Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Ailing, illing, but not illin'

I want to drill a hole in my cranium to alleviate the pressure that is causing this headache. Also I'm pretty positive I have a fever and, possibly, the flu. Me need cortisone shot, right in the buttock. Never before have I longed to have my ass pierced and violated -- that's how rotten I feel. I'm not going to work today and depending on what the doc tells me I may not tomorrow. Fuck work. I woke up with night sweats last night and fits of hot and cold. T'aint fun.

If anyone wants to bring me some coffee ice cream I'll metaphorically suck their dick.

On the sunny side my landlord is putting in a new air conditioner for me. which excites me beyond comprehension; I feel like a little schoolgirl. I've always maintained that the greatest invention man or woman ever made was air conditioning. Central air is king, but the window units do the job.

I'm making copies of all my DVD's so I can sell them. If anyone is interested they're $5 each, probably. And while on the topic of high finance I may have to sell my ACL tickets. I'm running very light on the yen lately and need to inject a little Jewiness into my practices.

Mmmmmm that's good anti-semitism...

Sunday, July 23, 2006

J. Krishnamurti on love

"Where there is the possibility of pain there is no love The questioner wants to know how he can act freely and without self-repression when he knows his action must hurt those he loves. You know, to love is to be free; both parties are free. Where there is the possibility of pain, where there is the possibility of suffering in love, it is not love, it is merely a subtle form of possession, of acquisitiveness. If you love, really love someone, there is no possibility of giving him pain when you do something that you think is right. It is only when you want that person to do what you desire or he wants you to do what he desires, that there is pain. That is, you like to be possessed; you feel safe, secure, comfortable; though you know that comfort is but transient, you take shelter in that comfort, in that transience. So each struggle for comfort, for encouragement, really but betrays the lack of inward richness; and therefore an action separate, apart from the other individual naturally creates disturbance, pain and suffering; and one individual has to suppress what he really feels in order to adjust himself to the other. In other words, this constant repression, brought about by so-called love, destroys the two individuals. In that love there is no freedom; it is merely a subtle bondage.

Book of Life - July 21st

Thursday, July 20, 2006

R.W. Emerson Self-tout

This is an excerpt from the essay Self Reliance by Emerson:

But the man is, as it were, clapped into jail by his consciousness. As soon as he has once acted or spoken with eclat, he is a committed person, watched by the sympathy or the hatred of hundreds, whose affections must now enter into his account. There is no Lethe for this. Ah, that he could pass again into his neutrality! Who can thus avoid all pledges, and having observed, observe again from the same unaffected, unbiased, unbribable, unaffrighted innocence, must always be formidable. He would utter opinions on all passing affairs, which being seen to be not private, but necessary, would sink like darts into the ear of men, and put them in fear.

I've been reading some essays by Emerson, one of my favorite writers to quote. I find myself disagreeing with him in regard to Self-Reliance though.

He writes that our natural instincts should trump opinions and perceptions honed by existence, education, society, culture, etc.; a child's view is superior to that of an adult's since it has not been corrupted by experience.

Perception isn't pure and right simply because it hasn't been influenced by outside factors though. Humans as animals have an innate desire to eat, to fuck, but we don't run willy-nilly over creation stealing and raping to nourish those instincts, because civilization has pre-empted those needs in recognition that we need an ordered societal structure.

Par example: our president -- not exactly an algonquin roundtable nominee. Supporters call him "resolute" for tuning out opinions of the American and world majority and doing what he allegedly believes is right non grata (and in the fantasy bubble world in which he lives, I may cede that he does believe he is right).

But we can't live in fantasy worlds. It's necessary that you formulate beliefs and practices based on something more factual and applicable than instinct (or Biblical passages, but that's a whole other morass to get into). I understand the Ockam's razor notion of simplicity's credence, but even that simplicity is based on proven scientific fact.

Maybe childlike innocence is prefereable in some ways to adults formulating opinions around what they want to believe, not necessarily the truth, such as those that decide what ends they want (usually financial gain) and subsequently facilitate the means in their mind to make said means seem moral and/or logical, ala Bush. But I don't accept that our original humanity is always corrupted by experience.

Ralphie, no air rifle for you this Xmas. It all sounds like a rationale for laissez-faire, thunderdome behavior.

Although I can appreciate the notion of heaving a big helping heaping of "Fuck You" to conformity, so long as it bears reason in mind and isn't some ephemeral rebellion for the sake of rebellion.

Currently Listening To:

The Grates

Gravity Won't Get You High


Hello all (both of you). I am still alive and blogging, I just mainly do it on my Myspace blog now:


It's just more convenient to get blog updates via mail than to have to repeatedly check people's blogs every day to see if they've posted something new.

I'm deliberating coming back to blogger, but for the time-being if you want to read my drivel you'll have to go there. Sincerely I appreciate the interest.

Love and fucks.