Complementary Partner?

When you’re young, you like simple, you like big statements. “Life is sad”, or “I’ll find my prince”, or “I wanna be an actor”.

Some people stay there, it’s why they love categories. They REALLY think they are INTJ – and if you say that sometimes you are also an INFJ, they say you don’t understand the concept. They use boxes and labels. For themselves.

Big question I had when I was in my twenties : “What’s better, to find a complementary partner or a same as you partner?”.

With easily guessed consequences :

  1. If you marry someone like you, it’s easier, you party together, you love the same movies and musics, and your sex life is paradise.
  2. If you marry someone not like you, it’s a mess : quiet vs loud, classical music and hardcore rap, reading in bed and motorbiking in the mud.

After all : BooksTeaCat, SportsBeerDog & their Social Interactions Necessities

Then you grow up and you live and the constant rain of complexities, disillusions and surprises end up to your upgrade : it’s A Matter of Levers – simplicity is senseless.

As we are moving forward in our days, we change, we plug to possibilities, we have many speeds, many joys, many powers and weaknesses, we have many intensities, and feelings.

(And it’s the same for your partner, silly!)

Whoever your partner is, the result is a mess, right? So what? That’s life! Amor Fati!

Oh snap : When you hate someone and 3 mn later you deeply love this person

  1. When your other is a lot like you, it’s great : my lover is a cat person, a book lover, a quiet person, and she has no car (oh this is perfect!) – we evolve in the same aquarium. And I can write or take photos as much as I want!
  2. When your other is a lot NOT like you, good. Why did you choose this person? How do you dance? Isn’t complementary perfect? Don’t you like to read alone when your spouse kills ducks in mudfens? Don’t you have a friend to talk to when your lover is a man of zero words? And also don’t we all need to be disturbed?

What’s the secret here? To stay yourself, of course. Not to bend too much, at the risk of losing your inner light…

Mmhhhhh…

“Opposites attract, but similarities bind”. Is that true?

The “Let’s make it a dance” tool says this : “When it’s difficult somewhere but you have to insist and you have to stay in the system, just accept and absorb the difficulties – and invent a dance. Your dance. It’s a mess, but you can dance it, smile, and climb the stairs”. And ignore the others. Nobody can understand your own dance. It’s a secret.

Sorry, this article is a mess, tant pis. I don’t even know where it went. Hence, I found a picture of my Eliette playing watergunning (or squirtpistoling) with a friend, voilà.

Bonne journée ! Thanks for reading!

IMG_2856b.jpg

Everything that goes wrong goes right

Are our Fears camouflaged Desires?

Advertisements

The wish for mentor

Mentor sounds good. It’s not a guru – where you feel it’s toxic, too much, manipulation. It’s not a guide. It’s maybe in the middle…

It’s not a muse, nor an authority, it’s not a coach, not your parents, or disturbers.

I’m reading Irving Yalom‘s autobiography, where he tells his constant need, during his growing life, for a mentor. An adult person who would have “detected” his uniqueness, his talents, his whatever makes one special…

Then, this person would guide you a little, would show you things you should know, and would probably tell your parents (who aren’t aware, of course).

It’s a cousin-pattern of many things, linked to Types,

  • like the teacher who unblocks you with a single phrase,
  • the uncle who offers you a magnifier (or a telescope),
  • the best friend who marks/scars you forever with a single innocent observation,
  • the soul-mate lover who disturbed you so much you’re reconfigured in the whole of you, or almost.

Wishing you had a mentor is almost a Type in itself : overthinkers, introverts, shy people, book lovers, quiet seekers.

Everybody needs attention and understanders (and I think it’s why some love stories are so intense), good conversation lovers, listeners, good askers. Here, it’s something else, right? Not sure…

Every other helper I listed here can embody the role of the Mentor… one needs. Someone who gets you, even in a 2 seconds sentence,

  1. points you out to others
  2. shows you possible paths (doors, windows)

 

Well, we should NOT need that, but… we do what we can!

Have you met a mentor? Have you been a mentor to a kid? Should you? How?

 

Thanks for reading!

IMG_5053.jpg

What do you do in a trustless world?

What do you do in a trustless world?

First of all : is “trustless” even a word? I know how English build/uses words, hence (or therefore) I can invent “trustless”. Voilà. I’m pretty sure to be understood, here.

What do you do in a trustless world?

Hmmm I think you need two different tools, which are a FILTER and a MACHINE.

  1. The Filter is the Comical/Grotesque one. This helps to tolerate, to bear the world around.
  2. The Machine is the wordy one. Accounts, Stories, Tales. This is it. The tendency to tell, to write, to invent ideas or stories from the craziness.

 

Where d’you see that? Which one do you choose? What is efficient, for you? Where does the “I wear a mask” intervene here? Do you hide your filter? Do you hide your machine?

What about this event, this process : “Abandonment of the Mask”? Another article. I know.

Thanks for reading!

IMG_9176b.jpg

 

 

Movements in a line (and amounts of possibles)

Just a little pattern to play with :

Valéry writes about what came, in literature, after Romanticism – example : Baudelaire after Hugo.

That’s this : Movement B comes after Movement A. It comes :

  1. To distort it
  2. To bring corrections to it
  3. To bring contradictions to it
  4. In the end, to stand in, to take his place

 

…what we are, what we can, what we want

Amounts of possibles?

  1. Unexplored domains
  2. Paths to trace
  3. Fields to exploit
  4. Cities to build
  5. Relations to establish
  6. Processes to spread

 

Can B bring exact responses to B? Is B a retaliation to A? Is this answer a energy source in order to gather? What are the desires in play? To be more solid, more clever, more… pure? What is the adolescence of newness? Why is it an advantage? Where are the imprudences, vulnerable spots, the impurities? Wisdom, move, perfection : when (after) do they come? What and where is the loss, when B crystallizes? How do audiences move around these?

Where do we see that? Between personalities? In Art only (fashion, architecture, etc)?

 

Have a nice day!

IMG_4869b.jpg

 

 

Objective Ns of little happy baby goats

One of the most stupid and dangerous diseases of companies is evaluation.

There are books, entire books about this curse.

Today, everything about your work is measured with percentages and numbers…

And people in the field know that this doesn’t show anything.

I wrote an article about the N/N-1 stupidity : N/N-1 Business Bullshittery

So today if you accept that game, you work to “make numbers”, not to work well.

For example : for a moment French police officers where “evaluated” according to the number of identity checks they made in a day, which led to absurdities, and they complained that you shouldn’t check identities to “reach your objective”, but when you perceive you should do it.

So a “good” policeman was the one who goes over his objective, and the “bad” policeman was the one who just work normally.

When you’re under a hierarchy, you have to understand it’s a play, a game. You can run and jump like a little happy baby goat, of course, to “reach your objectives”, or you can perceive what’s under, and do your job the best you can (it’s the deal).

That means that you don’t expect to be valued correctly. You’ll be valued negatively, most of the time, because you don’t reach your numbers (which will climb next time if you do it, as you can expect). You thus have to be valued… by yourself.

Work well, and smile in your belly.

Thanks for reading!

IMG_0926b.jpg

Digits Masters Detrimentors

 

Experiences or Things?

I had a friend who loved to separate concepts. You only could be a “giver” or a “taker”, for example. Which one are you?

These rhetoric traps were funny to detect, as a sign of…. whatever.

Useless it is to say you can be a giver here AND a taker there, AND differently all along the day, useless to say it’s a constant process : life, movements, dance.

With money, should you buy experiences or things?

As if you have to choose between both…

I’d buy experiences AND things. And things which could bring you a great experience : typical : a DVD, a book. And things bought WHILE you’re living a great experience. Etc etc etc.

The constant adaptive dance of life is really great to process and to unfold…

Experiences can make you grow, or give you memories, they change you if they are important. Things can be offered, can trigger experiences, can be source of pleasure. A bottle of Chardonnay wine (thing) is able to illuminate a great experience (the greatest conversation ever, in a summer night). Etc.

The tool and dial and lever here are really easy :

Each time someone summons you to choose between two concepts (it’s very common in companies, in hierarchies), close your mind or catch the double and juggle like with plastic poos : it’s a trap, enclosing you (or trying) between two artificial pincers which don’t even exist. Get out of here, and remember that life is NEVER simple. It’s subtle, fluid, complex, and a joy to activate.

Have a nice day!

IMG_5928.jpg

Watzlawick wrote somewhere that when something is bad…

Watzlawick wrote somewhere that when something is bad, the contrary is not necessarily good.

The idea of “choice” is really a problem, right?

  1. If you INSIST, you’ll maybe fail : “More of the Same Thing”, when insisting is a failure
  2. If you QUIT, you’ll maybe fail too. Or succeed. You have to try!

There’s this : if you walk on one path, you’ll never know what you could have discovered on the other one. One just imagines (convinces oneself) it’s the good choice.

In a way, it’s understandable. A choice, and you close a part of your brain. It’s simpler.

The Frenchness in me is a bit mischievous, and tells me that in front of a choice, I’d choose both – “Bake Two Cakes”, or the dangers of segmentarity

But the crux (I just learned this crux word, and I’m happy!) of these problems is Haecceity.

Insist on A and Quit B, and you just close possibilities, that’s all.

Life is not made of A or B, but to plug with possibilities, it’s constantly moving along the day, along days. Therefore big choices (apart of choices like “I quit smoking”, which is obviously clever) are maybe mistakes : one should always be prepared to play with propositions of life. Don’t you think?

But some days, we are tired, I agree.

Have a great day!

tal_alex__-__tennesseewilliams__quoteoftheday___.jpg