Kevin's Watch

Yeah, I was thinking along the lines of "fiction," although it's not to say that you mean to trivialise them. (Nor in fact that you do...but when you mentioned "stories" I thought of something not quite real.

i wouldn't, i don't think, trivialize if i could help it, when talking story. talk story. it's what i like to do.



Perhaps I merely project my own issues onto you there.

not at all, you were just interpreting. not a problem. if i don't understand you, i'll ask, because you always so graciously answer me, Av.



I don't feel much empathy, i don't believe that. not from what i've heard from you after however many weeks i've been coming here.


hence my own struggle with accepting the reality of each of those lives that will never instersect with mine.

there's still a connection made, Av, i think, when you see beauty. (or am i way off track in saying that?)

Hell, even those who do still appear to me as bit players, if you know what I mean.

i love the bit players. they always add color.


I know, intellectually, that they're not. But not emotionally. Or very rarely at least. Call me callous if you like.

that's not how i think of you, Avatar. not anywhere close to callous.

Aah, MatrixMan, you miss out by avoiding the Close I tell you. The only way to keep things sane and thoughtful is for sane and thoughtful people to continue participating. Glad you're enjoying the thread.

As you so rightly point out, I never worry about threads going off topic. I set them loose, and let whatever will be get thrown up onto the shores of consideration. (And you don't have to mention my name either. ) Derail at will, and I'll participate gladly.

And if you ever do get the chance to get out here, be assured of a standing invitation.

Africa is indeed a land of stark contrasts, both ecologically and socially. But what better than contrast to throw each seperate factor into sharp relief? Without the one, how can we even see that there is another? Extremes are a matter of course here in Africa.

Whether it's a fault or not Sgt, I can't decide. Nor whether it is a weakness or a strength. Personally, I don't connect to animals either. I'm too inwardly focused on my personal present.

Oh, MM, there's a new thread about selfishness here in the Close if you want to discuss it. Think I called it "Giving...how much and how far" or something like that.

--A

When we're talking about the apparent natural beauty in things like sunsets, wide landscapes... I suspect it's not so much an aesthetic thing. I think it's more of an in-awe response. Advanced as we may be, there's still a very primal "Wow-factor" when you look at the sky and half of it seems to be on fire. It's that sense of being dwarfed by something

Another example would be something like a tornado. Nobody likes a tornado; there's no association with a memory of beauty there. But you look at it and you can't help but be amazed at its appearance.

The same applies to almost anything we'd view as extraordinarily beautiful in nature. A huge flock of birds migrating, a massive mountain range, a huge ancient tree... and it's not just the scale; you can get closer and closer and it just keeps getting more detailed and complex - it's all that feeling that, in comparison, you're insignificant, tiny... and then on top of that, to think that all this is not done intentionally (well... that last bit is what I think. Obviously a great deal of people will consider it to be purposely designed that way. Then again, I think those people would be moved by this 'natural beauty' because they're in awe of what they percieve to be its creator).

It's for the same reason that - at least for me - I get a similar feeling about huge man-made things. Enormous bustling cities amaze me; they're not natural, and often not very aesthetically pleasing. But if I just stop to look at one, it still fills me with that wonderment that I'd get from a natural phenomenon.


Not quite sure if I've gone off on a tangent there, but... hm.

Good post Sorus, and good to have you participating. Yeah, that "awe" response was something that I tried to bring into it earlier, when I talked about the "primitive worshipfulness", but I think you set it out much more clearly. That feeling of insignificance in the face of the world's, let alone the Universe's immensity.

And because I agree with you about the "to no purpose" bit, I must also agree that that doesn't lessent the feeling at all. If anything, it enhances it.

And hell, while I'm agreeing, let me also agree about the cities. In fact, if I think about it, anything I take the time to ponder upon, to view from the many angles, to think of the many factors, is a source of awe to me. Whether it's natural or man-made, a phenomenon, an every-day occurence. Truly, the world, regardless of the reasons, is a place of wonder and beauty. We can ask why it's beautiful all we want. It doesn't remove the central fact that it is.

LuciMay, I missed your post earlier, so let me quickly take it up now.

Lucimay wrote:Perhaps I merely project my own issues onto you there.

not at all, you were just interpreting. not a problem. if i don't understand you, i'll ask, because you always so graciously answer me, Av.

Thank you, although to be honest, I wasn't apologising, I was looking for a reason for my interpretation. Always ask, Asking is so important when it comes to understanding.

Lucimay wrote:I don't feel much empathy, i don't believe that. not from what i've heard from you after however many weeks i've been coming here.

There's a big and noticable difference between seeing/knowing/understanding the other point of view, and feeling it. I can sympathise with somebodies plight, but I don't feel it. I don't have an emotional response to many, if not most things. I'm not a particularly emotional person when it comes to my own life, let alone those of others.

I might be able to point out injustice and inequality and all that, but emotionally, I might as well be pointing out that it's raining.

Lucimay wrote: hence my own struggle with accepting the reality of each of those lives that will never instersect with mine.

there's still a connection made, Av, i think, when you see beauty. (or am i way off track in saying that?)

Now that is an interesting point, and one which hadn't really occurred to me. I think that I'll have to think about it.

Lucimay wrote:I know, intellectually, that they're not. But not emotionally. Or very rarely at least. Call me callous if you like.

that's not how i think of you, Avatar. not anywhere close to callous.

Thank you. You obviously haven't come across some of my more facist posts.

Good posts guys. And stop worrying about tangents. Tangents are what it's all about.

--A

Avatar wrote:And hell, while I'm agreeing, let me also agree about the cities. In fact, if I think about it, anything I take the time to ponder upon, to view from the many angles, to think of the many factors, is a source of awe to me. Whether it's natural or man-made, a phenomenon, an every-day occurence. Truly, the world, regardless of the reasons, is a place of wonder and beauty. We can ask why it's beautiful all we want. It doesn't remove the central fact that it is

This is exactly the way I feel too... I think we should stop more often and look at everyday occurrences and things with new eyes, there can be found much beauty and awe even in the simplest things, no matter whether man-made or natural.

I find the Dow chemical plant down the road to be beautiful at night. miles of steel glowing from the sodium lights, the gas release valves burning off with 6 foot flames.

sgtnull wrote:I find the Dow chemical plant down the road to be beautiful at night. miles of steel glowing from the sodium lights, the gas release valves burning off with 6 foot flames.

Yeah, the "Eternal Flame" that burns off methane at the landfill is pretty cool, too. Lights up the golf course real pretty at night.

long as you don't think of all the poison being burned.

What did I post?

I thought I was just lurking here.

Sorry, I meant the Somberlain. (But now that you're revealed, why not post something? The more participation the better.

Have to agree with Xar. If we take the time to look around, even the most every day objects and events can be revealed as beautiful in some sense. Their other functions/applications/intention are an entirely seperate consideration. But the absolute marvel that is this world and everything in it never ceases to amaze me...if I bother to make the effort of thinking about it...an effort we should all make more often.

--A

The full moon over the Bay Bridge on a clear night, reflected below in the dark water.

What makes it beautiful? Is it the mystery of nature, or perhaps respect for human achievement on such a grand scale?

Beauty is subjective, ever in the eye of the beholder.

But it is nearly everywhere, even if you sometimes must look hard to find it.

I may have to give this more thought.



(Sure it wasn't some super mod mind-reading power? )

you WERE just lurking...Av was having a FLASHBACK. heh.


edit: she IS kindof THE Sorus, tho!

Unfortunately not. On both counts.

Glad you decided to join in though. It's good to get as many thoughts as possible on something. And do think about it and get back to us.

Oh LuciMay, been thinking about your earlier comment. While it may be a connection of sorts, it's still an almost false one. What I connect to is the mindless beauty of the totality. It's not an emotional connection to any of the somposite parts, I think. One person more or less in that totality will not only go unnoticed, but be irrelevant to it.

--A

Lucimay wrote:you WERE just lurking...Av was having a FLASHBACK. heh.


edit: she IS kindof THE Sorus, tho!

I'm not sure what that means, but I sure hope there's only one of me.

Avatar writes,
Oh LuciMay, been thinking about your earlier comment. While it may be a connection of sorts, it's still an almost false one. What I connect to is the mindless beauty of the totality. It's not an emotional connection to any of the somposite parts, I think. One person more or less in that totality will not only go unnoticed, but be irrelevant to it.

but but...wait, here...

i mean it like this...

If it was only the outer voice of sky
And cloud, of the sunken coral water-walled,
However clear, it would have been deep air,
The heaving speech of air, a summer sound
Repeated in a summer without end
And sound alone. But it was more than that,
More even than her voice, and ours, among
The meaningless plungings of water and the wind,
Theatrical distances, bronze shadows heaped
On high horizons, mountainous atmospheres
Of sky and sea.

It was her voice that made
The sky acutest at its vanishing.
She measured to the hour its solitude.
She was the single artificer of the world
In which she sang. And when she sang, the sea,
Whatever self it had, became the self
That was her song,

in this piece Stevens is describing a "perfect moment". and he talks about how hearing the woman singing "made" (why do i feel like esmer here) the sky acutest at its vanishing. all the components were necessary even if there was no "emotional connection" to any single component. so i say it's a connection to the whole (no matter what the components are) that cause the recognition of beauty on whatever level.
it is recognition of the whole. i don't know how else to say this. am i making sense?

Recognition of the whole! Makes sense to me.

In fact, that's the point I was failing at getting across in my post.

oh EXcellent!! at least if you get what i'm trying to say, Sorus, i might be saying what i mean!

Oh, I understand that recognition of the whole. But without one of the components of that whole, it would still be a whole.

Going back to the original idea of the beauty of all those people living out their lives, the point is that the totality is independent of any one part.

Remove one of those parts, you still have a totality that you're appreciating. The presence or absence of a single part of it is unoticable in terms of the perceived beauty.

Fifty of the people behind those lights may be dead, or suffering, and it wouldn't diminish that beauty. In fact, in a way, it may even enhance that beauty.

But when I talk about my lack of empathy, I mean that I regard that possibility, even the certainty, should I have it, with no more emotional attachment than I experience when considering that Arch-Duke Ferdinand was assasinated. It has no emotional impact on me. I know it. I just don't feel anything about it.

--A

Avatar wrote: But when I talk about my lack of empathy, I mean that I regard that possibility, even the certainty, should I have it, with no more emotional attachment than I experience when considering that Arch-Duke Ferdinand was assasinated. It has no emotional impact on me. I know it. I just don't feel anything about it.

--A

Any chance that you are the "GoTo Guy" for your family or social group during a crisis?