L.C. Barlow's Blog, page 5
January 27, 2015
On Sia's Elastic Heart and the "Pedophilic" Music Video
This is just a quick note On Sia's Elastic Heart video featuring Shia LaBeouf & Maddie Ziegler, which you can find here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWZGA...
(This is about a 3 minute read).
As most of you may know - or maybe you don't - there has been a fairly strong reaction to Sia's Elastic Heart video on what is, potentially, a pedophilic interpretation. This has to do with the nude bodysuits, the incorporation of an underage girl with an adult man, and the sort of battle between them. Some choose to interpret it as very close to, if not verging on, pedophilia.
My response to this is, "Maybe. Maybe not." And I don't mean this in terms of either/or. I mean it with an "and."
When you go to graduate school - particularly in liberal arts - what you learn to do is add on the "maybe not." To erase black and white interpretations and instead create a metonymy of them in order to see the entire picture. In other words, is it possible to derive a pedophilic interpretation of the video? Yes (obviously people have). And also no.
Other more creative interpretations view 1. the little girl as a bad thought that is plaguing the adult man who is stuck in the cage of his own depression or anxiety 2. Shia and Maddie as the same person waging a war against him and/or herself 3. a comparison of a young heart to an older one 4. a father-daughter relationship, where the daughter is always trying to cheer up the father who is mentally imbalanced 5. etc.
Which one of these is correct? All of them. And at the same time, none of them. It's yes and no always in art. And art does not survive if there can only be one interpretation. Nor can it survive if it panders to those with black and white views, who demand only one interpretation.
Of the potential 1,000 interpretations of this video, the pedophilic analysis can be made. But it is often made so that one can take the interpretation off of the table as soon as it's placed on. And often times some people can only enjoy something fully when they find something wrong with it. It's kind of like saying, "Now that we have fully admitted that there is a pedophilic message in this video, we can enjoy it. Now that we admit there's something wrong with it, we can love it." Or, "We can only love it as long as we use it as proof of something that we're not supposed to love." The pedophilic interpretation must be placed on the table so that people can enjoy the video as though it is not on the table. It is similar to the idea that presently you can only portray Russians, Arabs, and Villains smoking in movies and television. It is only by allowing the villain to enjoy cigarettes that the enjoyment of cigarettes is allowable. As long as we use a character who is inglorious, we can portray him loving the things that we are not supposed to love.
What this comes down to is, if you're going to create something artistic, don't listen to people. Because they will reduce the 1,000 interpretations down to just one, which is a lie. There is no either/or. There is only combination. Metonymy. "Yes," and also "no" to every analysis available.
My interpretation:
I think that the power looks like it's tilted towards Shia's side in the beginning of the video. If a tiny bird is caged with a bigger bird, or a tiny dog is caged with a bigger dog, you can guess who is going to survive in that battle.
Unless, of course, the little bird or dog can slip through the wires of the cage. Which, indeed, Maddie can.
And so there is a shift in power halfway through the video when she slips through the bars. She only loses the game if she plays it, and she doesn't have to play it. It's her choice, and she can leave.
Her ultimate use of her power, though, (and something that gives nearly all of the power to her) is to go back inside that cage to try to help Shia out. She has shown him the game doesn't have to be played the way he's playing it (life doesn't have to be lived like a battle in a cage). And there's even a moment, where she seems to take a look in his mouth, inhale the poison, and blow it back out. As though to heal him.
When she leads him to the edge of the cage to help him release himself, he refuses to slip through the bars, which it seems as though he could at any time (he does nearly slip through the bars at 3 minutes in). So, it is his choice to remain in the cage and play the only game he has ever played. He does not have the elasticity required to see that there are more ways to live.
The use of a small girl with a large man is to help play on the fact that it's not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog.
(This is about a 3 minute read).
As most of you may know - or maybe you don't - there has been a fairly strong reaction to Sia's Elastic Heart video on what is, potentially, a pedophilic interpretation. This has to do with the nude bodysuits, the incorporation of an underage girl with an adult man, and the sort of battle between them. Some choose to interpret it as very close to, if not verging on, pedophilia.
My response to this is, "Maybe. Maybe not." And I don't mean this in terms of either/or. I mean it with an "and."
When you go to graduate school - particularly in liberal arts - what you learn to do is add on the "maybe not." To erase black and white interpretations and instead create a metonymy of them in order to see the entire picture. In other words, is it possible to derive a pedophilic interpretation of the video? Yes (obviously people have). And also no.
Other more creative interpretations view 1. the little girl as a bad thought that is plaguing the adult man who is stuck in the cage of his own depression or anxiety 2. Shia and Maddie as the same person waging a war against him and/or herself 3. a comparison of a young heart to an older one 4. a father-daughter relationship, where the daughter is always trying to cheer up the father who is mentally imbalanced 5. etc.
Which one of these is correct? All of them. And at the same time, none of them. It's yes and no always in art. And art does not survive if there can only be one interpretation. Nor can it survive if it panders to those with black and white views, who demand only one interpretation.
Of the potential 1,000 interpretations of this video, the pedophilic analysis can be made. But it is often made so that one can take the interpretation off of the table as soon as it's placed on. And often times some people can only enjoy something fully when they find something wrong with it. It's kind of like saying, "Now that we have fully admitted that there is a pedophilic message in this video, we can enjoy it. Now that we admit there's something wrong with it, we can love it." Or, "We can only love it as long as we use it as proof of something that we're not supposed to love." The pedophilic interpretation must be placed on the table so that people can enjoy the video as though it is not on the table. It is similar to the idea that presently you can only portray Russians, Arabs, and Villains smoking in movies and television. It is only by allowing the villain to enjoy cigarettes that the enjoyment of cigarettes is allowable. As long as we use a character who is inglorious, we can portray him loving the things that we are not supposed to love.
What this comes down to is, if you're going to create something artistic, don't listen to people. Because they will reduce the 1,000 interpretations down to just one, which is a lie. There is no either/or. There is only combination. Metonymy. "Yes," and also "no" to every analysis available.
My interpretation:
I think that the power looks like it's tilted towards Shia's side in the beginning of the video. If a tiny bird is caged with a bigger bird, or a tiny dog is caged with a bigger dog, you can guess who is going to survive in that battle.
Unless, of course, the little bird or dog can slip through the wires of the cage. Which, indeed, Maddie can.
And so there is a shift in power halfway through the video when she slips through the bars. She only loses the game if she plays it, and she doesn't have to play it. It's her choice, and she can leave.
Her ultimate use of her power, though, (and something that gives nearly all of the power to her) is to go back inside that cage to try to help Shia out. She has shown him the game doesn't have to be played the way he's playing it (life doesn't have to be lived like a battle in a cage). And there's even a moment, where she seems to take a look in his mouth, inhale the poison, and blow it back out. As though to heal him.
When she leads him to the edge of the cage to help him release himself, he refuses to slip through the bars, which it seems as though he could at any time (he does nearly slip through the bars at 3 minutes in). So, it is his choice to remain in the cage and play the only game he has ever played. He does not have the elasticity required to see that there are more ways to live.
The use of a small girl with a large man is to help play on the fact that it's not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog.
January 22, 2015
Why People Go Insane in Grad School
I have read several articles recently on mental health and graduate school, and though I think many hit the nail on the head, they kind of miss an important point:
The point they miss is perfectionism vs. survivalism. They don't discuss how one saves and one kills.
So, here is my two cents.
I believe that perfectionism is our attempt to know the future. It is an attempt to write our autobiography in advance. After all, if you know you have done something perfectly, then there is no longer a need to worry about how everything will eventually play out. It's done before it's done.
Worry derives from the fact that we cannot know. Perfectionism is the attempt to know or, rather, ensure.
Grad school is a big step. School, in general, is a big step. I remember speaking with the mother of my host family in Germany. She told me that high school in Germany is far more intensive and stressful than it is in America. Her senior year, she woke up one day dizzy and deaf. Her mother took her to see a doctor. After an examination, he said that it was the stress of finals that had done that to her. That, because of stress, she had lost her hearing.
Imagine that. Age seventeen, age eighteen. And, already, you are temporarily deaf from stress. Or, perhaps more accurately, deaf from perfectionism. Later on, she got the highest score possible on her finals. Of course, that perfect score ended up being a double-edged sword.
She said her teacher - to make life kinder for her - marked her down as having scored at the second best level. Why? Because those who got perfect scores were suspected of cheating and were required to take their test again. Her teacher knew she hadn't cheated, and she knew her health was suffering from stress, so in order to help her, she marked her down as having done second to best. Because she was listed as having the second to highest score, there was no suspicion of cheating. No more testing. My host family mother, at age seventeen or eighteen, could sit down and rest. Get her hearing and balance back.
Perfectionism will kill you.
The US high schools don't put that kind of pressure on students, but US colleges and - in particular - grad schools can. Under pressure, everything becomes meaningful. Everything becomes stressed.
And the money. Oh the money that is required to go to school. The fear is enough to kill you.
For four years of undergrad and two years of an MA, one can easily go into $95,000 of debt at just a Tier 2 school. That's enough to cause a heart attack.
And the worst thing possible is always: you don't know if you'll make it. Every new year of school is new. You have never experienced the next level before.
Oh, what you will do to make sure you'll make it through. Oh what you would do to make sure that your debt is not wasted.
Some women sell their eggs to pay for law school. You can get up to $150,000 for selling your eggs.
This stress over money and time and degree is where perfectionism comes in. How do I know that my money and time and energy won't be wasted? If I perfect everything. Every little study moment, every little test, every little quiz, every little paper. All I have to do is perfect all the tiny things, and I won't have to worry about the larger portion - the debt, the degree - anymore.
This is where obsessive-compulsiveness grows. And the internal thought can unravel into something like this: As long as, say, the butter is put back in the fridge just perfectly, then the study moment will go perfectly, and if the study moment goes perfectly, then you know you'll pass the class, you'll get your degree.
And as long as everything else goes back in the fridge perfectly, then the butter can go back in perfectly, then the study moment will go perfectly, and if the study moment goes perfectly, then you know you'll pass the class, you'll get your degree.
This is how perfectionism kills you. And grad school is a Petri dish for perfectionism. It grows there like none other. And that is why some students turn suicidal. That is why there is a plethora of mental unbalance.
Because, what it comes down to is, we want to know we can get our degrees. We want to know that the debt will be worth it. Because there is no safety net. There is no safety net if we fail.
We seek perfectionism, because we want to know the future. And, to know the future, we are willing to lose our hearing, our balance, our low blood pressure, our sanity, and sometimes, even our lives.
This is why people in grad school go insane.
Not only this, but think of the isolation. The cage you're in. Perfectionism is isolating. So is school. Sitting down to read and read and read and write and write and write is isolating. And, according to George Monbiot, this kind of loneliness is killing us: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisf...
And this loneliness can cause addictions to alcohol, gambling, drugs, etc. For me and many others, the addiction during school was shopping. My friend's boyfriend never spent so much money on shirts and camping equipment and watches and ties as when he faced the bar exam. I never spent so much money on clothes as when I was facing my thesis and coursework for my MA. And there is a fantastic article on loneliness/the-awful-cage-we're-stuck-in and these addictions that you can read here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-...
And if you're one of the ones that has gone through this, and you're looking for a way back out, there is an answer, but it isn't going to be pretty. And you will rail against it with all of your heart, because the answer will not tell you the future you so desperately seek to know. The answer will not assure you that the debt will be worth it, or that you can pay your debt, or that you'll survive and attain your degrees. The answer to your misery will not ensure an A on that next test.
The answer is survivalism.
Perfectionism is the enemy of good.
Perfectionism is the enemy of good enough.
of getting it done.
of greatness.
of creativity.
of progress.
of achievement.
Perfectionism is the enemy of everything.
And, contrary to what perfectionism would have you believe, it cannot let you control or ensure or see the future. It will not keep you safe.
/Survivalism/ is your friend.
Survivalism doesn't give a shit about your debt or the next grade you'll make on that test. Survivalism doesn't care if you've put the butter back in the fridge the correct way. Survivalism doesn't worry about if you succeed in attaining your degree.
But survivalism does allow for a focus on /getting it done/. And, frankly, that is the only thing you need to think about. Getting it done. Because worrying about the rest will kill you.
My friend and I very recently had a conversation in which he (an MD and PhD major - yes, you read that right: he's both an MD PhD) told me that he is a survivalist - that his focus is simply on accomplishing things. As long as they get done, he's happy. Following this, he was able to put perfectionism's inefficiency into terms that were easily understandable.
He said that when you read a book, on average, in the first reading you retain something like 60% of the information. Upon the next reading, you then retain an extra 20%. Upon the third, another 10%. And so on. He pointed out that, although you may eventually get to 100%, it's not worth the time spent in reaching 100%. He said that in the lab he works with impure elements all the time because there is simply not enough time to purify all chemicals before using them. So, you make a note, such as, "I am using 80% purified such-and-such chemical."
This example puts into very real terms the problem of perfectionism. Though you may be able to get something perfect, the amount of time required in perfecting each and every moment isn't worth it. No experiment would ever get done if pure chemicals were required. So, the point then is to GET IT DONE, rather than get it done perfectly.
Thus, it is not about knowing the future. It is about doing enough for the now.
It is about getting it done.
It is about surviving.
But in grad school, in that often isolating cage, it is so tempting to go the other way, and I think this is something that many articles on mental health and grad school miss. Perfectionism is something easy to sink into in graduate school. Fear is easy to sink into. Because in the US, school isn't free, and there's no guarantee that any of it - the debt or the degree - will ever come to fruition.
And there's no safety net if, say, two years into law school, you realize it's not for you, or that you're dying from the coursework, or you need a break for your mental health. So you don't take the break, and then all sorts of terrible icky thoughts sink down deep into you.
That's the way it often goes.
Because the world kinda sucks.
My Biology II teacher in high school was told by one of her students, "You could have been a doctor. You're definitely smart enough to get through med school. You could have saved lives."
Her response was, "I save lives by convincing people not to become doctors."
How apt.
And it's a good point to make.
I suppose my own point is this: If you're going through grad school, and you're living an unsustainable life, do this: Don't focus on perfecting the day. Focus on just surviving it.
Oh, and if you can, go to school part time.
There. That's my two cents.
Addendum: I came across this article on the 23rd on perfectionism and Madison Holleran - https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/when-...
The point they miss is perfectionism vs. survivalism. They don't discuss how one saves and one kills.
So, here is my two cents.
I believe that perfectionism is our attempt to know the future. It is an attempt to write our autobiography in advance. After all, if you know you have done something perfectly, then there is no longer a need to worry about how everything will eventually play out. It's done before it's done.
Worry derives from the fact that we cannot know. Perfectionism is the attempt to know or, rather, ensure.
Grad school is a big step. School, in general, is a big step. I remember speaking with the mother of my host family in Germany. She told me that high school in Germany is far more intensive and stressful than it is in America. Her senior year, she woke up one day dizzy and deaf. Her mother took her to see a doctor. After an examination, he said that it was the stress of finals that had done that to her. That, because of stress, she had lost her hearing.
Imagine that. Age seventeen, age eighteen. And, already, you are temporarily deaf from stress. Or, perhaps more accurately, deaf from perfectionism. Later on, she got the highest score possible on her finals. Of course, that perfect score ended up being a double-edged sword.
She said her teacher - to make life kinder for her - marked her down as having scored at the second best level. Why? Because those who got perfect scores were suspected of cheating and were required to take their test again. Her teacher knew she hadn't cheated, and she knew her health was suffering from stress, so in order to help her, she marked her down as having done second to best. Because she was listed as having the second to highest score, there was no suspicion of cheating. No more testing. My host family mother, at age seventeen or eighteen, could sit down and rest. Get her hearing and balance back.
Perfectionism will kill you.
The US high schools don't put that kind of pressure on students, but US colleges and - in particular - grad schools can. Under pressure, everything becomes meaningful. Everything becomes stressed.
And the money. Oh the money that is required to go to school. The fear is enough to kill you.
For four years of undergrad and two years of an MA, one can easily go into $95,000 of debt at just a Tier 2 school. That's enough to cause a heart attack.
And the worst thing possible is always: you don't know if you'll make it. Every new year of school is new. You have never experienced the next level before.
Oh, what you will do to make sure you'll make it through. Oh what you would do to make sure that your debt is not wasted.
Some women sell their eggs to pay for law school. You can get up to $150,000 for selling your eggs.
This stress over money and time and degree is where perfectionism comes in. How do I know that my money and time and energy won't be wasted? If I perfect everything. Every little study moment, every little test, every little quiz, every little paper. All I have to do is perfect all the tiny things, and I won't have to worry about the larger portion - the debt, the degree - anymore.
This is where obsessive-compulsiveness grows. And the internal thought can unravel into something like this: As long as, say, the butter is put back in the fridge just perfectly, then the study moment will go perfectly, and if the study moment goes perfectly, then you know you'll pass the class, you'll get your degree.
And as long as everything else goes back in the fridge perfectly, then the butter can go back in perfectly, then the study moment will go perfectly, and if the study moment goes perfectly, then you know you'll pass the class, you'll get your degree.
This is how perfectionism kills you. And grad school is a Petri dish for perfectionism. It grows there like none other. And that is why some students turn suicidal. That is why there is a plethora of mental unbalance.
Because, what it comes down to is, we want to know we can get our degrees. We want to know that the debt will be worth it. Because there is no safety net. There is no safety net if we fail.
We seek perfectionism, because we want to know the future. And, to know the future, we are willing to lose our hearing, our balance, our low blood pressure, our sanity, and sometimes, even our lives.
This is why people in grad school go insane.
Not only this, but think of the isolation. The cage you're in. Perfectionism is isolating. So is school. Sitting down to read and read and read and write and write and write is isolating. And, according to George Monbiot, this kind of loneliness is killing us: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisf...
And this loneliness can cause addictions to alcohol, gambling, drugs, etc. For me and many others, the addiction during school was shopping. My friend's boyfriend never spent so much money on shirts and camping equipment and watches and ties as when he faced the bar exam. I never spent so much money on clothes as when I was facing my thesis and coursework for my MA. And there is a fantastic article on loneliness/the-awful-cage-we're-stuck-in and these addictions that you can read here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-...
And if you're one of the ones that has gone through this, and you're looking for a way back out, there is an answer, but it isn't going to be pretty. And you will rail against it with all of your heart, because the answer will not tell you the future you so desperately seek to know. The answer will not assure you that the debt will be worth it, or that you can pay your debt, or that you'll survive and attain your degrees. The answer to your misery will not ensure an A on that next test.
The answer is survivalism.
Perfectionism is the enemy of good.
Perfectionism is the enemy of good enough.
of getting it done.
of greatness.
of creativity.
of progress.
of achievement.
Perfectionism is the enemy of everything.
And, contrary to what perfectionism would have you believe, it cannot let you control or ensure or see the future. It will not keep you safe.
/Survivalism/ is your friend.
Survivalism doesn't give a shit about your debt or the next grade you'll make on that test. Survivalism doesn't care if you've put the butter back in the fridge the correct way. Survivalism doesn't worry about if you succeed in attaining your degree.
But survivalism does allow for a focus on /getting it done/. And, frankly, that is the only thing you need to think about. Getting it done. Because worrying about the rest will kill you.
My friend and I very recently had a conversation in which he (an MD and PhD major - yes, you read that right: he's both an MD PhD) told me that he is a survivalist - that his focus is simply on accomplishing things. As long as they get done, he's happy. Following this, he was able to put perfectionism's inefficiency into terms that were easily understandable.
He said that when you read a book, on average, in the first reading you retain something like 60% of the information. Upon the next reading, you then retain an extra 20%. Upon the third, another 10%. And so on. He pointed out that, although you may eventually get to 100%, it's not worth the time spent in reaching 100%. He said that in the lab he works with impure elements all the time because there is simply not enough time to purify all chemicals before using them. So, you make a note, such as, "I am using 80% purified such-and-such chemical."
This example puts into very real terms the problem of perfectionism. Though you may be able to get something perfect, the amount of time required in perfecting each and every moment isn't worth it. No experiment would ever get done if pure chemicals were required. So, the point then is to GET IT DONE, rather than get it done perfectly.
Thus, it is not about knowing the future. It is about doing enough for the now.
It is about getting it done.
It is about surviving.
But in grad school, in that often isolating cage, it is so tempting to go the other way, and I think this is something that many articles on mental health and grad school miss. Perfectionism is something easy to sink into in graduate school. Fear is easy to sink into. Because in the US, school isn't free, and there's no guarantee that any of it - the debt or the degree - will ever come to fruition.
And there's no safety net if, say, two years into law school, you realize it's not for you, or that you're dying from the coursework, or you need a break for your mental health. So you don't take the break, and then all sorts of terrible icky thoughts sink down deep into you.
That's the way it often goes.
Because the world kinda sucks.
My Biology II teacher in high school was told by one of her students, "You could have been a doctor. You're definitely smart enough to get through med school. You could have saved lives."
Her response was, "I save lives by convincing people not to become doctors."
How apt.
And it's a good point to make.
I suppose my own point is this: If you're going through grad school, and you're living an unsustainable life, do this: Don't focus on perfecting the day. Focus on just surviving it.
Oh, and if you can, go to school part time.
There. That's my two cents.
Addendum: I came across this article on the 23rd on perfectionism and Madison Holleran - https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/when-...
January 9, 2015
Second Revision
About 5 days ago, I sent in the second revision of Pivot. Of the two readers that are currently reading it, one of them gave an absolutely positive response. A little bit of polishing to be done, he said, but a great second revision. He said we are very close to the next step.
This journey has been great, but difficult. I have enjoyed it immensely and wouldn't have it any other way.
And, again, I reiterate that if you want something, go to it. Don't stop. Don't ever stop. (Don't obsess, but don't ever give up on it).
In the words of Charles Bukowski:
"get a large typewriter
and as the footsteps go up and down
outside your window
hit that thing
hit it hard
make it a heavyweight fight
make it the bull when he first charges in
and remember the old dogs
who fought so well:
Hemingway, Celine, Dostoevsky, Hamsun.
If you think they didn't go crazy
in tiny rooms
just like you're doing now
without women
without food
without hope
then you're not ready."
This journey has been great, but difficult. I have enjoyed it immensely and wouldn't have it any other way.
And, again, I reiterate that if you want something, go to it. Don't stop. Don't ever stop. (Don't obsess, but don't ever give up on it).
In the words of Charles Bukowski:
"get a large typewriter
and as the footsteps go up and down
outside your window
hit that thing
hit it hard
make it a heavyweight fight
make it the bull when he first charges in
and remember the old dogs
who fought so well:
Hemingway, Celine, Dostoevsky, Hamsun.
If you think they didn't go crazy
in tiny rooms
just like you're doing now
without women
without food
without hope
then you're not ready."
December 29, 2014
Bukowski
Charles Bukowski is an author I only recently discovered through a friend, and I have not read any of his works. But what I do know about him is he was a drunkard, worked many menial jobs, and was absolutely brilliant.
I came across a letter of his via Brain Pickings, and I found the letter so profound that I am going to copy and paste it here. It did my soul some good to read it, and I do believe it will call to a good many others:
August 12, 1986
Hello John:
Thanks for the good letter. I don’t think it hurts, sometimes, to remember where you came from. You know the places where I came from. Even the people who try to write about that or make films about it, they don’t get it right. They call it “9 to 5.” It’s never 9 to 5, there’s no free lunch break at those places, in fact, at many of them in order to keep your job you don’t take lunch. Then there’s overtime and the books never seem to get the overtime right and if you complain about that, there’s another sucker to take your place.
You know my old saying, “Slavery was never abolished, it was only extended to include all the colors.”
And what hurts is the steadily diminishing humanity of those fighting to hold jobs they don’t want but fear the alternative worse. People simply empty out. They are bodies with fearful and obedient minds. The color leaves the eye. The voice becomes ugly. And the body. The hair. The fingernails. The shoes. Everything does.
As a young man I could not believe that people could give their lives over to those conditions. As an old man, I still can’t believe it. What do they do it for? Sex? TV? An automobile on monthly payments? Or children? Children who are just going to do the same things that they did?
Early on, when I was quite young and going from job to job I was foolish enough to sometimes speak to my fellow workers: “Hey, the boss can come in here at any moment and lay all of us off, just like that, don’t you realize that?”
They would just look at me. I was posing something that they didn’t want to enter their minds.
Now in industry, there are vast layoffs (steel mills dead, technical changes in other factors of the work place). They are layed off by the hundreds of thousands and their faces are stunned:
“I put in 35 years…”
“It ain’t right…”
“I don’t know what to do…”
They never pay the slaves enough so they can get free, just enough so they can stay alive and come back to work. I could see all this. Why couldn’t they? I figured the park bench was just as good or being a barfly was just as good. Why not get there first before they put me there? Why wait?
I just wrote in disgust against it all, it was a relief to get the shit out of my system. And now that I’m here, a so-called professional writer, after giving the first 50 years away, I’ve found out that there are other disgusts beyond the system.
I remember once, working as a packer in this lighting fixture company, one of the packers suddenly said: “I’ll never be free!”
One of the bosses was walking by (his name was Morrie) and he let out this delicious cackle of a laugh, enjoying the fact that this fellow was trapped for life.
So, the luck I finally had in getting out of those places, no matter how long it took, has given me a kind of joy, the jolly joy of the miracle. I now write from an old mind and an old body, long beyond the time when most men would ever think of continuing such a thing, but since I started so late I owe it to myself to continue, and when the words begin to falter and I must be helped up stairways and I can no longer tell a bluebird from a paperclip, I still feel that something in me is going to remember (no matter how far I’m gone) how I’ve come through the murder and the mess and the moil, to at least a generous way to die.
To not to have entirely wasted one’s life seems to be a worthy accomplishment, if only for myself.
yr boy,
Hank
Source: http://www.brainpickings.org/2014/08/...
I came across a letter of his via Brain Pickings, and I found the letter so profound that I am going to copy and paste it here. It did my soul some good to read it, and I do believe it will call to a good many others:
August 12, 1986
Hello John:
Thanks for the good letter. I don’t think it hurts, sometimes, to remember where you came from. You know the places where I came from. Even the people who try to write about that or make films about it, they don’t get it right. They call it “9 to 5.” It’s never 9 to 5, there’s no free lunch break at those places, in fact, at many of them in order to keep your job you don’t take lunch. Then there’s overtime and the books never seem to get the overtime right and if you complain about that, there’s another sucker to take your place.
You know my old saying, “Slavery was never abolished, it was only extended to include all the colors.”
And what hurts is the steadily diminishing humanity of those fighting to hold jobs they don’t want but fear the alternative worse. People simply empty out. They are bodies with fearful and obedient minds. The color leaves the eye. The voice becomes ugly. And the body. The hair. The fingernails. The shoes. Everything does.
As a young man I could not believe that people could give their lives over to those conditions. As an old man, I still can’t believe it. What do they do it for? Sex? TV? An automobile on monthly payments? Or children? Children who are just going to do the same things that they did?
Early on, when I was quite young and going from job to job I was foolish enough to sometimes speak to my fellow workers: “Hey, the boss can come in here at any moment and lay all of us off, just like that, don’t you realize that?”
They would just look at me. I was posing something that they didn’t want to enter their minds.
Now in industry, there are vast layoffs (steel mills dead, technical changes in other factors of the work place). They are layed off by the hundreds of thousands and their faces are stunned:
“I put in 35 years…”
“It ain’t right…”
“I don’t know what to do…”
They never pay the slaves enough so they can get free, just enough so they can stay alive and come back to work. I could see all this. Why couldn’t they? I figured the park bench was just as good or being a barfly was just as good. Why not get there first before they put me there? Why wait?
I just wrote in disgust against it all, it was a relief to get the shit out of my system. And now that I’m here, a so-called professional writer, after giving the first 50 years away, I’ve found out that there are other disgusts beyond the system.
I remember once, working as a packer in this lighting fixture company, one of the packers suddenly said: “I’ll never be free!”
One of the bosses was walking by (his name was Morrie) and he let out this delicious cackle of a laugh, enjoying the fact that this fellow was trapped for life.
So, the luck I finally had in getting out of those places, no matter how long it took, has given me a kind of joy, the jolly joy of the miracle. I now write from an old mind and an old body, long beyond the time when most men would ever think of continuing such a thing, but since I started so late I owe it to myself to continue, and when the words begin to falter and I must be helped up stairways and I can no longer tell a bluebird from a paperclip, I still feel that something in me is going to remember (no matter how far I’m gone) how I’ve come through the murder and the mess and the moil, to at least a generous way to die.
To not to have entirely wasted one’s life seems to be a worthy accomplishment, if only for myself.
yr boy,
Hank
Source: http://www.brainpickings.org/2014/08/...
December 16, 2014
Good News!
Pivot made IndieReader's Best Books of 2014!
http://indiereader.com/2014/12/irs-be...
I'm so excited! IndieReader has been so incredibly awesome. Bringing Indie authors to readers and readers to Indie books.
IndieReader used Pivot's old cover for the photo (with the flames), but that's alright.
After all of these successes, I want to emphasize to everyone who reads this that, if you have an idea for a book, then write it. Write it for you. Write it because you want it to exist. Write it because you should write. Know some naysayers? Of course, you do. They're everywhere. Cut yourself off from them. Make your writing private.
You never know what can happen when you follow your heart. But the process of following your heart is the point, wherever it may lead you. So, whether it's writing, coding, researching, teaching, whatever calls to you, go with the call.
http://indiereader.com/2014/12/irs-be...
I'm so excited! IndieReader has been so incredibly awesome. Bringing Indie authors to readers and readers to Indie books.
IndieReader used Pivot's old cover for the photo (with the flames), but that's alright.
After all of these successes, I want to emphasize to everyone who reads this that, if you have an idea for a book, then write it. Write it for you. Write it because you want it to exist. Write it because you should write. Know some naysayers? Of course, you do. They're everywhere. Cut yourself off from them. Make your writing private.
You never know what can happen when you follow your heart. But the process of following your heart is the point, wherever it may lead you. So, whether it's writing, coding, researching, teaching, whatever calls to you, go with the call.
December 14, 2014
Another Quick Update
Still working on revisions for the new, revised Pivot. I am on the second round.
The thing that I am noting as I work on this round is that in order to work with a professional on revision, you have to have stamina and desire. My novel is approximately 200 pages in a single-spaced Word document. So far, I have thrown out approximately 600-700 pages, as I have laced and unlaced and re-laced Pivot. These cut pages have been worked and reworked scenes, scenes cut altogether, rewordings, etc.
600-700 pages cut might seem high, and it probably is high; however, I learned recently that the author of Cold Mountain - Charles Frazier - said he reworded every sentence in his novel 10 different times. His book is 450 pages long according to Amazon. What this means is that 4500 pages were written. 450 were kept.
And I'll mention very quickly that this sort of labor-intensive development exists in every field. For instance, Anthony Hopkins says he reads each script out loud 250 times before filming: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000164/bio
You've got to have stamina, and you've got to love it, and you've got to be able to handle it like it's a job, not a fairytale. It's different than I expected, I think, but that does not mean it is bad. It is a struggle in the way that grad school is a struggle, that work is a struggle. It is sitting down to wrestle every day.
So, my update is that I am still revising Pivot. =)
I hope everyone's December is going well. The holidays are just around the corner. Have a sweet and merry one.
The thing that I am noting as I work on this round is that in order to work with a professional on revision, you have to have stamina and desire. My novel is approximately 200 pages in a single-spaced Word document. So far, I have thrown out approximately 600-700 pages, as I have laced and unlaced and re-laced Pivot. These cut pages have been worked and reworked scenes, scenes cut altogether, rewordings, etc.
600-700 pages cut might seem high, and it probably is high; however, I learned recently that the author of Cold Mountain - Charles Frazier - said he reworded every sentence in his novel 10 different times. His book is 450 pages long according to Amazon. What this means is that 4500 pages were written. 450 were kept.
And I'll mention very quickly that this sort of labor-intensive development exists in every field. For instance, Anthony Hopkins says he reads each script out loud 250 times before filming: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000164/bio
You've got to have stamina, and you've got to love it, and you've got to be able to handle it like it's a job, not a fairytale. It's different than I expected, I think, but that does not mean it is bad. It is a struggle in the way that grad school is a struggle, that work is a struggle. It is sitting down to wrestle every day.
So, my update is that I am still revising Pivot. =)
I hope everyone's December is going well. The holidays are just around the corner. Have a sweet and merry one.
November 5, 2014
Maya Angelou
There's a line from The Grand Budapest Hotel that goes something like this: "Yet, without question, without fail, always and invariably she’s exceedingly lovely. Why? Because of her purity." And it's a hard line to grasp if you can't remember what purity is supposed to be.
I couple this line with Maya Angelou. But it is not just her purity, her genuineness that I see, but an ability to know more in one single moment, to speak to more things in one moment, than an average person usually does. Consciousness is comparable to a flashlight in a dark room. It can only illuminate so many things at one time. Because of that, it is difficult to get the full picture. We see fragments, as we shine our conscious flashlight on things, and sometimes we can form those fragments into a picture, and sometimes that picture makes sense, and sometimes we have to change it. But listening to Maya Angelou, I get the sense of a full picture, and as I listen to her, I don't know if it's that the diameter of the flashlight alters, or the depth of the light, but consciousness changes. And the more I listen, the more I'm certain that I am no longer seeing just one bundle of objects at a time, but many things all at once. With her, the fog clears, and a full picture comes into view, and it seems so /easy/. I wonder how she formed herself into such a remarkable human being. Every sentence of hers is like another's hundred. I am so incredibly thankful people like her exist.
Consider watching the interview with Maya Angelou and Oprah here:
http://www.oprah.com/own-super-soul-s...
I couple this line with Maya Angelou. But it is not just her purity, her genuineness that I see, but an ability to know more in one single moment, to speak to more things in one moment, than an average person usually does. Consciousness is comparable to a flashlight in a dark room. It can only illuminate so many things at one time. Because of that, it is difficult to get the full picture. We see fragments, as we shine our conscious flashlight on things, and sometimes we can form those fragments into a picture, and sometimes that picture makes sense, and sometimes we have to change it. But listening to Maya Angelou, I get the sense of a full picture, and as I listen to her, I don't know if it's that the diameter of the flashlight alters, or the depth of the light, but consciousness changes. And the more I listen, the more I'm certain that I am no longer seeing just one bundle of objects at a time, but many things all at once. With her, the fog clears, and a full picture comes into view, and it seems so /easy/. I wonder how she formed herself into such a remarkable human being. Every sentence of hers is like another's hundred. I am so incredibly thankful people like her exist.
Consider watching the interview with Maya Angelou and Oprah here:
http://www.oprah.com/own-super-soul-s...
October 12, 2014
More on Writing
So, here are a few other short tips that I have learned as I have started working on the second book in the Pivot trilogy, I have started working on ANOTHER book not in the Pivot universe, and have been reassessing and revising the first book.
1. In a story, you do need to lay out both the chessboard and chess pieces; however, you need to do more than that. You need to play the game, and the game must at all times follow the rules you have set down in the first portion of the book. The problem that I have is that I enjoy putting down the chess pieces, and I enjoy laying out the chessboard, but I tend to lapse in playing the pieces against each other in an actual game. I have discovered I can't just put down pretty pieces of glass or stone. I need to move them forward, pit them against each other with their own logical motivations. I can't just create and recreate the pieces and board each chapter.
2. Stephen King's statement that "Only God gets it right the first time" can be read two ways. It can be read as an assurance - that it's alright your story isn't perfect in the first or second draft. It can also, however, be read as a demand. In other words, DON'T turn your first or second draft in. "Only God gets it right the first time," so give your story six weeks and then go over it again, no matter what.
The truth is that, if it wasn't for the people I'm working with now, I would not have realized the necessity of hindsight. The magical nature of hindsight. No matter how great the first draft feels to me, it's not going to be perfect in the read through. I should NOT expect it to be.
3. An explanation for why hindsight is so magical is the following: The difficult thing about writing is that, unlike an art where you already have the substance you're going to manipulate, you have to first create that substance you're going to shape and form. So, writing a story or article is kind of like making the clay while you're also forming the clay into something, and then going back and molding the clay again. You're never going to get it perfect the first time because half of your effort in the first draft is just getting the monster out on the table, so you have to make peace with your errors. You are incapable of getting it right the first time because that's just part of the messy, messy process. That is probably why King says to just get the first draft out there. Just get it on the table, no matter how awfully ugly it looks. Because then you finally have the clay you are going to manipulate, add to, and form. Give it a few weeks, or a month, and then take another hard look.
1. In a story, you do need to lay out both the chessboard and chess pieces; however, you need to do more than that. You need to play the game, and the game must at all times follow the rules you have set down in the first portion of the book. The problem that I have is that I enjoy putting down the chess pieces, and I enjoy laying out the chessboard, but I tend to lapse in playing the pieces against each other in an actual game. I have discovered I can't just put down pretty pieces of glass or stone. I need to move them forward, pit them against each other with their own logical motivations. I can't just create and recreate the pieces and board each chapter.
2. Stephen King's statement that "Only God gets it right the first time" can be read two ways. It can be read as an assurance - that it's alright your story isn't perfect in the first or second draft. It can also, however, be read as a demand. In other words, DON'T turn your first or second draft in. "Only God gets it right the first time," so give your story six weeks and then go over it again, no matter what.
The truth is that, if it wasn't for the people I'm working with now, I would not have realized the necessity of hindsight. The magical nature of hindsight. No matter how great the first draft feels to me, it's not going to be perfect in the read through. I should NOT expect it to be.
3. An explanation for why hindsight is so magical is the following: The difficult thing about writing is that, unlike an art where you already have the substance you're going to manipulate, you have to first create that substance you're going to shape and form. So, writing a story or article is kind of like making the clay while you're also forming the clay into something, and then going back and molding the clay again. You're never going to get it perfect the first time because half of your effort in the first draft is just getting the monster out on the table, so you have to make peace with your errors. You are incapable of getting it right the first time because that's just part of the messy, messy process. That is probably why King says to just get the first draft out there. Just get it on the table, no matter how awfully ugly it looks. Because then you finally have the clay you are going to manipulate, add to, and form. Give it a few weeks, or a month, and then take another hard look.
October 6, 2014
Tread Lightly, for You Tread on My Dreams
So, here is something I have been thinking about due to recent experiences.
Any project that a person is working on with his or her full heart has a sensation equivalent to walking on a tight rope. This is a good metaphor for it because it has the connotations of fear, sweat, hard work, tension, and desire.
When you are in the middle of the tight rope it is not helpful for a person to call out to you, "Man, it doesn't really look like it's going to work out for you. You really shouldn't have started walking on that rope." Nor is it useful to hear, "That tight rope looks tough. I hope you will be adequately compensated for your work on it. If you aren't, it really wasn't worth the struggle." Nor is it useful to hear the very big extreme of, "You will surely fall."
On the other hand, it's not really helpful to hear, "Man, you got this. I don't know what you're worried about. It's just a twenty foot fall if you don't make it." Nor is it helpful to hear. "You're already to the other side. You shouldn't be worrying at all." In this instance, the person on the tight rope most likely thinks, "Shut up. To assume I'm already at the end, and to speak as if I'm already there, is just begging for a wind to come along and blow me off."
On top of these two extremes, it is apparent to me that when a person realizes he has made a mistake by saying one of the former sentences, like, "That tight rope looks tough. I hope you will be adequately compensated for your work on it. If you aren't, it really wasn't worth the struggle," then he is more likely to overcompensate by saying the exact opposite sentence: "You're already to the other side. You shouldn't be worrying at all." That is, to make up for their slight in one extreme, they then go the exact opposite direction to the other extreme because they think that's what will make up for it, or is what you want to hear, as you're walking on this very thin rope, with your heart beating fast in your chest.
These extremes are not helpful at all.
The most important thing for a person to hear on the tight rope is an acknowledgment of their very situation. That is, "Keep your eye on the rope. You've come really far, and that's good. But I know that there may still come a wind. Maintain your focus. Keep going. I'm wishing the best for you. You are in my thoughts."
I am suspicious of people who speak in the first or second extreme. I am loyal to the people who follow Yeats' poem: "Tread lightly. For you tread on my dreams." I am loyal to people who acknowledge the reality of a person's situation as they walk across the tight rope.
I'll add that I think just "You got this" is fine. But it's the whole "You got this. What could you possibly have to worry about?" that I have a problem with. I picture a person rolling their eyes.
And I mean for my example to access the kind of inherent superstitious nature of, "Please for the love of God don't invite the wind. I will tip over."
It can be just as frightening for people to speak of a success you haven't yet captured as it is for them to speak of a success they think you will never capture.
I think people who naturally tread lightly will automatically move towards the mediatory "Keep your eye on the rope. You've come far, and you should believe in me that I believe in you." It doesn't have to be a conscious decision.
I'll also add that walking on a tight rope makes one super sensitive to what one hears. It makes people super sensitive to statements that they may not take so seriously if they were standing on solid ground. And, taking things seriously, people naturally think more deeply about them. Hence, this post.
I really wanted to seek an adequate metaphor that is helpful for others (and myself) to explain their discomfort when people do not tread lightly in terms of their ideas or projects.
Any project that a person is working on with his or her full heart has a sensation equivalent to walking on a tight rope. This is a good metaphor for it because it has the connotations of fear, sweat, hard work, tension, and desire.
When you are in the middle of the tight rope it is not helpful for a person to call out to you, "Man, it doesn't really look like it's going to work out for you. You really shouldn't have started walking on that rope." Nor is it useful to hear, "That tight rope looks tough. I hope you will be adequately compensated for your work on it. If you aren't, it really wasn't worth the struggle." Nor is it useful to hear the very big extreme of, "You will surely fall."
On the other hand, it's not really helpful to hear, "Man, you got this. I don't know what you're worried about. It's just a twenty foot fall if you don't make it." Nor is it helpful to hear. "You're already to the other side. You shouldn't be worrying at all." In this instance, the person on the tight rope most likely thinks, "Shut up. To assume I'm already at the end, and to speak as if I'm already there, is just begging for a wind to come along and blow me off."
On top of these two extremes, it is apparent to me that when a person realizes he has made a mistake by saying one of the former sentences, like, "That tight rope looks tough. I hope you will be adequately compensated for your work on it. If you aren't, it really wasn't worth the struggle," then he is more likely to overcompensate by saying the exact opposite sentence: "You're already to the other side. You shouldn't be worrying at all." That is, to make up for their slight in one extreme, they then go the exact opposite direction to the other extreme because they think that's what will make up for it, or is what you want to hear, as you're walking on this very thin rope, with your heart beating fast in your chest.
These extremes are not helpful at all.
The most important thing for a person to hear on the tight rope is an acknowledgment of their very situation. That is, "Keep your eye on the rope. You've come really far, and that's good. But I know that there may still come a wind. Maintain your focus. Keep going. I'm wishing the best for you. You are in my thoughts."
I am suspicious of people who speak in the first or second extreme. I am loyal to the people who follow Yeats' poem: "Tread lightly. For you tread on my dreams." I am loyal to people who acknowledge the reality of a person's situation as they walk across the tight rope.
I'll add that I think just "You got this" is fine. But it's the whole "You got this. What could you possibly have to worry about?" that I have a problem with. I picture a person rolling their eyes.
And I mean for my example to access the kind of inherent superstitious nature of, "Please for the love of God don't invite the wind. I will tip over."
It can be just as frightening for people to speak of a success you haven't yet captured as it is for them to speak of a success they think you will never capture.
I think people who naturally tread lightly will automatically move towards the mediatory "Keep your eye on the rope. You've come far, and you should believe in me that I believe in you." It doesn't have to be a conscious decision.
I'll also add that walking on a tight rope makes one super sensitive to what one hears. It makes people super sensitive to statements that they may not take so seriously if they were standing on solid ground. And, taking things seriously, people naturally think more deeply about them. Hence, this post.
I really wanted to seek an adequate metaphor that is helpful for others (and myself) to explain their discomfort when people do not tread lightly in terms of their ideas or projects.
September 25, 2014
York Peppermint Patties = The Bliss and Addiction of Hardcore Narcotics?
This isn't really a post. It's just something I noticed recently.
For the first time just a few nights ago, I was watching one of the York Peppermint Patty commercials and was reminded of Requiem for a Dream's eye dilation shots (and the very movie cover of Requiem for a Dream).
York Peppermint Patties = the bliss and addiction of hardcore narcotics? Not an overt argument, but subtle perhaps?
York Peppermint Patties commercial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpM4t...
Requiem for a Dream:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0180093/
For the first time just a few nights ago, I was watching one of the York Peppermint Patty commercials and was reminded of Requiem for a Dream's eye dilation shots (and the very movie cover of Requiem for a Dream).
York Peppermint Patties = the bliss and addiction of hardcore narcotics? Not an overt argument, but subtle perhaps?
York Peppermint Patties commercial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpM4t...
Requiem for a Dream:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0180093/
