Raised by Wolves

Gaki: writing myself Real

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Hello?  Navi?


Note mostly to self:

I just wanted to write this down for the sake of recollection later; moved desks upstairs today, to a place where the light of day and blue of sky upon rooftops can sneak over my shoulder. I don't buy into "past lives" in the dogmatic, literal sense that many people do, and so perhaps it was that shift of environment on my neurochemistry and nothing more, but for a single moment I had a strong, clear sensation of the axis of my consciousness shifting. It was like the dreams I have had, where an entire lifetime goes by in the time between presses of the snooze button. I very distinctly felt that I was another me, a split-timeline me, looking for a place to live with other-me's friends, in a burned-out suburb somewhere to the east, somewhere starting with a D, like Detroit or Denver or Delaware.

There was nothing fantastical about other-me, it was just the clarity of the impression I want to fix in memory -- it was just for that brief instant as though I really WERE that person, and everything here, the Bay Area, my job, my friends, my life, all just a reverie on the verge of dissipation. It felt spinny like deja-vu, and bright like revelation. It felt so true. But it fell apart in the instant of analysis.

Sometimes I wonder if it means anything, if it's a sign of emotional immaturity or something -- that in my rare dreamings during sleep, and in occasional manic flashes, I have these indescribable, transcendent and empowering emotions. (Sidebar: Maybe I like the music I like -- screamy punk, electronica, rappers with foreign accents, melodic trance, tightly wound and vulnerable folk -- because they replicate these emotional states for me. The transcendent.) But typically in the waking world, the emotions that I have experienced with the most burning intensity are fear, frustration, alienation, and Sartre's nausea. Not to get all emo, I have plenty of happy things and experiences, but in terms of raw intensity, I have only really reached the level of the ecstatic while in dream or reverie -- but I have been my most crushingly, maddeningly unhappy while fully conscious.

Is that normal, or abnormal? I wonder if this is symptomatic or causative, in terms of how my personality works?

Anyway; thought recorded.

  • 1

you win: a rambling exegesis from trey!

definitely with you on the ecstatic in dreams thing -- and at least for me, part of what makes the dream-state so appealing is that everything *fits*, there's clearly a sense of meaning behind it. so it makes what in consciousness is a fleeting moment of happiness into something extensive and eternal. even in my nightmares, there's a stronger sense of meaning, so those unhappy times aren't as unhappy. whereas in the conscious routine,there's more of a sense that this could all be meaningless, it could all be for nothing, we could not be here and nothing would change. and yet you still have to struggle anyway. which makes my life sound more negative as it is, but the deficit is Meaning, perhaps with that foreboding capital M; it's behind the lack of connection that breeds alienation, the incipient void that's behind our fears (we might be negated) and our frustration (our efforts might be/are being negated). and i'm not fully up on Sartrean nausea, but from what i know, that fits in. the idea that God ain't gonna save you, ain't nobody checkin' for you, so you better get to the task of living in a world with no ultimate reason for doing so.

in dreams, it's just there. it's natural, it has the inevitability of the best fiction, and a truth that makes your heart break into a million shards of brightest sunlight. it's almost like your subconscious, when left to its own devices, drifts towards the oneness of the source. but our splintered awareness and mental chatter breaks that link upon the return to the surface (complete with the bends).

ok, end ramble. but i know what you mean, and I've found that music (and, much more rarely, certain movies/books) is the closest easily available analog for said ekstasis.

Re: you win: a rambling exegesis from trey!

Good god. That was breath-takingly lucid. I tried to copy paste a section to quote and comment upon, Oracle, but it ended up being the whole post from "even in my nightmares..." onward.

In dreams Potential and Purpose seem alive, they quicken in my soul like a gasp. And yet, because of the limitless nature of Potential, there is no sense of confinement as it pertains to destiny. It is meaning without the dogma. It is divinity without the religion. It is Beautiful. And it is what has been making me so very very sad about my waking life of late. I want to bring that sense of wholeness into my waking life to feel like all of me. Sometimes I want that so badly it is as if I might truly explode.

And Hermit. As to further thoughts on your split self feeling: I feel that way every time I see the picture of blueella you sent me. Our eyes are so similar its eerie. I used to try to stare into the mirror as a kid and see if I could see what I Really look like. When I see her eyes it's like looking into what might have been had I just held my breath or stared a second longer at my own image as a kid. As crazy and insane as that sounds, looking at her is like looking at my doppleganger.

Re: you win: a rambling exegesis from trey!

"It is meaning without the dogma. It is divinity without the religion."

I love that. Yes. Meaning without the dogma. So then, is dogma necessary in a finite mortal life? Or is it just a crutch?

Re: you win: a rambling exegesis from trey!

I would like to think it's just a crutch because I don't want it; don't want to have to need it. And because that means the pains of dependency will eventually lessen. This too shall pass.

Re: you win: a rambling exegesis from trey!

For kingsnake, from Nausea:

My thought is me: that's why I can't stop. I exist because I think… and I can't stop myself from thinking. At this very moment - it's frightful - if I exist, it is because I am horrified at existing. I am the one who pulls myself from the nothingness to which I aspire. [135-6]

I am. I am. I exist, I think, therefore I am; I am because I think that I don't want to be, I think that I … because … ugh! I flee. [137] I exist, that's all. And that trouble is so vague, so metaphysical that I am ashamed of it. [143]

It's that existential malaise that is difficult to explain without sounding like a whiny melodramatic pose; the opposite of exaltation. It's when there doesn't even seem to be a point to getting out of bed, because we're all rude decaying matter, and what's the point? And then someone's like, "Well, you have your health," or "people have it worse, what are you actually feeling bad about?" And you can cognitively understand that, without it helping the condition in the slightest.

Now, thing about meaning without dogma is -- well, it's similar to my stance on the existence of sadness or evil, i.e. without it, would we understand where we stood? So much of my mental process is about sifting meaning from dogma, that I'm not quite sure what kind of person I would be without that process. It's an artist's ideal; if we had the ideal, then what would happen to art?

Re: you win: a rambling exegesis from trey!

"So much of my mental process is about sifting meaning from dogma, that I'm not quite sure what kind of person I would be without that process. It's an artist's ideal; if we had the ideal, then what would happen to art?"

To continue in the pseudo-dialectic medium:

I would suppose that ideal in this instance would refer to the transcendtal or the sunum bonum, or perhaps as simply as we put it as Potential. And given the cross-country discussion on the nature of Potential (and thus this Artist's Ideal that one must reach for) that by its very nature it is not static. It must always be beyond reach, we must always keep on thinking, keep on sifting. There will be no point at which we have arrived at some final metaphysical Aha! But rather one of many that should lead to more. So, I would suppose that you're right, we can't already have it. Even if we've had a glimpse, there's always the next part to realize. In this context dogma works like a filter or a grid for the masses, a framework. In that sense we do need it, as one needs a necessary evil or simply the negative in an equation. In order to know what something Is it helps to know what it is Not.

In this way, I suppose the dogma is unavoidable. But it really is sad that too many people see it as the Answer rather than a means to sift answers.

  • 1

Log in

No account? Create an account