I have a lot I want to say (surprise). But I find myself spending too much time deliberating between not having the time to commit it to writing in the first place and then auto-censuring myself as I consider what I want to say and to whom. Much as I like to hold to the egocentric belief that people care what I have to say, most of what I want to say is to everyone. And yet no one. Mostly to me: the simultaneous everythingness and nothingness of me. I also should say that I find myself wanting to write in French.
All various explanations of why, with so much to say, nothing has been said. And now the eternal question of a blogger who, like a friend who has been away for a long time, doesn't know where to even start. There is no beginning in all this, though I sometimes wish that there were; that I could pinpoint and place in time, like words on the first page of a book. It's no secret to anyone that I think of my life as a book. Nor that I sometimes foolishly judge the quality of that life by how interesting the various episodes would be to read. But I feel like I'm repeating myself here and that this is a reoccuring theme or topic on these electronic pages and that no one really needs to be told this because it is probably a universal truth: novels, journals, and blogs would not exist otherwise.
So maybe I'll start with a chapter. It would be titled (and here I shall refer to myself in the 3rd person, just to make things weird for everyone): Brand New Pair of Wings.
I wrote the above over a month ago, toward the end of September. About a week ago I was reading this article about History for my Critical Theory class, a course which, by definition is designed to make us think more. Yeah, well, some of us don't need to learn how to think more, we need to learn how to think less. As is manifest in the fact that most of these amazingly intelligent theorists whose works we are reading lived lives of debauchery and usually ended up killing themselves. I've said it before and I'll say it again: some people are just too smart to function. And I don't know about you but I'd rather be functioning that brilliant. I mean, let's be practical. By extension, I'd also rather be living. As a matter of principle.
Lucky for me, I don't think I'll ever really have to choose between the two, no matter how much I learn. As far as I'm concerned, brilliance demands a sort of disregard for, or the ability to see beyond, conventions that I just don't have. As far as I'm concerned, brilliance comes down to creation. Look at Steve Jobs, for example.
Anyhow, back to me thinking too much. I must say that there is something entirely more productive in this line of thinking than in my usual near obsessive compulsive analysis/worrying. But I think that the fact that I am now thinking about so many different things-in this as in my other classes, not to mention in conjunction with a handful of other rather foreign experiences-that I have barely the time to think things through, let alone document them. Which is a real shame, really, because I actually feel like I have something productive to say versus the usual mumbo jumbo that goes on here.
Going back now to my passage from September and the article on History. The irony is that my desire to literacize (neologism is my best friend) my life by assigning chapters with titles is completely in line with Hayden White's theory on History. He writes on the writing of history and on the narrative form(s) involved. To summarize, he basically contends that history-its perception as well as the writing of it-is a literary act; that the facts do not and cannot speak for themselves.
To really drive this point home, I'm just going to directly quote the article. You'll see why it's pertinent in the duration of a few lovely paragraphs.
"The fundamental meaning of all fictions, their thematic content, consist, in Frye's view, of the "pre-generic plot structures" or mythoi derived from the corpora of Classical and Judeo-Christian religious literature. According to this theory, we understand why a particular story has "turned out" as it has when we have identified the archetypal myth, or pregeneric plot structure, of which the story is an exemplification. And we see the "point" of the story when we have identified its theme.
The events [in a history] are made into a story by the suppression or subordination of certain of them and the highlighting of others, by characterizations, motific (see, other people make up words too) repetition, variation of tone and point of view, alternative descriptive strategies and the like.
How a given historical situation is to be configured depends on the historian's subtlety in matching up a specific plot structure with the set of historical events that he wishes to endow with a meaning of a particular kind."
Some kinds of the plot structures he mentions are romances, tragedies, satires. You know, the kind of categorization you learn in highschool. Basically, these are the narrative structures by which we frame, not only history, but also our lives.
And here's the kicker. "We do not live stories," he tells us "even if we give our lives meaning by retrospectively casting them in the form of stories."
Isn't that what this whole blogging/journaling/facebook status-ing thing is? It's us giving our lives meaning by retrospectively casting them in the form of stories. Not only that, but WE are our own historians and we choose the narrative emplotment for our own stories. Our lives aren't inherently satirical or tragic until we choose that plot form with which to frame our lives.
This reality was especially fascinating to me. Not only am I writing a paper about it, but I am also procrastinating the writing of that paper by writing this blog entry about blogging about the assigning of narrative form to my life. The circle of life, my friends.
The reality that we retrospectively cast our histories seems yet another explanation as to why this blog has been neglected of late. I have this tendency, especially of late, to think of certain things, certain events going on in my life as being "pivotal". I also have the obsession with analyzing (again retrospectively) the moments in my life and in others lives' when "everything changed". And as I've been having so many awesome experiences these past few months, it's as though I can't decide which facts to suppress, which to subordinate. It's as though I'm still trying to identify the plot under which my life is currently framed. Not knowing how my "story" is going to turn out, I don't know how to cast the story. I feel like there are all these pivotal things but how can I know, just yet?
I should probably insert here, for the sake of unabashed authenticity that this whole narrative casting thing explains PERFECTLY my (and a great number of girls, and well, guys I know and probably ones that I don't know as well) obsession with a "good story" when it comes down to "relationships". (Yeah, that's right, that word did just make it onto my blog. I've been a closet lover of analyzing relationships up to this point but I'm ready to set the record straight. You probably saw right through me anyway.) Back to this "good story" nonsense.
I may be the exception here but how many times does the "idea" of a relationship, the fact that it looks and feels and acts like a relationship does and should, contribute to our "buying in" of the relationship? I mean, there are symbols, gests, which for us cast our relationships into certain narratives. The narrative of "the one" for example, the narrative of "love at first sight", the "Mr. Darcy" narrative where you can't stand the person at first but insults, passion, and most of all chemistry get the best of you and before you know it you're looking the narrative of "happily ever after" squarely in the face, and let's not forget the "meant to be", that one's the most dangerous. (Meant to be what, exactly? Never underestimate the damage done by lack of semantic precision) Not gonna lie, I am totally guilty of saying to myself in frustration "but this isn't how it's supposed to look, this is a LAME story" or I can't even figure out which narrative to cast for the thing and so I oscillate, not knowing how to feel without the narrative to allow me to feel thus.
Let's not get carried away with the whole R word crap. I do have a paper to write, after all. The point that I'm trying to make here I guess is that I'm still struggling for a narrative in which to cast my current ongoings. Maybe it is the giant unheaval that is, for once, of a more permanent nature (versus summer escape plans), but I feel like I've been going through a lot of growth lately, some of it painful. Some of that growth has been the mere recognition of the fact that I have a lot of growing up to do.
Right now, I have a set of facts that I don't know how yet to emplot necessarily. I present them for your enjoyment and for the sake of my procrastination:
I am an aunt. My baby sister has a baby. She is an amazing mommy. He is my favorite.
When I think of the "idea" of school, the image of a bench behind the U of U library floats to my mind. And somehow, I relive those feelings (which yes, I am not sharing) associated with that image, that bench, and a few moments from years ago, almost everyday.
This summer, for unidentifiable reasons, constituted some of the hardest few months of my life. Probably my life has been easy and well, everything is relative. Hopefully, they have made me softer around the edges.
I moved in June. I move in August. I made the right choice both times. (A shout out to my roommates, with love).
Somehow I manage to do everything I need:
All of the (just) above, when I think about it, literally amazes me. So much worrying for nothing. On my mirror are written the words "Avec Dieu, tout est possible". I'm pretty sure that is the only rational explanation I have.
I learn so much, everyday, from so many people, many of whom are my peers. There is not enough time to write all of life's lessons.
All of these things and so many more, are, I feel, changing me; though I don't know, can't feel, how or to what end. But I want to get them out, like Zeus throwing out stars to be caught in the night sky, so that later, maybe much later, I can connect the dots and see a constellation.
Or two.
I wrote the above over a month ago, toward the end of September. About a week ago I was reading this article about History for my Critical Theory class, a course which, by definition is designed to make us think more. Yeah, well, some of us don't need to learn how to think more, we need to learn how to think less. As is manifest in the fact that most of these amazingly intelligent theorists whose works we are reading lived lives of debauchery and usually ended up killing themselves. I've said it before and I'll say it again: some people are just too smart to function. And I don't know about you but I'd rather be functioning that brilliant. I mean, let's be practical. By extension, I'd also rather be living. As a matter of principle.
Lucky for me, I don't think I'll ever really have to choose between the two, no matter how much I learn. As far as I'm concerned, brilliance demands a sort of disregard for, or the ability to see beyond, conventions that I just don't have. As far as I'm concerned, brilliance comes down to creation. Look at Steve Jobs, for example.
Anyhow, back to me thinking too much. I must say that there is something entirely more productive in this line of thinking than in my usual near obsessive compulsive analysis/worrying. But I think that the fact that I am now thinking about so many different things-in this as in my other classes, not to mention in conjunction with a handful of other rather foreign experiences-that I have barely the time to think things through, let alone document them. Which is a real shame, really, because I actually feel like I have something productive to say versus the usual mumbo jumbo that goes on here.
Going back now to my passage from September and the article on History. The irony is that my desire to literacize (neologism is my best friend) my life by assigning chapters with titles is completely in line with Hayden White's theory on History. He writes on the writing of history and on the narrative form(s) involved. To summarize, he basically contends that history-its perception as well as the writing of it-is a literary act; that the facts do not and cannot speak for themselves.
To really drive this point home, I'm just going to directly quote the article. You'll see why it's pertinent in the duration of a few lovely paragraphs.
"The fundamental meaning of all fictions, their thematic content, consist, in Frye's view, of the "pre-generic plot structures" or mythoi derived from the corpora of Classical and Judeo-Christian religious literature. According to this theory, we understand why a particular story has "turned out" as it has when we have identified the archetypal myth, or pregeneric plot structure, of which the story is an exemplification. And we see the "point" of the story when we have identified its theme.
The events [in a history] are made into a story by the suppression or subordination of certain of them and the highlighting of others, by characterizations, motific (see, other people make up words too) repetition, variation of tone and point of view, alternative descriptive strategies and the like.
How a given historical situation is to be configured depends on the historian's subtlety in matching up a specific plot structure with the set of historical events that he wishes to endow with a meaning of a particular kind."
Some kinds of the plot structures he mentions are romances, tragedies, satires. You know, the kind of categorization you learn in highschool. Basically, these are the narrative structures by which we frame, not only history, but also our lives.
And here's the kicker. "We do not live stories," he tells us "even if we give our lives meaning by retrospectively casting them in the form of stories."
Isn't that what this whole blogging/journaling/facebook status-ing thing is? It's us giving our lives meaning by retrospectively casting them in the form of stories. Not only that, but WE are our own historians and we choose the narrative emplotment for our own stories. Our lives aren't inherently satirical or tragic until we choose that plot form with which to frame our lives.
This reality was especially fascinating to me. Not only am I writing a paper about it, but I am also procrastinating the writing of that paper by writing this blog entry about blogging about the assigning of narrative form to my life. The circle of life, my friends.
The reality that we retrospectively cast our histories seems yet another explanation as to why this blog has been neglected of late. I have this tendency, especially of late, to think of certain things, certain events going on in my life as being "pivotal". I also have the obsession with analyzing (again retrospectively) the moments in my life and in others lives' when "everything changed". And as I've been having so many awesome experiences these past few months, it's as though I can't decide which facts to suppress, which to subordinate. It's as though I'm still trying to identify the plot under which my life is currently framed. Not knowing how my "story" is going to turn out, I don't know how to cast the story. I feel like there are all these pivotal things but how can I know, just yet?
I should probably insert here, for the sake of unabashed authenticity that this whole narrative casting thing explains PERFECTLY my (and a great number of girls, and well, guys I know and probably ones that I don't know as well) obsession with a "good story" when it comes down to "relationships". (Yeah, that's right, that word did just make it onto my blog. I've been a closet lover of analyzing relationships up to this point but I'm ready to set the record straight. You probably saw right through me anyway.) Back to this "good story" nonsense.
I may be the exception here but how many times does the "idea" of a relationship, the fact that it looks and feels and acts like a relationship does and should, contribute to our "buying in" of the relationship? I mean, there are symbols, gests, which for us cast our relationships into certain narratives. The narrative of "the one" for example, the narrative of "love at first sight", the "Mr. Darcy" narrative where you can't stand the person at first but insults, passion, and most of all chemistry get the best of you and before you know it you're looking the narrative of "happily ever after" squarely in the face, and let's not forget the "meant to be", that one's the most dangerous. (Meant to be what, exactly? Never underestimate the damage done by lack of semantic precision) Not gonna lie, I am totally guilty of saying to myself in frustration "but this isn't how it's supposed to look, this is a LAME story" or I can't even figure out which narrative to cast for the thing and so I oscillate, not knowing how to feel without the narrative to allow me to feel thus.
Let's not get carried away with the whole R word crap. I do have a paper to write, after all. The point that I'm trying to make here I guess is that I'm still struggling for a narrative in which to cast my current ongoings. Maybe it is the giant unheaval that is, for once, of a more permanent nature (versus summer escape plans), but I feel like I've been going through a lot of growth lately, some of it painful. Some of that growth has been the mere recognition of the fact that I have a lot of growing up to do.
Right now, I have a set of facts that I don't know how yet to emplot necessarily. I present them for your enjoyment and for the sake of my procrastination:
I am an aunt. My baby sister has a baby. She is an amazing mommy. He is my favorite.
When I think of the "idea" of school, the image of a bench behind the U of U library floats to my mind. And somehow, I relive those feelings (which yes, I am not sharing) associated with that image, that bench, and a few moments from years ago, almost everyday.
This summer, for unidentifiable reasons, constituted some of the hardest few months of my life. Probably my life has been easy and well, everything is relative. Hopefully, they have made me softer around the edges.
I moved in June. I move in August. I made the right choice both times. (A shout out to my roommates, with love).
Somehow I manage to do everything I need:
- I have not missed or been significantly late to any class.
- I make dinner almost every night with real, delicious, and healthy food, and it is one of my most dreaded and yet favorite moments of the day. Funny how once school started I suddenly became a chef.
- I am not behind (though not ahead) on homework.
- I am back to running 3 times a week and have found my stamina again. The feeling: gorgeous. I have suspicions that the reason I feel sick often despite gluten free (and recent sugar free) eating comes down to my running. I have imaginary conversations with me and various doctors telling me I need to find something else. They always end with me yelling at them, rolling my eyes, or slamming the door. Various degrees of defiance. Such imaginings only bring home to me the fact that (probably because it is so mental) I love running. And I won't be told to stop. Especially by people who only exist in hypothetical conversations in my head.
- I have more of a social life than I have had in years, even though sometimes that just entails me staying on campus late on Friday nights chatting with other student instructors. Shout out.
All of the (just) above, when I think about it, literally amazes me. So much worrying for nothing. On my mirror are written the words "Avec Dieu, tout est possible". I'm pretty sure that is the only rational explanation I have.
I learn so much, everyday, from so many people, many of whom are my peers. There is not enough time to write all of life's lessons.
All of these things and so many more, are, I feel, changing me; though I don't know, can't feel, how or to what end. But I want to get them out, like Zeus throwing out stars to be caught in the night sky, so that later, maybe much later, I can connect the dots and see a constellation.
Or two.