I love Tim Burton. I love when Tim Burton directs Depp.
:)
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Harry Potter (2) and The Terror
two people have complained, or had issue with my last blog. still, i stand by everything i said in the blog.
---
i'll start, again, by saying the harry potter series will go down as one of my favorite series ever behind only two (maybe three) other series of books.
my issue is that it is (the series) a one-way street for many. a lot of people i know feel like they are the best books of the last 15 years. definitely the best in the fantasy genre.
which is fine. opinions are different, i get that. nor am i saying that i want to challenge opinions held by so many people i know.
again, i just feel it is a one-way street. people refuse to move to different genres after the series, and in fact, i know of at least two people who have read nothing since the series (underwhelming) conclusion.
that bothers me. it really does. i don't know why. i would just think after reading one great series of novels one would want to move on to more. maybe they won't like what they read nearly as much, but not reading is closing doors. for many (see my earlier blog) reading is like the alamo of the imagination.
it's where it is taking its last stand knowing it is out numbered.
my other (major) issue is that people believe these books are the lord of the rings of our generation. which it is not. i like the hp novels MUCH more than i do lotr but the latter series defined everything that followed. i can't see harry potter and his seven years at hogwarts doing the same.
i don't want to see that because they are lacking the originality i feel is needed to define all fantasy novels that i read for the rest of my life.
i just don't want them to become some gold-standard, with all reviews for future fantasy novels saying, "it is no harry potter" or "the next great fantasy for those looking for something after harry potter".
which the diary of a wimpy kid books already did.
yeah, i have other issues with the books. mostly having to do with lack of the world-building that wasn't there in the novels, the lack of threat to those outside of hogwarts, or the fact that the real "meat of the story" didn't occur until book 5.
but i can lay that aside. i still love the books, and i think i always will. again, there is just more out there that i like more.
but maybe i just want rockie to stop reading these over and over and spend more time devoted to me. : )
(15:56)
---
a quick note on dan simmon's the terror. it was fucking amazing. one of the best novels i have read in 2009, and probably one of the best novels (or at least favorite) i have ever read.
that's two for two on the over 700 page novels this year (jonathan strange and mr. norrel, by susanna clarke, which was also amazing and a fantasy novel).
i'll start, again, by saying the harry potter series will go down as one of my favorite series ever behind only two (maybe three) other series of books.
my issue is that it is (the series) a one-way street for many. a lot of people i know feel like they are the best books of the last 15 years. definitely the best in the fantasy genre.
which is fine. opinions are different, i get that. nor am i saying that i want to challenge opinions held by so many people i know.
again, i just feel it is a one-way street. people refuse to move to different genres after the series, and in fact, i know of at least two people who have read nothing since the series (underwhelming) conclusion.
that bothers me. it really does. i don't know why. i would just think after reading one great series of novels one would want to move on to more. maybe they won't like what they read nearly as much, but not reading is closing doors. for many (see my earlier blog) reading is like the alamo of the imagination.
it's where it is taking its last stand knowing it is out numbered.
my other (major) issue is that people believe these books are the lord of the rings of our generation. which it is not. i like the hp novels MUCH more than i do lotr but the latter series defined everything that followed. i can't see harry potter and his seven years at hogwarts doing the same.
i don't want to see that because they are lacking the originality i feel is needed to define all fantasy novels that i read for the rest of my life.
i just don't want them to become some gold-standard, with all reviews for future fantasy novels saying, "it is no harry potter" or "the next great fantasy for those looking for something after harry potter".
which the diary of a wimpy kid books already did.
yeah, i have other issues with the books. mostly having to do with lack of the world-building that wasn't there in the novels, the lack of threat to those outside of hogwarts, or the fact that the real "meat of the story" didn't occur until book 5.
but i can lay that aside. i still love the books, and i think i always will. again, there is just more out there that i like more.
but maybe i just want rockie to stop reading these over and over and spend more time devoted to me. : )
(15:56)
---
a quick note on dan simmon's the terror. it was fucking amazing. one of the best novels i have read in 2009, and probably one of the best novels (or at least favorite) i have ever read.
that's two for two on the over 700 page novels this year (jonathan strange and mr. norrel, by susanna clarke, which was also amazing and a fantasy novel).
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Harry Potter
you know, the further i remove myself from the harry potter series the more i wonder why people are so hung up over it now.
in truth, i think it is that many people stopped reading outside of the modern genre defining novels in-between releases. even now, i think (twilight novels) that many have refused to move on.
they just move from one similar type of novel to the next.
i'm not saying that the hp novels are bad or anything of the sort. i actually love the series, and they were one of the defining series of what i have read thus far.
what i am trying to say, is that after reading a good amount of fantasy novels before and since, they are nothing new.
nothing particularly special.
i read lord of the rings (finally) earlier this year, and so many of the characters in rowling's opus seem to come out of the novel. yes that issue is inherent in many, many fantasy novels, but it's too apparent with the archetype characters, the villians, everything besides hogswarts itself.
yet, even then, magical schools are nothing new to the genre (dragonlance).
i also, for whatever reason, have a gripe with deathly hollows. the 700+ concluding novel it just a tad too agsty. i don't know what it was, it was almost too much of a departure from the preceding six chapters.
in truth, i think it is that many people stopped reading outside of the modern genre defining novels in-between releases. even now, i think (twilight novels) that many have refused to move on.
they just move from one similar type of novel to the next.
i'm not saying that the hp novels are bad or anything of the sort. i actually love the series, and they were one of the defining series of what i have read thus far.
what i am trying to say, is that after reading a good amount of fantasy novels before and since, they are nothing new.
nothing particularly special.
i read lord of the rings (finally) earlier this year, and so many of the characters in rowling's opus seem to come out of the novel. yes that issue is inherent in many, many fantasy novels, but it's too apparent with the archetype characters, the villians, everything besides hogswarts itself.
yet, even then, magical schools are nothing new to the genre (dragonlance).
i also, for whatever reason, have a gripe with deathly hollows. the 700+ concluding novel it just a tad too agsty. i don't know what it was, it was almost too much of a departure from the preceding six chapters.
plus, none of the novels seem to have any "felt" threat. you know voldemort is coming back, you know he is powerful but outside of glimpses, you never feel like anyone is in any danger. you don't feel the effects he is having outside of the uk area... if there are any.
it almost all seems simple and overblown.
---
again, i don't hate the potter novels. i actually, really, really, like them.
it's just that i feel there are so many books, both in the genre and out, that do more.
king's dark tower and the connections that run through the majority of his works seem like more of an achievement. not only do you feel the effects of the main characters story in his main story, but you see and feel those effects across most of king's non-series books.
martin's a song of ice and fire are better fantasy novels as well, more original, and again, you feel the threat of something wihin the novels.
---
i'm glad i read the books, but i am sad that people are stuck in that series. reading is just a huge part of my life, and every book i read opens a new door. a new place for me to explore, and i think it is something that many don't feel.
---
15:11
Friday, June 12, 2009
Education (Trade the Magic for Facts)
"i am questioning my education,
is my education who i am now?"
-Pearl Jam
---
what makes us who we are on a day-to-day basis?
---
i woke up today thinking about the question and what it means to us. all of us.
individually. as a group.
and i thought, i don't know.
so i thought, staring up at the white nothingness of my ceiling.
---
but, thinking about it today i really have to say that i believe it is our imaginations that make us who we are. i am also, slowly, starting to believe our educations break down the walls of our castles in the mind. our ability to say, looking up at the clouds passing overhead, "that one looks like a turtle".
"a bird."
"a castle in the sky".
---
what am i trying to say, what point am i trying to get across?
---
i think that the further things come in the world, the more we learn, individually or as a group, the less we can create (or imagine) anything new.
it's like when you are very young, and you look up at the night sky, at the full moon, and you wonder if the moon is following you over head.
then, just a few years later, you decipher that magic. realizing it's a trick, you trade it in for fact, and by doing so you trade in the magic of your imagination.
you lessen yourself through learning.
---
i look at friends who are graduating, and what career paths they have chosen, be it business, education, or entertainment, and i just see them looking blankly at cubicles.
at white walls. and monotone.
monotony.
you get to a point where education is just a way for you to make money. yet along the way, no one seems to ask at what cost is the price you pay for losing what makes you you?
---
you're told what to do, and ask no questions.
---
i am not saying education is bad. i want to teach.
i just think that it lessens us to a point.
every semester i delve deeper into literature, into academic writing, and i find myself less able to come up with poems, with stories, with anything creative.
---
i don't know. i just want to look at the clouds and know that it isn't just randomized.
i want to know what i see is a fucking bear, not just accumulated moisture.
---
12:21
is my education who i am now?"
-Pearl Jam
---
what makes us who we are on a day-to-day basis?
---
i woke up today thinking about the question and what it means to us. all of us.
individually. as a group.
and i thought, i don't know.
so i thought, staring up at the white nothingness of my ceiling.
---
but, thinking about it today i really have to say that i believe it is our imaginations that make us who we are. i am also, slowly, starting to believe our educations break down the walls of our castles in the mind. our ability to say, looking up at the clouds passing overhead, "that one looks like a turtle".
"a bird."
"a castle in the sky".
---
what am i trying to say, what point am i trying to get across?
---
i think that the further things come in the world, the more we learn, individually or as a group, the less we can create (or imagine) anything new.
it's like when you are very young, and you look up at the night sky, at the full moon, and you wonder if the moon is following you over head.
then, just a few years later, you decipher that magic. realizing it's a trick, you trade it in for fact, and by doing so you trade in the magic of your imagination.
you lessen yourself through learning.
---
i look at friends who are graduating, and what career paths they have chosen, be it business, education, or entertainment, and i just see them looking blankly at cubicles.
at white walls. and monotone.
monotony.
you get to a point where education is just a way for you to make money. yet along the way, no one seems to ask at what cost is the price you pay for losing what makes you you?
---
you're told what to do, and ask no questions.
---
i am not saying education is bad. i want to teach.
i just think that it lessens us to a point.
every semester i delve deeper into literature, into academic writing, and i find myself less able to come up with poems, with stories, with anything creative.
---
i don't know. i just want to look at the clouds and know that it isn't just randomized.
i want to know what i see is a fucking bear, not just accumulated moisture.
---
12:21
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Up (2D) v. Up (Digital 3D)
let me start this blog with what i think about up as a whole.
the first 10 or 15 minutes really made the movie, it was almost completely silent (past the childhood parts) and was done almost as if it were one of pixar's own short films. actually, i think they actually titled the segment, "married life", so who knows?
that 10 minutes or so, that opening sequence, was one of the most heart-felt few minutes i've ever seen in a film. it really made you feel for the movie's main character (carl fredrickson), and it made me see, like wall e last year, that animated film making could be so much more.
from there the film is truly an adventure film, from the meeting of russell ("tiny mail man"), to the films climax in a blimp, you feel as if you are on an adventure. more than that, the film captures a distinct '50's or '60's adventure film feeling. the way it was animated, the over done "acting" of it all, it really captured that earlier film ages focus on pop adventure films.
in short, it feels almost like an indiana jones film. i'm not kidding, lucas could really take what pixar did and apply it to his planned indiana jones 5 and i think it would be much better than kingdom of the crystal skull was.
so there is my brief thoughts on the movie as a whole, and after seeing it a second time, i still love it. maybe not as much as wall e, but it was close. it's probably my second favorite pixar film, and definitely in my top 5 of all time.
so was it worth the 3D?
yes and no.
it made certain moments of the film more immersive, and of course, it made some scenes more... adventurous?
yet (and this is good), unlike many, many 3D films, up doesn't really come across as a "3D experience". Instead, scenes have more depth of field, more small touches in 3D. These touches do enhance the experience, and it does make the film look really amazing at parts, but it is never in your face about it.
i saw coraline last year without the 3D, and the whole time i couldn't help but notice which scenes were obviously meant for 3D. because of this, i just didn't enjoy coraline as much as i could have...
it's like i was missing some vital part of the film... like watching star wars without darth vader's breathing sound effect.
up does things differently. never did i see a scene while watching the "2D" film, that made me wander what i would look like in 3D. and while i did notice some things in the 3D showing, it won't be on my mind when the DVD ships (obviously) without the 3D.
i guess all of this is trying to say that while up is good in 3D, it is just as good seeing it traditionally.
it is an amazing achievement for pixar to have such a long streak of fantastic movies, and up is one of those films (unlike dreamworks films) that will be remembered as a classic.
go see up. 3D or no, it is an amazing hour and a half.
oh, and the short "partly cloudy" is cute. much better than "presto" which was attached to wall e.
---
---
18:40
the first 10 or 15 minutes really made the movie, it was almost completely silent (past the childhood parts) and was done almost as if it were one of pixar's own short films. actually, i think they actually titled the segment, "married life", so who knows?
that 10 minutes or so, that opening sequence, was one of the most heart-felt few minutes i've ever seen in a film. it really made you feel for the movie's main character (carl fredrickson), and it made me see, like wall e last year, that animated film making could be so much more.
from there the film is truly an adventure film, from the meeting of russell ("tiny mail man"), to the films climax in a blimp, you feel as if you are on an adventure. more than that, the film captures a distinct '50's or '60's adventure film feeling. the way it was animated, the over done "acting" of it all, it really captured that earlier film ages focus on pop adventure films.
in short, it feels almost like an indiana jones film. i'm not kidding, lucas could really take what pixar did and apply it to his planned indiana jones 5 and i think it would be much better than kingdom of the crystal skull was.
so there is my brief thoughts on the movie as a whole, and after seeing it a second time, i still love it. maybe not as much as wall e, but it was close. it's probably my second favorite pixar film, and definitely in my top 5 of all time.
so was it worth the 3D?
yes and no.
it made certain moments of the film more immersive, and of course, it made some scenes more... adventurous?
yet (and this is good), unlike many, many 3D films, up doesn't really come across as a "3D experience". Instead, scenes have more depth of field, more small touches in 3D. These touches do enhance the experience, and it does make the film look really amazing at parts, but it is never in your face about it.
i saw coraline last year without the 3D, and the whole time i couldn't help but notice which scenes were obviously meant for 3D. because of this, i just didn't enjoy coraline as much as i could have...
it's like i was missing some vital part of the film... like watching star wars without darth vader's breathing sound effect.
up does things differently. never did i see a scene while watching the "2D" film, that made me wander what i would look like in 3D. and while i did notice some things in the 3D showing, it won't be on my mind when the DVD ships (obviously) without the 3D.
i guess all of this is trying to say that while up is good in 3D, it is just as good seeing it traditionally.
it is an amazing achievement for pixar to have such a long streak of fantastic movies, and up is one of those films (unlike dreamworks films) that will be remembered as a classic.
go see up. 3D or no, it is an amazing hour and a half.
oh, and the short "partly cloudy" is cute. much better than "presto" which was attached to wall e.
---
---
18:40
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
No Post
no real post today.
just a busy day.
tomorrow's will be "up (2D) versus up (3D)".
boring, but it is more for me to remember than anything.
friday a personal blog.
saturday a "book" blog, but not sure what that means yet.
sunday, most likely another personal blog.
just a busy day.
tomorrow's will be "up (2D) versus up (3D)".
boring, but it is more for me to remember than anything.
friday a personal blog.
saturday a "book" blog, but not sure what that means yet.
sunday, most likely another personal blog.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Our Lives are Parallel
"go then, there are other worlds than these."
-jake chambers, the gunslinger
---
i'm sitting here, and for whatever reason that quote is stuck in my head. it won't go away, it is just sitting in the fore of my mind, and, as always with (anything about) king's dark tower epic, the idea of it is really fascinating me.
king's tower epic deals in so many ways with the idea that there are multiple universes, and everything in all the universes run parallel and what happens in one directly effects the rules and history of the other.
it just always makes me think, not because it is a theory (einstein's "parallel earth" theory) that is a real-life idea, but because i look at life in a way that is so similar to this idea; this idea that worlds are connected is how i look at life.
i think that everyone on earth somehow, eventually, effects every other person.
maybe not in real meaningful ways, but still, i believe we all have some effect on one another. i know all of those i asked to read this, and they may go on to say something about what (to someone else) i wrote in one of these (mostly) nonsensical blogs, and thus i am interconnected with someone i have no idea of.
i keep thinking of this parallel lives idea, that even without knowing someone, i am connected to them.
similarly, one of you may say something to me, have me listen to a song, and i may pass THAT on, and thus you have touched someone you don't know.
it's like a wave, and by doing one thing, you actually could effect dozens. hundreds.
thousands.
it's a bizarre thought, and i think the idea that writing... blogs, stories, poems, essays, whatever... can make people more connected than so many other forms of communication, and because of this, connect to more people...
i think it's what makes writing so important to me.
it just makes me really wonder...
---
time: 10:38
-jake chambers, the gunslinger
---
i'm sitting here, and for whatever reason that quote is stuck in my head. it won't go away, it is just sitting in the fore of my mind, and, as always with (anything about) king's dark tower epic, the idea of it is really fascinating me.
king's tower epic deals in so many ways with the idea that there are multiple universes, and everything in all the universes run parallel and what happens in one directly effects the rules and history of the other.
it just always makes me think, not because it is a theory (einstein's "parallel earth" theory) that is a real-life idea, but because i look at life in a way that is so similar to this idea; this idea that worlds are connected is how i look at life.
i think that everyone on earth somehow, eventually, effects every other person.
maybe not in real meaningful ways, but still, i believe we all have some effect on one another. i know all of those i asked to read this, and they may go on to say something about what (to someone else) i wrote in one of these (mostly) nonsensical blogs, and thus i am interconnected with someone i have no idea of.
i keep thinking of this parallel lives idea, that even without knowing someone, i am connected to them.
similarly, one of you may say something to me, have me listen to a song, and i may pass THAT on, and thus you have touched someone you don't know.
it's like a wave, and by doing one thing, you actually could effect dozens. hundreds.
thousands.
it's a bizarre thought, and i think the idea that writing... blogs, stories, poems, essays, whatever... can make people more connected than so many other forms of communication, and because of this, connect to more people...
i think it's what makes writing so important to me.
it just makes me really wonder...
---
time: 10:38
Monday, June 8, 2009
Infinite Space
---
"i need no inspiration other then nature's. she has never failed me. she mystifies me, bewilders me, sends me into ecstasies. besides god's handiwork, does not man's fade into insignificance?"
-Gandhi
---
the picture above is one of the few things i have seen shown in photographically that has changed me in some way. it's actually more than one photo, taken by hubble, it's of different regions of the "space sky" that have been put together into one large, cohesive, image.
over 3,000 objects, and scientists believe that most are entire galaxies, with planets, suns, comets, everything that that word "galaxy" evokes is in that image.
think about it, it's almost a picture of infinity. of the abyss. the possiblilties of that image are impossible to comprehend.
the picture changed my life. truly.
it makes me think, everytime i see it, just how insignifigant we are. yet at the same time it drives me to understand myself, my surroundings, more than before.
it's almost spiritual, almost religious.
i look at that picture, and, to me, it drives me to learn more. to understand everything just a little more than i do now.
it also makes me ponder my own spirtituality... or at least it makes me understand why people strive to keep faith in god, or whatever higher power they believe in a little more. i see why people want to understand, or believe, that they have a place to go after death because the image is a fearful one on two ends.
on one end, again, the image is the closest we have yet to come in showing the infinite. when i, when anyone, sees the image, they have to think that dieing is a tragedy when we know that there is so much more to see.
so much more that we can't comprehend.
yet on the otherhand, some religions believe their version of hell is infinite. is just blackness. nothingness.
and while this image is the opposite of nothingness, everytime i see it, i almost get lost in what i can't see. there are so many points of light, that really, i can't wrap my mind around the possibilites of what they are. and getting lost in something like that is a terrible why to imagine nothing.
to image nothing as being everything is terrible.
to image nothing as being everything is terrible.
i love this photograph. i love what it shows, what it leaves to the imagination, and most of all i love how it makes me think. how it makes me wonder just how much we don't know.
how small we each are, and how perfect nature (for lack of a better term) is to us.
it just humbles me, it makes me see that humans are NOT some god at the center of the universe.
no, it makes me understand that we are on the outside of the outside, looking into windows of the universe's soul.
---
"two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity... and i'm not sure about the universe"
-albert einstein
"if the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe, and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was the dark. dark would be without meaning"
-c.s. lewis
---
time: 14:28
---note: no second viewing of up today. probably tuesday.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
"Undefinable"
one of the options for my critical thinking final was to write a research paper on what "true love" is. at first i thought that this essay would be a breeze. after all, how hard can it be to push out a paper on something i have written on four or five times in an academic setting?
then i sat down, started to type, and churned out a rough outline and introduction. i read it, reread it, analysed, cut, added.
all of this to just a single paragraph and jotted down nonsensical ideas.
then i took it to class, and realized that i had written it in a way that closely resembled my fiction voice. it read almost like a short story, giving cliched views on what love is. a hand held, a stolen kiss in the rain.whatever.
it was a fucking joke. the one paragraph was just a romance movie reel.
it was, in short, fiction. a fictitious view that i couldn't believe i had written. not because it was bad, i didn't really think that, but it was really my view on love.
---
i look at love in a variety of ways, not many that are really conventional. for instance, i don't believe that we only have one "true love".
i think that we all have the person we are destined to be with, and the person we can't have. can't have for so many reasons. commitments, children, jobs, friendships. whatever.
i also don't believe many people are in love, and that for many people "in love" passion drives lives. or monetary positioning.
something meaningless.
---
best symbol of love?
best way you can express love to someone? i really thing hand holding does it more than anything else.
kissing, sex, gifts.in truth, that all is just more.
simply, i think holding someones hand is love.
---
i love.
i always give off this vibe that maybe i don't believe in it that much, that i just have a devil may care attitude towards it. but the truth is, the truth is, i know i've been in love. i know what love is.
i've felt it.
i've been it.
i've held its hand.
---
you listen to songs, you see movies, you read books. all of these mediums speak of love. speak of a word that just is used as a selling point.
selling point, because too many depict some perfect bliss.
some perfect love.
i don't believe in perfect love. it's supposed to have it's faults. your partners are supposed to stumble, to hate you a little, to love you more, to run away, come back, eat and sleep alone after a fight.
say, "fuck you."
say, "goodbye."
it needs everything.
it needs to live humanly before it's love.
---
again, i believe in love. i just don't believe in the word being defined in any way.
it is undefinable.
a voice. a god. lifelike and deathlike in just how unknown it is.
full of sadness and misery, but always there to make you into a better person.
it's all we need, and it's all we can hope for.
---
time: 20:14 :/
i hate this post.
then i sat down, started to type, and churned out a rough outline and introduction. i read it, reread it, analysed, cut, added.
all of this to just a single paragraph and jotted down nonsensical ideas.
then i took it to class, and realized that i had written it in a way that closely resembled my fiction voice. it read almost like a short story, giving cliched views on what love is. a hand held, a stolen kiss in the rain.whatever.
it was a fucking joke. the one paragraph was just a romance movie reel.
it was, in short, fiction. a fictitious view that i couldn't believe i had written. not because it was bad, i didn't really think that, but it was really my view on love.
---
i look at love in a variety of ways, not many that are really conventional. for instance, i don't believe that we only have one "true love".
i think that we all have the person we are destined to be with, and the person we can't have. can't have for so many reasons. commitments, children, jobs, friendships. whatever.
i also don't believe many people are in love, and that for many people "in love" passion drives lives. or monetary positioning.
something meaningless.
---
best symbol of love?
best way you can express love to someone? i really thing hand holding does it more than anything else.
kissing, sex, gifts.in truth, that all is just more.
simply, i think holding someones hand is love.
---
i love.
i always give off this vibe that maybe i don't believe in it that much, that i just have a devil may care attitude towards it. but the truth is, the truth is, i know i've been in love. i know what love is.
i've felt it.
i've been it.
i've held its hand.
---
you listen to songs, you see movies, you read books. all of these mediums speak of love. speak of a word that just is used as a selling point.
selling point, because too many depict some perfect bliss.
some perfect love.
i don't believe in perfect love. it's supposed to have it's faults. your partners are supposed to stumble, to hate you a little, to love you more, to run away, come back, eat and sleep alone after a fight.
say, "fuck you."
say, "goodbye."
it needs everything.
it needs to live humanly before it's love.
---
again, i believe in love. i just don't believe in the word being defined in any way.
it is undefinable.
a voice. a god. lifelike and deathlike in just how unknown it is.
full of sadness and misery, but always there to make you into a better person.
it's all we need, and it's all we can hope for.
---
time: 20:14 :/
i hate this post.
---
[edit: fixed spelling mistakes... 6/7]
Saturday, June 6, 2009
13 Minutes
i am starting something that i attempted to do with my pry, to blog on this "unraveling seems" blog.
for the next 13 days (starting tomorrow) i will be writing blogs within a 13 minute time frame. i want to try this because, hopefully, the blogs that come out of it will be more "me" then the blogs i have so far posted here.
hopefully.
every blog is posted at 12:01am even if i write the post beforehand.
for the next 13 days (starting tomorrow) i will be writing blogs within a 13 minute time frame. i want to try this because, hopefully, the blogs that come out of it will be more "me" then the blogs i have so far posted here.
hopefully.
every blog is posted at 12:01am even if i write the post beforehand.
they can also be about ANYTHING that's on my mind, so monday's will probably be about up in
3-d... tomorrows i have no idea.
Without Judgment (Pry, To post)
"Strangely, although music is something to listen to, I think music listens back because there's no judgments. A kid can find something he identifies with. Or an adult. Here's a place you can go to where [there are no] judgments. [There is not] someone telling you what to believe in."
-Marilyn Manson
Does music listen to you?
I don't know what to think of this quote, by a man, that, admittedly, whos music is unknown to me. But something about this quote is so meaningful to me that I can't deny it holds some truth.
Whenever I am down, I can go into my iTunes and find a song that will either uplift me or will be perfect for whatever mood I am; sad, lonely, loved, in-love, happy. Whatever. I can find something that knows.
Or at least fits.
It's odd how music can do this. How I can find a set of words, lyrics, that describe exactly how I feel at the moment in time.
How I can hear music, drum beats, guitar rifts, bass chords, piano compositions, and it just feels right. Feels right for how I feel. How I am. Whatever. And not only do I see these as fitting me "alone", but also I take it all as one, and it still fits. Lyric with sound, sound with lyrics, and it still fits.
Also, music, in many ways identifies who we are. We grow up with some types, myself "oldies", or grunge, or even rap... and it symbolizes our growing up. It makes us remember specific events of our childhood based on hearing a song. Music can recall memory, and sometimes, I guess, memory can recall a certain song. A certain feeling.
Then we grow, and we pick and choose what music means to us based on who we are.
Punk, rap, rock, country, classical, soundtrack compositions, techno, R&B; all these sounds, and all the people listening to the same songs, that millions, or no one, listens to and we still find a way to make it ours.
We grow up and music is ours. We find a popular song, a popular sound, and it probably means something different to me than it would to anyone else. Than the songwriter, than my best friends, to strangers.
Everyone.
Someone else's music is always mine alone. Meaning. Sound. We all hear it differently. It makes us, our music defines us.
It's an old friend to cry to.
It's a new friend to meet.
It's who we are. When we are alone. With friends. In the center of a crowd, our music may sometimes know us best.
It never judges. It's a friend that has so much to say, but who always listens.
Surface
through the eyes of thought you have to believe there is something more inside yourself than what you present to the ones around you on a day-to-day basis.
i'm not really talking on a conscience level either, but maybe in an "under the surface" way.
last night i wrote this drunken haze poem, and it was not very long, but something in it struck me for whatever reason because it was something that i didn't think outwardly. didn't "project". to others, to myself, it was something below whatever surface hiding behind my breaking mind.
"all these times
shattered like a memory
rising through the mind like a morning haze
and we await the long sunset
where you have been you
and i have been me
next to the seashore
where you remembered
all the times
that we never shared"
i wrote these lines and i know what they meant. sort of, i know why i wrote them, and thinking that they were not about what they may look like they are about at first glance, and really the whole thing is really about myself. not anyone.
myself, and what i am doing wasting time.
i don't know. i think, after last night, that there is so much we don't know about ourselves. about how we feel. about how we feel about others.
destinations.
dreams, aspirations, fears and regrets.
it's all just behind the surface of our minds. just waiting.
it's all just hard to imagine, and because we can't express...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)