Do you ever have those "grrr" moments where you know that what you are saying is both new and correct, and it seems like no one will just take what you are saying as a potential solution, instead getting bogged down in how some aspect of the idea could never work?
In these moments, right or wrong, we can feel very alone. It's as if we are experiencing the world by ourselves, instead of collectively. We also see other people as both trapped and in cahouts, intensifying the lonliness. I offer collective existentialism (CE) as a way to understand this perception.
The aspect of CE that I maybe didn't stress enough in my last post is that people cannot experience reality fully when they are subject to collective existential forces. This is not a choice of theirs, however much of a choice or precess of seduction the initial leap into CE was. And so, this concept is along the lines of many anti-groupthink, anti-media concepts but provides a different focus, a different angle for compassion, and a different strategy for change.
The strategy for change is key, and what I wish to flesh out. How can we end the now-unconscious cycle of CE in an individual. I believe that this could be done using the same kind of tools that a spiritual guru might utilize. Essentially, one who wishes to end CE in another must simply experience reality in a charismatic way around that other person. I think examples of this should be obvious, take watching a grieving widow, if charismatic, for example. And of course the charisma would depends on the experience.
That's all and well, you might say, but what about dealing with groups? How can one really affect a group, all under the spell of CE, through mere charisma? The short answer is that most people cannot, and attempting to will make one feel attacked from all sides, having potentially serious long-term psychological effects. This is of course because the individual would be attacked from all sides by the varied, unconscious resistance of each individual in the group. Poison arrows with different poison on each because, we must keep in mind, it is CE that is the illusion and each inidividual succumbs to it in different ways.
In the end, we must all focus on ourselves and lead by example in this arena, thereby lessening the need for the great charismatic leaders that come so infrequently. Keep in mind, too, that some aspect of experience that for you has always come naturally, might be the greatest struggle for another individual who has succumbed to a deadened collective exestential attitude toward that aspect of experience. You could be the example that helps set that individual free, the key to their birthright paradise.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Did I stumble upon a new field of study?
So I titled my last post "Collective Existentialism" after stumbling across the phrase in my mind-wanderings at 5am. I think it has a lot going for it so here goes:
Collective existentialism grows from individual consciousness. For an individual, there are many escapes from the rush of consciousness: unconsciousness, cultural simplicity, etc.. Collective existentialism is a symptom of one or more of these escapes.
In my last post, I suggest that a true genius is someone who can create change that overcomes collective, unconscious restraint in an elegant way. To put it another way, a true genius can create change that does not cause a collective existential crisis.
A collective existential crisis might look something like a leader persecuting someone unjustly and the community going along with it even though there is little logic to support the punishment, in whatever form. The community would go along with it because of a collective, unconscious aversion to something that the persecuted individual represented. The collective would accept the injustice because of it's function in stopping a collective existential crisis.
It's important to point out that existentialism and crisis are a part of life/consciousness and there is no value judgment as to what is better, only that perhaps the ideal would be to live as consciously as possible and never experience crisis.
I believe that a prime example of collective existentialism is death, generally, and funerals in particular. This is to say that funeral rituals serve, in part, to avoid a collective existential crisis. The ritual in itself reflects he existence of the collective existentialism. As children, many of us attempt to take on the issue of death by ourselves, experiencing a few sleepless and tear-laden nights as a result. Most of us transition from this individualized existential crisis, however resolved, into collective existentialism with regard to death.
Collective existentialism is very powerful in temporary instantiation as well. A group watching a performance can begin to perceive reality in similar ways and this is in fact part of the reason that people enjoy large performances. This group perception is a kind of break from individual consciousness. The existential aspect of this phenomenon consists of the conscious processes that are not occurring as they normally would in the individual or collective mind.
For example, an individual at performance is not asking him or herself, most likely, why am I doing what all of these other people are doing? generally, is this what I should be doing? and likely not having the same kind of sexual thoughts that occur when surrounded by strangers normally. If this individual were to suddenly awaken in a room where hundreds of people were sitting in chairs and looking at a performance, there would be a period of existential crisis, perhaps slipping into a collective existential peacefulness but likely causing a panic.
This is perhaps the most interesting aspect of collective existentialism. A person allows it to happen in a semi-conscious or ritualized manner. This process then becomes unconscious, especially when the ritual is similar to a previous experience with collective consciousness. For example, a good way to get people to be calm in a crowd and not worry about what might happen in a small, enclosed, area that they have never been to before is to give them each tickets, take the tickets at the door and give back stubs, have seats in the room, etc.. This ritual will cause a reduction in the conscious processes that might question the situation. In short, this is a great way to reduce individual consciousness and promote collective consciousness.
If, instead, a large group of dispersed people were told to go into a room and the room had no chairs (just beds?), no clear front or back to the room, no tickets, no stubs, etc. then you can be sure that many people would panic or simply refuse to go in, whatever the non-ritualized content might be. At the same time, this could perhaps be overcome by simply having music playing and a table with drinks prominently displayed.
What I'm really curious about, is how to get a group of people who, for example, have stopped worrying about why they are a a certain location and doing a certain thing, to start thinking about that and other things, as a group or individually.
I mean, could there be a way to make a hundred people seated in a movie theatre suddenly feel as if they are one hundred people standing up in an empty warehouse? And would it be possible to get people at a funeral, besides the grieving widow, to have existential crisis concerning death?
The fact is that I believe that this collective existentialism creates a problem. I believe it carries over into daily life for many people and essentially stops them from having certain conscious thoughts and reacting to experience in certain ways. Perhaps church-goers are less able to experience the divine outside of church, in nature of in the eyes of another person. I'm just saying that this might be the case. But also, people who watch lots of tv news and political talk might find it difficult to fully engage in a political discussion with a friend, or an interesting stranger.
When collective existentialism extends into daily life, there is the problem that the individual is neither having that portion of consciousness available to them, nor experiencing the collective. It's as if no change can occur until another ritual has occurred and what are the chances, in modern times, that another ritualized, collective consciousness event will be liberating for that person?
I worry that people are not really small-minded, that much of their minds are trapped in a collective perception of reality. Going back to politics, it seems that many people believe that television pundits bring up all of the important political issues. And so, an individual might hear of another issue from a friend or stranger and not be able to have a fully conscious reaction to that new piece of information, perspective, or what have you until they hear it on television or perhaps begin to reject the ritual of televised political debate. The sad thing is that if a person hears about something and cannot fully experience it until the next ritual, they are almost guaranteed to adopt one of the perceptions that exists in the ritualized presentation.
In this way, collective existentialism is the result of a ritualized perception of reality.
Collective existentialism grows from individual consciousness. For an individual, there are many escapes from the rush of consciousness: unconsciousness, cultural simplicity, etc.. Collective existentialism is a symptom of one or more of these escapes.
In my last post, I suggest that a true genius is someone who can create change that overcomes collective, unconscious restraint in an elegant way. To put it another way, a true genius can create change that does not cause a collective existential crisis.
A collective existential crisis might look something like a leader persecuting someone unjustly and the community going along with it even though there is little logic to support the punishment, in whatever form. The community would go along with it because of a collective, unconscious aversion to something that the persecuted individual represented. The collective would accept the injustice because of it's function in stopping a collective existential crisis.
It's important to point out that existentialism and crisis are a part of life/consciousness and there is no value judgment as to what is better, only that perhaps the ideal would be to live as consciously as possible and never experience crisis.
I believe that a prime example of collective existentialism is death, generally, and funerals in particular. This is to say that funeral rituals serve, in part, to avoid a collective existential crisis. The ritual in itself reflects he existence of the collective existentialism. As children, many of us attempt to take on the issue of death by ourselves, experiencing a few sleepless and tear-laden nights as a result. Most of us transition from this individualized existential crisis, however resolved, into collective existentialism with regard to death.
Collective existentialism is very powerful in temporary instantiation as well. A group watching a performance can begin to perceive reality in similar ways and this is in fact part of the reason that people enjoy large performances. This group perception is a kind of break from individual consciousness. The existential aspect of this phenomenon consists of the conscious processes that are not occurring as they normally would in the individual or collective mind.
For example, an individual at performance is not asking him or herself, most likely, why am I doing what all of these other people are doing? generally, is this what I should be doing? and likely not having the same kind of sexual thoughts that occur when surrounded by strangers normally. If this individual were to suddenly awaken in a room where hundreds of people were sitting in chairs and looking at a performance, there would be a period of existential crisis, perhaps slipping into a collective existential peacefulness but likely causing a panic.
This is perhaps the most interesting aspect of collective existentialism. A person allows it to happen in a semi-conscious or ritualized manner. This process then becomes unconscious, especially when the ritual is similar to a previous experience with collective consciousness. For example, a good way to get people to be calm in a crowd and not worry about what might happen in a small, enclosed, area that they have never been to before is to give them each tickets, take the tickets at the door and give back stubs, have seats in the room, etc.. This ritual will cause a reduction in the conscious processes that might question the situation. In short, this is a great way to reduce individual consciousness and promote collective consciousness.
If, instead, a large group of dispersed people were told to go into a room and the room had no chairs (just beds?), no clear front or back to the room, no tickets, no stubs, etc. then you can be sure that many people would panic or simply refuse to go in, whatever the non-ritualized content might be. At the same time, this could perhaps be overcome by simply having music playing and a table with drinks prominently displayed.
What I'm really curious about, is how to get a group of people who, for example, have stopped worrying about why they are a a certain location and doing a certain thing, to start thinking about that and other things, as a group or individually.
I mean, could there be a way to make a hundred people seated in a movie theatre suddenly feel as if they are one hundred people standing up in an empty warehouse? And would it be possible to get people at a funeral, besides the grieving widow, to have existential crisis concerning death?
The fact is that I believe that this collective existentialism creates a problem. I believe it carries over into daily life for many people and essentially stops them from having certain conscious thoughts and reacting to experience in certain ways. Perhaps church-goers are less able to experience the divine outside of church, in nature of in the eyes of another person. I'm just saying that this might be the case. But also, people who watch lots of tv news and political talk might find it difficult to fully engage in a political discussion with a friend, or an interesting stranger.
When collective existentialism extends into daily life, there is the problem that the individual is neither having that portion of consciousness available to them, nor experiencing the collective. It's as if no change can occur until another ritual has occurred and what are the chances, in modern times, that another ritualized, collective consciousness event will be liberating for that person?
I worry that people are not really small-minded, that much of their minds are trapped in a collective perception of reality. Going back to politics, it seems that many people believe that television pundits bring up all of the important political issues. And so, an individual might hear of another issue from a friend or stranger and not be able to have a fully conscious reaction to that new piece of information, perspective, or what have you until they hear it on television or perhaps begin to reject the ritual of televised political debate. The sad thing is that if a person hears about something and cannot fully experience it until the next ritual, they are almost guaranteed to adopt one of the perceptions that exists in the ritualized presentation.
In this way, collective existentialism is the result of a ritualized perception of reality.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Collective Existentialism
Do we revere things because we hope that other people will too?
Maybe openness is the real way, tempered by experience. How many people really die in bar fights, blind rages, etc? But then I see those back-alley people. Women who don't realize how badly they are treated, constantly tense. Men who are ready to lash out at a moment's notice. There is little room for growth there but wasn't this a natural restraint on progress? Before conservatives, there was the reality of slowness in the conceptual evolution of, and implementation of, progress. Now we have some restraint on the implementation of progress and varying levels of theoretical restraints on the evolution of progress. We have outgrown the base-emotional restraint and yet have not devised any system to replace that restraint. The fact is that most people are still functionally the same as the back-alley types that used to be the ruling majority except they no longer restrain anyone else with their backward culture (maybe because of police, distraction, apathy?), fear, violence, etc.. Where has this balance gone?
The worst thing is that I can hear the responses now, from the mediocre intellects of our time. They will say that all these new conceptualizations of progress and the wild implementation is nothing but good, perhaps not incrementally but in the long run. They ignore the complexity of the balance that we have lost. The fact is that those of us who can control our more base emotions are doing just that, controlling them. They exist, they are human responses, they carry information. A true genius listens to his unconscious.... somehow. And a true genius knows with some certainty whether their increment of progress sits well with humanity as a whole, the whole that includes the base emotions. This is how the geniuses of the past avoided ostracism, to an extent which allowed the acceptance of their progress, but perhaps more importantly earned the respect of their communities over the course of their lives.
This is the heart of the matter, the tribe mentality, the violence, the superstitions, the small-mindedness circumvented by genuine genius, the kind of mind that listens to the whole of humanity (at least within that community) and earns the awe-struck respect of that community over a lifetime, leading to an instance of progress that is accepted by that "tribe". This process ensured that growth was harmonious with consciousness, and vice versa.
The fact is that consciousness has been scattered in the modern world. Divide and conquer, right? this is how capitalism has survived so long without a re-organization of wealth. All these different "progresses" that don't mesh with consciousness.
Maybe openness is the real way, tempered by experience. How many people really die in bar fights, blind rages, etc? But then I see those back-alley people. Women who don't realize how badly they are treated, constantly tense. Men who are ready to lash out at a moment's notice. There is little room for growth there but wasn't this a natural restraint on progress? Before conservatives, there was the reality of slowness in the conceptual evolution of, and implementation of, progress. Now we have some restraint on the implementation of progress and varying levels of theoretical restraints on the evolution of progress. We have outgrown the base-emotional restraint and yet have not devised any system to replace that restraint. The fact is that most people are still functionally the same as the back-alley types that used to be the ruling majority except they no longer restrain anyone else with their backward culture (maybe because of police, distraction, apathy?), fear, violence, etc.. Where has this balance gone?
The worst thing is that I can hear the responses now, from the mediocre intellects of our time. They will say that all these new conceptualizations of progress and the wild implementation is nothing but good, perhaps not incrementally but in the long run. They ignore the complexity of the balance that we have lost. The fact is that those of us who can control our more base emotions are doing just that, controlling them. They exist, they are human responses, they carry information. A true genius listens to his unconscious.... somehow. And a true genius knows with some certainty whether their increment of progress sits well with humanity as a whole, the whole that includes the base emotions. This is how the geniuses of the past avoided ostracism, to an extent which allowed the acceptance of their progress, but perhaps more importantly earned the respect of their communities over the course of their lives.
This is the heart of the matter, the tribe mentality, the violence, the superstitions, the small-mindedness circumvented by genuine genius, the kind of mind that listens to the whole of humanity (at least within that community) and earns the awe-struck respect of that community over a lifetime, leading to an instance of progress that is accepted by that "tribe". This process ensured that growth was harmonious with consciousness, and vice versa.
The fact is that consciousness has been scattered in the modern world. Divide and conquer, right? this is how capitalism has survived so long without a re-organization of wealth. All these different "progresses" that don't mesh with consciousness.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
The End of Daze
“Well granddaughter, the world was a much different place when I was young. I started to see it clearly at around the age of 20, in 2005. In those times, most people's perception of reality was controlled by something called mass media, not by one's parents', friends', and acquaintances' life experiences like today.”
And that wouldn't have been so bad except that mass media was a highly manipulated medium, and the paradigms it created in people's minds were wrought with misguided intention. The movies, television programs, and the like mostly put forward the paradigm that social success required sacrifice, struggle, or natural good looks at the least. The news coverage made economics and politics seem complex and nearly unknowable to a common man, best left to the rich and politically connected.”
And I could go on and on. The main point I want to make is that most people were afraid to either disregard popularly held beliefs or have beliefs of their own that were not popular. Secondly, these beliefs came from far away and corrupted sources, not from personal connections.”
Nowadays, as you know, we love to hear about people's personal perspectives an beliefs, and we don't mind if someone doesn't share our belief, like the man we met yesterday who thought that the moon was a liquid mass that communicated with our ocean. We assume these days that that perspective is somehow based on personal experience, somehow valuable to that man, and also that it is entirely harmless to us that he holds that belief. Furthermore we wouldn't care in the slightest if someone thought that the moon was an illusion and never wanted to discuss it.”
People's minds were more compartmentalized back then as well. I think this must have related to how many aspects of life did not seem to logically relate to one another. The public school system seemed to me to play a large role in this phenomenon. In school, it was common for students to act nonchalant about the information being taught and do a minimum amount of work, focusing on receiving a good grade from a particular teacher based on that teacher's preferences, acting as if one cared about the teacher's perspective but not genuinely seeking a deeper understanding of the material. Conversely, socializing between students seemed to largely rely upon taking even the smallest social interactions, gossip, etc. very seriously and acting as if one didn't seek any peer approval, even though one truly did seek such approval.”
Employment also followed this model. Most jobs existed as parts of large corporations, where the individual worker did not care about the success of the company, focusing instead upon pleasing their superiors and avoiding responsibility. Interestingly enough, it was popular to both complain about the corporate structure when socializing and also discuss one's personal work efforts with pride. In these ways, the individual internalized the bureaucracy and therefore became compartmentalized.”
There were outsiders, of course. The problem with many of these people is that they lacked either the social support or psychological and experiential framework for success outside of the system. For me, starting at age 20, many situations that I observed and experienced made me feel sad about the path that humanity was on. Genuine interactions on deep subjects were few and far between for me until age 26 or so. Often enough, groups of people would form that were some ways along the path toward a better perspective and motivation but stall along the way, instead falling into patterns of group-think and bureaucracy. It was very few who were willing to meet the challenges of being an outsider head-on and even upon meeting these few, I found that connection did not always lead to support, as there was a mutual resignation toward solitude and a lack of psychological and experiential framework for successful and sustainable support. This charged for me around the age of 26, though.”
A perspective-shift happened for many people around that time. People, rich and poor, moved toward a more genuine appreciation of natural beauty. This impulse was largely corralled by the media, channeled toward global environmental politics and environmental tourism, outdoor sporting products and destinations, and so forth. In the end, though, this recognition that the natural beauty needed no enhancement, and existed everywhere that hadn't been spoiled, won out for a large minority of the population.”
Along with this realization came movements toward many of the popular shared values that we have today. People began to appreciate those who were different from themselves in experience and belief, or lack of belief, more and more. Hand in hand with that change, activities, destinations, and topics of conversation that had been very popular for decades became less attractive to most people. This led to economic and cultural instability, but also an explosion in genuine exploration and the generation of new outlets for creativity.”
“It became very vital for people to share resources after this shift had gained momentum. Luckily, the corrupt government was set up to provide many resources, provided that the ratio of wealth stayed where it was. This was ultimately unsustainable but as the value of money became more and more absurd, people began to realize that they were already sharing resources with one another, through the middleman of currency. This realization led to the most difficult part of the transition, the reorganization of wealth.”
Luckily enough, a popular belief emerged that the wealthy needed to be pitied and not scoured. This belief was based on experience. The masses had realized, as government supplied more and more resources and therefore made a farce of the monetary system, that sharing labor and goods without real concern for future wealth, as becoming wealthy if you weren't already had become an impossible dream, was an easy life. The fact remained, though, that the balance of wealth made no sense to anyone, least of all the wealthy who were now being openly pitied by the poor and free. As the bottom of every bureaucratic pyramid became a sea of helping hands, the top became more rigid and brutal. In conjunction with various incidences of brutality by the wealthy and their henchmen, another popular belief emerged: that suffering at the hands of the wealthy, pitiable wretches deserved the highest praise and support and reporting on that subject became the most popular form of alternative media.”
In the end, there were brutal episodes and tragedy for sure, but much of this was alleviated by time, as more and more heirs and heiresses donated all wealth to the common good, and more and more layers of the pyramid melted into a watery mess of genuine human interaction.”
The rest, as we used to say, is history. There were those famous catastrophes and last stands of the old guard. There were hard times and many fleeting moments of communal bliss. Things have leveled off, very much so, and yet things are still changing.”
And that wouldn't have been so bad except that mass media was a highly manipulated medium, and the paradigms it created in people's minds were wrought with misguided intention. The movies, television programs, and the like mostly put forward the paradigm that social success required sacrifice, struggle, or natural good looks at the least. The news coverage made economics and politics seem complex and nearly unknowable to a common man, best left to the rich and politically connected.”
And I could go on and on. The main point I want to make is that most people were afraid to either disregard popularly held beliefs or have beliefs of their own that were not popular. Secondly, these beliefs came from far away and corrupted sources, not from personal connections.”
Nowadays, as you know, we love to hear about people's personal perspectives an beliefs, and we don't mind if someone doesn't share our belief, like the man we met yesterday who thought that the moon was a liquid mass that communicated with our ocean. We assume these days that that perspective is somehow based on personal experience, somehow valuable to that man, and also that it is entirely harmless to us that he holds that belief. Furthermore we wouldn't care in the slightest if someone thought that the moon was an illusion and never wanted to discuss it.”
People's minds were more compartmentalized back then as well. I think this must have related to how many aspects of life did not seem to logically relate to one another. The public school system seemed to me to play a large role in this phenomenon. In school, it was common for students to act nonchalant about the information being taught and do a minimum amount of work, focusing on receiving a good grade from a particular teacher based on that teacher's preferences, acting as if one cared about the teacher's perspective but not genuinely seeking a deeper understanding of the material. Conversely, socializing between students seemed to largely rely upon taking even the smallest social interactions, gossip, etc. very seriously and acting as if one didn't seek any peer approval, even though one truly did seek such approval.”
Employment also followed this model. Most jobs existed as parts of large corporations, where the individual worker did not care about the success of the company, focusing instead upon pleasing their superiors and avoiding responsibility. Interestingly enough, it was popular to both complain about the corporate structure when socializing and also discuss one's personal work efforts with pride. In these ways, the individual internalized the bureaucracy and therefore became compartmentalized.”
There were outsiders, of course. The problem with many of these people is that they lacked either the social support or psychological and experiential framework for success outside of the system. For me, starting at age 20, many situations that I observed and experienced made me feel sad about the path that humanity was on. Genuine interactions on deep subjects were few and far between for me until age 26 or so. Often enough, groups of people would form that were some ways along the path toward a better perspective and motivation but stall along the way, instead falling into patterns of group-think and bureaucracy. It was very few who were willing to meet the challenges of being an outsider head-on and even upon meeting these few, I found that connection did not always lead to support, as there was a mutual resignation toward solitude and a lack of psychological and experiential framework for successful and sustainable support. This charged for me around the age of 26, though.”
A perspective-shift happened for many people around that time. People, rich and poor, moved toward a more genuine appreciation of natural beauty. This impulse was largely corralled by the media, channeled toward global environmental politics and environmental tourism, outdoor sporting products and destinations, and so forth. In the end, though, this recognition that the natural beauty needed no enhancement, and existed everywhere that hadn't been spoiled, won out for a large minority of the population.”
Along with this realization came movements toward many of the popular shared values that we have today. People began to appreciate those who were different from themselves in experience and belief, or lack of belief, more and more. Hand in hand with that change, activities, destinations, and topics of conversation that had been very popular for decades became less attractive to most people. This led to economic and cultural instability, but also an explosion in genuine exploration and the generation of new outlets for creativity.”
“It became very vital for people to share resources after this shift had gained momentum. Luckily, the corrupt government was set up to provide many resources, provided that the ratio of wealth stayed where it was. This was ultimately unsustainable but as the value of money became more and more absurd, people began to realize that they were already sharing resources with one another, through the middleman of currency. This realization led to the most difficult part of the transition, the reorganization of wealth.”
Luckily enough, a popular belief emerged that the wealthy needed to be pitied and not scoured. This belief was based on experience. The masses had realized, as government supplied more and more resources and therefore made a farce of the monetary system, that sharing labor and goods without real concern for future wealth, as becoming wealthy if you weren't already had become an impossible dream, was an easy life. The fact remained, though, that the balance of wealth made no sense to anyone, least of all the wealthy who were now being openly pitied by the poor and free. As the bottom of every bureaucratic pyramid became a sea of helping hands, the top became more rigid and brutal. In conjunction with various incidences of brutality by the wealthy and their henchmen, another popular belief emerged: that suffering at the hands of the wealthy, pitiable wretches deserved the highest praise and support and reporting on that subject became the most popular form of alternative media.”
In the end, there were brutal episodes and tragedy for sure, but much of this was alleviated by time, as more and more heirs and heiresses donated all wealth to the common good, and more and more layers of the pyramid melted into a watery mess of genuine human interaction.”
The rest, as we used to say, is history. There were those famous catastrophes and last stands of the old guard. There were hard times and many fleeting moments of communal bliss. Things have leveled off, very much so, and yet things are still changing.”
Monday, July 11, 2011
I blow my nose (rap song)
I'm striking this pose because I'm blowing my nose
I'm striking this pose because I'm blowing my nose
I'm striking this pose because I'm blowing my nose
The only reason that I pose is that I'm blowing my nose
I blow my nose because I'm wearing clothes
I blow my nose because I'm wearing clothes
I blow my nose because I'm wearing clothes
The only reason that I blow is cuz I'm wearing clothes
I'm wearing clothes so that nobody knows
I'm wearing clothes so that nobody knows
I'm wearing clothes so that nobody knows
I'm only wearing clothes so that nobody knows
Nobody knows that when I strike a pose
To blow my nose it's cuz I'm wearing clothes
Nobody knows because nobody shows
I strike a pose because nobody shows
I'm striking this pose because I'm blowing my nose
I'm striking this pose because I'm blowing my nose
The only reason that I pose is that I'm blowing my nose
I blow my nose because I'm wearing clothes
I blow my nose because I'm wearing clothes
I blow my nose because I'm wearing clothes
The only reason that I blow is cuz I'm wearing clothes
I'm wearing clothes so that nobody knows
I'm wearing clothes so that nobody knows
I'm wearing clothes so that nobody knows
I'm only wearing clothes so that nobody knows
Nobody knows that when I strike a pose
To blow my nose it's cuz I'm wearing clothes
Nobody knows because nobody shows
I strike a pose because nobody shows
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Everyone Desires Me
Everyone desires me
some want me to quiet down
some want me to slouch
with eyes down
speaking softly until scolded for it
some want me to smile when they smile
to disappear when they frown
to forget most of what they do
some want me to surprise them
but do not know it
many wish for me to lie, cold and stiff
but some only want me to die
some want me to quiet down
some want me to slouch
with eyes down
speaking softly until scolded for it
some want me to smile when they smile
to disappear when they frown
to forget most of what they do
some want me to surprise them
but do not know it
many wish for me to lie, cold and stiff
but some only want me to die
Thursday, July 7, 2011
The flowers
The flowers
they smell me
The cool wind comes over snow,
through trees,
between the grass
to feel me
Last night I was afraid
of what I'd meet between here
and nowhere
Tonight I am peaceful
already violated by my senses
The constant prodding of the physical
prepares me for the dreamworld
they smell me
The cool wind comes over snow,
through trees,
between the grass
to feel me
Last night I was afraid
of what I'd meet between here
and nowhere
Tonight I am peaceful
already violated by my senses
The constant prodding of the physical
prepares me for the dreamworld
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Lucid Dream Goals
1. Meet my spirit animal
2. Create a Sunset
3. Write a song/poem
4. Cry for the beauty of the world
5. Do Qi Gong
2. Create a Sunset
3. Write a song/poem
4. Cry for the beauty of the world
5. Do Qi Gong
Monday, January 17, 2011
the beautiful secret
The secret, the real secret,
Is usually noticed in a flicker,
Or caught in a glance
There are some who keep it as a flame,
Even those can't know it all at once.
It is a beautiful and terrifying secret,
Sometimes I can see it in your eyes.
Is usually noticed in a flicker,
Or caught in a glance
There are some who keep it as a flame,
Even those can't know it all at once.
It is a beautiful and terrifying secret,
Sometimes I can see it in your eyes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
