There’s a tree, in front of you, while you walk.
Perception. Your eyes send images to your brain. “It’s a tree”.
In a second, you brain has the image, thus the word and the concept linked to it.
You brain has a powerful tool : Analogy.
If it “looks” like a tree, thus you decide it’s probably one. Then you watch and fix, adapt.
Analogy is pretty good for representations, drawings…
If you hear something behind you, your brain computes immediately a 3D-Map of what is probably there. Then your turn around and your eyes fix, amend the “reality”.
Successive drafts, like instant sketches…
Yes, it’s splitting hairs the French way, to imagine dials. Donc :
- What if a word was a tack? And a strong one…
- What happens when our senses send us something else than the tacked word?
- How do we know that all these are the Letter A?
- Who are those who think with preconceiveness?
- Why am I wary of words (as labels)?
- What are hallucinations?
- Why should we train ourselves to endless improve, enrich, amend what we think we know?
- What is movement, here? Haeccity?
- What is to plug with possibilities and propositions?
- What does “She’s mean” mean?
Have a great day!
My previous article quoted S. Shore about photography :
“A photographer solves a picture, more than composes one.”
At first you want to think that it’s wrong – or at least “too easy”, but you have to admit there’s something intriguing here. To “solve” a picture… To find its balance, maybe? It’s stayed as a seed in my brain.
In the eighties I was in University and a friend of mine told me this story :
“I played so much Tetris these last days that this morning, as I was interviewed by a guy for a job, I saw all of his questions like Tetris tetrapods : I just had to move them, rotate them until they fit into my brain”.
OK, this is a puzzle. Here are some pieces :
- The idea of “solving” a photography
- Communication from another human being seen as a Tetris game (four square blocks geometric tiles moved sideways and rotated until it fits with no “gaps”)
- Marcus Aurelius’ constant pattern telling that the problem is not reality (therefore “the others”) but the way we react or not – which depends on us only
- The third Toltec Agreement : “Don’t take anything personally. Nothing others do is because of you. What others say and do is a projection of their own reality, their own dream. When you are immune to the opinions and actions of others, you won’t be the victim of needless suffering…”
See my workshop table? Some of you will get me, will see me coming. Recenter. You decide. Logic against feelings. The limits of all this. Watching/listening to others. Empathy. Etc.
I’ll have to write a bit more to sort all of it.
Some say that to blog is a way to learn things, right?
The 3rd Agreement risk is to consider others like irrelevant fishes in an aquarium, or something like “the weather” – but it can be an asset. Could be.
(to be continued)
Have a nice day!
Instagram : itspeteski
As the weather is a bit stormy these days in France, some trees fell, some houses lost their roof, and you read articles in the press telling about mini-tornadoes, with an explicit picture (you can google.fr “mini tornade”).
Immediately, weather specialists stand up in furia and learnedly explain to the community that “It wasn’t a mini-tornado, these don’t exist”. You see their point : categories, how “real” tornadoes appears, etc.
As if you’d slap your little boy in the face because he plays with cars. “It’s not a car, silly, it’s a toy car!“. Bim!
There is something to notice here, a pattern we should watch closely.
At first you want to say “Breathe, buddy”. This thing looks like a mini-tornado, so why can’t people use this word? What’s the point with definitions, here? Isn’t, like a “toy car”, mini itself enough to say “not real”? What if we obey? It’s not a mini tornado. So what?
It’s like a cristallization of our problems with words and reality.
- Reality is real. Your house really lost its roof, even if mini-tornadoes “don’t exist”. Words are impartation, values – and names are conferred words.
- When we think about someone, we have a bunch of labels all ready, and the person disappears under stickers. It is convenient, but wrong.
- We often amalgamate the word and the reality, which deprives us from intelligence. A word closes the box, letting us stuck in stupid simplicity.
- What else?
“Haecceity” is about Labels on your Forehead, from where I copy paste this :
Deleuze says we are more accurately longitudes and latitudes, a group of different speeds and slownesses, an individual, a singularity, constantly inventing grapes of possibilities, a play of forces or encounters.
Thanks for reading!
Instagram : jenamalone
« Anyone can face a crisis — it’s the day-to-day living that wears you out. »
from Instagram: http://ift.tt/2pQZ9b2
In an old article I played with this Chinese idea : Instead of pushing towards our “goals” like stupid bulldozers, it’s maybe smarter to use the propensity of things. The “natural tendency to behave in a particular way, to move in a particular direction.”
Stay positive, keep your chin proud and high, move forward soldier, go go go!
But in Afghanistan, guys from the desert kidnap soldiers, cut their arms, legs and penis, put a solid tourniquet on each stumpextremity to keep them alive before giving back the poor body with a head next to a US base with medics. Purpose is not honorable : “Suffer, now, and until you die”. Medicine now is able to keep these men alive…
The ideal propensity of a warrior is to vanquish. The ideal propensity of a couple is to live in rich harmony (sex, hobbies, communication). The ideal propensity of fast cars is to make the knight-driver feel powerful and to go home faster, you go boy!
Tendencies and propensities have a dark side, Darth, though. The dark propensity of a soldier is trauma, to die or to be wounded. The dark propensity of a couple is drama or worse : manipulation, misunderstandings and boredom. The dark propensity of fast cars is accidents and consequences : death, hospital, disability.
What’s the dial? To watch all paths? Not being angelic? Cut the wrong ways up? Be attentive? Consider other assumptions?
OK : pay attention. That’s good.
– I owe you so much!
– No no no, it’s I who owe you…
- A therapist takes care of his patient.
- Stravinsky or Hindemith were influenced by Bach.
- Someone is watching and analyzing a painting.
All these three examples are simple and clear. You can draw the arrow, right?
We thinkers like to go deeper, though. To find nuances, subtleties :
- There are many ways of listening, of helping someone…
- What are the elements which makes us notice the influence?
- What do we seek – and find in Arts? An emotion? Links?
You can spend months on each, reading books. Refining concepts is a bliss, right? Good!
Today I study one thing : reversibility. It’s meeting a surprise “the other way around”, and it’s charged with intensity :
- A therapist suddenly talks about himself. Instead of listening, he tells his own story. The patient is suddenly captivated. This is a well known trick in this field! Psychotherapists say it gives a stronger link (therefore a power) on a patient. Adding humanity in the bond is a strange and powerful idea…
- Many specialists come to a point where they see where is Bach in Hindemith, but also that there is some Hindemith (1895-1963) in Bach (1665-1750). Two centuries before, OK, but you can study this the other way around – even if you think it’s “not OK”. It’s a game for spirits, to study how the now can be seen as an influence for the past.
- An Art lover studies a painting, a music, and he realizes it works in the other way : the piece of work moves him, changes him, teaches him, overwhelms him. You explore yourself through another person’s work. You are amazed by unconscious and historical forces at stake. Your skin (or your guts) are activated. Astonishment is a trigger for your brain. Then, maybe, you’re… slaked (and this can be in MANY ways), right?
A child comes from a mother, a father. But parents are also transformed by the coming. In the end, the person who is a child gives parents… motherhood and fatherhood.
Mhhh I like that. You feel that I touch something here, oui? Where, in what other examples can you imagine this reversibility process? Business? Couple? Creativity? Ads? Poetry? Where, when it’s obvious “things are going this way”, could you reverse something? Therefore what?
Thanks for reading!