Two questions.

What does it mean to be able to find a way to color in voids that don’t directly affect our lives? Finding out about the deaths of strangers, be they celebrities or not, and feeling a dull, saturated type of human grief… well, that is still grief nevertheless. How powerful and yet how frail it is to be a human being with so much to conquer and yet given such an uncertain time limit.

Are we capable of communicating human kindness through a profession if the clarity of our intentions aren’t always so clear? I am not saying that human beings are all malicious by nature, but I question about how these issues interfere with the decisions we make in our lives and how it affects others in society. I worry about the execution of my decisions based on my intentions and the clarity of my head, which is so often clouded with poor judgment and emotions.

I am sure that other individuals have pondered the same and felt the same and I long for nothing more than a rigorous discussion regarding the technicalities of such issues.


3 thoughts on “Two questions.

  1. “the force be equal to mass times acceleration.”

    i was just watching that couple of days back and i thought, that was funny… especially it has this political implication with sensibilities in the hypertext of information which pressuposes ’empowerment’ as the holy grail of cloud logic. yet what globalization of monoculturist transpires is the anti-culturist at its core that it disregards the “i”, like “this is my opinion”, “what are your objections?” in its dialogic.

    the kind of argument you were making there.

    here’s the void of hope that one can become “lucid” to substitute the dialogue with “communique”. just precisely how the new feeds distorts the desires or worldviews, and it’s a bad drug, eh? or maybe how berlusconi’s assistants mapping out their propaganda strategies based on situationist international at the core of anti-situanionist itself when its original idea to provide analysis in a new stage of capitalist accumulation and theorizing a new form of praxis in order to counter it.

    surely one cannot blame the internet for such would be as lame as a postmodernist arguing about debate with meta-debates about the legitimacy of the debate itself… but one thing for sure, it’s fairly hard to live when one doesn’t get irony.

    freedom is real but no one can liberate the others.

  2. Shari,

    1. More and more I’ve come to realize that there are no voids out there, merely voids in our mind. The stranger you chance upon on the street possesses a history that stretches infinitely in every direction. Unfortunately we’re incapable of comprehension on such a level that we can only fill in the voids with our own imagination (something you already excel in), or attempt to place ourselves into a position where we end up directly affected.
    How do we know there’s antimatter if it can’t be seen?

    2. Don’t worry, there is no way you can be sure your intentions will be understood whether you know them or not. The likelihood of someone picking up exactly what you’re putting down is almost nil. The good thing is that the people whom your words have the most impact on are the people who are most prepared to accept your bs, so don’t hold back too much when it comes to them. Only in the company of strangers should you use vague, general terms that can’t be disputed. And remember, you say more with questions than statements.


    1. Hello,

      I realize that this is late but thank you for taking the time to give such a well-thought out response. Although it has been more than a year since those two questions were posted,they still occupy my mind every now and again. The voids of our minds can only be colored by so much but this doesn’t change the fact that we are still preoccupied, sometimes even obsessed, with seeking answers or some clarity to the things that catch us on a daily basis. You are right that we say more with questions than with statements – I think that is a concise way of putting it all across, and it sometimes makes me wonder the relevance of even disputing anything at all.

      But yet I sometimes wonder if it is really true that our words have the most impact on the ones dearest to us. What if it touches strangers more? I think that to yearn to be a writer is having that strong desire to graze the surfaces of others unknown to us, to touch them, to flatter or inspire or move them, even at the slightest shift. It is voyeurism at its best.

      Perhaps someday we can debate this further. In the meantime, I hope this reaches you somehow and that you are in good health.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s