World, Magnified

One Year

2010-10-29T10:26:00.000-04:00

The wind in New Rochelle sucks. Which is to say, if I had a choice, I'd never come back to this blustery town based on that single criterion. Walking from the train in the morning, climbing the chain-link enclosed stairs to street level, everything seems fine. And then, just as I turn the corner on the Trump Tower monstrosity on Huguenot Avenue, the wind slaps me in the face, as if it's been laying in wait to ruffle my wet hair and invade my body's every nook and cranny for the entirety of the walk to the office.

But today, as I made this irritating trip, I remembered that in its sameness, today is different. As of the 31st (Sunday), I will have been in New York an entire year, and this day marks my one year anniversary at the company towards which I trudge through the wind daily. As people, I think we tend to make a bigger deal of these occasions than is deserved, but in my case (as I'm sure is true of all specific cases), I think it represents a wonderful opportunity to reflect upon the ups and downs of the past year.

Perhaps most present in my mind is the concept of freedom. I've been away from home and on my own for a full year, free from the influence of my parents (which was never really an issue, to be honest). I pay my own bills. I'm free to make my own decisions. I'm also reading Freedom by Johnathan Franzen, a primary theme of which is the double-edged sword freedom presents to our lives. I've also been free of health insurance, a car, and large amounts of discretionary spending this past year, which many will recognize as purely optimistic phrasing of a pretty frustrating situation.

It's been incredibly stressful, uplifting, and growth-inducing to be on my own. I came to this city full of hope and with a heart open to change and malleable to the influences I might find here. I also arrived with a deep depression fueled by personal uncertainty, various life events, and almost entirely empty pockets. In a lot of ways, it's one of those typical "kid moves to the city" stories, but that would be simplifying things greatly. I remember the fear with which I stepped onto the subway platform for the first time, the confusion at seeing such high prices on such simple grocery staples as bread, and the anxiety of being the only polite human being within a ten mile radius (I was raised in a small town, in the South). All that changed, and quickly. Within two months I was in the full swing of things: I became rude, learned to advocate for myself in tricky situations, and had managed to quell my depression with music, writing, and personal exploration.

I would be hard pressed to find a dull moment in the last year. From the all-night parties, to the days spent in my dear friends' garden, to the moments swiftly riding my bike through the green wilderness of Prospect Park where I thought I might cry from the beauty and transience of all life and all things, my life has been absolutely filled to the brim. Had I known what I was up against by moving to the North, I might have decided against it to avoid the stress, the perpetual fatigue, and the frequent emotional suffering, but looking back, I know it was worth it. Trite though it may be, it's impossible to put a price on friendship, on human connections, or on life lessons that are felt and experienced rather than taught second-hand. And I know, with all my heart, that the experiences of the last year will stay with me forever.

I still remember the wonderment of reconnecting with old college friends after a full year of absence, of taking my little brother with me to a New Years celebration where hugs were exchanged and lives were changed forever by the new faces and names I became acquainted with. The following months constituted some of the most severe ups and downs of my life: love found, lost, and finally cemented into eternity, personalities of friends expounded upon and appearing more and more nuanced, and the discovery that within each of us is a stable core capable of withstanding the sharpest pain of humanity's inadvertent cruelty. We are all fragile beings, each one of us, and sometimes we make mistakes that shatter the glass surrounding another's heart. Ultimately, however, we all have the tools to redeem ourselves and to redeem those who have harmed us in the past. In the past year, I learned true forgiveness.

And more recently, from within the ever-branching circle of friends and loved ones that has captured me in the center of its ever-so-sticky web, I found devotion and heartfelt human compassion in another human being. The connections that led me to arrive where I am today make no sense and point to a unique human randomness that operates not on the principle of a simple lack of order, but rather chooses indiscriminately from the relevant and useful aspects of your life, illuminating a path that you can choose to follow if your mind is attuned properly. In one of those rare moments of clarity, I stumbled upon a person who has become one of my best friends and a better conscience at times than I can provide for myself. She knows that as much as we pretend to, none of us truly stand tall on our own, not without the love and positivity of others. I learn new things from her each day, with one recurring lesson: there's nothing better in the world than another human being who you can connect with deeply and without fear.

So, that dear readers, has been my year. Somehow, by being far away from my roots, I've grown closer to them. My family has become dear to me in a new and more profound way, and my own life has been an exercise in juggling the responsibilities and privileges of being free in a society that generally discourages such nonsense. And on the cusp of my second year in New York, all I can say is: bring it on. Bring it all, however quickly, irritatingly, or frustratingly you want to, because I think that despite my complaining (sorry to those who have had to endure this!), this city has made me a stronger, better person.

Although, I honestly could do without the wind.

Open Hardware Blog

2010-07-16T09:52:00.001-04:00

http://open-hardware.blogspot.com/

GO THERE FOR OPEN HARDWARE DISCUSSION YES.

A long hiatus. But I'm back!

2010-07-16T09:30:00.000-04:00

Well, it's been a very, very long time. I feel like it's going to be really difficult to get "back on the horse" with this blog, but you can really only take it one step at a time. I feel like this blog has sort of lived out its usefulness, and since I'm spending so much time focusing on my budding amplifier business, I'm going to start a new blog on that very subject! Stay tuned, as later today I will be launching it and spreading the news.

The Politics of Music: Part two [music]

2010-03-19T10:35:00.000-04:00

I'm BACK! I mean, for now.

Last time I introduced the idea of music being a historical record of political movements and trends in our society. Today I'd like to discuss what that has contributed to my generation in particular.

First, which generation do I belong to? We generally define generations narrowly, but for our purposes, I'd like to use a broader brush. My generation is defined by a proficiency in technology, the expectation that information be available quickly and constantly, and a desire to be fluent in the social memes of today. This includes anyone from high school age to those in their mid-30s. It can easily include those older than that, but because there is a higher chance of these individuals having actually lived the history being referenced in music, we will put them in a different category for now and discuss their experience a little later.

So, we have this broad swath of society that has the capability and desire to be exposed to the intensely diverse variety of music in the world today. Mp3 players allow us to bring this music with us everywhere we go, and the internet gives us access to crowd-sourced databases of information on bands, albums, and lyrics. The ability to download large quantities of music (legally or otherwise) means that if you want it, you can get it, period. Availability of music has almost made obsolete the radio and other services that don't allow the end-user to choose which song they are listening to at what time.

And thus, we are inundated with music. We are able to listen to the music of our parents, thanks to CDs and vinyl and re-releases in digital form, as well as the music being produced today. We are thus exposed to not only the vastly different perspectives present in our own generation, but also those of our parents, their parents, and so forth. Where before artistic eras were marked by a general sensation, be it modernism, post-modernism, etc., our generation is marked by a lack of cohesion to a single or dominant set of ideals or truths. Some of us believe we should return to a time when the counterculture was alive and well. Others believe we should assimilate into the mainstream. Still others believe we should ditch everything and start over, we've made too many mistakes to recover properly.

And, because of the loud voices of a few, the vast majority of us no longer care. An overload of knowledge and an ability to exist in a state of complacency has led many of us to a life of hedonistic, indulgent apathy. We hear, through music being produced at the current moment, that there are others in the world that are seeking change, forcing it through with teeth bared and arms held high, and we feel their rush, their triumph, their struggle. It is this channeling of the emotions of others that makes us feel that the problems we see in society are being addressed, thus making our own action superfluous and an addition to the chaos.

We have become, in effect, mirrors and shadows of a few great ideas, repeated through history, first in person, then over the airwaves, and now transmitted through a series of small tubes. Our political consciousness is a reflection of this shadowy existence; there is no incentive to pay attention or speak up, because we are already having the emotional experience of having done so.

Is this a bad thing? An end-point or a phase of our growth? Does this pave the way for a prophetic presence, a musical genius whose ability to bring us together outstrips all who came before? Or is this simply another form of social masturbation, a method through which our appetites for change and progress are sated artificially and without real catharsis?

sorry.

2010-03-18T10:13:00.000-04:00

The culprit behind my inability to write: work. My mind is bound up by the futility of resisting the pull of complacency that is so deliberately laid out for my eyes to gaze upon. This is not the life I want. This is not the future I foresaw, nor the future I will inherit. Stay strong, fellow resisters. Don't give in to the allure of the 9-5 time-waste.

The Politics of Music: Part one [music]

2010-03-15T14:48:00.000-04:00

I have lost my gumption to write on this blog. This is an attempt to reclaim said gumption.

I am supremely interested in the question of how people receive their perspective on politics. Every generation has their defining moment, or set of moments, that catapults them from political adolescence into political maturity. My generation was framed by 9/11 and the political reactions that preceded and followed it. Our parents generation was framed by the Kennedy assassination, the Vietnam War, and the cold war. [Editor's note: this is a clear generalization, possibly very inaccurate, and is not the point of the post!]

The point is, our political consciousness tends to crystallize at a certain point based on the experiences we have, and this consciousness is organized generationally to some degree. We tend to think that our political knowledge comes from books, school, and teachers. This is true to an extent, but what about other media sources? Print media certainly has a large effect on the ways we view current events and those past events that remain in our cultural consciousness. Television and the internet both provide us with the same scrolling, up-to-the-minute source of news such that anyone in our society is almost forced to be aware of SOMETHING current, whether it be political or not.

I'm purposely eliminating media sources here in order to arrive at the one I believe has the most impact on us: music. Like art, music possesses the quality of being "timeless," which is to say, able to be enjoyed in a context other than the one in which it was created. Unlike art (of the painted or sculpted variety), music made in the last 150 or so years transmits its message without a necessity for an education dedicated to its appreciation. It does so using familiar tropes, mechanisms, and above all by using lyrics that we can understand simply by speaking the same language.

Songs about war have always existed, but as of late, they have taken on more and more political undertones. Songs about sex have reflected the way we think and talk about sexuality, and also the sub-cultures within our society and how these specific slices of people in a specific time comprehend it. We can sing about feelings and sensations using similes and metaphors to current events that later fade into history, thus informing future listeners to the way in which we think about love, hate, loyalty, and so forth.

In the next parts of this topic, I want to talk about the ways in which music contributes to political movements, collective memory, generational forgetting and political apathy. Those will have to wait for tomorrow, though.

Stay tuned!!

The Increasingly Delicate Nature of Reality [scope]

2010-03-08T15:03:00.000-05:00

Today, we take a trip into scary territory. Reality, as a concept, is integral to our understanding of the universe. Philosophies that explain away reality are explaining away the very basis of existence--without it, we exist only in theory. I'm not interested in proving what is real. Most things I write, think, and do are based on the assumption that SOMETHING, however trivial, is real. Surreality can substitute for reality in a pinch, as well, so that's on the table at all times.

What's interesting, though, is the nature of our present reality versus the reality of a citizen of the British Empire in the mid 1800s. Our ideas of permanence would differ very drastically from theirs, and by association our sense of time and progress. Let's take the example of the computing device. In the 1850s, this would have been a slide rule at most, an abacus if you lived in the east, or simply a pen and paper. If you were really lucky and knew a Mr. Charles Babbage, you might have gotten a glimpse of the future in the form of a "difference engine," the precursor to the modern binary processing computer. The devices of this age were robust, easily integrated into life, and generally relied more on a person's ability to manipulate numbers rather than a device's ability to perform without error. Thus, the computing device of the mid-1800s was relatively slow but ultimately reliable and did not require repairs on any grand scale.

Shoot forward to the 1950s. Computers like ENIAC now exist, taking up the space of an entire room and outputting as much information as a modern 4-function calculator. The assembly line is entrenched in society, and we see the normalization of the commodity market. TV dinners are available, and a slew of time-saving devices (microwaves, faster cars, telephones, electric razors, etc) allow the pace of life to increase. The effect of all this: more and more "things" become disposable, and build quality drops a notch.

And lastly, we get to today. It's 2010, and I have just dropped $200 for a brand new iPhone. It is slated for planned obsolescence within 2 years by its build materials and the quality of its internal battery. Innovation into increasing durability and lifespan of products has all but ceased. Our reality now relies not on the quality of objects or even their power to efficiently perform a task, but rather on the speed at which a new item replaces an older, slower item. Our pace of life has never been faster, and continues to increase exponentially as Moore's Law continues to define the progress of the convergence of computational devices with everyday life. At this point, almost all our commodities have integrated digital circuits, to the point where our cars, clothes, and shopping carts all need to be programmed in order to work.

Planned obsolescence does not necessarily lead to a more tenuous commercial reality, but the way in which our data is stored certainly does. When the Library of Alexandria was burned by the Romans, much data was lost, some of it forever. Today, that amount of data could be contained on a single hard drive in a single data center of a single company. With the miniaturization of information and the expansion of information sharing, we have opened ourselves to a reality in which the slightest misstep could throw us into an informational dark age. As of May 2009, world internet data was estimated at 500 billion gigabytes, or as the linked article explains, enough books to reach from here to Pluto 10 times.

Picture this: in 1890, an electromagnetic pulse is released from a gigantic solar flare, wiping out all communications on Earth, all electrical impulses, causing beautiful auroras, screwing up compasses, and really pissing off a young Nikolai Tesla. Business as usual continues. Manifest Destiny continues to dominate US social policy, there is still a debate over the use of gold versus silver as the US currency-backing metal, and a few ships get lost for a couple days at sea. Bummer.

Now picture the same pulse released today: planes lose their navigation systems. A few of them crash. Cars built in the last 10 years will not turn on, and those that do suffer throttle, control, brake, and fuel efficiency issues. The internet shuts down. Phones built on digital transmissions fail. Your hugging shirt stops hugging. Your information is erased from all RAM and flash-based storage. mechanical hard drives spin down, many of them will never spin up again. And Willy Nelson just laughs and lights another joint.

The picture I'm painting is not one of panic, but of a changing sense of permanence. We no longer believe that durability from the elements, from blunt force, or from a simple interruption in electricity is something to be desired. We rely on (unsustainable) energy sources to provide our reality every day. And with each passing moment, virtual reality becomes more and more real. The real tragedy is not the comically simple disruption we could face, it's the fact that we no longer have respect for quality, nor do most of us even have a clue how that sort of durability was achieved. And with every passing generation, we will move further and further from that slow-moving past. Already we find builders and Makers focusing on repurposing other people's garbage and disposable commodities. Innovation continues, but the flow of history has been diverted from the pursuit of perfection. Have we accepted an innate flaw of expansion, or are we as a society poised for a plane-crash of epic proportions?

Privacy: Sam Starts Writing Again Edition [privacy]

2010-03-05T15:51:00.000-05:00

Well. It's been a long time since I've written about the news. So, this might be a little rough (or just a little short).

If you haven't heard, the Lower Merion School District in the suburbs of Philadelphia has installed a mandatory spying program on the laptops students are required to purchase. The spyware is capable of monitoring students both at school AND at home, and can hear conversations and take photos and video via the built-in webcams (reports indicate that the school uses Macbooks). This was discovered when a student was reprimanded for eating candies that looked like pill capsules. He was doing this AT HOME, but the computer took a photograph of the activity and sent it to the school, which then found it necessary to mention it to the student.

Since then, the school has since denied spying on students, and then was interviewed by PBS and seemed to know VERY WELL what was happening. The ACLU and EFF have taken up the case of the student's parents, who are suing the district for spying on their child, and the FBI is on the criminal case as we speak. Since the lawsuit was announced, several other school districts have been called out for using similar tactics.

Whoa. My first reaction to all this is to vomit violently, all over the faces of the principals and administrations involved. That may not be the most mature reaction, but to be honest, every single person who ever attended a public school remembers the draconian tactics implemented by administrations in the name of maintaining "order" and controlling the behavior of adolescent, naturally unpredictable human beings. I was furious about the infringement on rights back then, and I am furious about it now. Some pundits ask "when did this happen?" which is simply ridiculous and falsely assumes that this is a new phenomenon. Administrations are always looking for new ways to exert control on the lives of their students. I remember having to take drug tests in order to participate in sports. Many school districts require a breathalyzer test before entering school functions. Detention has always been assigned for running in the halls, public displays of affection, arguing with teachers (because dialog is the root of all evil), and even for laughing too much. I remember seeing The Breakfast Club recently and thinking that despite its attempt at hyperbole, it is a rather accurate depiction of what high school is like in some places.

Some people have been making the argument that it's better that SOMEONE is paying attention to these children, that parents are neglecting their duties and thus the schools must pick up the slack. I have two huge issues with that:

1. What we're talking about here is a gigantic breach of privacy that could also constitute the criminal charge of child pornography if any inappropriate images were captured. Some parents are not attentive, present, and child abuse is a real issue in the world. But taking a photo every time a student opens their laptop doesn't stop child abuse, and it sends the message to these students that privacy is not important and encourages repetition of the behavior.

2. It is INFINITELY more effective to mentor children and positively reinforce behavior by providing opportunities for participation in school-related and extracurricular events than it is to try to punish every little infraction committed. In fact, children (being much smarter than most school administrators), when confronted with such asinine bullshit as this laptop spying will spend energy evading the rules, resulting in a behavioral arms-race which administrators are bound to lose. And additionally, this sort of necessary rules-evasion leads to the development of life-long skills which certainly aid in the committing of illegal activities, some of which is bound to be more heinous than eating a jujyfruit in front of a laptop webcam.

At some point, school administrators and our government as a whole will have to recognize children as viable human beings. Until then, each and every child that enters the public school system is doomed to a sub-standard education (check our rankings against other developed nations sometime. you will be surprised), draconian and punishment-intensive administration, and a complete disregard for their educational and emotional needs. Can you imagine how far the money spent on spyware might have gone if it were invested in after-school programs or community mentoring? How about if it were applied to teacher salaries?

I'm listening to Hall and Oates right now. They sum up my thoughts perfectly:

"You're out of Touch," administrators.

(photo courtesy of boingboing.net)

Hair

2010-03-04T16:27:00.000-05:00

My mother came to visit for the last few days. I had to work during the day, and she was in meetings, but we spent the evenings together, went out to dinner, she met important people in my life, saw my new living situation, we went shopping at Macy's, and we went out to a Broadway show. We had deliberated for a good week or so prior to buying tickets, and finally she made an executive decision that we would be seeing Hair. I felt a small amount of trepidation about this, as Hair is known for having extensive nudity and sex, neither of which exactly fit in a show being viewed with one's mother.

But, as with all things, nothing really pays off if you're unwilling to see past the possible negatives. So we went to the show. I came straight from work, and after blitzing through a juicy diner burger and several diet cokes we took a cab to the theater, anxious about being late. As usual, we were about 10 minutes early. I love the theater, especially theaters in NYC, but the seats are WAY TOO SMALL. This usually detracts from the show itself, but not this time--not even the giant of a man in front of me with the tall gelled hair distracted me from the show itself.

It was clear from the comments my mother made and the way she reacted that it was a significant performance. She was involved in the counterculture movement at its tail end, but the hippy lifestyle was her own. She cried at the end of the show. I came close, not for times past, but for the fierce revolutionary spirit that burned within people of that caliber and seems to have died out in my own generation. Our response to the negative aspects of life has been to become apathetic and ignore as much of the world as possible. At least, that's how I see it. The activists among us are a rare breed and generally thought of as too radical for the mainstream to adopt their ideals.

But, there is always hope. We can change the way people think simply by providing a viable alternative at the right time. Just like at the end of the show when the audience was asked to come dance on stage to "Let The Sun Shine." We would have been unwilling to do so before the show, but afterwards, full of pathos and empathy for a bygone era of free love, marijuana, and awesome clothes, we were more than happy to oblige. And we had fun doing it.

Heads up: Sam is goin' offline for awhile

2010-03-01T16:13:00.000-05:00

Well,

I have a LOT of meetings this week, and my mom is visiting from VA! I will not be able to update the blog because I'll be super busy during my usual writing hours. Stay tuned, though, I'll be back in full force as soon as I can be.

NaBloPoMo: My Siblings [ties]

2010-02-25T10:08:00.000-05:00

Oops. Forgot to finish this yesterday

It's only been in the last year or so that I've gotten close to my younger brother (19) and my older sister (27). Perhaps my only regret is that it didn't happen sooner. But, as with all things in life, it happened because it should have, and it happened at this time because we all needed each other.

We grew up together, of course, went through the same traumas and the same vacations and had the same parents. But we were always so far apart in age that becoming "friends" seemed like it might never happen. My sister was the rebellious one--taking risks and never being afraid to do what she thought was appropriate and right, and as a result my brother and I had a MUCH easier time with our parents as we went through the same trials. Thank you, Rachel!

My brother Will is the baby. Smart as hell, and metabolically blessed (he's 6'4"), he deserved to be treated much better than I treated him when we were little. It's a wonder he doesn't still hate me for all the times I locked him out of my room or punched him in the shoulder for tagging along with me. But, apparently this is what siblings do to each other (WHY??), and we now share an amazing friendship.

I can actually remember the moment when it seemed like we were finally going to be a sibling unit instead of three people with three very separate lives. We were in West Virginia with my dad, step-mom, my sister's boyfriend, and my ex. The trip was an end-of-summer celebration and a last opportunity for a big family vacation before Will went off to school and my sister and her boyfriend went to Guatemala for six months. We were staying near the New River so as to facilitate a day-long white-water rafting trip down a stretch with several challenging rapids. Our guide's name was Graham, and most of us had NO clue what we were doing (my ex and I had gone rafting in Ecuador, and I'd been once before that).

It was a bonding experience for everyone involved. Lots of team-building, laughs, and terrifyingly exciting moments. We saw an entire raft flip in front of us, spilling all its passengers. We joked about pushing each other out and laughed when we hit each others' paddles during critical moments. And at some point, Rachel Will and I recognized that we are all grown ups, and we like each other. It's weird and perhaps obvious to say that, but then again, loving your brother and liking him are two separate things.

So here we are, today. Rachel is still in Guatemala. We email and communicate via facebook and the like. Will is at school, fratting it up big time. I'm in New York, as you know, working and living my life in the best way possible. We're far apart physically, but the connection remains. Through good times, like now, we feel validated by each other's praise and vicariously-felt excitement. Through bad times, we're there for each other, allowing pain to be felt and providing healing words.

And beneath it all is the sensation that this is just a beginning. The future is wide open.

Break from NaBloWriMo: What I'm gonna build

2010-02-23T14:49:00.000-05:00

I am going to turn this:

into this:

and make it sound like this:

NaBloPoMo Comfort [ties]

2010-02-22T14:50:00.000-05:00

It is swelteringly hot in my office right now. It was like this last Friday, too. Come to think of it, there hasn't been a day in the last few weeks when it hasn't been extremely hot in the afternoon. Very few other people seem to mind, but I'm sitting here sweating up a storm. It's like this on the Subway, too. Everyone wears their coats, scarves, and gloves while I am forced to immediately rip off all outerwear and still end up sweating a fair amount. I've tried meditation, deep breathing, drinking cold water, and wearing more breathable clothing, but I just cannot keep from getting overheated. New Yorkers are crazy!!

At least, that's what it seems like from the outside. I also thought that Peruvians were crazy because they rode buses for 7 hours at a time with no ventilation whatsoever. Argentinians liked their air conditioning, so they were OK with me. This highlights the relative, cultural nature of what it means to be comfortable. Sometimes we chastise individuals for not being "tough" enough, or not being able to adapt to changing situations, but the truth is, sometimes we're not really able to do so. It's a bodily response to sweat profusely. I'm sure I'll get over it eventually, but until my body figures out how to cope, I will continue to do so and I will continue to be uncomfortable. There's really nothing I can say to myself to make comfort suddenly spring from the stagnant, humid air and burst into my lungs, filling me with refreshing and revitalizing Comfrons (the quantum unit of comfort).

It's the same for food. We are encouraged in foreign countries to eat the local fare, but more often than not our bodies tell us otherwise. Preparation methods, local bacterial flora and the like keep our bodies from "going with the flow" (actually, this is usually the problem) and we end up miserable for a small amount of time until we either switch back to Americanized food or push through until our bodies adapt. Neither way is necessarily better than the other, but it's important to recognize that it's not simply a matter of interest or cultural sensitivity. Bodies are different because they're used to different things.

And I'm comfortable with 68 degrees everywhere, all the time, dammit.

NaBloWriMo: Empathy [ties]

2010-02-20T15:38:00.000-05:00

I am sitting with my computer, doing some work, relaxing on a saturday, and contemplating the meaning of empathy. I think there's this huge component to my life that involves wanting and feeling like I need to help other people. Sometimes, this means just going a little further for complete strangers, helping them on the subway, giving up my seat if they look uncomfortable, or offering to pay the extra 50 cents in a grocery store line when it is clear that someone doesn't have the correct change.

Other times, it's more selfishly motivated. When you care for someone, I think the concept of altruism ceases to apply. You do things for that person for many, many reasons, but many of those reasons are not selfless. For instance, I spent yesterday evening taking care of my very good, quite sick friend. I did it because it made me feel good, but also because she was upset about it and she doesn't deserve to suffer needlessly. But that's just it--I made the decision that suffering more than X amount is unnecessary, and because it makes me feel bad to see someone suffer more than that, I stepped in, let my pre-med skillz out of the bag, and she is now on the mend, napping and recovering while I learn how to make KMLs show up on a google map API. Oy.

And that makes me reflect on what it means to love, or to care, or to be there for someone. Does it make a difference if you are there for yourself as well as for the other person? I'm not sure it does. Show me an instance where a person comes through for another person, really sticks their neck out in order to help someone out, and I'll point out how that person is also getting something important out of it. It's just the nature of the universe that all agents in a situation are able to glean SOMETHING (good, bad, important, subtle) from every interaction they have.

Which I guess makes it all OK in the end--if we're constantly holding ourselves up against this unattainable goal of altruism and betterment for the sake of betterment without any personal gratification, then we may never find emotional fulfillment. I think it's much better to accept the reality of the situation than try to change it. In this case, this means indulging my desire to help others until I no longer want to. It means letting people count on me to the extent of my abilities and desire, but no further. Really, it's about knowing who you are as a person and letting that come out, instead of some reflection of who you are based on what you THINK other people want to see.

Hmm...

NaBloPoMo: caffeine [ties]

2010-02-19T14:55:00.000-05:00

Caffeine has got to be one of the most addictive substances on earth, and to complicate things further, we believe that we NEED it to wake up in the mornings.

And it makes you feel good. Mainly because of its similar excitatory effects to alkaloids of similar structure, such as cocaine, nicotine, and the like. It's quite odd that we tolerate this substance, which occurs naturally in coffee and tea and can be extracted from tea leaves and coffee beans in the same manner as cocaine is extracted from the Coca plant, but we have a strong social block against cocaine.

I'm not advocating for cocaine. I'm not advocating against caffeine. They both have their place and have contributed a huge amount to our social awareness and the way we live our lives from day to day (recall: cocaine derivatives include novocaine, benzocaine, and other numbing agents). But I wonder about our relationships with addiction and whether we can truly get away with pooh poohing such actions as smoking cigarettes while championing a good hearty cup of Joe every morning. Granted, smoke is more visible, irritating to non-participants, and causes more obvious side-effects, but in terms of long-term effects, there are millions of smokers WITHOUT emphysema or lung cancer, and millions of coffee drinkers who suffer from heart palpitations, panic attacks, vitamin deficiency (you pee most of it out), and insomnia.

I'm not giving my coffee up. I like it. But I think the next time I see someone chastising someone else for smoking or eating poorly, I will splash a big ole cup of hot coffee in their face. Just kidding. But I will probably say something.

NaBloPoMo: Writing [ties]

2010-02-18T15:06:00.000-05:00

It was only a matter of time before this became a meta analysis. Clearly, I have a love for writing. I think what has eluded me over the years, though, is being able to set up a routine whereby I write regularly and extensively enough to get my ideas down on paper. This has changed in the last few months, and I've begun writing the blog every day, plus writing in my own personal journal, plus writing to friends and family on a more regular basis. It's this variety in subject matter that keeps me going, I think. The ideas keep flowing because there's always a medium through which to express them. Nothing gets clogged in my head anymore.

I could probably go on for pages and pages about how writing makes me feel, but I think if I said it makes me feel "good," most of you will be satisfied. I think instead I'll just touch on the importance of developing your own style, if writing does become something that you personally want to pursue.

And that's sort of the point of this month in the first place: "ties" is simply an ambiguous way of talking about the connections or affinities we feel for the different things in our lives. It's sort of impossible to have a tie to something that doesn't mesh with your way of thinking in some way. Writing, expressing thoughts through mutable yet concrete and recognizable words and phrases, is a perfect example of this. Many disciplines force writers to conform to a certain set of stylistic criteria (journalism, science writing, grant writing, instructional writing), and the writer is forced to find their voice within a rigid framework. This can be fun, challenging, even rewarding, but is rarely about building an outlet of expression.

Building your own style, or simply using conventions that you want to use, can be liberating. It can also be catastrophic. I for one don't want to read these cell phone novels, written entirely in contractions and abbreviations. You might, but it might be better suited for a personal journal than for public consumption. This highlights the flip-side of building your own fount of self-expression: writing, at its heart, is also about communication. It's very difficult to communicate ideas and thoughts effectively if your audience has NO IDEA what you're talking about. But everyone's balance has to be different, because everyone's ability and perspective is different. Go figure.

I know, it just wouldn't be me if I actually ANSWERED a question. That's just my style, though.

NaBloPoMo: technology [ties]

2010-02-17T15:14:00.000-05:00

As a tinkerer, a maker, and an all-around fix-it type, I have a healthy respect for the technology that exists around me. I think, though, that I also revile it more than most.

It's this ambivalence that has struck me lately more so than earlier in my life. I think that as I was growing up, technology (specifically computer tech) grew with me and I integrated it into my being. That gave me the skills I needed to effectively become an "expert" without actually attending a single class or having any formal mentoring. At some point, though, I stopped taking the existence of technology for granted. I think at that point, maybe at the age of 18 or 19, tech started to wear on me rather than boost my energy levels.

And that's where I am today. Sitting in front of a computer all day definitely drains me. I find myself scouring the internet for new ways to be more productive and to make things more exciting. I am just as caught up in the craze of having the best and shiniest new gadgets as soon as they come out, although I tend to build rather than buy these when possible.

All this has me asking myself, where does this road end? It seems that our landfills are filling up faster and faster with the useless, disposable crap we build and sell and then throw away. That doesn't take anything away from the fact that these tools have revolutionized our way of connecting to each other. And it doesn't de-legitimize their usefulness in any way. But it does beg the question: is it worth it?

This love/hate relationship must resolve itself, I think.

Signed,

a tech lover.

NaBloPoMo: Music (Well, guitars) [ties]

2010-02-16T14:57:00.000-05:00

I was in eighth grade when I got my first guitar. I didn't know what I was getting into, but it just felt right somehow to ask for an electric set for my Bar Mitzvah present from my dad. He bought it from a friend of mine. It was an Epiphone Les Paul Special, the cheapest guitar in the product line. That night, I learned "Purple Haze" by Jimi Hendrix and played it constantly over the next few weeks. I was awful at it, and I appreciate my parents' patience with my learning process.

Eight years, four guitars (acoustic, electric, another acoustic, and another electric. I only kept the last two, though), uncountable amplifiers (well, more like 6), and LOTS of lessons later, I'm a passable musician with enough skills to play in a wide variety of scenes. That really doesn't interest me, though. What does interest me is the way the guitar feels in my hands when I pick it up off the wall, its weight and the balance with which it hangs off my shoulders by the strap. The vibrations through the body and neck still give me chills, and honestly there are moments when sitting still and plucking a single note over and over is enough to please me.

As readers are beginning to realize, I am easily made wide-eyed about small but significant aspects of my life. I think my relationship with the guitar is an archetype for this sort of experience. Every now and then I spend several hours simply touching the guitars, polishing them and inspecting them, tuning them and changing the strings, never actually playing them. Like anything in life, if you treat a guitar well, it will treat you well in return.

An instrument is a conduit to another dimension, a set of feelings and sensations not accessible through non-musical means. It can facilitate friendships, long nights spent playing and learning and creating, and it can foster romances, spreading feelings unknown to that point, or providing a connection upon which to base affection and embraces. Learning how to play the guitar is the most rewarding, frustrating, and affirming experience in the world. I will never stop learning, because there is no end to what you can know and do with those six strings.

NaBloWriMo: Creation [ties]

2010-02-13T20:15:00.001-05:00

I didn't write yesterday, mostly because I was on the phone all day with the cable company. They are terrible.

I had wanted to write about Music. That will have to be another day's post, though, and will probably take several days to cover. Today, I'm going to tackle my interest in building and creating.

When I was five, my grandmother gave me an electronic fire engine. It had a wired remote with buttons on it to raise and lower the ladder, sound the siren (there were several varieties), move backward, forward, and each axle was independent. It must have cost a fortune! Within two weeks, I had taken it apart, disassembled the remote, and re-routed it to my model rocket launching system so that you could launch at least 15 rockets at once, if you so chose.

My parents were furious.

By the age of ten, I had boxes of broken toys and old computers under my desk, mostly useless, ready to be repurposed into whatever projects I could think of. By thirteen, I had built my first computer and knew the purpose of each component and how they interact on a relatively basic level. I still have parts from that original machine in the latest iteration, which is now sitting in my closet, waiting for the financial freedom I will need to upgrade it to a serviceable level.

I have always been fascinated with how things work. The interactions of electricity, a "substance" we cannot see, within visible components that are constructed with specific behaviors in mind just interests me to no end. I am entirely enamored with the idea of building things from scratch rather than buying them, and I do so at every possible occasion. There is just something so powerful about working with your hands, using the tools available to YOU to build something that YOU can use. It is freeing and enlightening and it keeps me sharp. I learned more from a year of tinkering with guitar amplifiers in college than I did in most of the courses I took that year. The culmination of that year was this:

That's a Fender Vibroverb. I converted a newer "Custom Vibrolux Reverb," repaired the cabinet, and recovered the amp. It sounded amazing, and it fetched me about a $400 profit. Not bad for my first project. I played it at one show and was totally hooked. I have not stopped playing with musical toys since.

Today, I built my friend Cait a Fuzz Face pedal. That's a distortion effect for those of you non-guitar nerds. I can still smell the solder in the air, and while I am happy with the job I did, I am already aching to build something else. Luckily, I am building a guitar for a friend in exchange for a bike, so I am busier than perhaps I should be.

I am not emotional about my building and my creating. I am all business, all the time. I am connected viscerally to my work and the job at hand. It's the most zen-like I ever get, I think. There is the work, and there is you, but you are one with the work. You speak to the work, and it speaks to you, but there is no speaking. At this point it is easy to see how it all fits together, and suddenly you're in it, entirely in it, dualistically aware of how each intricate move will affect the finished product. You strive for perfection, but rarely find it. That's the game. And it's a fun one.

NaBloPoMo: The Outdoors [ties]

2010-02-11T13:51:00.001-05:00

Nature is where I belong. I belong to nature. I am a part of nature. Nature is a part of me. The world exists around me, and I exist inside the world. I did not create the world, and the world did not create me. I inhabit the earth, and the earth inhabits me.

Cities have their place in our world--I'm living in one of the biggest ones on earth right now, with the most wealth and the most poverty and the most opportunity and the most disappointment--truly a place of extremes. And that's just it. Cities are great ways for people to come together and enhance their social, economic, and intellectual lives. We move to cities to find wealth, love, and answers.

In that way, being outdoors is almost the exact opposite to being in a city (despite the existence of large parks and the prevalence of public transportation). I feel connected to cities, but I feel born of the earth, akin to nature, and at home without need for shelter or internet or phones.

Sometimes, I like to take long hikes. Other times, I enjoy just sitting in the woods, no matter what time of year. And I can almost always make a case for building a fort out of dead limbs and pine boughs, sitting inside and reading for hours at a time. In my travels, I've seen forests and deserts and mountains and oceans and rain forests and high plains and subtropical rivers and so many more ecosystems than I can count. I think even seeing the million varieties of a single species of tree could excite me in the same way. What matters isn't how, why, or how much, but just that there IS nature left in the world.

My world is the world of the outdoors. They are one and the same, and yet separate. I can live in the city and have my mind be perpetually in the clouds, the forest, or the cloud forest. In my head I am frequently walking through the underbrush, rafting down a raging river, or wheezing at the top of an Andean summit. I doubt I will ever tire of these experiences, and I hope against all hope that I will have the ability to go to these places and walk these ancient paths until the day I die.

NaBloPoMo: The Internet Died Edition [ties]

2010-02-11T09:07:00.002-05:00

My internet was dead yesterday at home. I kept putting off writing, and then it just became impossible. I was only going to write a tiny, tiny bit anyway, so here goes:

I live in Brooklyn. I have become so attached to this place, how it works and feels, and how it makes me feel. I love it. And so I wanted to share a lyric from an Avett Brothers song:

Brooklyn Brooklyn take me in

Are you aware the shape I'm in

My hands they shake my head it spins

Brooklyn Brooklyn take me in

It's a simple lyric, but it gets to me. I came to Brooklyn broken, alone, and lost. Within weeks I'd found a community, reasons to live and love, and peace of mind. I could not be happier. So, thank you Brooklyn, for providing for me what small towns could not.

NaBloPoMo My Home [ties]

2010-02-09T15:48:00.000-05:00

I grew up in the woods outside of Charlottesville, in Virginia. I wasn't born there, but all my childhood was spent in this house:

Seeing this photo reminds me of the incredible springs, summers, and falls I spent outside at home. This house is on a 5-acre plot, with a pond (behind the camera), a stream (to the right) and woods extending all around. In the summer, when the leaves are the thickest, you can't hear the road.

I used to spend every free moment outside, making forts, walking trails I blazed with my father the summer we moved here, and fishing down at the pond. I developed an active imagination, and I created mythologies about the animals that lived in the woods. Friends and I built dams down by the stream, dug caves, hid from my brother, and planned new Utopian societies that would form just feet from a major road. It was bliss. I had such a connection to nature, the elements, and what it means to be alive in a world almost completely overtaken by pavement and development.

We had a garden, fenced off to keep out the deer. That didn't last long, because deer couldn't care less about a fence (they jump). We also had beds upon beds of lilies, lamb's ear and other inedible and edible herbs, all maintained by my mother, the nourisher (my father was more of a "let's make sure everything's working well" kind of person). We would help her for maybe 15 minutes at a time, then run away to swing on the rope tied to a Mimosa tree nearby.

A lot of change has touched my life since then, but I never forgot the beauty and the solitude of the woods below my house. To this day, when I am troubled and at home, I take a walk down to the stream. The only difference between now and then is that now I know I'm just visiting the places I used to inhabit. The mystery, mythologies, and harmony of that places still exist, just temporarily. Getting used to that was hard, but I will never be too old to feel that way again.

NaBloPoMo: Trust [ties]

2010-02-08T15:20:00.000-05:00

Today, someone told me they trusted me. I cried.

That moment was powerful. It was important for reasons I won't go in to here, but also simply because it highlights how beautiful and intrinsic the concept of trust is. For the most part, we are individualistic creatures. The cultural differences that exist across the scope of humanity do little to dim the light of unique individuality that exists in each of us. We tend to consider our opinions to be most valid, especially when applied to ourselves, because it's assumed that we know our own self in more depth than anyone else can. Similarly (but significantly distinct), we tend to believe that we are most suited to making the decisions that affect us personally, both important and trivial.

We are outraged when someone assumes they know us better than we know to be the case. Sometimes, we're wrong, and the object of our outrage is actually speaking from wisdom and experience and careful, loving observation of your own life. This is the case with parents and their teenage progeny. We have all experienced wondering how the hell our parents can be so wrong, and most of us have the good fortune of laughing about how silly it is to think such things about people so close to you.

We live in a world where trust is the exception, not the rule. I think a lot of people wish this were not the case, but it is often so difficult to determine whether a person has your best interests in mind while they make decisions that affect you. In most cases, we'd rather be safe than sorry. And then, sometimes, rarely, someone comes along. This person may be a friend, a relative, a stranger, or anything in between. What connects us to this person is typically undefinable, but there's an affinity almost at once. Maybe we feel inexplicably that within moments of meeting this person it's safe to tell them more than perhaps we should, or maybe it just means they put us at ease.

Whatever the case, when those seeds germinate, they put roots down into your soul and push shoots up into the world. Trust is grown, cared for, and harvested by those who notice it. It nourishes and inspires those who understand its intricate subtleties. And sometimes, it just makes you cry a little bit. However it manifests, trust is organic and irreplaceable. There is no substitute, in a romance, in a friendship, even between enemies. Those people who you know the best may not be trusted most, but those trusted most will soon be understood best.

After all, what is trust but unconditional and universal love for the way we interact as human beings, spinning at a million miles an hour through the vastness of space, alone, or not, but always surrounded by the potential for understanding our place in the world.

Trust ties me to people. It ties me to myself. Trust is the force that holds us together, and when it breaks, we become unglued. Heartbreak is nothing more than a loss of trust. Betrayal is the result of misplaced trust. And when trust continues unabated, evolves and grows, puts down new roots and regrows season after season, we call it love.

NaBloWriMo: Hair Models [ties]

2010-02-07T15:17:00.000-05:00

Wow. What an incredible weekend. And it's not over.

Friday I went to a meeting with a newly signed metal band. If you know me, you understand how odd that is. They are going to PAY ME to start rowdiness at their show. Oh, and free booze. Freaking great.

Oddly enough, that was the least eventful part of the weekend. Yesterday, I was lucky enough to be a friend's Hair Model at the Aveda Institute in Manhattan.

When I first agreed to it I was just happy to be getting a free haircut, from a friend, at a nice salon. That was really all the motivation I needed. It turns out that Aveda is all about natural ingredients and the organic integration of meditative techniques into their services. If you know anything about me, you know that this, unlike the metal band, is very much what I'm in to.

The entire experience was zen-like, concentrating on a perfect process and the true immersion of self/universe duality into every moment. It started with a licorice/mint tea, designed to relax me, continued with a scalp massage which incorporated shiatsu techniques and some amount of energy balancing, and then we were off on the 3-hour process of cutting my hairs.

My friend Lindsay is a student at Aveda, but she's talented, to say the least. She came right out and told me that the way I was used to wearing my hair was pretty ridiculous, and she was right. It looks great. It really does. And just in time to start some pits at this metal show.

The three hours of hair cutting were inspirationally meditative. Thoughts kept passing over my mind in ways that I have trouble initiating when alone in my room and putting my mind to only meditation. Realizations and priority reorganization occurred quickly and without interruption, and the typical distractions that occur stayed only long enough to alert me of their presence and then fled as my mind was again taken over by the mindless mindfulness of meditation.

It was great. I couldn't have asked for a better haircut or company. Kudos, Lindsay, you're going to go far!

weekend plans to rival those of the stars

2010-02-05T16:12:00.000-05:00

Tonight:

paid gig to be in the audience at a "hard rock/metal" show and be included in a music video. No idea who the band is (they haven't said) but the space is in midtown Manhattan and quite famous.

Tomorrow:

being a hair model. Yes, you read that correctly.

Sunday:

Superbowl.

Yes, I know, lame post. I can't think of anything else to write today. Sorry.

NaBloPoMo: My friend Seth [ties]

2010-02-04T10:54:00.002-05:00

There's a lot of soul-baring going on around these parts lately, and I figure I should keep it up. Today's post is about my friend Seth.

In a lot of ways, Seth has been a brother to me. I know, I know, I have a brother, but Will, for all his current wisdom, charm, and maturity, was not always that way. In fact, when we were younger, we didn't get along due to the age difference (4 years). I was mean to Will, too mean, and I am trying to make amends for that now. There will be a post in the near future about that. What I mean, though, is that Seth filled the role of compatriot and partner-in-crime from the time we were 7 until now. I assume this will continue into the future, even as our lives take us in different directions.

How we met is sort of irrelevant, because it didn't make a difference how long we had known each other--it was like we had always been friends. I think I spent about three quarters of my weekends in middle school with Seth, either at his house or mine, staying up late, watching rented VHS's and eating popcorn made in a cast iron pot topped with soy sauce. We would laugh, talk about poop and farts, as young boys will do, and go to sleep usually after several reminders by parents to shut the hell up. We were not a quiet pair.

Over the years, Seth has been one of the very few people I have always been able to go to for advice. And more often than not, the advice given was truthful, hard to swallow, and abusively delivered. This has always been the way we worked. Somehow we are always able to vent our frustration with the world on each other and allow it to build us up, not tear us down. Seth has always been the "friend approval" I look for when I embark on relationships, and lacking this I inevitably feel as if I might be doing something wrong.

From the moment we first got in trouble for making faces at each other at Seth's sister's Bat Mitzvah (he was in the front row, I was up behind in the mezzanine, how the hell did we think other people wouldn't see?), we've been partners in crime. We've broken every type of furniture known to mankind, had some rough mornings after nights of drinking, played pranks on each other and our siblings, And one incident that went like this: "Hey, if we open the window when we play music it won't be as loud in here!" Cue complaints by neighbors. We've worked together, gotten in trouble for laughing too much, playing chess not during lunch hours, complaining to the wrong people, and generally being screw-ups.

And yet, we both got into great schools, different schools, and excelled academically (probably because we weren't around to distract each other). I remember the day I left for college, anxious as hell that this might be the end of our friendship. It wasn't, and I was pretty stupid for thinking so. Friends like that only come around every now and then, and they stay with you for life.

Right now, Seth is in Korea, and I'm in New York. We've seen each other only once or twice in the last year. It's been rough, what with my own troubles (travels, breakups, depression, new jobs, new living situations) and his own (dissatisfaction with Korea, women, and the like). But, as always, we make it work. Skype, AIM, and the occasional Facebook hijack (check his wall, kids) have kept us close. When he gets back, even if he doesn't know it, he's moving to Brooklyn. We're going to start a music shop that sells a very specialized type of spoon, and Baba Yetu will play constantly in the background. Life will be great.

Until then, Seth, thanks for being a best friend and brother throughout my life. And yes, this is, in fact, a bromance. Get over it.

NaBloPoMo [ties]

2010-02-03T15:14:00.000-05:00

Ties.

I love my family. In fact, especially recently they've become the most important people in my life. So, here's a quick shout out to each one of them:

M: Here's to your unbridled courage in the face of your struggle, and a fighting spirit that you've passed on to me. Plus, even though you're self-conscious about it, you give great advice.

D: Thank you for instilling in me the need to learn and to know what the world is like. Without this, I don't think I would stand a chance. And, when it comes down to it, you're the smartest person I know.

R: You glow with healing energy. No joke. Please, never change, the world needs such a wonderful example of what it means to care. You have my utmost respect and love.

W: Every day you turn to me and tell me something new you've learned. Sometime this isn't conscious, but buddy, you've got the makings of an amazing human being, and each time I turn around you show me more reasons why I should have been nicer to you when we were growing up. You can always talk to me, you know that.

...and not to leave out the newest members of the family:

C: You bring much-needed humility and perspective to a family that thinks a little too much of itself. Thank you for teaching me the power of humor and the healing power of loss.

D: Your unbreakable calm soothes souls. Nothing can perturb you, and that is not only rare, it's downright amazing. Thank you for bringing happiness, support, and hope to my mother.

I love you all.

National Blog Posting Month (NaBloPoMo)

2010-02-03T10:12:00.000-05:00

In an effort to promote myself, I'm participating in the NaBloPoMo this month. it actually occurs each month, but this month's theme is "ties," whatever that means. I will be writing every day (but I do anyway) about neckties, bowties, twistie ties, and so forth. Not really. Because I'm pretty sure ties means something else here. Almost positive. More to come.

More writings [Writing]

2010-02-02T19:41:00.001-05:00

I'm on a publishing kick. Funny, because I work at a publishing company! Ha Ha Ha!!!!1111one!

This is a short story. It's not finished. But I think that's part of the charm.

To answer your inevitable questions:

1. No, it's not about me, although there are bits and pieces of me in the story. How could there not be?
2. It's not as hopeless as it sounds.
3. I can't really make risotto.

Something reeks of repression. Heavy curtains of muffling wool settle lethargically against the window trim. I could move them, look outside, see what could be making that noise, but I don't. I tell myself it's just because I'd rather imagine than spoil the surprise, that schrodinger and his cats would be proud. The curtains know differently.

It sounds like someone is cutting down a tree with a chainsaw, but it's too quiet and yet very present. Could there be an animal outside? None that sound quite like that, and at noon in summer in a crowded neighborhood, I doubt the poor critter would stick around long enough to try. Here, I'll lift my arm, force my hand to draw the curtains to one side.

Or not. A breeze tries to ruffle the curtains but succeeds only in producing a long, low sigh as barely lifted it falls back into place. I hear a car out by the road. It's saturday, and not many people are out and about. If I had to guess, I would say this one was a sedan. Two 30-something adults in the front seat of assorted genders. It doesn't sound like the back seat is full. The vibration seems too light, too carefree to be carrying baggage.

I should go do my errands. There's no food in the house, and no clean dishes. I can smell the mold from last month's leaky roof all the way from the bedroom. I feel the air change temperature against my cheek. Another breeze. This one can't seem to move the curtain at all.

Silence. Peace. Mist. Now I'm in the kitchen, hot water running over my palms as I soap down each cold metal dish. Red and green and orange crusts of dinners past flow downwards into the drain, caught by a piece of paper towel I've fashioned for this purpose. Success. The soap soothes at it cleans, leaving my hands red, cracked and dry with accomplishment. Surveying my work, I notice a face in the window across the street. A thin man, graying hair, not looking at me, cleaning his own dishes. his loneliness speaks to me, and I feel sympathy for the middle-aged the world over. To get halfway through life only to realize that happiness and love are not cumulative must crush one's spirit. I am inspired to pity and to tears.

Calm. Motion. Confusion. I am on the bus, reusable fabric grocery bags in hand. A list of ingredients plays itself on infinite repeat in my skull:

fresh bread
mushrooms
chicken stock
rice
wine
air freshener

Tonight my lover will be a saucepan of risotto. I already have the cheese. Dinner for two: myself, and my mind. Someone once told me that I spend too much time "in my head," whatever that means, so I thought about it, loosened up, and now I only eat meals with my thoughts.

A woman is sitting near me, poised for nothing and ready for everything. Her read hair drapes down below the top of the seat. Two seats up, one to the left. I wonder where she's going and how heavy her curtains are. She gets off two stops before me, smiling at the bus driver and barely clutching a purse woven from discarded gum wrappers. Laura, I name her. I would have invited her to dinner if she had gotten off at my stop, I tell myself. That makes the loss of her red hair easier. I stand up, smile at the driver, and step off the bus. Fresh bread, mushrooms, chicken stock, rice, wine, air freshener. And a pack of Parliaments. I'll find a lighter later.

We survive because of food, but risotto doesn't exist in the wild. Native Americans, the Masai, and the Sumerians all did without, and they lived full lives anyway. Perhaps theirs were empty lives, though. No one should be deprived of this dish, this delicately crafted amalgam of alcohol, smokiness, and grain. If love were a food, it would be risotto, and mine has learned to love me unconditionally. Stir, watch, add more liquid. I lead, but the bubbling saucepan is my dance partner. Nowhere in me is the capability to create this without the help of a pot of bubbling foodstuffs.

Music wafts in from the living room, indie/reggae melding with cooking mushrooms, reminding me of phosphorescent clouds and created worlds at some festival or another in the hills of New York. I can't even recall when that could have been, or why I was there, only that my soul was moved enough to try to learn more about itself. The real delusion is expecting a drug to fix something you don't think is broken. Shiitakes replace psilocybin.

Sleep. I leave the window open to let in the cool night air. Even in summer, Brooklyn is comfortable. I think some would call me crazy, but I like to reserve that self-description for more flagrant differences of opinions. My body's issue with my mind, for instance. They both think the other is insane--but they're both wrong, and too stubborn to admit it. Tonight, it's my brain's fault:

Body:  It's time for bed. I'm closing the eyes now.
Brain: Hey, wait a minute, I just need to finish this.
Body: Listen, you're always dishing out some excuse. Take a break, and we can both work on it in the morning.
Brain:  Why don't you want me to succeed?
Body: Not this again. We've been over this. There's a time and a place for everything, and right now it's late and we're in bed.
Brain:  Fuck you. I miss the way things used to be.
Body:  Why do you have to act like that? You know I love you. Plus, where else can you go? We just need to find a good compromise.
Brain:...
Body: Brain? Are you OK?
Brain:...Goodnight, Body.
Body: Goodnight, Brain. I love you, Brain.
Brain: I know you do.

Morning. that noise, the chainsaw, is still right outside the window. Leaves and trash are whipping down the street. I smell the faint damp smell of light rain on warm pavement. Time to get up. The curtains are unperturbed by the storm building outside. Pitterpatter. Splash. A car slides by on slick rubber, insulated from the chill of rain and wind.

Time to get up.

I assume the sun continued to rise. My immobile body sweats through and glues me to the blue cotton sheets on the bed. Now I'm committed to this, I think, as the clock int he hallway counts off the moments I am wasting. Lazy Sunday, I say, but the excuse sounds thin, fake, false. I want to reach for the glass of water near the bed that I placed there last night, but when my mind looks for the impetus, it finds only a river of distractions and envy. My mother has Parkinson's disease. I remember the first day she called me, unable to get up out of bed and crying, scared and stuck in her too-young body. I cried with her, out of empathy and out of fear that my mother may have slipped away from me while I wasn't looking. I don't have Parkinson's disease, so what's my excuse?

In a way, all our bodies begin decaying the moment we are born--even as we grow out of infancy, through toddlerhood, and onward towards adolescence our bodies are accumulating toxins and making plans for us without our knowledge. I tell myself that this grand conspiracy of flesh is only one way to see it, that my body is mine to control until it isn't, that my best years are still ahead of me. I don't think I believe myself.

Brain:  Prove me wrong, body! Come on, I need you now!
Body:  NOW you come crawling back! Why should I let you into my heart again?
Brain: Because Sam needs us--don't do this for me, do it for him.
Body: Alright, but understand that I'm still upset with you.
Brain:  We can talk about it later. Now get up!

Shower. Clothes. these things seem so basic yet entirely out of reach, and then suddenly, they're done My shirt even matches my eyes. Success feels like a lukewarm cup of coffee. All the elements are there, but if only the context were a bit different. I stand at the counter while my bread toasts. The gray-haired man is at his window again. The loneliness returns. His loneliness. I wonder if he's happy, if his life has been interesting, whether he's visited Europe. He looks like he would enjoy Paris, or Barcelona. He would probably not like London.

Work. Clickity clack goes the keyboard. New words and numbers appear on the screen and old ones disappear, endlessly. Data changes places delicately on smooth platters of magnetized metal. I dream of a moment when someone will have a nervous breakdown after realizing the fragility of this digital world. It seems that we refuse to acknowledge the tenuous nature of data storage and electronically controlled machinery. The headline would read:

"Big Magnet Destroys World. No One Injured"

Suicides would follow. Money, meaningless. Cars, trains all non-functional. No electricity, television, or credit cards. My stove runs on gas, not binary. I'd still have a way to cook my risotto, once the grocery store riots ended.

And then I imagine people after such a catastrophe, all frozen in place, waiting for instruction. no alarms or digital organizers, traffic lights or news reports. Hands held in midair parallel to the ground, hailing taxis that will never come. Staring unfocused at a dark computer screen. Hopeless, paralyzed, and confused, the world would grind to a halt.

It's thoughts like this that make me realize something's wrong. The small uncomfortable smile creeps across my face, alerting me of this fact. My fingers stop their incessant clatter. I become aware of the sheer volume of noise in the office--countless keyboards, ringing phones, now and then a copier warming up, and the chatter of dozens of voices, droning on about this and that, never really saying anything. My ears are full. The weight of the noise starts to press on my temples. Panic. I am being pushed into myself, trapped, forced to tune into the millions of miniscule details that normal people deal with every day. I feel nauseous. I make it to the bathroom, shut the door behind me, and vomit. All I hear in the stall is the gentle massage of the ventilation system. I close the lid of the toilet, flush my panic, sit down on the closed seat and close the door to the stall. My skin feels prickly, like I've been running outside during the winter and I'm just about to start sweating. Eyesight blurry, I disappear inside my tears.

I read somewhere that the self is like a swinging door. When a person breathes, there is no "I," no world, only a swinging door. I guess that's a way for a newcomer to understand the contradictions of Zen. it's also my mantra for putting up with myself. Actually, I'm not sure what that means. I guess it implies balance and the cyclical nature of the universe. Whatever it is we lost on the exhale will be riding back in on the next inhale. It's that sort of organized hope that always gets me into trouble.

I haven't been back to work in three days. I've called in sick each day, knowing that if I went I would just end up on the tiled floor of the bathroom stall, panicky and confused. In front of me are a glass pipe and a lighter. one hand reaches for the pipe, another gropes for the plastic lighter. Flick. Inhale. Hold. Exhale. Repeat. I calm myself with organic, locally grown marijuana because we must all do our part to save the environment. My shoulders lift and I'm floating above the world, lightly tethered to my sob-wracked body. I don't think pot can fix me tonight. On second thought, what needs fixing?

songs [music]

2010-02-01T12:13:00.000-05:00

I do this ever so rarely because to be honest, I'm terrified of feedback on my own work. Here's two songs I've written in the last month. Don't read too much into them, though.

Enjoy!

These feet ache for the open road
for calluses and the thrill of bedtime heartbeats
waking up to a world larger than love
and flowing ice from winter cold
you lean in and I drop my guard
hands tremble, arm against arm

I've spent years living tomorrow instead of today
loving like we'd have forever or even more
you drag your hands through your hair and you were rid of me
without you the sun still rises, deep red smiles
**************************************************
So we ride the rails clickity clack clickity clack
feeling the high-tide energy building rising
high-rise jump and our feet leave the ground
our words reach other suns but we remain unsurprised

I've got these arms strong from years of raising them
against the tyranny rained on those who march out of time
and a chest with a scar straight down the middle
appeared just the day after we committed our crime

Don't brutalize that which you don't understand
we rise, harmonize high above those so tiny-minded
the ever-tempted white man crusading for yesterday
forever minor players under our study

The Logical Conclusion of (some types of) Critical Theory [Scope]

2010-01-29T11:15:00.000-05:00

I have a feeling that this post is going to raise some eyebrows and heat up some tempers, so let me state up front:

This is by no means a definitive account of ANYTHING. I am open to criticism. Please, give me feedback, as this is my own theory and by no means a reflection of all my beliefs.

Phew. I dislike disclaimers, but the internetz require them sometimes.

Sociology is, at its core, an objective discipline that strives to describe and collect data regarding the inherently subjective experience of social interactions within a given culture. In its purest form, Sociology is akin to the "hard" sciences like Biology and Physics, following the scientific method by requiring the testing of hypotheses and the replication of results under similar conditions. Theories arise in Sociology that are quickly disproved, just like in any other science, and those that do withstand the test of time are rightly brought into question as our understanding of society evolves and changes.

While intellectually valuable, Sociology, like other hard sciences, needs a branch dedicated to applying itself to the issues it tackles. Over the years, this branch has spawned multiple movements working towards equality in society including certain forms of Feminism, parts of the GLBTQ movement, and has raised awareness regarding continuing racial, gender, and socioeconomic disparities. Most recently, Sociology has given rise to the field of Critical Theory, which strives to look at every social interaction through the sociological lens, thus providing constant feedback and an informal platform for dialectic exchanges.

When formalized, Critical Theory observes the situations of many different types of people and assigns them an amount of privilege as dictated by their social location. A good representation of this is given by Patricia Hill Collins in her essays on the intersection of different social oppressions. She states that we all have a location within an oppressive "matrix" (dubbed the Matrix of Oppression) that gives every individual a unique level of privilege, and conversely a unique oppressed status, thus making comparisons of oppression irrelevant and unhelpful to the continued objectification of oppression as it relates to a person's experience.

Everything about this makes sense. In fact, it's quite liberating from the perspective of anyone who seeks to enact social change because it meshes so well with the "live and let live" philosophy that is embodied in the ideal of social equality.

In practice, however, there are some flaws in the theory's application to reality that need addressing if we wish to continue citing it as a justification for equality. The issue becomes clear when we investigate more deeply the premise that people are not responsible for their social location and thus accountability is not to be considered on an individual level. The idea is that privilege (and conversely oppression) are inherited through a number of channels including genetics, appearance, level of education available, socioeconomic status of family, and so forth. For instance, a child of white affluent parents has a higher level of privilege and a lower level of oppression (debatable if you come from a family of WASPs. just kidding.) than a child whose parents are dark-skinned, recent immigrants, and poorly educated by our society's standards. Critical theory states that neither child is responsible for their social location because there was no conscious choice that could have been made otherwise.

Nothing wrong so far. But when we take it to the next step, issues start to arise. The more conservative among us say that all individuals should be held to the same standards. This is wrong. There is no one right way of living, thus standards should be flexible. However, the Critical Theory contention, that we should excuse those who suffer the most oppression out of hand while questioning (also out of hand) the actions of those least oppressed, is equally as fallacious logically. Recall: the premise of the Critical Theory argument is that no one is responsible for their social location. Thus, no one should be held responsible for their actions. This is also incorrect. Accountability is important not just as a personal value but as a societal value, and whether you believe in government or not, odds are you believe SOMEONE should be held accountable for atrocities committed against other human beings.

So, what we have here is a theory unequally applied. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THOSE WITH HIGH LEVELS OF PRIVILEGE ARE OPPRESSED. What it does mean, though, is that the theory needs revision. When people interested in social equality (myself included) look at the social fabric that contributes to social inequality, we say "this is wrong." That statement is still valid. Those with privilege deserve less than they have, and those with less privilege deserve more than they have. That is not a subjective statement, but rather one based on the philosophy that all humans, by merit of being human, deserve the same set of rights and privileges as their neighbors. This idea has been around since before the written word: there is evidence that pre-agricultural tribes had horizontally organized societies without clear winners and losers, resulting in a society of equals.

So here we are: this is the jumping-off point for a whole new perspective. If you can't blame someone else for your problems, and you can't blame yourself (both of these are valid conclusions), then what do you do to stay sane, improve your situation, and aid in efforts for equality?

A few things come to mind. First is the radical idea that change can happen without clear winners and losers. Sometimes, such as in a well-structured anarchy (oh, the contradiction!!!), change occurs because it should, and not because of some misguided sense of justice or desire to set the record straight. Ours is a society that forgets its past, and quickly. We are better served by moving forward with our plans for an equal society than we are by trying to fix problems that exist now because of the past.

What that means: Let's start over! It's laughable how easy it would be to simply drop out of society, especially from the perspective of the disenfranchised, simply because when a large enough group does so, they become their own social entity, independent of the needs and wants of the society we live in. In a lot of ways, the privileged will have the hardest time with this because from ~~their~~ (our) perspective, there is a lot to lose. Daniel Quinn (It wouldn't be a post without a reference to DQ) has a solution for this, too, and I paraphrase: think not of all you will have to give up, but of all you have to gain by doing so. This isn't a losing battle. We can do this. All we need are the skills.

"If you give a man a fish..."

apologies

2010-01-28T16:02:00.000-05:00

All,

I've been absolutely slammed at work the last couple days building a social networking cluster for my company. Oy. Sometimes the things that SHOULD work together just don't. I'm following the Phaedrus method as pioneered in the book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, which states that when you are put up against a roadblock, step back and readjust your perspective. Perfect!

Anyway, hopefully tomorrow I'll have time to write a post about the logical conclusions of sociological reasoning. It's a gem.

Makers: Yesterday Meets Tomorrow [Social Change]

2010-01-26T15:00:00.001-05:00

In the late 1950s and early '60s, young people everywhere began to get fed up with the lifestyle of their parents' generation, and the counterculture was born. We all know about the great legacies championed by these young people (the civil rights movement, environmental reform, war protests, art, music, drugs) and the avenues they opened up for us today.

Something we tend to forget is that the counterculture generation was perhaps the last to grow up learning a set of valuable skills most of us today never really think about anymore, things like woodworking, baking (from scratch!), sewing, metalworking, and general craftsmanship. It's weird to imagine this, but the consumer-goods boom really only started around the time the counterculture was forming, and it was against this consumerism (and many, many other factors) that the counterculture formed its governing principles.

Cue the 21st century. We were thrown into the "future" with promises of flying cars, Star Trek style interactive computers, and faster-than-light travel. None of these really panned out (YET. I'm still waiting for my jetpack), but in the race to innovate, companies have used lower and lower quality materials, QC procedures, and generally have lowered the standards of manufacture while increasing the price with the justification that as commodities, they are obliged to charge what the consumer is willing to pay.

And this place we're in now, where technology is largely proprietary and owned not by the community but by private corporations, is precisely the location from which the counterculture was trying to push us away. Unfortunately for that philosophy of quality-above-all-else, the counterculture has largely assimilated itself into the mainstream, and its members have families, jobs, mortgages, and practical problems of their own, seemingly erasing the possibility of accomplishing this goal.

But there is always hope when an idea embodies a basic human ideal. In the past few years, slowly and largely under the radar, a new movement has been growing around the idea that ALL technology should be available to ALL. They call themselves Makers, and their exploits are not only impressive, they are downright revolutionary.

The idea is to take back the means of development, fabrication, and production, and to do so in a way that produces something USEFUL, DURABLE, and INNOVATIVE. Using quick-fab techniques based on programmable microprocessors such as the Arduino, Makers have developed unique art, productivity tools, instruments, and other unclassifiable but undeniably cool stuff. Other tools employed include 3-D printers and scanners, both of which can cost upwards of $50,000 if bought commercially but can be BUILT FROM MAKER-SOURCED KITS for less than $1,000 apiece!

And it doesn't end there--in a bid to recapture the means of production, workshops are being built that just blow away any previous attempts. Organization and convergence are the buzzwords for this movement--you can expect a serious Maker to have fewer tools that do more things, and many of which are made at home.

The movement, while largely unnoticed, has made some gigantic contributions to our society as a whole. Most notable are the introduction of the Open Source mentality, popularized by Canadian blogger and author Cory Doctorow and American Beard-Wearer Richard Stallman. As the inventor of the GNU public licensing scheme, Stallman is directly responsible for the post-DRM opening of intellectual property licensing and management, which has been vastly popularized through Doctorow's writing. Their philosophy is if you create something of high quality, people will pay for it. Period. Case in point: Doctorow's recent chronicle of a hypothetical future, titled Makers was released entirely open-source and free to the public, and as a result made a profit almost instantly. This is in contrast to authors and musicians who submit their work to large labels or publishing houses whose rights management software simultaneously raises prices and limits viewership, thus delaying the date of first profit.

In a heart-warming scene of collaboration and camaraderie, the Maker movement seems to be crossing generational and other social barriers with ease, bringing people together over their basic desire to innovate and create. MIT runs a low/high tech lab that focuses on innovation with crafts and textiles, and there are groups of food innovators, music innovators, materials innovators, and citizen-scientists, all contributing to the success of this movement and meeting in popular locations to spread their ideas. Younger generations may focus on the computational aspects of the movement, reverse-engineering popular proprietary tools and recreating them as open and free software, or simply creating new and innovative ways to create on platforms that have grown relatively stale. Meanwhile, older generations may feel more comfortable working with the skills they learned as young people, innovating in the areas of product maintenance, durability, repurposing, and fabrication.

The idea, though, is that no one should be pigeonholed by the options available. Once accepted, this philosophy states that anyone has the ability to create new ways of doing and being. Thus, the movement has resulted in unprecedented levels of choice, variety, diversity, and personalized services.

Rock on, Makers everywhere!

News, news, and a solicitation

2010-01-25T11:22:00.000-05:00

What The Fuck. Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States of [Corporate Free Speech] decided that Corporations are people too, and thus they are allowed the same right to free speech as individuals, thus making laws that limit their spending on political campaigns and political advertising unconstitutional.

John McCain sipping a thirst-quenching Coca-Cola, Sarah Palin human-hunting with a .50 caliber Barrett rifle.

What the fuck have we become? This has got to be closest to the "jumping-the-shark" moment in this country since the institutionalization of slavery. Basically, the court has decided that corporations don't have enough legal protections and thus we should give them our first-born as payment.

Oy. Sorry for the inaccuracy and hyperbole, but I'm pretty pissed. Let's see what it would cost to move to Canada...

IN OTHER NEWS:

My wonderful, thoughtful, talented sister Rachel will be contributing to the blog in the near-future! I have instituted a no-edit policy, which means that whatever she writes I will keep my hands off of entirely! This is in the interest of exploring the creation of a small, individually-autonomous community in which each person's beliefs are as important as the next.

RELATED:

I am looking for authors! I want thinkers, writers, photographers, anyone, really! This is a space for sharing ideas and beauty and your deepest darkest secrets (if thats what you want to talk about). There are no rules, except that the content be original and "future-seeking." The interpretation of that is up to you.

So, if you want to write, just drop me a line, leave a comment, etc. Hope to hear back from some of you!

test post to twitter

2010-01-24T10:32:00.001-05:00

Right now I'm setting this blog up to go straight to twitter. Let's see if it works. Twitter witter itter tter ter er r re ret rett retti rettiw rettiwT

retesting

A little excerpt by a very obscure author [excerpt]

2010-01-23T22:49:00.001-05:00

I wanted to share this little bit from a story someone near and dear to me wrote about 3 months ago:

14th Street

Electric sentries hold their small orange-bright domains open for the clean masses to pass through on their way to forget their sorrows. Green dresses flutter by worn by blondes, all so sure they are the only ones to look that particular way tonight. I am relieved to find that despite the repetition, each person manages to carry herself with autoamory, eking out a smile for her clones.

No one looks at me. They look through me, seeing a plaid shirt, a pint of mediocre beer, and the tired insecurity of a person whose thoughts are constantly elsewhere. I smile. I lie. The sentries stand tall in amused silence, never judging but providing no support for shaky hands and sweaty brow. This is my fight, my life. Not a one will malfunction tonight, not a one will hand me the opportunity I need to escape in embarrassed darkness into the quiet street, cloaking myself in the smoke of past suffering and current pain.

There is no room for introspection here, only big blue eyes, half-revealed breasts in the streetlights, and the cheesy excuses made in order to utter words to bodies made uncomfortable by the language of my smile and face. There is no success tonight. No nakedness and heavy breathing barely audible beneath iPod soundtracks. No new friends who wish only for closeness and whose desire is masked by morals and fear. Tonight, there is only the discovery that I can be heard over the thousands of angry bees and the constant drone of bass, and of love for all people, no matter how small, dishonest, or beautiful. Tonight is a time for exploring the dark, dusty corridors of personhood, the entryway to humanity, the gateway drug of health.

Nothing

2010-01-21T15:00:00.001-05:00

I got nothin' today. so here's this:

http://niccageaseveryone.blogspot.com/

The Culture of Most Harm [Scope]

2010-01-20T10:55:00.001-05:00

Sometimes, an idea pops into your head so suddenly that you wonder if someone didn't put it there. We call these thoughts epiphanies, and they have led to some of the greatest discoveries of all time. It's as if our instincts, when coupled to a conscious motivation in a specific and delicate manner can form new ways of thinking without our direct input.

The whole concept is pretty bizarre, but perhaps more bizarre is what I just experienced while reading Beyond Civilization by Daniel Quinn (Yes, I'm on a Quinn kick this week). Some of Quinn's ideas are of that perfect, epiphany-esque quality and must have given him great joy and exhilaration during their creation. What's more amazing is how perfectly these ideas resonate in my own brain. In this case, someone HAS put this idea in my head, very directly via the written word, and it feels as if I've been thinking it for years and years.

The idea itself is difficult to transmit in my own words because of the inevitable perspective difference you, the reader, have in regards to me, the writer. Put simply, Quinn as stated that as a society we are unique in believing that all others must live the way we live. No one in history has believed this and gotten away with it, except for us, the descendants of the agricultural revolution. It's quite an uncohesive "we," because the civilizations included did not all go through this revolution together. The fact remains, however, that this viewpoint is the most harmful way of being ever invented. In its wake it has left millions dead, marginalized, and overcome with an insatiable greed and desire for consumer goods. We are the pinnacle of this idea, working tirelessly such that all of our descendants will continue to live the way we live.

Quinn takes this concept and quickly moves past its application to current events to cover his main thesis regarding how to move PAST this idea, and I see his advice as being timeless and almost above reproach. However, in the spirit of intellectual observation and categorization, let's investigate the ways in which this view manifests itself in myriad ineffective, harmful ways.

1. Activism: (quick note: I love activism. I'm an activist for all sorts of issues pertaining to human equality. I also see it as ultimately unsuccessful.) This is sort of the ultimate realm of "treading water." The basic idea behind activism (on all sides of all issues) seems to be "I have ideas about the problems in the world. These ideas are true for these reasons, and therefore you have no moral choice but to believe what I believe." Regardless of the merit of the ideas themselves, the pattern is almost always the same: people who believe strongly in the ideals posited by a movement will join it, quickly at first. Then recruitment efforts begin, and ultimately fail, for the simple reason that a person has to want to change their mind. Period. If there are compelling reasons not to change the way one conducts hir life, then that person will not change. Period. And thus, activist groups end up wasting huge amounts of energy on recruitment and mind-changing under the false hope that something will give, eventually.

2. Criminal Justice: This one is very, very easy to see. Some laws are made to protect people (laws against violence, sexual misconduct, stealing, etc). Others are made to keep business running smoothly (business regulations, tax laws, election laws). And still others are made to keep people "in line" (laws against drugs, public exposure, obscenity, sex-work, copyright law). All three categories have some successes and some failures. What unifies them all is the belief that if we write it down as illegal and prosecute it, people will stop doing it. As a result, we have a growing number of people in prisons every year but no appreciable drop in crimes of any sort. The lesson here: people will not behave in a way just because they are told to do so. The fact that people will risk punishment to act in ways considered unsavory by society is strong evidence that this instinct runs deeper than simple anti-social attitudes.

3. Globalization: simply put, we believe all people should be privy to the "beauty" of capitalism. Not unlike the proselytizing of evangelical missionaries in the last few centuries, we are under the impression that all people the world over will be "freed" by capitalism (the fact that it pads our pockets isn't a deterrent, either). As Buddha said (and I am paraphrasing here, I have not spoken with Buddha in awhile), having money only induces greed. Despite the economic and social destruction that the introduction of capitalism inevitably brings (argue with me all you want, having more is not the same as having more of what you need), we continue to push it on the as-yet uninitiated. The crux of this is, we believe all people should conduct business the way we do.

So there you go. A quick set of examples. Tomorrow I want to explore what this means, and where we can go without making it worse (short answer: anywhere but here)

Featured Blog of the Week: Hoostown [Featured Blog]

2010-01-19T14:04:00.000-05:00

"What a [cutting-edge] piece of [art]" is the greeting/subtitle on this witty, fun, and utterly nerdy (in a good way!) blog. Hoostown chronicles the exploits of a Charlottesville, VA-to-Houston, TX transplant (those in the know will not understand the meaning of the title) in the pursuit of a Masters in Fine Arts.

More importantly, it's written by a very dear friend of mine, sister of my BESTBEST friend, and herself a BEST friend (um, that's a bit arbitrary, but i can only have one BESTBEST). We grew up in each other's lives and I started reading the blog out of a desire to keep in touch.

However, the familial focus ends there. I CONTINUE reading because this shit is hysterical:
This Just In
Domestic Situation
Thao and the Get Down Stay Down (I went to school with 2 of these people)

So anyway, I encourage you to read this excellently written, hysterical, always grammatically correct blog.

The Rise and Fall of... [Scope]

2010-01-18T12:19:00.000-05:00

If the world is saved, it will not be by old minds with new programs but by new minds with no programs at all.

-Daniel Quinn, Beyond Civilization

Today on the train I had a bizarre moment where I burst out laughing, burgeoning with energy over the clear reality that our society is much further gone than we think it is. The irony of this thought as I rode to a 40-hour-week job was just too much. The excitement I experienced was in reaction to the confirmation of a feeling I've had for some time now, that our society is ultimately unsustainable, and continues to worsen. Mondays can do that to a person, huh?

For those of you who have read his other books, the above quote from Daniel Quinn (Ishmael, The Story of B, My Ishmael) is somewhat old-hat. For those of you who have not, it may not make a whole lot of sense, so let's break it down quickly:

Quinn's M.O. is the salvation of humanity through a radical paradigm shift away from civilization as we know it and towards something more resembling tribalism (don't knock it until you've read it!). Here he is describing the difference between vision (unified cultural memes that we look back at and declare, "there's no other way that history could have gone!") and programs (solutions that work to change the flow of vision by impeding its progress or diverting resources).

What he's saying here is that programs, while helpful in a way similar to the paramedic at the scene of an accident, are no replacement for a unified cultural infrastructure (analogy: hospital with its resources and doctors and nurses and so forth). What we need to "change the world" is a new Vision, a unified idea of what it means to be Humanity, NOT a series of better-funded or more-radical programs whose stated goal is to fix social ills. Another way of saying it is, we need to create a new future, not fix an old one.

That's actually not ALL that radical an idea, but Quinn is entirely correct, we will need new minds, or at least changed minds.

I'd like to report a phenomenon that confirms this idea: I talk with my "smart" friends all the time about these ideas ("smart" really just indicates a conversation partner...not a measure of intelligence by any means!) and for the most part, we agree on what SHOULD happen. We need change, and we need it soon. I even get some decent feedback on methods for enacting said change, but once we turn to reality, to actual implementation, predictions become much, much more pessimistic.

In fact, most conversations end with the following situation: people continue their immersion in work, the digital age, and the self-indulgence we have available to us in this time period as the world crumbles around us. We look up one day to see that nothing we need to survive exists, and we simply fade away as a civilization without the proper infrastructure to sustain us.

For those of you who have seen Serenity, the parallel to the Reaver origin story is absolutely spot-on. People dying where they stand, too pacified and too apathetic to feed or maintain themselves. From what I've read, this sort of complacency also accompanied the fall of Rome as it expanded beyond its ability to maintain its borders and the number of slaves and overtaxed colonies greatly outnumbered the land-owning Roman Citizens. Rome was too caught up in its own affairs to notice that it was crumbling from the inside out, leaving the door wide open to barbarian invasion. Rome was dead long before it was sacked.

What about us?

That's a stupid question (no stupid questions only stupid people bla bla) without any real answer. We're in the midst of our culture, fulfilling the Vision of our times, and it's almost impossible to see where that will lead us other than further down the road of our current Vision. As it stands, the above assessment is spot-on; in all likelihood we will continue to deny the existence of the "lethal memes" within our Vision up until the moment it destroys us, or else we will find a way to change our Vision.

My hope is that my overly optimistic perspective will be adopted by enough people that this will not come to pass. What we need are new minds and changed minds, and right now those are in short supply. We are treading water, people, and our civilization is losing steam, fast. Can minds be changed in time? Yes, they can. Look at how we help our own when disaster strikes (as of Jan. 14). If we change our vision, our culture will follow. Now, what do we change, how do we do it, and where do we want to end up?

To be continued...

1951 Silvertone 1342 Amplifier [Build]

2010-01-16T20:34:00.002-05:00

Today, I took apart the guitar amplifier I bought last month. It's a 1951 Silvertone, model 1342, that I honestly believe belongs in a museum. So, because I am who I am, I took it apart!

The neat thing is that there is no schematic of this amp online, no real information on it other than anecdotal stuff by old-timers and collectors. For the most part, it has fallen through the cracks in history and into my hands via a very fun, very interesting older gentleman by the name of Dash who lives in the east village, still bikes around at the spry age of 60-something, and invited me to jam with him whenever I get a chance. Cool cat, for sure, and yet another awesome Craigslist experience.

This amp cost $65 new when built and the design only lasted two years, for reasons unknown to me. I'm in the process of putting the 100% original components through their paces and replacing what needs to be replaced in order to keep the amp and the player safe from harm. Here's a list of things I'm going to do (things completed are in bold):

1. Replace 2-prong power cord with properly grounded 3-prong cord
2. Clean potentiometers, jacks, speaker, grille, and cabinet. Make sure all solder connections are solid.
3. measure resistor drift (this happens over time, esp. in older, cruder resistors)
4. replace all electrolytic capacitors (these can leak and explode and actually have about a 30-year shelf-life)
5. properly shield the chassis from Radio Frequency (RF) interference
6. Replace speaker baffle
7. Replace speaker for personal use

Just for funsies, here's a link to a site that specializes in vintage Silvertone stuff

Here are some photos of the amp and some explanations of what the crap goes on inside one of these things:

You can't really see it, but it's slightly trapezoidal. The explanation in the catalog is that this "improves airflow." But that's pretty much bullshit. Note how clean the contact paper is. This thing was babied.

panel from left to right: 2x instrument jacks, microphone jack (unbalanced), instrument volume, microphone volume, tone/on/off, fuse, pilot lamp.

The speaker has a tiny ALNICO magnet (that stands for Aluminum, Nickel, Cobalt) and pushes out about 10-20 watts peak. It's not very efficient, which leads to some beautiful break-up as you turn up the volume.

Tubes, from left to right: 1273, 6SL7GT, 2x 6V6GT, 5Y3GT. The two metal cases behind the tubes are multi-capacitor cans with several VERY high voltage capacitors whose function was originally to filter the electricity as it comes from the wall. As they get old, they can burn up and explode, causing the big metal power transformer (to the right behind the tubes) to burn up. At that point the amp is worthless.

If you've ever seen a modern amplifier, you know that this is nothing like those. This is a true point-to-point design, without any support or organizing boards. All these components are discreet, there is not a single transistor or integrated circuit. That makes it fun, but the disorganization makes it harder to work on.

This is the full tear-down. Note the plywood speaker baffle, which is honestly the only bad part about this amp. It's thin, flimsy, and the screw holes have started to split. I will replace this if I keep the amp, which is still up in the air.

This is the seriously awesome schematic. The Silvertone brand was part of the Sears Roebuck company. They also made guitars, harmonicas, and other various instruments. Kinda cool.

A Need to Lighten Up [Humor]

2010-01-15T10:12:00.000-05:00

I am always telling myself to "lighten up." Mostly that stems from some anxiety issues I have, but recently it's also been applicable to this feeling that there's really no reason to get worked up about anything, because the honest truth is, tomorrow will come as it may. Needless to say, the situation in Haiti has gotten me very, very upset, and there's nothing we can do from here other than send money to reputable charities, pray, and wait for enough infrastructure to come back online to make rebuilding a possibility.

So, if any of you are feeling the way I am, I invite you to fill your hearts with laughter and lightness in order to replenish your emotional reserves and be your strongest for the struggles sure to crop up in the future:

First, let's turn to NBC late night. If you haven't been paying attention, Leno got fired for being a bad comic and then was offered Conan's spot, who got pissed and lashed out and was supported by everyone but his boss at NBC, leading Leno to shrug his shoulders and act even MORE like a douche.

And then there was Hitler.

After all this, NBC is finding a ratings boost in its newest reality show, tentatively titled: "Coco vs. Chinzilla," to be filmed in Vancouver alongside the 2010 Winter Olympics featuring special guest Maifist U. Plenosass.

And I also found this gem last night during a rare perusal of MTA's Metro publication. This guy has got the sort of blogosphere attention I can only dream of (har har), and he's not even awake while creating his content!

AND they have t-shirts!

Help Haiti Recover

2010-01-14T14:19:00.000-05:00

Today, I have no thoughts of my own. I am utterly stunned by the situation going on in Haiti, and I want to reach out to whoever is reading this blog and say, please, pay attention, find a reputable charity (see below) that will funnel its funds to those who need them most, and keep sending messages of healing and hope into the ether.

Here we have another opportunity to show what we're capable of as a civilization. Let's not screw it up this time. Let the world see how big our hearts can be.

This is a list compiled by MSNBC of all the charities known to be operating in Haiti. I cannot attest to the legitimacy of ANY of them, nor do I know which ones give the largest percentage of funds to the actual cause versus advertising and recruitment efforts. I urge you to check out the web pages and find out for yourself, and then donate.

I've donated $25 to UNICEF, and I intend to donate as much as I can afford.

How Big Is Your Picture? [Scope]

2010-01-13T12:02:00.000-05:00

Today let's talk about scope.

I was tickled/annoyed the other day by a woman calling in from an AIDS research society who was unaware that there were style standards for writing scholarly papers. Oy, vey. I thought to myself, there is NO way she got through school without learning that! And I have quite a bit of evidence that this is the case.

As I sat back and marveled at her seeming ignorance, I of course began to recognize that there were many, many reasons why despite having this drilled into her skull, this person with a PhD was oblivious to the concept of standardized writing style. She was simply coming at the question of writing a paper from a different perspective, and it was outside the scope of my job to consider hers as a valid way of being.

At that point, this realization blossomed into a much larger self-discussion about how important the breadth of our ideas is to the way we go about life. Sometimes, like me in this case, we're caught with our pants down and with very little at our disposal to explain why our perspective is so limited. This is the case with many people without extensive education or experience, but is just as easily applied to people who live such sheltered lives they forget the vast expanse of ideas and possibilities that exists in our world.

Similarly, there are people who wake up and say "oh shit, the world is ending!" because their perspective has been widened too much too quickly. Both of these ways of being are relatively ineffective when we go about enacting change. In fact, I posit that all unsuccessful attempts at change result from issues with the scope of the attempt's perspective.

I'm not going to provide any examples today, but only because I want this to be #1 in a longer series on scope and the ways in which we are manipulated by it.

Note: I've been sitting on this post for awhile, trying to flesh it out. I'm publishing it as a fragment now to elicit reactions and in the hopes of returning with a slightly different perspective later today. Stay tuned.

Featured Blog of the Week: Lifehacker [Featured Blog]

2010-01-12T14:32:00.000-05:00

Lifehacker is pretty much the best resource on earth. Delightfully geeky, yet incredibly useful, the website is at its heart a blog dedicated to providing resources for those confused or overwhelmed by life today. The writers are of the mind that technology should be used for good and in a way that increases productivity, rather than as a distraction or just as a source of entertainment.

Included on this frequently updated blog are the following sections:
-How-To: LOTS of different projects, tips, and DIY paraphernalia for the Maker in you.
-Tips: Specifically user-submitted tips, running the gamut between tech how-to's and recipes for scrumptious meals.
-Downloads:What you'd expect, but these are mostly low-budget, open-source tools

And my personal favorite:
-Featured Workspace: Home offices of the productive and not-so-famous. These are incredibly well-thought-out workspaces that inspire me every day to be more productive simply via organization and feng shui.

So, I encourage you to give this blog a look. I subscribe to it via RSS because the layout can be confusing.

I honestly end up with a new useful tip from Lifehacker almost daily! (for instance, my new tagging style)

With Whom Do I Agree?

2010-01-11T14:11:00.001-05:00

I was asked today by a coworker whether I am a die-hard democrat. I laughingly answered, "no!" and proceeded to clarify that I'm not a die-hard anything, and that I disagree wholeheartedly with almost all political actions that are taken (or not taken). The resulting question, after a short pause, was "well, what do you find so objectionable about Objectivism, then?"

Oh, boy. I was somewhat blindsided by this, because as I see it, I'm diametrically opposed to Ms. Rand's philosophy on life, its celebration of selfishness, and its equating of personal pursuits with the common good.

To those uninitiated, Ayn Rand was a nutjob. Perhaps that's a bit inflammatory, but I really, vehemently dislike her writing, her philosophy, and her premises. This isn't going to be a discussion of her, though. It's an introspection on why at first glance I appear to be in accordance with her.

I don't have faith in the system. In fact, I see the system as being a complicator and a hindrance that contributes to the suffering (mental, physical) of everyday people. Regulatory law is extremely convoluted and written to reward certain (seemingly arbitrary) interests and punish others. Tax policy seems designed to allow for loop-holes, and the criminal justice system seems set up to encourage racism, prejudice, and the propagation of the almost exclusively white male-run society we live in.

Whoa, that actually jives with Rand a lot! She railed against the bullshit thrown at us by our governments, stating that individuals should be free to pursue their own interests, and the only good government is one that protects a person from other people who intend to infringe upon that pursuit. Good so far. She believed that this would manifest itself as an entirely laissez faire capitalist economy. Oops. There I go, swimming for the shore. I've jumped ship.

And that's because, from this point onward, Rand is justifying a system that already has tried to exist, and is rearing its ugly head again, in effect making the jobs of already-corrupt politicians even harder while making it easier for them to provide handouts for constituents and supportive business interests. The final word on this is, pure capitalism doesn't stick around for long. How many years did it take from our country's inception for business to find itself under the sway of the federal government? Even Jefferson, the historically pro-capitalist anti-conflict-of-interest 3rd president couldn't keep us away from regulation or meddling with the affairs of the average citizen.

So, I'm not too hot on capitalism or its relatives. It just seems too much like a breeding ground for greed and unbridled ambition, which inevitably lead to attempts to destroy the system they purport to support. The system is broken. That much is obvious.

What's more, when I state that the government is corrupt beyond all measure, I mean that the people in positions of power abuse that power, and we ENCOURAGE them to do so. Time after time we vote them back into office because their campaigns have shinier ads or we feel less "afraid" of them, and they feel absolutely entitled to do as they please. These politicians haven't been led astray by visions of power so much as they have been told that they are expected to do so. Our measure of propriety when it comes to politicians seems to be, "If you haven't slept with someone who isn't your wife/husband, you can keep your job."

What bullshit! The results of this are health care reform bills that benefit the insurance companies that got us into the mess in the first place, finance reform that funnels billions back into the institutions that just failed, and a system of government where the most Randian has the most say as to how to best keep the little guys' hands away from the levers of power.

And no, I don't think it's a conspiracy. It's a well-oiled machine that works because we pay for it to work. It ceases to capture our attention because it is so mundane, so usual, and so regular that we simply don't notice it. We're trapped by our own acceptance of a system Rand wrote about some 70 years ago.

I don't have answers to someone who asks me how to fix the country, but I can point out the problems (don't you love the liberal arts education?). And the biggest problem that I see is that rather than being a radical alternative to where we are now, Rand's Objectivism is in the end-game stage as we speak. It has won us over so completely we don't even see it there. And it's failing is what it always has been: it can only succeed for the handful of over-motivated, over-greed-driven individuals who happened to be at the right place at the right time.

That felt good.

comment malfunction (UPDATED)

2010-01-10T14:56:00.001-05:00

It seems like comments aren't working...

...on that note, I guess I might as well tell you, I dislike greatly the Blogger service. I will be exporting this blog to wordpress soon, I think...

Update: It seems that it wasn't blogger, it was the custom template I had installed. I've changed it (I like this one better) and the comments are working again. Enjoy!

Levity [Humor]

2010-01-08T11:51:00.001-05:00

A quick perusal of this blog makes it seem like I really don't have a sense of humor...

That's unfortunate, because I really feel like the crux of what I'm after in these posts is to help myself and others like me be at peace with the world, and I think that happiness, laughing, and general buoyancy of spirit are ESSENTIAL to letting the world wash over you without negative effects.

So every now and again I'm going to tag something with [Humor] in order to lighten the mood!

This guy is Awesome!

You can check out the story, but this is an adorable 8 (i've also read 10) year old boy who was banned from youtube after he got popular enough for the site admins to notice he was under the 13-year-old minimum. So, of course, 4chan fights back with a viral campaign of porn clip mashups. Apparently it was wildly successful, and hilarious.

Other, equally successful retaliations:
-repost all videos of parkour with naked performers
-find a way for this guy to repost his amazing videos : http://www.wired.com/underwire/2008/02/parody-videos-s/
-1-for-1 legit video for rickroll exchange. Trust me on this one.

How would you mess with youtube? Honestly, the possibilities are endless.

The Outsider Perspective

2010-01-07T10:52:00.000-05:00

Observation is a powerful tool, and we use it from the moment we're born until the moment we die as a way to gather information. Our culture has formalized observational technique into multiple disciplines such as anthropology, behavioral biology, quantum physics (paradoxically), sociology, and so forth. The list is long because of how important observation is to our ability to gather information, and our senses seem designed to operate in a way that allows us to be absent as an agent but present as an observer.

Some will state that it is impossible to be an observer in our society, that we are all influenced by the situations we see and the way in which we process them. This is absolutely true, but only to a point. For the most part, the faculty most incapable of remaining impartial is our emotive capability, and the influence of our emotions seems directly tied to our investment in the situation at hand. To put it another way, the further removed from a situation you are, the better you will be at observing it impartially.

This premise is difficult to argue with; it is relatively clear that emotions and logical processes inhabit separate locations in our minds and while they certainly create feedback, noise, and difficulty for each other at times, it is theoretically possible to distill one without the other. Philosophy finds this as the ONLY method by which to approach problems of life, the universe, and everything. The scientific method is based on this idea, on the assumption that there are facts and laws and mechanisms that can be known and understood based on observation and variable elimination.

And yet, almost to a person, we believe that the most essential way of knowing a person or a group of people is to be that person or a part of that group of people. The distinction is incredibly important, because there are intrinsically subjective elements to being a unique organism or being part of a unique culture that cannot be understood from a separate context. We have words to describe the inaccessibility of this knowledge, the most notable is Empathy.

To be empathetic is to have, for a split second, an understanding of what it means to be a part of the situation being observed. This point of reference is used from that point onward in order to alter the situation, but at no point has the observer become the observed. This is akin to our forays into astrophysics, which are based entirely on snapshots--generally stationary--of systems we cannot touch, feel, or measure directly. We know that in all reality, this is the closest we'll come to a true understanding of the cosmos or of each other.

Interestingly, there are cases in which we do trust others to have more knowledge about ourselves than we do. Psychotherapy is a perfect example of this, in which a total stranger is asked to help illuminate things about ourselves that we would otherwise be relatively blind to or in denial about. The methodology surrounding psychology/psychiatry is such that rather than building a catalog of all the possible personalities, a good therapist will look for markers that indicate more common TYPES of personalities or ways of coping with life.

All of this is just a lead-up, though. I want to talk specifically about efforts to "improve" the world (quotes for subjectivity). Activist groups are a special breed, passionate to an intensity head and shoulders above the rest of their respective cultures and generally interested chiefly in solving problems that affect them at their specific social locations. Western progressive activism tends to center itself around the concept of intersectionality, under which characteristics of a person decide their unique social location and end up creating subtly different communities underneath the larger progressive umbrella.

Race, class, gender, sexual orientation, (dis)ability, body type, educational level, and geography all play into this matrix of forces that influences us every day. People at certain locations have more privileges than others due to history, context, and the Isms that describe the multiple types of discrimination faced by regular people every single day. And thus, activists tend to rally in order to overcome these Isms.

(Full disclosure: I'm white, male, well-educated, generally straight, without any disabilities)

The general feeling within these activist groups is one of emotional support, empowerment, re-education, and direct action. There is not a huge amount of room for scientific discovery, which is in part due to the rejection of science as a valid way of describing human society (see this post). However, there also seems to be a general sentiment that empathy is not enough. To effectively fight an Ism, you have to be affected by it.

And that's fine! I'm not whining that I can't participate in empowerment campaigns for groups I don't belong to. Being a progressive, forward-thinking individual, though, I do see room for improvement.

Activism could benefit greatly from a big dose of Outsider Perspective. Not the hostile, "what are you whining about?" type, because this is given all too willingly and all too often. I'm not even talking about the sort of white guilt that results in somewhat well-intentioned but ultimately doomed efforts to "save the children" of poorer, less-western, less-white cultures. What I'm referring to is the perspective held by those of us who empathize with the cause but cannot participate due to the hypocrisy that would result.

And this is where I tend to get into trouble. How do you approach a group of legitimately marginalized people and tell them, here, my privileged life has yielded a more helpful way of doing things! I used to do this as a kid, before I understood the error I was making, by questioning the submissiveness and lack of academic integrity embraced by many young girls my age simply because they were girls. It just wasn't my place to tell them that something was off, but it didn't change the fact that I knew.

Rather than end with a resolution, I end this post with a dilemma: how do the well-intentioned, entirely devoted outsiders of a cause make a positive impact? There has to be a way, just as there was a way to overcome the problem of powered flight, just as there was a way to fuel the civil rights movement in the 1960s, just as there now is a way to communicate nearly instantly using invisible ones and zeroes over thousands of miles.

tiredness

2010-01-06T15:08:00.002-05:00

I can't write today. I'm just too tired. But I am forcing myself to write SOMETHING every day, so, this is it. An admission of physical weakness. I'm giving up coffee and caffeine until my insomnia resolves itself.

I've got some new ideas though. And some great improvements to make to the blog, like references, links, pictures, and videos. That should really get it jumpstarted, eh?

see you tomorrow.

Corporate Responsibility

2010-01-05T15:12:00.003-05:00

This is going to be a short one, because like yesterday, I'm just too tired to actually write anything worth sharing with friends.

I just wanted to touch on the ways in which we think about corporate responsibility. Opinions vary wildly depending on where you are in the world, if you are part of a corporation (and sense are both dulled and sharpened while being part of the machine), and so forth.

So, what does it even mean to be responsible? Is that something that's applicable to corporations, which by their very definition operate on the principle of the free market? Most people think that yes, there should be a guiding dogma for all corporate entities, and that this dogma be based on some amount of regulation. And yes, I'm including even the most radical laissez faire advocates in this analysis: even these individuals agree with holding companies to some amount of international law (like not killing people, for instance).

In our country, we try to regulate heavily based on the principle that corporations have a responsibility to consumers, investors, employees, and when large enough, the general public. The specifics of these regulations and the logic behind them differs from state to state and from market to market, but for the most part, our government seems to get that we want safe products made by workers who are treated well.

However, this is entirely at odds with corporate philosophy. Most, if not all, corporations operate on the principle that if a venture is profitable in the end, then steps along the way are justified. On the more responsible end of this continuum are companies that try to make ends meet, and when they can't, ask for input from employees and make changes based on collective bargaining. On the sleazy end are companies that perform massive layoffs, lower the quality of their products (or the quantity per dollar), or ship their industry to places where they are tax-exempt or where labor is cheaper. The degree to which they are motivated by Machiavellian economics varies, but the guiding principle is the same: the bottom line defines success.

And there are many in our country who believe that this is the way things should be. After all, we were founded on the principles of capitalism, meritocracy, and Locke's idea of equal starting points. Why is it then that companies with worse business models, practices, and products become more successful? Why is it that despite massive regulation, most industries find way to bypass the law? And why is it that despite a call for new jobs in the United States, a record number of positions are being shipped overseas?

I don't have answers to this. I personally think that capitalism is crap, an educated white man's justification for retaining the purse strings of an entire globe in the face of widespread poverty, violence, and intolerance. To me, the corporate structure reinforces the hierarchical structure of our society and maintains the perceived integrity of those on the top while dooming those at the bottom to obscurity.

But, like any person with an opinion but without a solution, I can't say that my perceptions are all that valid. I know I don't like what I see, but is there any way to successfully communicate ideas of frustration and disgust without an alternative in mind? For the most part, this is what gets those with a social conscience (some call us progressives. that was a joke.) are accused of on a daily basis: having criticisms without being able to forge a new paradigm from the decay all around us.

What do we need in order to do that? Collaboration? Better ideas? A new perspective? More power? LESS power? Inner peace? Inner pain?

Who knows?

No seriously. Who does? Do you?

The Science of Sleep

2010-01-04T11:03:00.002-05:00

Boy, am I tired today. Sometimes, even well-intentioned people can be loud until midnight when you need to get up at 6:30 the next morning.

I woke up and did a quick analysis of my condition. Eyes barely staying open. Arms lethargic, legs like lead weights, coordination entirely off. 5 hours of sleep, after a weekend of extreme, strenuous, exhilarating fun (New Years, visit from my brother, a great evening with a new friend, and today, my birthday!). I'm about 12 hours in debt to myself, and there's really no sign that this deficit will be repaid any time soon.

But, as I arrived at work, buffeted by the bone-chilling Westchester Wind (I've anthropomorphised this Beast of Winter), I remembered something incredibly important that is honestly quite easy to keep in mind while I'm feeling well. In fact, it's become second nature to me, except when I'm cranky, anxious, or tired. Unfortunately, those are the times when advice such as this is most necessary. Bandages aren't that useful when you don't have a wound in need of dressing, and therapy is generally lost on even the most damaged of individuals if they happen to be in a good mood at the time.

But I digress. I walked, and I thought the following: at some levels, both the highest level of being (the Observer) and the lowest level (the Reactor), we need only BE. There is no need to engage ourselves in every distraction that comes our way. As long as we are engaged in our own existence, we are safe no matter what happens to us.

So today, I'm exhausted. I really would rather be at home and asleep than at work, but I know that focusing on that will only make my estrangement from bed all the more painful. As a culture, we tell ourselves all the time that focusing on the negative is not helpful, but in general our solution is to distract ourselves in some other way. For instance, I could focus on work or writing this post, but in the back of my mind, I will always be thinking about wanting to go to sleep.

This method sucks (at least for me). And I know I'm on a Zen-Heavy trip these days (sans the dogma and doctrine), but in a lot of cases, the Zen answer is the correct answer. In this particular case, we find that rather than distracting ourselves further, the healthiest course of action is to acknowledge the discomfort, let it be felt, and let the thought dissipate naturally. Don't dwell, but don't try to artificially replace the thought either. And voila! You're out the other side, on your way to some sort of sleep-deprived enlightenment!

Every moment of my life in which I deal with thoughts and experiences AS THEY COME is a successful moment for me. Every moment in which I succumb to distraction is slightly annoying, but not sinful. There is no sin in this world, and that's what makes it so powerful. Sin is just another distraction from self, a roadblock that must be overcome in order to be truly OK with the world from moment to moment.

And, that, my friends, is how you write a barely cogent blog post. It feels good, though.

Happy New Year!

2010-01-01T11:44:00.003-05:00

This doesn't mean a whole lot now, considering no one reads this blog yet, but I want to set a precedent of having an "open thread" where people can just comment on whatever they want, and talk about whatever is on their minds. Enjoy!

Nature, Enabling Nurture

2009-12-31T09:11:00.002-05:00

Let's put this debate to bed for the last time. Every school child is taught that there is a raging conflict during the human development process between biological predestination and the effect of environmental factors, such as social norms and parenting styles. We have been reminded of this dichotomous--and yet mutually exclusive--relationship so many times that we have given it a very neat name: Nature vs. Nurture.

Constantly in the news, we are indoctrinated time and time again that to be on the side of one is to decry the other. In fact, in the realm of science, where psychology and sociology once had their roots, new methodologies have been created that reflect the assumption that the two determinants exist as the only two possibilities in the quest for knowledge.

On the flipside, Sociology itself has rejected nature out-of-hand by defining its study as limited ONLY to environmental stimuli in the context of our cultural development. Sociology refuses to define any social problems as emerging from biological tendencies, and Biology refuses to conclude that biological status can underly social forces without causing them directly.

Thus, we have a situation that occurs all too often in western thought: a falsely black and white choice in place of what should accurately be defined as a continuum of a multi-dimensional nature. That is to say, the variables of "nature" and "nurture" do not exist in a vacuum, nor do they represent a single set of factors that are so powerful as to preclude all possibility of including others. There is extensive, complex interaction between the two forces, enough to create a universe in which no two people will EVER be identical.

For instance, in the ongoing debate about gender and its place in our taxonomy of knowledge, biologists are always publishing data that depicts a wholly anatomy-determined gender identity, while sociologists are constantly fending off this blasphemy with re-definitions and distinctions between sex, sex identity, gender, and gender identity.

Neither one of these viewpoints is correct, but neither one of them is wholly false, either. They tell two sides of the same story, which at its core simply explains that we are complex creatures with complex beginnings and indeterminate presents. No wonder we haven't learned to tell the future!

All of this stems from a few basic misunderstandings of our own selves and the way we perceive the "self" to be constructed. For starters, let's throw out some facets of this conflict that we don't need to consider. First, religion and spirituality have no bearing on either biology or sociology. We don't need to argue the existence or non-existence of god(s) in order to consolidate these two viewpoints, but we do need to ignore any possible ways in which higher powers touch our lives and stick to a purely humanist analysis of Self. Second, we must assume that subjectivity is NOT the only valid perspective. There are branches of philosophy and sociology that believe the only definition of self comes from within. While this MAY be true, and most certainly has some amount of validity, it is irrelevant to our analysis, and thus should not be used to derail the discussion because the author has a different set of experiences and thus cannot define such a global concept. Subjectivity flows from knowledge, it does not create knowledge, and so if the points raised here are valid, it is up to each person's subjective experience to accept or deny them, but the knowledge will exist either way.

Now that we've determined the playing field on which this debate will take place we can dive right in. I want to stress in this analysis the unique ways in which concepts from either the nature or nurture camps can be applied to the opposition in order to achieve a more powerful argument in favor of a synergy of the two. The first concept is that of Emergent Properties, and comes from Biology, but has been applied to physics, chemistry, and psychology as well. The crux of this idea is that at every level of organization there are interactions that cause behavior that could not have been predicted by the way in which lower-level interactions occur. This is a lot simpler than it sounds; for instance, take a cell, which by itself can sustain life on its own, process its own foodstuffs, do a remarkable amount of self-maintenance and repair, and even replicate itself. Individual cells can process huge amounts of information on their own, but once you get them together, boy, look out! A group of cells extensive enough to be called an organism has an ENTIRELY different set of available behaviors and reactions to stimuli. For instance, the formation of tissues from groups of cells affords us self-contracting cardiac muscle, energy-storing fat tissue, information-processing neural tissue, and many, many others. From tissues, organs are formed. From organs, organ systems. And from organ systems, an organism. So we can see, it's all about organization (look at that word: even the etymology screams of biological processes!). In a sense, we're all very lucky that our cells organized the way they did, because we are a very, very unlikely combination of all the possible ones that exist.

The concept of emergent properties has been used to explain the way in which toxins affect our bodies, how metabolism and homeostasis are regulated, as well as how our emotions and mood-states are formed and maintained. Our understanding of psychological issues such as depression and addiction are underpinned by the biological knowledge we have gathered regarding neural functioning and the way it manifests in reality. In this way, Biology claims to have proven that the source of all human behavior is biological and nature, and thus we are right on to think of it in this way. Social construction of this idea has led to pharmaceuticals being developed for every condition known to humanity, the well supported theory that sexual orientation is innate, and broad social discomfort regarding gender nonconformity on the grounds that biology (sex) determines behavior (gender). The resulting retaliation by queer activists has been to explain that these non-conformists ARE in fact different biologically, and thus their feelings of different-genderness is warranted.

None of those ideas are inherently wrong. In fact, antidepressants have positively affected millions, biological support for gayness has forced many uncomfortable with the concept to finally accept the normalcy of their gay brothers and sisters, and the same seems to be true of research into the biological source of sex and gender (it's not as clear cut as you'd assume!). But, like almost all things in this world, the situation is not as clear-cut as simple biology, and Sociologists have capitalized on the inadequacy of this theory with a very different perspective in mind. For the most part, this new type of research is done by assuming the following. First, that biology inadequately explains the social forces at play in our world. Second, that social forces can be described without manipulating them, and should be done so from a lens of objectivity. The result has been a huge body of work in the last 50 or so years that seeks to catalog and categorize the experiences of millions of people, paying close attention to those who were once considered exceptions to the rule. And, in large part, Sociology is succeeding. We are now especially attuned to ways of thinking that may be socially induced instead of personally solicited, and as a result our society moves in the direction of addressing social ills such as sexism, racism, and classism in some of the same ways that biology's attunement to the needs of the physical led to the cure of many of the most debilitating diseases of our time.

Sociology also introduces the concept of a Social Problem into our lexicon, which is the basis for all of its workings as a discipline. A social problem is simply something, anything, that a group of people considers enough of a social ill to publicize and integrate as a meme into our social heredity. No judgment is passed on the legitimacy of this problem, or the evidence produced in order to bring it to public attention. That it captures our attention is enough to label it a problem. The point in identifying these problems is so that our social framework can be looked at in a higher resolution in order to "connect the dots," so to speak. The result of defining social problems is an overwhelmingly complicated tapestry of issues raised by almost every identifiable interest group in the world regarding where we are headed as a society or group of societies. We owe our ability to define social movements and trends to this taxonomy created by sociology, and it is indispensible in the study of social changes or lack thereof. Basically, our society IS a collection of social problems, either solved (the American Revolution "solved" our social problem/conflict with Britain), present (gay rights is a big one these days, competing directly with the movement to deny them these rights), or just budding (I forsee a huge outcry surrounding the utilization of technology, the greying of america, and so forth). We are described and defined by these problems, and we need not look further than these to see who we are and where we came from.

This, too, is inadequate in describing our world. We are biological beings, and we act based on biological principles that CREATE our ability to be social. There is no getting around our biology in order to end up in a place where we even have a social tapestry to discover! Likewise, there is simply no way to discuss our biology if we don't have a social structure or institution of science that allows us to do so! The purpose of Biology's denial of the Social is the same as Sociology's denial of the Biological: it's simply too difficult to combine the two. And while it may be true that a study of both would be overwhelming, it is for this reason that specific scientists focus on specific subjects. In reality, the only time Biologists and Social Scientists exist is when they are describing themselves to a person who many not understand the specific field they belong to. This is neither here nor there, but it is important to understand that definitions sometimes do a poor job of describing, and the subsequent integration of these poorly described concepts into our understanding is generally detrimental.

Here, we see that the stated reason for the impasse between social and biological science is demarcation, or artificial separation based on criteria decided on using majority-based opinion. However, these disciplines are not mutually exclusive, and considering them to be so obscures the truth of the nature/nurture debate while further encouraging participants to disagree on what amounts to be a non-issue.

Let's first take the example of Emergent Properties. In our explanation we halted at the organismal level for the sake of brevity, but it is entirely accurate to say that levels of organization continue indefinitely until acted on by the fundamental laws of the universe (in this case, it's because we have a hard time breathing without an atmosphere). That is to say, organisms group themselves into social units, and these social units collectively make up a Culture. On each level, the organization of the components below dictate and describe the current level, but do not account for all of the interaction possibilities that are now available. Just as a billion separate cells living a billion separate lives will enable a single organism to perform extraordinary tasks when grouped properly, a group of people is always capable of behaviors and thoughts and actions of which a single human is not. The same goes for small communities of families being grouped into a town. The only difference is, WE provide the organization. At some point, someone stood up and said, "let's all live close together together to keep warm and to discourage predators from eating us!" and we all said "great, let's also divide responsibility based on who is good at what." This basic process has repeated itself over and over until we find ourselves where we are today. The agents of change have become different, and the net result is much more significant today than it was during the organization of the first communities, but the concept is the same: each level of organization finds itself where it is BECAUSE of the level it rests upon.

Thus, social forces emerge from biological ones, but once above the level of pure biology, we see quite a bit of improvisation and differentiation that cannot be explained simply by biology. For instance, the curing of disease is an entirely social force that basically counteracts the purpose of our biology--the drive to survive based on fitness and genetic integrity alone. By curing diseases that once killed us, we are weakening the biological gene pool but strengthening our social bonds by merit of real or perceived altruism. Likewise, the idea of consumerism is entirely contrary to biology and has been linked to harmful behaviors (overeating, sedentary lifestyles, environmental destruction, apathy due to materialism, monetization of social classes, etc etc) that seem to be reinforced by biological desires to survive and find themselves re-manifested in the social arena due to their entrenchment at a level of organization high above that of the biological individual.

Conversely, we see biology influencing the very social concepts it helps define, such as in the previous example of consumerism. This can be seen in the very unfortunate mechanism that defines our "first impressions" of other individuals of our species. Intrinsic, biological fear is frequently the response to socialized racism and directly reinforces its hold over our society, even as we have attempted to intellectually and collectively eradicate such behavior from our social lexicon. The fear and response to someone we consider to be an "other" is almost certainly a vestige of pre-urban, pre-agricultural societies in which someone who looked different most likely did not belong in your habitat and thus deserved to be approached with caution. Today, it's an excuse for terrible and unequal treatment for those we perceive as different. For the most part, social definitions of racism and "other"ism ignore any discussion of the role of biology, resulting in a body of knowledge that only desires to describe half of the situation. It can be clearly seen that there are other, non-social influences on the way in which we perform socially, and thus these factors deserve attention in the interest of better defining the way in which we interact as social and biological beings.

We can very easily take this model and explain how to incorporate biology into the concept of the Social Problem by questioning the individual starting points for the strong emotions that are required to publicize and defend a position on an issue of public scope, but I'd like to take our discussion in a different direction and bring us back to the false choice of nature versus nurture. Earlier it was declared that these two factors are points in a multidimensional matrix that represents all possibilities for explaining human behavior and existence. Nature represents what we are given inherently by biology, genetics, psychology, and Nurture represents what we learn from environmental factors, such as social interactions, life events, family structure, cultural context, and so forth. Each of these sub-elements of Nature and Nurture deserve a "corner" of our matrix, whereby visually placing a behavior closer to that "corner" indicates that the behavior is best explained by that factor.

To grasp exactly how this matrix works, visualize for a minute each of these seven (somewhat arbitrary) factors placed equidistant on a sphere. This is the model by which all behaviors can be "measured." Assuming our model has an infinitely perfect knowledge of the question "why do we do things THIS way?" we can toss any behavior into our sphere, give it a good shake, and have it place our behavior in an area proportionally distanced from each of these seven factors. This is INCREDIBLY complicated to comprehend, as we are moving from two variables (nature and nurture) to at least seven. Our brains are much more comfortable with black/white choices, and (watch me prove my own theory here) thus this BIOLOGICAL tendency was exploited by the SOCIAL forces of the media in the relaying of information regarding this debate. Pop culture in turn was able to influence scientific research sufficiently, leading to the institutionalization of a debate that honestly should never have occurred. The universe is rarely as simple as we make it out to be, and playing on the mutual desire of the public and the research community to simplify our understanding of life, the universe, and everything has directly and negatively impacted the way in which we understand ourselves as individuals and as a species.

It is my belief that we will be unable to truly understand WHY we act the way we do socially without accepting biology as a possible explanation at some level, just as it is entirely unthinkable to me that a person's own actions can be described ONLY by biology without any social factors. We live in a society of biological organisms, and we are each individual organisms with intensely social tendencies. We can never escape our genes, or our physical biology any more easily than we can change what culture we were brought up in or how our society impacts our thoughts and actions.

All that thinking and explanation for this: I am hereby calling out all "science" types who discount social research due to its lack of quantification, as well as "social" types who discount biological explanations as valid based on a lack of concern for social factors. True, both disciplines need to reconcile their differences if we are to see any synergistic literature that contextualizes biological and sociological processes, but in the meantime, a healthy dose of skepticism will do in a pinch. However, be careful about WHY a piece of research is discounted; it is contrary to our deeper understanding of our existence to deny credibility to research with which we simply disagree. Logical analysis is the bedrock upon which both biology and sociology stand, making impartiality of the utmost importance.

So let's do this again:

Nature or Nurture?

I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.

The Bootstrap Problem

2009-12-30T09:09:00.005-05:00

A person filled with gumption doesn't sit around dissipating and stewing about things. He's at the front of the train of his own awareness, watching to see what's up the track and meeting it when it comes.
-Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

We all face hurdles in life that we must cross, some bigger than others. These challenges come in all shapes and sizes, and more often than not affect more than one person at a time. We can call these social problems, or give a lengthy description of what these problems MEAN to us, but at the end of the day, if a person is affected, they must learn to deal with the issue or find a way to cope with it.

When a person has lots of these challenges to face, we consider them "disadvantaged." It sucks to be disadvantaged, pure and simple. Those of us (myself included) who are not in that situation feel much sympathy and empathy for people whose life is spent dealing with problems such as hunger, financial struggles, racism, sexism, family tragedies, abuse, illness, and so forth. More often than not, the sensitivity felt by onlookers like myself is accompanied by a desire to help in any way possible. This desire is quickly dashed by the realization that for a person to change, they have to WANT to change, and they have to do most of the work themselves. And thus, we run into an obstacle so large many have called it insurmountable.

We are not constructed as beings that respond well to drastic change, and we are even less suited to instituting that change ourselves. I'm not talking about "change" as we consider it in politics, or the number of things a person owns, or the nature of the relationships they accumulate, but rather change in a more profound sense, as in the transcendence of socioeconomic status, or finding a way to escape abuse, or learning to recognize the intrinsic value of self and community. These things can happen, but do so rarely because of how closed our perspective is to the possibility of change.

This is what I call the "bootstrap" problem, from the antiquated phrase, to "pull yourself up by your bootstraps," which is really a great way of describing how seemingly impossible it is to move yourself with no point of reference by which to accelerate against. Try it: you cannot physically overcome the force of gravity without an additional force in the opposite direction. It's the same for personal/social problems. We are immersed in our own worlds, and it is almost impossible to change those worlds without a force pushing you in that direction.

For those disadvantaged individuals whose situation is sub-optimal (I realize this is a mild way of describing a very terrible phenomenon in our culture), there are constant forces of social, economic, and emotional oppression applied upon their lives at such constant intervals as to require perpetual attention. In order for a person to find a way out of this mess (to whatever extent that is possible), an opposing force is needed. Sometimes this is direct aid, sometimes it is social empowerment or education, but most of the time, even when presented with these options, people who experience the weight of their situation acutely and dynamically are unable to overcome it.

When we see the lack of results these efforts generally produce, we commonly react by saying the model must be tweaked, or a new perspective has to be embraced by whatever outreach program appears to be failing. Rarely do we stop and think about the personal elements of change that must be accepted before a person will let themselves change in a broader sense.

Look at the quote at the beginning of the post. This idea of being at the forefront of your own self-awareness is somewhat foreign to us as westerners. In fact, it's a decidedly Zen idea (and ideal) to be in a state of being under which all other states of being come as no surprise and are easily prioritized and interpreted. This is usually done within the meditative state common to eastern religions, but can easily be re-created in the daily routines of which we are so fond. The routine becomes the process through which you access your thoughts without distraction, and allows a mind to rise above itself in such a way that thoughts and emotions float across rather than become lodged the mind, facilitating a deeper analysis and understanding of one's inner-self.

That might seem like a very distilled, anemic version of appropriated bellybutton-worship, but what we're concerned with here is not the philosophy itself, but the process of being self-aware and open to whatever the universe holds. I am convinced that this is the secret to self-maintenance and social change. By being self-aware and open to the outside world simultaneously (note the duality), a person opens the self to the possibility of change in a way unavailable without such an understanding. Change can come from within, without outside prompting, simply because patterns of behavior are unable to silence new thoughts when a mind is observing and experiencing rather than attempting to reach some invisible "end." You are, in a sense, lifting yourself up by your bootstraps.

Anyway, that's the theory, at least.

Prime Optimism

2009-12-29T14:28:00.003-05:00

There's a beautiful, delicate irony about the desolate situation our culture finds itself in at the moment. A year and a month ago, we performed our national duty and voted in a president who stood for "change we can believe in." He was so different, in the way he spoke, the words he had to say, and the hope he instilled in us. No longer would we sit idly by while our lives were dictated to us by politicians! We were getting back our freedom, our civil liberties, and we resolved never to allow ourselves to be disenfranchised again.

I stand at a very unique distance from these events, being young, just out of college, and having grown up knowing only the failed policies of George W. Bush. In fact, my political awakening didn't occur until after 9/11, at which point I was a freshman in high school. This put a lot of pressure on this past election to bring about the first real change anyone in my generation could be a part of directly. And boy, did we take advantage of the opportunity! We went to the polls in record numbers, raised record funds, worked record hours, and drank record amounts when the results came in. We felt a sense of relief, like we could rest easy knowing our patriarchal leader and his matriarchal spouse were watching over us at all times.

And I think for many of us, that sense of safety and comfort has not worn off yet. Here we are, a year later, and none of the big promises Obama made have been kept. We've been thrown into a recession forcefully and without choice by behemoths of business so poorly understood that the measures implemented to save the economy did little more than funnel money back into their hands. We're a part of two wars we were promised would end, and the war in Afghanistan is poised to grow in scale, not shrink. Jobs don't exist, but the stock market continues to go up. Education budgets are slashed and public welfare services are cut, but the richest 1% continue to gain wealth. The environment has been told that we are very sorry but we have more pressing matters at hand right now. And most importantly, we have been told that our health is negotiable and subject to a bottom-line.

How is it that "change we can believe in" seems so much like the status quo? I think a lot of people would make an appeal to governmental accountability at this point, declaring with fire and brimstone that politicians will descend to the deepest depths of societal hell if they don't change their ways. Others will point to apathy and the consumerist in us all that whispers in our ear, saying "it'll be OK, go indulge yourself and the stress will go away." But neither of these explains why a year ago we were so gung-ho regarding shaping and electing "our" candidate, and why now we seem so complacent and willing to let the new administration get away with so much. We didn't become zombie slaves over the course of a single year, and most of us still have the same ethical standards. So what is it that has frozen us in our tracks?

The answer isn't pretty. It isn't hopeful, and it isn't fun. But it is something we can rally around, and we can use it as a wake-up call to spur the growth of effective interest in REAL change. The answer is: reality. Hope and change are words, feelings, and descriptions that are used to show the way in which an event occurred AFTER the fact. They can motivate, inspire, and cure the wounds of apathy and disillusionment. But they can't write policy, and they don't understand the nuances of working within a system. It's time to actually get to work; we can have a real, tangible influence on the way the rest of Obama's term plays out, but we cannot take any more time to rest on our laurels.

It's time to get up, unwrap ourselves from within the "United for Change" posters we still sleep with at night, and implement the change we want to see in the world. You're just one person, true, but look at what we did last November. We can do that again, easily, in an instant. We have the internet, limitless ideas, and hearts full of love. We have an understanding of the world that no one else can lay claim to, and it sees us all better off as equals instead of subject to arbitrary hierarchies. So get out there, let out your battle cry, and do the work! Fight for change, sweat for it, spread your hope and spread your love and show the world that last November wasn't a blip of progressive thought--it was the beginning of a new tomorrow.

First post!

2009-12-29T14:21:00.001-05:00

First post!

I'm going to let this new blog speak for itself. These are ideas, photographs, re-posts, and the like. None of this is profound unless you find it that way. Mostly, these are my thoughts because I think they want a place outside of me more than they want to stay inside of me. We'll see where this goes!