouTube video? Treachery, betrayal, incompetence, ignorance, negligence, selfishness, cute YouTube video!
No love, no joy, just snuff videos, 24 hours a day.
Cute YouTube video!
BoingBoing:Terence McKenna’s library destroyed in fire February 22, 2007
Posted by admin in : Irrelevant, Psycho/Spirit , add a commentThe bad kind of novelty.
Two Twins January 13, 2007
Posted by admin in : Discourse, Irrelevant, Psycho/Spirit , add a commentTwo Twins. Men. Joel and Jesse or something. Identical. Finish each other’s sentences, folks can’t tell ‘em apart. They’re bright, likable, from a well-bred upper class East Coast family. Excelled in English and art. Both marry similar women, have similar kids. They work, succeed, make contributions,etc.
Then one of them tragically dies — auto accident. His loss is felt, he is grieved, mourned, eulogized, judged affectionately by all who knew him. He dies at, say, 33. Let’s say it was Joel who died.
Now Jesse is wreck. His grief is powerful — it destroys his marriage. He begins to change. He begins to say and do things people would never expect, not least himself. He fails at his marriage, his family, his career. He is estranged from his former life. He wanders, forms new attachments, abandons those. He is not evil, exactly, or criminal. But neither is he easy to like or care for. He’s bitter, distant, slightly mean but never cruel. He lives 30 more years this way, then he dies of a stroke, heart attack, something health-related and sudden.
Anyone in a position to judge would not judge him kindly. He has left countless relationships in a sour, unresolved condition. A few people even take pleasure in Jesse’s demise, for all the pain and disappointment he has caused.
How is a man to be judged? Had Jesse not been as good a man as Joel, until the age of 33? Is a man to be judged by what he has become at the end of his life rather than by who he once was? Who is to be judged more harshly: the man who started off good and finished bad or the man who started off bad and finished good? Is it fair for the standard of judgement to be higher for those who live longer? Is it possible to live more than one life in a lifetime?
Does Jesse’s disgrace in any way taint Joel’s memory? For if Jesse is capable of such pain and misery, was Joel not also destined for such a fate?
Myth, Science and Faith November 16, 2006
Posted by admin in : Discourse, Irrelevant, Political/Editorial, Psycho/Spirit , 1 comment so farThe atheist and the fundamentalist share the belief that science and faith are incompatible.
The atheist claims that the burden of proof of the claim that God exists is on the believers, not the skeptics. The fundamentalist claims authority that a true skeptic can never accept. Both are in error. I do not feel that a believer need prove the existence of God any more than anyone need prove that a certain painting is beautiful. We can all accept the subjective nature of aesthetic judgment. If you find the painting beautiful, science cannot prove you wrong, and should not try. In the same way, atheistic antagonism of spiritual experience is misplaced. Conversely, a fundamentalist who insists that the myth of creation is any sort of fact that should be taught as science is hugely mistaken. This is like claiming that the protagonist of a novel is real in the same way the author is real. Of course this is a fallacy and a gross misreading of the myth.
The compatibility of science and religion is possible when these equally human realms of experience are understood in their proper context. The atheist is likely to be frustrated if she expects human civilization to evolve to a point where religion is unnecessary. As long as we are human, it will never be true that we will lack for myth or folklore or art or dance or ecstasy. They are here to stay, so peace should be made.
I am an atheist with many personal spiritual experiences that felt mystical. I am an atheist with respect for the value of myth, and the truth of myth. Myth is a process of discovery – not an authorized narrative. Issues of authority certainly foul the taste of religion. All the complaints about religion which have to do with authority and power and politics for me are not really challenges to the myth per se, and can be said of any act of authority, including secular authority. The complaints have to do with people fighting wars over religion; or pressure to conform or convert or display religiosity; Asserting their political power in absurd ways like forcing Creationism onto a school curriculum. These are valid charges, but again, all can be directed at secular authority as well, and reveal more about the nature of power than the nature of myth or the experience of faith.
There can be aspects of religious belief which are incompatible with science. Both myth and science evolve. Over time the usefulness of a myth may be superceded by the knowledge provided by science. We can see in the development of child psychology, or in the experience of personal growth in general that we are all limited. In spite of our limitations we need a theory of reality, a paradigm to help us manage the information we receive, and to provide a vocabulary for expressing and interacting with and influencing our reality. The theory might be provisional, and as the limitations of the theory become apparent, we adjust it or overturn it, replacing the old theory with a new one.
One way to apply this thinking to religion is to assert that a myth of creation is really just a provisional theory of the creation of the physical world. The theorists were limited since no science existed to explain fossils, the movements of the stars, DNA, etc. As modern scientific theories of biology and physics and geology emerged, the old myth of creation can be dispensed with as there is no further need to suffer its obvious limitations.
However, creation myths persist. That could be because of lot of people remain ignorant about physics and science. That is certainly the case. But that does not mean there is no further value in the myth, or even that explaining the physics of the world was the original intention of the myth. The book of Genesis was authored to illustrate man’s relationship with God, and every element of that myth always emphasized this. That some people used it provisionally as a theory of physics is their problem – it’s not necessarily inherent in the myth itself. And the practice of religion which involves retelling and reinterpreting the myth remains a viable and dynamic mode of spiritual experience.
Much about the world can be explained by the prevalence of inadequate theories. This is fundamentally an issue of education and literacy. The better educated we are the better leadership we will enjoy, the more research we can conduct, the more we can advance science, and the better able we will be to discern the true value of myth. These schizophrenic antagonisms among the various capacities of the mind will be diminished.