Redundance

Posted by yseult on Mar 12, 2005 in Personal, Writing

I got so terribly annoyed yesterday evening that I decided to hit the movies with a friend of mine. (Wow, that’s an odd sentence there… Why? Because the reason I got annoyed in the first place was the fault of my ‘other friends’ and a terrible moment of ‘does anybody actually give a damn?’ that hit me like a sniper bullet right out of the blue… nevermind that some of these friends – stuffed in the box labelled ‘Swiss’ while I am here – are reading this… I figure that since they don’t really care, there is no reason for me to hold back. So this is for you guys: you are annoying the bits out of me!!! That said, let me carry on with the main entry after the closing of this bracket. *wink*)
OK, so I went to the movies with Dan and a friend of his (we’re going along with the friend theme here, lol) who’s a art historian – just finishing off his undergraduate degree and completely baffling with me with his broad knowledge – and had quite a pleasant evening actually. Although I swore I wouldn’t stay out until 2 or 3 am as it has become a habit of Dan and me whenever we meet, I just got home at 1 am. Well… only to be woken out of a wonderful slumber at 2 am by my mother asking me if everything was all right… huh? Nevermind, I am trailing off again.
Apart from the normal human sciences chit chat and diving in the ‘ah, don’t we just love our work’ pool, Dan and I ended up in a café talking about this blog here. I know that his way of dealing with the internet differs quite acutely from mine and that quite obviously he had never come across a blog or a livejournal and apart from the fact that he thought it looked terribly professional – *clears throat* thank you all customisable blog-city.com – he was wondering (once again) on the necessities and goals of such a page. (Of course he was also wondering why the heck (sic!) I was writing it all in English and if I had a thought in French or German I would translate it. The answer to the later question is ‘no’ or at least I don’t think so. As to the why I guess it’s only fair because most of my French, Swiss or other acquaintances that would be as bold as to venture into the ‘attic’ know English. My US./Canadian/UK friends on the other hand wouldn’t know enough German or French to get along.)

So… we’re back on the meta level of the blog – seems to be the topic of the week I guess. I’ll try to tackle it from another side this time.
Why not write a blog? Because there is nothing interesting to write about? Because nobody is going to read it anyway? Why not use the the traditional way of email or a phone call? (Yes, he asked me that.)
The ‘nobody is reading this’ fallacy or lie: I have addressed this in various entries of my old blog and some entries I didn’t publish in here. First, I think it’s a typical internet excuse… or has anybody who holds a conventional diary ever asked that question? I guess not. Apart from that, I think it’s a nice cosy constructed writing situation. Constructed because there is a vast number of bloggers out there that actually voice this as an attempt to get commentaries, trackbacks and feedback. Now I don’t necessarily think it’s a bad thing to do, as long as it’s the expression of a real feeling. Everything else is just manipulation. However you – and I am addressing YOU here, yes, you that you’re sitting with your coffee in front of the screen and have nothing better to do than read this – might answer this question for yourself in your own blogging experience, I think it’s something we automatically address when writing, thus it’s a fallacy. People are vain – and I am no exception – and in order to even write anything you will have to face this issue and get over this fallacy. Because if you really believe in it, then why are you writing yourself? See where I am going here?
Email vs. Blog: Well, my answer is simple really and twofold. [Holy C*** My mother just sent me her first email!!!! Don't laugh, we all started out small one day...] For one I don’t see why I should write one of those silly ‘massed round emails’ depicting my status here in Paris, preferably sent out once a month. I hate getting those and would hate to inflict this on others. Kant’s categorical imperative at work here *smile*
Secondly, in a blog I don’t need to hold back or think about what to include, what better not to mention (in fear of getting worried phone calls telling me to seek out a counsellor) etc. I can jump on every idea and thought my ever so weird mind sends me. It’s simple really. You just put it in the blog and people get to decide when or whether they’re going to read it or not. That way the experience of ‘catching up with me’ is a lot moor casual than a phone call or an email where you’re quickly on the ‘After Action Report N° 24454 regarding my attempt at getting a reader’s card at the library’ level. I somehow can make myself believe that this here is less vain than all the other options.
Why not to write a blog: Like my crusade for the non-categorisation of blogging showed this week, I am quite idealistic about a lot of things and I guess my answer follows the line ‘be whatever you want to be’ closely. What is appealing to me is the ‘don’t hold back’ factor of a blog. The articulation of a simple ‘take it or leave it’ stance that I don’t really get to live out during my days.

So… why not to write a blog:
… if expressing your feelings and thoughts seems like a calvaire to you.
… if you prefer doing your laundry to reading.
… if you’re uncomfortable with introspection.
… if you think that post-modernism is right and that all important things have already been said by others before you.
… if you think that the internet is a subcultural articulation of our social difficulties to bond.
… if for you the internet is but a means to achieve a goal
… if you don’t want people to see how many typos you’re able to fit into ONE phrase.
… if you’re a solipsist.

Sorry, about the last one, I couldn’t resist. I am sure this list will get expanded over time as it seems that I am terribly redundant in my thoughts and that people keep asking me the same questions about blogging over and over again… maybe I should consider writing up some FAQ like some of my ‘beloved’ internet rulers. Mean, mean, mean…

Coffee thoughts

Posted by yseult on Mar 11, 2005 in Personal

What is proof? Proof of love, of life, of feelings unshared? Proof of caring, of contributing or simply knowing?
What is proof if not the very fact of troubling enough to be there?

I am being cryptic here… and people have told me time and again that I am rivalling Pythia on the steams from the Oracle of Delphi sometimes. What a nice comparison… but the picture is a bit off. It supposes that I actually have anything of interest to say. Pythia was a seer sought out to give you answers to important questions regarding your future or your destiny. Not one word coming from me would ever do that now, would it?
I don’t even know where the cryptics come from here… It could very well be that I have studied symbolism too much and too long and that I have lost the ability to express myself in any coherent way due to this. Maybe it the simple fact that I am afraid of addressing my inner feelings or attitudes in a direct way… maybe I should see a psychologist to sort me out.

Or maybe I will just stay what I am… a terribly overcharged philosopher with a nick for the poetical…

Definition of a Blog…

Posted by yseult on Mar 11, 2005 in Writing

Absolutely NO COMMENT… Deutsche Welle article on the question ‘Please don’t ask what a Blog is…‘ => hereEr… I revise the ‘no comment’ for this:

Hell, what do I care what the REAL definition for a blog is? The difference between a LiveJournal and a weblog… Whether the Hypers think it’s a blog or an essay… Each blogger has to decide about that.

But let’s hear how another of those wise men tries to define what the ‘blogger community’ is all about… hold on to your seats: it is a subculture. There. Now I know…
“A subculture has sprung up around blogging. Groups of people maintain blogs and cite each other in their blogs. They even visit each other.”

I need a doctor to remove the constant blinking of my eyes here. I am part of a subculture… so after the ‘Ivory Tower’ and the removed ‘attic’ of the philosopher, the ‘are you crazy?’ tag for the Medievalist, ‘you are just sad’ tag for the poet, now I can add ‘subculturally deficient’ to my collection.

Oh, here‘s another very nice way to put it:

“In case you are new to the genre, Weblogs take two canonical forms…”

- don’t I just looooove the use of the present tense as an assertation and the word ‘canonical’ here -

“…links-and-commentary: A Weblogger surfs the Web and links to items of interest. One may provide a bare, unadorned link, a link plus an excerpt, or both of those plus one’s own pithy commentary.
Diary or journal : One keeps a regular or irregular journal online. It is quite possible to combine the forms: You can write about your life, which itself includes the Web-surfing you do.”

Ok, so I am actually allowed to do ALL that… isn’t there some regulation act nr. 87243 from the ‘WRTI’ (aka ‘We rule the internet’) Board that says personal thought and comments are not to be uttered unless you want to pass as a troll? Or was that the another part of the XXX.XXX paratax G on Godwin’s Law? I can’t remember…

Never mind Joe Clark manages to hit the ball even further: You cannot understand Weblogs without understanding the nature of the Web. Items posted to Web sites are meant to be read. There are clear exceptions – company intranets, password-protected sites, subscriber-only areas – but the entire point of publishing online is to allow others to read and experience your work. The Weblog format engages a quasi-dialogue in which the blogger posts a link to and likely comments on a public Web posting elsewhere. The source can and very often does counterblog in return, and indeed it is possible for a handful of Weblogs to do nothing but read to and write to each other in public for days on end.

Glad that we’ve settled that. So to understand a blog I not only need a diploma in ‘The Nature of the Internet’ of the ‘UoCIU’ (aka ‘University of Correct Internet Use’, regulated by the WRTI-Board of course), but I need to have a look in the Mirror of Narcissus and be absolutely adamant that people read my texts. What if I don’t? What if I sometimes do, but sometimes don’t?
And could someone explain to me – silly philosopher that I am – what a quasi-dialogue is? Someone seems to have had an overdose on Heidegger here and it surely was not me…

So this is where the professional instinct kicks in and over voices the sarcasm.
It is a common place that the human mind functions in categories, that the very foundations of our thinking are realised in basic settings of categorisation, qualification and judgement. Our society on the other hand – a body made up by minds that function like this – is mostly constructed on the acknowledgement or refutation of these categories. And then there are things that cannot fitted into any category or setting such as art, poetry or hobbies. Have I lost you here? Well. Have you ever been asked the question why you are either spending long nights on a sonnet or what it ‘offers’ you or even if that’s worth doing? No fixed category could take up my writing as ‘being worth’ to be done or your reenacting as having a value other than celebrating History.
And what about the internet? The internet can be a lot of things… a realisation of RL or the contrast of that etc. But differently from society: it is not governed by anyone or anything. Of course there are parts that are governed by the people who pay for the webspace etc. and sure the technical aspect does in a certain way ‘govern’ the internet.
But why should we be so ready as to accept any categories in the way we behave on the internet? Why would we allow anybody to tell us how we should write or what we’re not allowed to say in whichever context?
There are two classes of people in real life: sheep and wolves. 99% of the people around you are sheep. 1% are wolves. If you’re a sheep you find comfort in the categories and the way how others, society or ‘life’ [oi!] decides over you. If you are a wolf you rebel and try to change that. Then again it depends on the situation what you will be…
When it comes to writing I am a wolf. And wolves recognise each other… So any sheep who try to tell me that a) this is not a blog, but an illusion or a quasi-dialogue and b) that the internet IS what it is, should close their little gates very carefully tonight. The wolf is on the move… grrrr.

Time

Posted by yseult on Mar 9, 2005 in The Odd Philosophical Question

I started listening to Handel’s ‘Il Trionfo del Tempo e del Disinagno’ again and it brought me back to my Medieval/Renaissance French Literature studies… Hmm… Savoury. The symbolisms and all the theories behind it, the ideals… it’s comforting to see that I still have all those references at my disposal and I hope it stays that way.
But that’s not what this entry is about. The plot of this ‘Oratorium’ by Händel is the ‘fight’ between Time and Disillusion for Beauty’s soul whose more drawn to simple, blinding Pleasure than truth and reality. And to see who’s in the right they start a feast of arias and musings trying to win over Beauty who refuses to give into the reality of passing time and age.
Time of course is sung by a man. The others are all women. Struggling women. Needless to say – judging from the title – that Time will win Beauty’s heart and she sees the light in the end. Reality and truth, real pleasure instead of purely eye daunting appearances.

There is a line sung by Time that struck me regarding the passing of so many veterans at the moment: even the strongest hero will bow at my might…

So does time win everything over? Is time all that rests when all other things have perished?
I don’t know how many poems and short stories, scraps have built up in my archive about this thought, but my guess is that they’ve reached quite a number.

Time is supposed to be a constant, something we all build our lives and securities on. Things that will pass. Reduced to ashes. That would be the depressing part of being in this world. The knowledge that the stability we may be able to linger in and that we think we’ve accomplished is just a thing of the moment that can be overthrown in the blink of an eye. And it doesn’t even take much to cast us humans out of our well trimmed categories and existences.
But as usual there’s always another side to things.
Time is the only thing that will keep us going. The knowledge of the ephemeral nature of being itself is the one thing that keeps us dreaming and striving.
And of course how could we ever overcome the blows we’re inevitably facing – the loss of family, failure, hurt, uncertainty, anguish – without the soothing constant passing of time. Things that projected into the future we would never think of living through, suddenly become small and simple, when being looked upon for a while. [That's probably why I am such a planning freak... <_<] Or tragedies we never think we’ll be able to live through, where we’re convinced that we’ll never see the light of day again, over time become a nagging remembrance at first and then disappear.

So maybe time is the only thing that really matters. Take the amount that’s given to us and use it as best as we can.

And I myself am struggling to come to terms with certain emotional issues I take comfort in this thought… maybe it’ll be the last thing that stays when all else is gone.

International Women’s day

Posted by yseult on Mar 9, 2005 in The Odd Philosophical Question

I am by no means a feminist. Not by any standard. Feminism in Europe or Philosophy is a very difficult and most of the time a quite laughable matter. Not so much because of it’s subject, but because of it’s vocabulary on one side and their hatred for men on the other. It is not something I like delving in. (I have been rendered sensible to the cause of the feminists by my former PhD consultant who must have had a dislike of women… but I never enthusiastically entered the feminist cause.)But when I see the various ‘social’ manifestations here in Paris planned for this week, I feel like writing something. And here I am. Today it is the turn of the students to protest against the new educational law… again. Of course they all end up in my quarter here. And I see those 16 year olds being manipulated by their left students association (yes, in France the students associations are politically orientated, something that in Switzerland would never be possible. In Switzerland every organ representing a mass of employees or students or whatever must be declared politically, religiously etc. neutral). Why did they have to demonstrate today? Why on this international day for the Women? You’d imagine that after the horrific images of the Turkish Police beating of peacefully assembling women (I am offering an Aljazeera.net link because this incident has been badly covered in the news, and they’re the only one with a picture :S) the well suited students of France could for once forget their whining sob stories of the ‘nouveau bac’ and cut down courses for a greater cause. No, of course not.

And while women in Kuwait demonstrate for the right to vote, I feel badly for the youth of my generation. It makes me sad to see that they are more readily on the streets against the US or for their own little prerogatives than for the greater reasons. I highly doubt that their right to be heard and to exerce their public voice will ever be heard for something other than prefetched judgements and ideology.

But there is a silent pale blue revolution taking place and one would be not too daring stating that this new century is starting to be the one of changes and the peaceful changes. The Velvet, The Orange, The Cedar and now the Pale Blue Revolution. (Again very badly covered in the news). And how fitting it is that none of those changes or silent upturns took place in ‘old’ Europe, but in the New parts of the EU and in the Middle East. Now that’s a thought to remember.

And although I am not a feminist or a fervent defendant of the women’s cause (I simply don’t think that their course of action is any better than the one of the discriminating men in this world…), today my thoughts go out to the Arab women across the globe fighting for their autonomy, their right to speak in public, dress how they want and choose their own way of life… it all starts with the right to vote. Women in Switzerland had to fight almost 90 years (from 1890 to 1971) until they were allowed to vote. Let’s hope that neither the Kuwaiti women nor the Turkish ones will have to fight that long until granted basic human rights.