to lucha, with love

1. cmcneill 01.21.09 / 5pm

   “Humans now have no idea of what their destination might be; they are like one of the silky-threads of the spider web.”

   As has ever been the case. This is nothing new. To say that we “now” have no idea of our destination is a gross misrepresentation, inasmuch as we have never known. Not KNOWN. We can try our best to “steer,” and while this effort may give us an illusion of direction, it is only that: illusion.
2. nezua 01.21.09 / 6pm

   Interesting. So you don’t think a high level of stimulation through technology and both virtual and physical traffic increasing in our 3D world has confused people’s connection with those realities that present in the absence of such? Or are you not commenting on that part at all? Or are you saying remarking on such is irrelevant and useless? Because it is “nothing new”? I ask because your strong reaction tells me you find something about this statement offensive. Is it that author postulates a modern illness whereas you feel it is unconnected to the causes posed?
3. cmcneill 01.22.09 / 7am

   Are you referring back to impressions gleaned from Koyaanisqatzi?

   Anyroad, I am offended in a way, I suppose. Perhaps I should just read the entire article. Perhaps this snippet is taken out of context. This gives an overall impression of humans as flecks in the wind, babies distracted by every passing pretty color. And I won’t say that there are not some.

   Originally I was commenting only on the one sentence: “Humans now have no idea of what their destination might be; they are like one of the silky-threads of the spider web.” It was the implication that we EVER knew our “destinations” that I found problematic. Having not read the entirety of the writing, again, I’ll concede that perhaps this idea is not the author’s intent.

   As far as connection confusion, the net has power equal to television in that regard. I don’t know that it’s confusion as much as strengthening. Televising the Vietnam war didn’t harden us to the violence; it actually helped bring and end to our participation there. I’m not certain there is such a thing as “too much information.”

   Am I missing the point here?
4. nezua 01.22.09 / 7am

   Nope, I’m not referring back to anything else. Or I don’t mean to. And yes, this quote actually fits the literal definition of “taken out of context,” eh? It has no context here. Just a quote on a black page. Cuz…I liked the quote just by itself. Clearly you do not! Which is fine. I was only curious what was behind what felt like a bit of a strong reaction when I hadn’t expected one. Ah, but expectations, eh?

   I’m sure you are not missing the point. Oh…and yes, I certainly do think there is such a thing as “too much information.” And I do think we get lost in a vibrant web of data and info flow.

   Anyway, It’s a quote from film analysis of Ghost in the Shell. Great piece. Great film. And you may be right in that you’d have a different reaction once you’ve read the entire piece (although this author’s quote is still only a quote in that analysis.)

   Feel free to try it out. On the Edge of Spaces: Blade Runner, Ghost in the Shell and Hong Kong’s Cityscape, by Wong Kin Yuen
5. cmcneill 01.22.09 / 7am

   I did seek out and find the referenced article but it is thick and meaty, will require time to read, and will have to wait till after the earning of the daily bread. Still, thanks for the link. I’m going to print it out and read it in bed tonight. This plan may be sabotage, as reading in bed usually puts me to sleep by page three, but perhaps it will be the first evening this week without need for melatonin and Benadryl, which would be nice. The chemical sleep gives me a rather unpleasant “hangover.”

   I’m intrigued by your belief of “too much information” and welcome further education on that point. I tend to think that information leads to broader understanding. True, it must pass through the individual’s “sifter.” Are you saying that the “sifter” gets clogged?
6. nezua 01.22.09 / 8am

   i will return the favor and think a bit on my response before replying.
7. cmcneill 01.23.09 / 6am

   PROGRESS REPORT:

   I’ve read 14 of 24 pages, while parasitically enjoying warmth provided by presence of 5-year-old grandson who’d climbed into my bed in the January freeze. After 14 pages, having not yet come upon the quoted material, I can only say (?what?). A sci-fi fan but not quite SO familiar with the discussed films, and having never studied film as such or art in any way, I’m drowning here. So far not seeing anything relating to what I thought was the point, so I’m more convinced than ever that I’ve missed it completely. Committed to finishing the article tonight.
8. nezua 01.23.09 / 9am

   experiential lessons? now you be in the silky sea of busy-ness with no idea where you’re going!
9. nezua 01.23.09 / 9am

   i think the filter doesn’t simply get “clogged,” i think the filter is made, in part, by what we choose to accept into our flow. and thus affects all else. so i think when we are not careful about what we even choose to pass through our filter, we lessen its effectiveness. maybe sounds paradoxical, but aren’t most truths made a bit of paradox? one might say but how can i know what to pass through if i havent filtered it yet, and th en we’d have to talk about “filters” and how many we have and how many are consciously used, and how many are used without us knowing it. so maybe it becomes about being more aware of how our Self is resonating or receiving the many energies we pass through/utitlize/emanate. maybe i’ll add more to this later.

   but i think my final point would be that silences and spaces in our info flow are good choices, too. they do not equal lack or absence. but presence of what was there before and what remains after the wash of noise passes over. our Self.
10. cmcneill 01.24.09 / 9am

    Okay. Finally read the entire article. Ended in the same quagmire of ignorance in which I began. Did finally come upon the quoted material, which turned out to be quoted from yet another article. Oy. Perhaps I’ll find the entire content from which this quote was lifted and find some enlightenment there.

    Meanwhile, I was directed by a friend (accidentally) to an article by Nicholas Carr: Is Google Making Us Stupid? (The Atlantic Online, July/August 2008), which I actually understood. This discusses the idea that the net rewires our brains, and also speaks of the “spaces” you’ve mentioned. What’s kind of funny is that the author talks about reading online versus reading on paper, and my normal practice is to print out online articles in order to read them.

    I don’t think Google is making us more stupid that television. I’m pretty sure about that.

    I can possibly see your point – that the massive deluge of information can make one a bit gaga. (is that your point?) But the fact is that the information has always been there. It is only what is. Just – now we have easier access. But since we’re the ones controlling accession, I don’t see a problem.

    We’re not unaffected, of course. But ALL of our experience informs and reshapes us. I’m a medical transcriptionist. Six days a week I sit here typing up medical reports on patients of gynecologic oncologists. It’s a parade of fear and suffering that makes me hyperaware of the benefits of NOT having cancer. (which doesn’t stop me from smoking) I also worked in the office for a while when I lived in Tucson. I’ve never seen so many beautiful, bald women. They taught me something about human dignity and strength of spirit. Of course I also had the privilege of having Thomas, who taught that and more. Anyroad, being perpetually this close to the dying (even in my remote way) does add to my perception that LIFE is what we want.

    Silence is good. I’ll certainly agree with you there. Those spaces, to me, are life. I’ve always known that those small moments are what I will be grasping for at the time of my own death.

    Speaking of Sci-Fi: One scene that brought me to a complete stop and commanded the whole of my attention was Edgar G. Robinson’s demise in Soylent Green. I’ve seen it many times since and I always cry.
11. nezua 01.24.09 / 9am

    hm. i’m not sure we need to chase down the original article to gain meaning from it. meaning is given and gained by the reader as much as the author. and i found what meaning works for me…which is why i quoted it. it’s very possible that we could read the original article and meaning would be applied differently than in the quoted article which may be applied differently than here. but that is how words and talk goes, eh?

    either way, i certainly dont interpret it to mean that contact with humans in situation of pain or challenge shouldn’t provoke gratitude, greater understanding, and empathy, which is what i read into your story about your job.

    and i don’t even know that i can go on defending the quote…it just made sense to me in a way that i didnt think out or dont have lots of articulation for. but if you are sitll asking me “is that your point”? then i have to let it go and just assume we both didnt connect to it. which is okay.

    but no, i dont think its the “same now as it ever was” by any means. “the information was always there” …what information was always there? i mean…a horrible mood, insofar as it is composed of chemical compounds within your body, is “always there,” too. but until it settles into your awareness and reality, it is not “there.” same with the massive amounts of info and distraction and data and proposed need for absorption and pressure to be enmeshed, and so on.

    there will be no accounting for two people who come upon a quote and see different things in it. that is life. and words! and reading. and meaning.

    and its been a good discussion. thank you.

de

Welcome to the free for all. Come ready to get freaky or don't come at all.

conecto

support the arts

UMX

A XOLAGRAFIK variation of Hemingway.

Entries RSS Comments RSSRegister