Start. Go.

If all of us know, or should know that we are ultimately separate and supposedly independent entities (okay granted, ones that seem to sometimes live and even thrive in communities), why do we care when certain others don’t stick up for us; when they don’t fight for our causes or petty concerns?

Is it just the physical discomforts that potentially follow? The irrational emotional impact that shakes and scares us? The exacerbation of an already perpetual underlying sense of loneliness?

A sense of betrayal or disappointment can only be justifiably instigated if there was a valid obligation or responsibility in the first place. And that might be the whole problem. Disparities in perceptions of obligations; inabilities of fulfilling them (and the natural self-condemnation that follows); simple (yet complex) unwillingness; misunderstandings and so on and so forth. Could this be the crux of all human conflict? Obligations? Not selfishness or greed or whatever, but obligations - both internally and externally generated.

This, just like almost everything I analyze, seems to come back to the question of whether humans are by nature innately good with a natural capacity for mistakes, or innately evil with desires and efforts to improve. And most of all, at the end of the day, I'm starting to wonder if it even matters whether we're innately good or bad. It's all a cycle anyway. And it's all flawed anyway.

***

If the fallen and the failed are so despised, why are the occurences of them still so prevalent? Could it be that some of us actually like and even cling on to the emotional hurts that cause us (or give us reason to) retreat into ourselves? A bubble of misery, angst, hopelessness and self-pity can be such a desolate place, and yet it can be such a... bubble (how else to describe it.. hmm), an almost comforting one. One that whispers convincingly that you don't need the world; nor does the world need you.


Truth be told... how did that phrase even come about? Why has it lived on for so long? How can ANYONE claim and tell truth. It just seems like such a bold statement. Obviously this calls for a deep analysis of the nature of truth but is it possible to just exclude that when pondering the question? What was the question? -_- Thoughts seem to have a tendency to fall through the cracks...

Is there a function or purpose for that?

ahh, goodnight

The point?

Everyone has a myriad of dimensions to them. And sometimes it’s funny when people try to project all of it into any one canvas - figuratively - be it blogs or bands or appearances or careers or people, because it’s just not possible, it’s limiting. There are so many limits to self-expression. And it’s not necessarily a bad thing. Limits make us rethink purpose and function. And self-expression needs desperately to be grounded in both of those. In theory and in practice. Figuratively and literally. Explicitly and implicitly.

The point is, this is going to be one dimension of me. Just one field of expression. It’s not going to be about my life. My opinions, perhaps. But not even all the types of opinions that I possess. Just the deeper, darker, almost hopelessly pessimistic ones; about cracks in the lens….. That’s the idea here anyway. Time tends to have this inevitable impact on original vision and purpose that erodes or changes them. No doubt for both the better and the worse.

But visions are just launch pads aren’t they? Not even the ends, nor the means, just the very start. So my vision in this moment is going to just serve as the intention, and not necessarily the realization. Not for anyone else but me.

So this will be able to be as transparent as transparent gets.