Yesterday I took another Saturday trip over to Occupy LA. This time was a little better, but people seem to be lacking a certain understanding ... of really how to do much of anything constructive. That seems harsh, but read on.
I arrived around 1:30pm and the first thing I saw was a group of students from local colleges around the LA area. About half were toting some kind of video camera. They were speaking about how difficult it was to organize any kind of large movement- especially on short notice. I know there is an Occupy group at SMC (without the tents @ the college I go to) but I haven't spoken to any of them yet. I didn't really take much from this meeting besides there are a number of activists from each school who travel from Occupy to Occupy sort of networking and trying to take from those sites whatever they can- trying to bring back something to share and some kind of method for organizing people. Without talking to Occupy SMC or Occupy UCLA, I can't really say how well they are doing at this.
One thing that was constant throughout my entire experience there yesterday was an increasing number of reports about theft, violence and general discord. There is a large number of people with mental illness- even a report of a group shooting heroin in the medical tent and leaving dirty needles. Violence typically erupts around four in the morning on the south lawn. A possible explanation of this is our (OccLA) proximity with Skid Row, formally Central City East, which is a long walk to OccLA. This area is home to the largest number of homeless people in the United States (3,668 to 5,131- so says wikipedia). A contributing aspect to this ruckus is the formulation of Tribes. More on this later.
There is some dispute over food rationing. They are also running low on gas- having to choose between cooking hot meals and keeping the media tent running. This doesn't make sense to me because of the close proximity to public libraries, but what the hell do I know. It seems like they could just export the media outlets to the library and focus on feeding people, but I just thought about that so I haven't discussed it. Again, the formulation of tribes play into this problem, but I'll expand on that later.
I saw a LAPD officer talking to someone I assumed to be the OccLA security team about someone apparently in OccLA who has been distributing weapons. From what I could catch, he described one weapon as a short baton, but I can't be sure. It was refreshing to see local PD working with the Occupy team. The LAPD building is right across the street, by the way. Yeah.
Occupy Los Angeles is broken up into two major areas- North Lawn and South Lawn. There is also a West Lawn, but I don't really know much about them. There is certainly a strong community there.
South Lawn has most of the action. Up the main stairs is the Media Tent and the stage, which is pretty separate from everything else. Dead center on the South Lawn is the Food Tent, Medical Tent, what was formally the print shop (AKA silk screening, since closed down due to theft), and the south-most edge is the welcome tent. All other space on the lawn is covered in Occupied tents. Again- I'll have to explain the Tribe situation.
South lawn has the most drug usage, it stays the loudest at night, has the largest transient population, the most violence (particularly amongst a single Tribe within South Lawn) and is home to the people who generally just want to party. This is a huge generalization, but it's impractical to get too detailed as things are constantly changing. Locations of the medical tent have changed several times since I last went, which makes pretty much any map irrelevant after a week. (Some locations like the media tent have remained unchanged)
North Lawn has the Library and the People's University. This is where I found the tent warning of liberal bigotry that I mentioned last week. Most of the meetings occur on this side because there is constant noise on the South Lawn. The General Assembly is held on the North Lawn- which could explain their poor turn out.
While I didn't attend the General Assembly I went to the mid-day equivalent (if you can call it that. it was eight people- most of which didn't attend more than half, lots of rotation). I think it was called the People's Assembly- or the Occupier's Assembly- something like that. It started with an open forum to submit concerns- mostly about theft and violence. The top issues for OccLA that I can discern are 1) they don't know how to deal with violent situations and 2) separate factions or "Tribes" don't really care to participate in anything beyond their group.
Tribes. As I generally understand it, this is what people are calling the groups of people that have formed. Some have names like "Camp Two Tarp" and most are defined either by an enclosure like a fence or a network made by running tarps from tent to tent, basically making large singular tents with small modular tents attaching to the edges. The basic structure is anywhere from three to seven tents in a semi-circle with tarps often strung from trees to form a single tent. I'd say there are about five major groups formed like this and several more on a smaller scale.
I've seen private storehouses of food within each Tribe as well as individual organizational structures (each tribe acts differently). Like I've mentioned last week, individually people have become much more organized but at the cost of a larger cohesion.
Ok- let's address the two major issues.
1) Violence. There is a security team- and a security word (which I find completely absurd. it's something like Sha Shanti) During the meeting I went to, some possible solutions were given such as to either dissolve the security team and form another or have trainings to make everybody part of the security. The second makes much more sense as you don't have to do anything with the existing security team. Also, you wouldn't have to waste precious time running around trying to find one of the security team, yelling Sha Shanti or whatever.
2) Larger Cohesion. As Tribes have become more popular out of frustration with the General Assembly, there has been a major loss in large-scale participation (especially if you don't talk with your fists). I was really surprised when possible solutions for this included alienating dissenters TO MAKE THEM WANT TO PARTICIPATE. Really? Really..? I tried to put my two cents in at this point, but was constantly interrupted. I should work the whole "being loud" thing.
I've had some training in dealing with difficult people. While I was working on a sailboat in Hawaii, we were planning a trip to a number of islands in the South Pacific where there would be yacht networks that I would have to infiltrate. Yeah, I've been trained in boating espionage, you want to fight about it? ANYWAY. Part of that process was to deal with the issue that many captains in the region are strongly egocentric and generally prickly characters. The way you'd get them to accept you, and, more importantly, actively care about your success was simply to ask for their help or input on your boat. No matter what their suggestion was, no matter how badly the advice (just short of punching a hole in the bottom and sinking your boat) you had to accept it and have them help implement the idea.
During that time I was also further trained in diplomacy by having to deal with several difficult characters including managers of several box stores and a Chieftain from Samoa. Turns out I'm pretty good at it.
This is how I'd apply that information to the Occupy Los Angeles issue: I'd go tribe to tribe, actively seeking help with some fundamental aspect of organization. I'd find out what each group was good at and try to implement that towards something I could use help with. The main objection within the Tribes is basically that the General Assembly does not give equal voice to all opinions. The counter to that would be to redesign the basic organization in regard to these voices. You'd essentially develop a much more complex system with many more parts- much more than any one group could organize. Done correctly, each tribe would have a vested interest and responsibility in running the infrastructure of Occupy Los Angeles. I'm going to write up a suggestion to that end and deliver it on my next visit.
This is precisely the same way I'd get more people involved with the movement. The same guy who suggested we alienate people to get them involved also suggested we kick out anyone that isn't political. I really wanted to punch this guy out.
I once heard art defined as anything you could speak about in an artistic language. (there is a reason I was going after philosophy of language. HEY LOOK, PRACTICAL APPLICATION!!!) Now, apply that to politics.
Now, all of a sudden, it isn't to find people with a political perspective but a matter of TRANSLATION. To take their concerns and even solutions and POLITICIZE THEM. I can't believe that I have to stress this but...
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE TO SOLVE POLITICAL PROBLEMS. Let's try to remember that NOTHING exists solely within the political landscape. Every single political issue has ties into at least a bajillion other issues and if you reject ideas because they aren't political, it seems to me that you've missed the bus completely.
So I suggest that Occupy LA- or anyone with the slightest tie to the Occupy Movement (if you've heard of it) takes their (major) concerns IN THEIR OWN LANGUAGE and presents it to someone within the Occupy sphere. A friend of mine had to close his bread delivery business because the price of flower was raised. I'm really too tired to do the due diligence but I'm 100% certain that one could convert that into a political issue if you tracked back the price of flower- as it's a basic commodity and it effects his livelihood as a small business owner.
I'd be more than happy to teach free classes in this kind of translation between ideas and the kind of research necessary. I guess I should get on that. After math homework.
Oh, a small note- Kat, the woman who started the silk screening printing @ Occupy LA lives a few blocks away from my house. Apparently Westwood area is trying to get something substantial started. I'll keep the facebook crew keen to those developments as they happen.
If you've got something to add, PLEASE DO SO. Especially if you disagree.
Basic recap:
Train the masses in problem resolution.
Ask for the help of dissatisfied groups.
Ask for the help of non-political people.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
This statement is a lie..?
When someone praises my intellect...
It feels like someone is claiming life
in a corpse that has just twitched.
And when someone calls me a moron...
It feels like they believe me a bumbler
when really I've momentarily stumbled.
And when someone declares me strange...
It feels like they've never had the courage
to breathe a word of honesty about themselves.
I am an ocean of fire.
The resolved paradox.
I am the clench of the open palm.
I renounce all philosophy.
All gods are bastards.
It feels like someone is claiming life
in a corpse that has just twitched.
And when someone calls me a moron...
It feels like they believe me a bumbler
when really I've momentarily stumbled.
And when someone declares me strange...
It feels like they've never had the courage
to breathe a word of honesty about themselves.
I am an ocean of fire.
The resolved paradox.
I am the clench of the open palm.
I renounce all philosophy.
All gods are bastards.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Occupy LA
Ok, so I just got back from Occupy Los Angeles and I'm not amused.
First, while there is a much greater organization on the personal level, it creates problems. There are fights. Mostly verbal- but I saw one fistfight. There is petty thievery, but mostly within a single group of people. There is a lot of bigotry- one tent I found warned of the "liberal bigotry" that was rampant at that location, and I can certainly attest to it.
Second, here are a lot of people there who's only aim is to get wasted and party. In the late afternoon there was a guy who represented part of the medical marijuana movement. There were huge weed banners, they gave out free samples of marijuana and most of the conversation I heard were people talking about scoring or how high they were. The crowd present during that part of the event (roughly half of the Occupied space) seemed to be there only to party. It was disheartening, to say the least.
I went to the General Assembly and it honestly looked like the student body council was running the show with a few older activists. There was very little active participation and the people's mic (having the crowd repeat the message to amplify the sound) didn't seem to be used for it's intention. It seemed like an indoctrination process. Everybody who wanted to hear was close enough to hear, and it seemed like the speakers were using it for their own enjoyment and as a flimsy way to get the audience to participate.
I spoke with some of the core group of the organizers (some of the people I felt were in the hub of the know) and they all had major hang-ups. There were four people talking together and myself, mostly listening or calling bullshit. One guy was obsessed with technology, always bringing up the fact that the government has something like "zero energy" which he knew ABSOLUTELY nothing about. Every single thing he brought up, I asked for details about. Nothing. Another guy kept bringing up Hamilton. Another kept trying to come up for a slogan for the corporate-government marriage. While I think each had strong and important points (some more than others), few could venture outside their area of specialization or general opinion.
One of them actually said this (I'm paraphrasing). "you know Pangaea? Yeah, well all the continents fit together! The dinosaurs died out because they liked to walk around and then the world's single land mass cracked." he goes on to explain, incredibly poorly, how the earth is expanding, how the grand canyon is a stretch mark and how the expansion of the earth creates water. Nevermind the simple fact that huge amounts of condensation in the early forming of the planet caused torrential flooding. There was too much bogus science to actually disprove piece by piece so I went to the heart of it. "What's the science behind the earth expanding? Why does it do that?"
"You know, it's sort of like why the planets spin in orbit. It's just something that happens!"
... and you're running this event? EXCUSE ME?! Then he went on how zero energy machines pull energy out of the environment. "What kind of energy does this thing pull? Like, static or heat or... what?"
"You can't think of it like that. You have to think about it like Einstein said- that everything is made of energy. You have to think about it like that." (I kid you not)
Ok, ok, okay, okie dokie. You burn something, Combustion turns it into heat and fire and light and smoke and ash- how does this machine take energy from the environment?
Oh, I don't know the science. There are like, really smart physicists that understand that. They make it work.
FACEPALM. All in all, I don't see humanity working out. Sorry. Nice try. I'm still going to provide updates. I'm still going to try to go once a week. I'm not at ALL enthused about what's happening. Interestingly enough, my original assessment holds true. We need more people of a more diverse ideological background. I'll add this, that we must become incredibly more proactive about our engagement with this thing or else it will just be a front lawn keger in every city hall. If that's the case, I really do hope the cops come and hose them off the grass.
-------
If I spend more than six hours there, I'm going to start hulk-smashing fools like Godzilla with a bone to pick.
Another major point I wanted to make is that we had some really excellent speakers! Like, incredible people! Unfortunately the majority of the people who showed up for the event were only there for the speech- they were not the people staying in the tents (most of them were not). Speakers include distinguished people as the following:
Robert Reich, Professor of Public Policy at UC Berkeley and former US Labor Secretary
William Black, professor of Economics and Law at the University of Missouri
Joel Rogers, professor of Law, Political Science, Public Affairs and Sociology at the University of Wisconsin
Michael Hudson - (via livestream) President of The Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends
Robert Scheer, Executive Editor, Truthdig.org
George Lakoff - (via livestream) - Professor of cognitive linguistics at UC Berkeley
Ellen Brown, Attorney and President of the Public Banking Institute
First, while there is a much greater organization on the personal level, it creates problems. There are fights. Mostly verbal- but I saw one fistfight. There is petty thievery, but mostly within a single group of people. There is a lot of bigotry- one tent I found warned of the "liberal bigotry" that was rampant at that location, and I can certainly attest to it.
Second, here are a lot of people there who's only aim is to get wasted and party. In the late afternoon there was a guy who represented part of the medical marijuana movement. There were huge weed banners, they gave out free samples of marijuana and most of the conversation I heard were people talking about scoring or how high they were. The crowd present during that part of the event (roughly half of the Occupied space) seemed to be there only to party. It was disheartening, to say the least.
I went to the General Assembly and it honestly looked like the student body council was running the show with a few older activists. There was very little active participation and the people's mic (having the crowd repeat the message to amplify the sound) didn't seem to be used for it's intention. It seemed like an indoctrination process. Everybody who wanted to hear was close enough to hear, and it seemed like the speakers were using it for their own enjoyment and as a flimsy way to get the audience to participate.
I spoke with some of the core group of the organizers (some of the people I felt were in the hub of the know) and they all had major hang-ups. There were four people talking together and myself, mostly listening or calling bullshit. One guy was obsessed with technology, always bringing up the fact that the government has something like "zero energy" which he knew ABSOLUTELY nothing about. Every single thing he brought up, I asked for details about. Nothing. Another guy kept bringing up Hamilton. Another kept trying to come up for a slogan for the corporate-government marriage. While I think each had strong and important points (some more than others), few could venture outside their area of specialization or general opinion.
One of them actually said this (I'm paraphrasing). "you know Pangaea? Yeah, well all the continents fit together! The dinosaurs died out because they liked to walk around and then the world's single land mass cracked." he goes on to explain, incredibly poorly, how the earth is expanding, how the grand canyon is a stretch mark and how the expansion of the earth creates water. Nevermind the simple fact that huge amounts of condensation in the early forming of the planet caused torrential flooding. There was too much bogus science to actually disprove piece by piece so I went to the heart of it. "What's the science behind the earth expanding? Why does it do that?"
"You know, it's sort of like why the planets spin in orbit. It's just something that happens!"
... and you're running this event? EXCUSE ME?! Then he went on how zero energy machines pull energy out of the environment. "What kind of energy does this thing pull? Like, static or heat or... what?"
"You can't think of it like that. You have to think about it like Einstein said- that everything is made of energy. You have to think about it like that." (I kid you not)
Ok, ok, okay, okie dokie. You burn something, Combustion turns it into heat and fire and light and smoke and ash- how does this machine take energy from the environment?
Oh, I don't know the science. There are like, really smart physicists that understand that. They make it work.
FACEPALM. All in all, I don't see humanity working out. Sorry. Nice try. I'm still going to provide updates. I'm still going to try to go once a week. I'm not at ALL enthused about what's happening. Interestingly enough, my original assessment holds true. We need more people of a more diverse ideological background. I'll add this, that we must become incredibly more proactive about our engagement with this thing or else it will just be a front lawn keger in every city hall. If that's the case, I really do hope the cops come and hose them off the grass.
-------
If I spend more than six hours there, I'm going to start hulk-smashing fools like Godzilla with a bone to pick.
Another major point I wanted to make is that we had some really excellent speakers! Like, incredible people! Unfortunately the majority of the people who showed up for the event were only there for the speech- they were not the people staying in the tents (most of them were not). Speakers include distinguished people as the following:
Robert Reich, Professor of Public Policy at UC Berkeley and former US Labor Secretary
William Black, professor of Economics and Law at the University of Missouri
Joel Rogers, professor of Law, Political Science, Public Affairs and Sociology at the University of Wisconsin
Michael Hudson - (via livestream) President of The Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends
Robert Scheer, Executive Editor, Truthdig.org
George Lakoff - (via livestream) - Professor of cognitive linguistics at UC Berkeley
Ellen Brown, Attorney and President of the Public Banking Institute
Monday, October 10, 2011
Friday, October 7, 2011
Butterfly in a Hurricane
Part of being an integral person is public announcement. I've got not only to take a stand, but take a public stand. It's just how I roll, yo. So here we go.
I live in my mind too much.
"Duh" you might say, but until recently, I didn't think it was a problem.
It's only a disadvantage if you don't know how to use it-
But there has been some things I haven't been able to get over with it.
I deal so much in theory because I'm terrified of action. I'm scared because how powerful I am. I've hurt some people because I was so capable. When I was a kid I was really manipulative and, much worse, I was incredibly good at it. So when I changed my habits, I gave up a lot of that ability because I couldn't use it responsibly.
I used to go out with a plan. I had a list of things I would make happen. You know what percentage I got? 100%. I could work a crowd better than anybody I knew. Occasionally I dip back into that feeling, but I always get scared.
Theory is comfortable. You don't have to touch anything. You can relate it in ways where other people can take action for you, in ways you don't involve yourself with. Psh. Not "you", it's about ME. I don't have to touch anything with theory and it's starting to make me sick.
Bouts of deep depression, isolation, I'm losing my voice. My cultural voice. My personal voice. I'm fading away and I won't have it. No. No, I'm taking my voice back.
So here is my public announcement. This shit is hard. It fucking hurts to step out and do this. It feels like I'm whipping a pistol around in a crowd and I don't want to hurt people anymore but you know what? People get hurt. It's a fact of life. I HAVE to become more responsible about what I can do or else I'm just going to disappear.
You ever been on Merry Go Round? The big metal plates with the bars- not the automated kind with the horses. While it's spinning, the farther towards the center you get, the more centrifugal force you feel. If you can't sneak onto a playground like I can (lololol) just spin in one place with your arms out. When you pull your arms in, you spin faster and reach the vomit threshold quicker. Science is fun.
When I start to take action, I feel that same kind of centrifugal heaviness. The more in my mind I am, the more mass I take, which makes taking action that much worse. When I'm really doing well, I have no mass and I reside in the center. No mass means no outward force; existing in the center means the greatest angle of rotation. Minus all the awkward science bullshit (oh, please, please let me explain hurricane physics! It's relevant, I promise!) when I'm stuck in my mind I do LOTS of WORK and get little done. When I'm free of that and can relax into whatever I'm doing, I get an INCREDIBLE amount of things done and do very, very little work.
A few people have seen me in those moments. It's one of the most beautiful things I've ever experienced, and to be fair, it's much more than simply getting out of my mind. For me, that is what I'm hindered by, so that's what I focus on. OR.... not focus on? i can haz paradox?
SO! How do I take on this herculean task? I've written "NOW" all over my apartment to help remind me about my issues of procrastination. It seems that when I don't procrastinate, it forces me into situations that in tern force me outside of my comfort zone- out of my mind. When I become uncomfortable it creates tension. That tension highlights what I need to work on- and then I work on that! WHICH IS AWESOME. SELF BETTERMENT IS SO GODDAMN SEXY.
Anyway.
Going to Occupy LA this Saturday.
Action.
Badass.
I live in my mind too much.
"Duh" you might say, but until recently, I didn't think it was a problem.
It's only a disadvantage if you don't know how to use it-
But there has been some things I haven't been able to get over with it.
I deal so much in theory because I'm terrified of action. I'm scared because how powerful I am. I've hurt some people because I was so capable. When I was a kid I was really manipulative and, much worse, I was incredibly good at it. So when I changed my habits, I gave up a lot of that ability because I couldn't use it responsibly.
I used to go out with a plan. I had a list of things I would make happen. You know what percentage I got? 100%. I could work a crowd better than anybody I knew. Occasionally I dip back into that feeling, but I always get scared.
Theory is comfortable. You don't have to touch anything. You can relate it in ways where other people can take action for you, in ways you don't involve yourself with. Psh. Not "you", it's about ME. I don't have to touch anything with theory and it's starting to make me sick.
Bouts of deep depression, isolation, I'm losing my voice. My cultural voice. My personal voice. I'm fading away and I won't have it. No. No, I'm taking my voice back.
So here is my public announcement. This shit is hard. It fucking hurts to step out and do this. It feels like I'm whipping a pistol around in a crowd and I don't want to hurt people anymore but you know what? People get hurt. It's a fact of life. I HAVE to become more responsible about what I can do or else I'm just going to disappear.
You ever been on Merry Go Round? The big metal plates with the bars- not the automated kind with the horses. While it's spinning, the farther towards the center you get, the more centrifugal force you feel. If you can't sneak onto a playground like I can (lololol) just spin in one place with your arms out. When you pull your arms in, you spin faster and reach the vomit threshold quicker. Science is fun.
When I start to take action, I feel that same kind of centrifugal heaviness. The more in my mind I am, the more mass I take, which makes taking action that much worse. When I'm really doing well, I have no mass and I reside in the center. No mass means no outward force; existing in the center means the greatest angle of rotation. Minus all the awkward science bullshit (oh, please, please let me explain hurricane physics! It's relevant, I promise!) when I'm stuck in my mind I do LOTS of WORK and get little done. When I'm free of that and can relax into whatever I'm doing, I get an INCREDIBLE amount of things done and do very, very little work.
A few people have seen me in those moments. It's one of the most beautiful things I've ever experienced, and to be fair, it's much more than simply getting out of my mind. For me, that is what I'm hindered by, so that's what I focus on. OR.... not focus on? i can haz paradox?
SO! How do I take on this herculean task? I've written "NOW" all over my apartment to help remind me about my issues of procrastination. It seems that when I don't procrastinate, it forces me into situations that in tern force me outside of my comfort zone- out of my mind. When I become uncomfortable it creates tension. That tension highlights what I need to work on- and then I work on that! WHICH IS AWESOME. SELF BETTERMENT IS SO GODDAMN SEXY.
Anyway.
Going to Occupy LA this Saturday.
Action.
Badass.
Monday, October 3, 2011
But what do you mean?
Friends and people I talk with often get confused to what I mean to say. Here's an explanation.
I recently wrote this little bit that's very near and dear to my heart.
"I'm a bohemian, but to me, so are you"
This is not what I mean to say at all. You see, a bohemian is a person that lives outside the normal way of operating. A person of fringe culture, a gypsy. Another way of saying what I mean to say would be...
"I'm an irrational, but to me, so are you"
I don't mean to pull the idea of logic into this at all either. It has nothing to do with the functions of logic or of social structure- what we choose to or are capable of adhering to.
Part of the problem is not that the phrase is so goddamn vague. The main issue, the crux to this message, and all of my personal messages really, is that it's an explanation of all things through one thing. I'm trying to show you and every person who experiences me what it is like to see the cosmos in a piece of beach wood.
I am outside of XYZ and I recognize openly, in a very public way, that YOU are also outside of XYZ. XYZ being that which you believe you're in. I can see the republican nature within the democrat and it isn't my fault if they can't see it.
This is, of course, saying that black is the same as white, which very few people can readily understand. So they generally have an awful time trying to figure out what the hell I mean by calling them a gypsy. It isn't readily available. It's very difficult to wrestle with intellectually. And that's ok! Don't stress it.
I recently wrote this little bit that's very near and dear to my heart.
"I'm a bohemian, but to me, so are you"
This is not what I mean to say at all. You see, a bohemian is a person that lives outside the normal way of operating. A person of fringe culture, a gypsy. Another way of saying what I mean to say would be...
"I'm an irrational, but to me, so are you"
I don't mean to pull the idea of logic into this at all either. It has nothing to do with the functions of logic or of social structure- what we choose to or are capable of adhering to.
Part of the problem is not that the phrase is so goddamn vague. The main issue, the crux to this message, and all of my personal messages really, is that it's an explanation of all things through one thing. I'm trying to show you and every person who experiences me what it is like to see the cosmos in a piece of beach wood.
I am outside of XYZ and I recognize openly, in a very public way, that YOU are also outside of XYZ. XYZ being that which you believe you're in. I can see the republican nature within the democrat and it isn't my fault if they can't see it.
This is, of course, saying that black is the same as white, which very few people can readily understand. So they generally have an awful time trying to figure out what the hell I mean by calling them a gypsy. It isn't readily available. It's very difficult to wrestle with intellectually. And that's ok! Don't stress it.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Resolved Paradox
To the townspeople, a new person can be strange.
To a stranger, everything is strange. So you start to wonder.
To a true and perennial stranger, is the feeling of strange in itself strange?
What I mean to ask is this.
To the husbander, to the steward of a property, a section of land is home.
To the wanderer, to those who's house is between houses, is their home not more grand?
Doesn't it include the land that other people call their homes?
Point in case.
If I give up all that is 'MINE'
does 'YOURS' lose it's ownership?
I don't believe, objectively.
(I just like saying that)
I was called fay today. = vaguely otherworldly.
I can dig it.
The rhyme to my rap sounds a lot different than how other people speak.
Sometimes that bothers me.
But then I listen to what they have to say.
Paradox resolved.
Well, that's settled.
To a stranger, everything is strange. So you start to wonder.
To a true and perennial stranger, is the feeling of strange in itself strange?
What I mean to ask is this.
To the husbander, to the steward of a property, a section of land is home.
To the wanderer, to those who's house is between houses, is their home not more grand?
Doesn't it include the land that other people call their homes?
Point in case.
If I give up all that is 'MINE'
does 'YOURS' lose it's ownership?
I don't believe, objectively.
(I just like saying that)
I was called fay today. = vaguely otherworldly.
I can dig it.
The rhyme to my rap sounds a lot different than how other people speak.
Sometimes that bothers me.
But then I listen to what they have to say.
Paradox resolved.
Well, that's settled.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
a thousand thousand.
Not angry about anger.
Not sad about sadness.
Not frantic in a rush.
Not quiet about quiet.
No motion in movement.
The supreme virtue Om.
Recall a recollection?
Not sad about sadness.
Not frantic in a rush.
Not quiet about quiet.
No motion in movement.
The supreme virtue Om.
Recall a recollection?
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Joke's on you
Thinking quickly.
I think I began intentionally speeding up the way I think when I became a showman among my friends. I guess I was 12 or so at the time and I was fiercely competitive when it came to being the center of attention. I employed a few tricks to keep all eyes on me and I became exceedingly good at it. As a kid I was always incredibly outgoing; walking up to tables full of beautiful women and making them all laugh when I was about 5 or so. I had the entire wedding party for my uncle circle around me while I brake danced at about age 8. I've always been able to bend a crowd when I've wanted to.
First, I had to identify my audience. There were a number of different kinds of audience members. My favorite ones were the people I could bounce ideas around with to build momentum of a joke- these were often rather quick witted folks who at times may have had much better jokes than I did. I had a trick they didn't though, but I'll expand on that later.
The second best kind of person to have watching you, believe it or not, are the slightly disinterested people. They are the ones that will pay the most attention if you grab them. They are also the ones that will end up referring other people and expanding the audience.
The very worst kind is the poor comedians. The ones who drag down the momentum with poorly crafted, poorly timed, or obvious jokes- often ones that are in bad taste. The up side is if you're of the persuasion, you can ridicule them to no end and they will stick around for the opportunity to one-up you. If you anticipate a joke far enough away, you can even build up a counter joke and feed the obvious one to them. They use it, feel overjoyed at the success and then you trump them, regaining the popularity while giving them some of the limelight.
The various tricks I employed dealt mainly with flow of conversation and presentation of ideas. It really didn't matter WHAT I said as long as the flow was properly fixed. I could make even the most grumpy bastard piss themselves with the word "Potato." Really. I tried that once and tinkle was produced.
One of the tricks that set me apart from every other yukster I've ever met was that I'd immediately disregard the first joke that came to me. I'd sometimes even scrap the first three or five jokes that came up- for the sole reasons that 1) if you jump into a bit without a little bit of development it can often fall flat and, more importantly, 2) if you're in competition with another comedian and they use that immediate joke, you've got a number of other much better developed jokes just waiting.
My second signature trick was to multi-task a joke. I'd tell someone a joke that was confusing or detailed while I'd simultaneously steal something from them. A bunch of friends and I were sitting at a McDonalds and this low-brow humorist kept making really bad jokes. I decide it's time to really put the hurt on this one so I start feeding her poor jokes (that she would then 'come up with') but I'd continually change the premise. For example I'd set up a scenario and allow the chump to guess at the plot or punchline, changing things up drastically as I went. While I kept them guessing, I'd use physical humor. Tapping them on the shoulder, whatever I could to get them looking around the room. I'd unzip a backpack while they looked at the door, then take a hand full of decorative pens, pencil sharpeners... really anything they would recognize that was small. I'd stash this behind me or, even better, behind a friend.
Using this distraction and stash technique, I could continually keep SOMETHING of theirs with me at all times during this entire show. I'd make sure the audience forgot all the hiding places, or simply didn't see them at all. Every once in a while I'd either hand the mark something of theirs or put it in plain sight. Even better, hide it under something they would later pick up. Ever pick up a soda to find your keys? The perplexed look on their face would keep things going solid for hours on end. Confusion begets confusion so the more you did it, the easier it became.
I eventually stopped being such a showman because it ended up feeling really cheap. I didn't feel like I could go to a party or hang out WITHOUT acting like that. As if my friends didn't really want to see another side of me. When I stopped being the center of attention and stopped feeding that laugh-a-minute machine, I felt incredibly lonely and got depressed, often going days without talking to anyone. What got me most is that people wouldn't call me or ask me to go anywhere. It seemed like I had to initiate everything.
Now things are much better. Having done the hermit thing for a number of years, I'm content with laughing for my own sake. I don't need to share the joke anymore and you know what I've found? People come to me to see what is so funny. Beautiful women approach me every day on the bus just because I smile the most. It's one of the most rewarding feelings in the world because my laughter doesn't depend on anyone. It doesn't matter what YOU understand because at the end of the day...
Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.
I think I began intentionally speeding up the way I think when I became a showman among my friends. I guess I was 12 or so at the time and I was fiercely competitive when it came to being the center of attention. I employed a few tricks to keep all eyes on me and I became exceedingly good at it. As a kid I was always incredibly outgoing; walking up to tables full of beautiful women and making them all laugh when I was about 5 or so. I had the entire wedding party for my uncle circle around me while I brake danced at about age 8. I've always been able to bend a crowd when I've wanted to.
First, I had to identify my audience. There were a number of different kinds of audience members. My favorite ones were the people I could bounce ideas around with to build momentum of a joke- these were often rather quick witted folks who at times may have had much better jokes than I did. I had a trick they didn't though, but I'll expand on that later.
The second best kind of person to have watching you, believe it or not, are the slightly disinterested people. They are the ones that will pay the most attention if you grab them. They are also the ones that will end up referring other people and expanding the audience.
The very worst kind is the poor comedians. The ones who drag down the momentum with poorly crafted, poorly timed, or obvious jokes- often ones that are in bad taste. The up side is if you're of the persuasion, you can ridicule them to no end and they will stick around for the opportunity to one-up you. If you anticipate a joke far enough away, you can even build up a counter joke and feed the obvious one to them. They use it, feel overjoyed at the success and then you trump them, regaining the popularity while giving them some of the limelight.
The various tricks I employed dealt mainly with flow of conversation and presentation of ideas. It really didn't matter WHAT I said as long as the flow was properly fixed. I could make even the most grumpy bastard piss themselves with the word "Potato." Really. I tried that once and tinkle was produced.
One of the tricks that set me apart from every other yukster I've ever met was that I'd immediately disregard the first joke that came to me. I'd sometimes even scrap the first three or five jokes that came up- for the sole reasons that 1) if you jump into a bit without a little bit of development it can often fall flat and, more importantly, 2) if you're in competition with another comedian and they use that immediate joke, you've got a number of other much better developed jokes just waiting.
My second signature trick was to multi-task a joke. I'd tell someone a joke that was confusing or detailed while I'd simultaneously steal something from them. A bunch of friends and I were sitting at a McDonalds and this low-brow humorist kept making really bad jokes. I decide it's time to really put the hurt on this one so I start feeding her poor jokes (that she would then 'come up with') but I'd continually change the premise. For example I'd set up a scenario and allow the chump to guess at the plot or punchline, changing things up drastically as I went. While I kept them guessing, I'd use physical humor. Tapping them on the shoulder, whatever I could to get them looking around the room. I'd unzip a backpack while they looked at the door, then take a hand full of decorative pens, pencil sharpeners... really anything they would recognize that was small. I'd stash this behind me or, even better, behind a friend.
Using this distraction and stash technique, I could continually keep SOMETHING of theirs with me at all times during this entire show. I'd make sure the audience forgot all the hiding places, or simply didn't see them at all. Every once in a while I'd either hand the mark something of theirs or put it in plain sight. Even better, hide it under something they would later pick up. Ever pick up a soda to find your keys? The perplexed look on their face would keep things going solid for hours on end. Confusion begets confusion so the more you did it, the easier it became.
I eventually stopped being such a showman because it ended up feeling really cheap. I didn't feel like I could go to a party or hang out WITHOUT acting like that. As if my friends didn't really want to see another side of me. When I stopped being the center of attention and stopped feeding that laugh-a-minute machine, I felt incredibly lonely and got depressed, often going days without talking to anyone. What got me most is that people wouldn't call me or ask me to go anywhere. It seemed like I had to initiate everything.
Now things are much better. Having done the hermit thing for a number of years, I'm content with laughing for my own sake. I don't need to share the joke anymore and you know what I've found? People come to me to see what is so funny. Beautiful women approach me every day on the bus just because I smile the most. It's one of the most rewarding feelings in the world because my laughter doesn't depend on anyone. It doesn't matter what YOU understand because at the end of the day...
Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Whatevas
It's as simple as "How are you doing?"
This question always throws me and I'm not always sure why.
It's not as simple as telling you, unless you're just looking to start conversation. Then I can pull that little introvert-turned-showman and charm the hell out of you- and I suppose that's just as much a part of any day as anything else. So I suppose that's how I'm doing- anyway.
What am I saying...
I'm doing well. This sounds like crap. But I haven't written in a while besides for school, which is fun. Anyway. This is pthft.
This question always throws me and I'm not always sure why.
It's not as simple as telling you, unless you're just looking to start conversation. Then I can pull that little introvert-turned-showman and charm the hell out of you- and I suppose that's just as much a part of any day as anything else. So I suppose that's how I'm doing- anyway.
What am I saying...
I'm doing well. This sounds like crap. But I haven't written in a while besides for school, which is fun. Anyway. This is pthft.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Computer is still fucked
It's only a virus, a ghost in the shell. Temporary possession that I can't afford to fix. It won't allow me to boot in safe mode. If only, if only, that glorious safe mode.
The best thing about this blog is I write what I'd like to read. Then I forget what I've written. Then I read it. Epic win.
I've been called 'cold' a number of times in the last week. Something about the measure of rationalization or speak of theory or philosophizing. In other news, I'm also voted "most empathetic," seems like the two are contradictory. OR perhaps it just emphasizes the feeling of coldness. "Yeah, I know what you mean and I still don't care" or something like that. I blame short attention spans. Those who are unwilling to commit to an actual look at what is happening. Flash judgements are in their hay day- and I all too often find myself stretched thin, heart'a'pounding over my appearance. It's stupid.
Then I find myself sitting in class with a headache because I'm not challenged and forced to sit through Dimwitty's presentation of whatever it is.
I read that the Amygdala is one of the first parts of the brain to receive information we process. As it's responsible for fear responses, it gives us that millisecond edge in the fight or flight response. The downside (and this is an oversimplification) is that we're prone to an overuse of emotional reasoning, which may lead to procrastination, as we yet haven't reached that nonlinear critical mass required to take the proper action in a situation.
I sit in class and passively digest the aura or feeling of a person. Often it's more about group behavior than individuals. It's funny how a larger ratio of individuals is needed to steer a small group than a large one. Cascade effects... oh I can feel it so vividly. The little streams of persuasion, trying to pool in and tip the cup-minds of those around it. It's not so much a virtue of language as it is liquid dynamics. Of course a tool is only as good as how you use it. I was very manipulative as a kid, and I don't agree with the ethics of that mode anymore. Instead of being made to happen, it should be allowed to happen. Let me explore that a little more.
To be allowed to happen.
Yes.
To make a thing, to synthesize it individually is to create from a position of an inferior force, for you will always personally make something that is less great than you are, unless it's a cooperation or group effort. Instead, focusing your attention to the natural and inherent rhythms of the world will allow your action to take multi-fold effects upon the desired way. Waves, when the peaks match the peaks and the troughs match the troughs, etc. You feed into the momentum of an action to increase the swing of a pendulum. This is why a person on a swing can increase his or her momentum without being pushed. You, unaided by outside forces, can use proper leverage to achieve a desired result.
Oh, that damned problem of leverage.
If you're not in a community that cares for the things you do or does not move towards your desired ends, this can be a problem. Anyway, I'm explaining too much of too little an idea. Overkill. Good to get it out though.
The best thing about this blog is I write what I'd like to read. Then I forget what I've written. Then I read it. Epic win.
I've been called 'cold' a number of times in the last week. Something about the measure of rationalization or speak of theory or philosophizing. In other news, I'm also voted "most empathetic," seems like the two are contradictory. OR perhaps it just emphasizes the feeling of coldness. "Yeah, I know what you mean and I still don't care" or something like that. I blame short attention spans. Those who are unwilling to commit to an actual look at what is happening. Flash judgements are in their hay day- and I all too often find myself stretched thin, heart'a'pounding over my appearance. It's stupid.
Then I find myself sitting in class with a headache because I'm not challenged and forced to sit through Dimwitty's presentation of whatever it is.
I read that the Amygdala is one of the first parts of the brain to receive information we process. As it's responsible for fear responses, it gives us that millisecond edge in the fight or flight response. The downside (and this is an oversimplification) is that we're prone to an overuse of emotional reasoning, which may lead to procrastination, as we yet haven't reached that nonlinear critical mass required to take the proper action in a situation.
I sit in class and passively digest the aura or feeling of a person. Often it's more about group behavior than individuals. It's funny how a larger ratio of individuals is needed to steer a small group than a large one. Cascade effects... oh I can feel it so vividly. The little streams of persuasion, trying to pool in and tip the cup-minds of those around it. It's not so much a virtue of language as it is liquid dynamics. Of course a tool is only as good as how you use it. I was very manipulative as a kid, and I don't agree with the ethics of that mode anymore. Instead of being made to happen, it should be allowed to happen. Let me explore that a little more.
To be allowed to happen.
Yes.
To make a thing, to synthesize it individually is to create from a position of an inferior force, for you will always personally make something that is less great than you are, unless it's a cooperation or group effort. Instead, focusing your attention to the natural and inherent rhythms of the world will allow your action to take multi-fold effects upon the desired way. Waves, when the peaks match the peaks and the troughs match the troughs, etc. You feed into the momentum of an action to increase the swing of a pendulum. This is why a person on a swing can increase his or her momentum without being pushed. You, unaided by outside forces, can use proper leverage to achieve a desired result.
Oh, that damned problem of leverage.
If you're not in a community that cares for the things you do or does not move towards your desired ends, this can be a problem. Anyway, I'm explaining too much of too little an idea. Overkill. Good to get it out though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)