Musings
"Blogging will be light today." I read that frequently in various blogs, but if blogging is conversation about the day's events, why shouldn't it occasionally be light? "What's hapn'n?" "Nothing..." "Hey! How about those Vikes?!"
But of course such chat is never the sole intent of the blogger. To be involved in blogging is to have an aspiration. That aspiration can vary perhaps as widely as there are individual bloggers... but there's always something out there, and the drive to say a few words about it.
As a new blogger my aspirations are very simple. First, just to get used to the idea of placing my thoughts in a public domain. You get used to it by doing it, but it still feels very odd. To argue via email makes all the sense in the world. I argue with my friends and my friends are wrong about everything, but to just put out an idea and let it drop... What's the point?
One point is clarification of thought. This is the main point. To publicly express an idea in such a way that a stranger can understand it is a discipline not natural to the private man. The entire burden of clarity lies within the words chosen. I can't grunt to make a point, and I can't assume specific proclivities, or information beyond general knowledge.
Or is it necessary to assume these very things, and thus address a specific audience? Do I just worry about this too much? Do other bloggers worry about it at all? Or should this just be a matter of "Let the chips fall where they may?" If a thought is carefully written it will be understood by those who care to understand; and since it's my conviction that I've never in my life had an original thought but only sometimes a "different" thought (given a "different" personality), perhaps by that reasoning I can assume that this whole consideration is pointless: Whatever I clearly express will be understood, it's only necessary to have the right reader. --There still though, is the desire to communicate to the largest range of personality possible, and that means having the right writer, and it's in this respect that I'm still not sure of myself. I do know that I don't want to discuss just politics.
But politics: "To say that Bush lied is to lie." Obvious. The interest here is in following the force and scope of the Bush counter offensive, and perhaps in examining the pathology of the Democrats. How much is this an unprincipled political calculation, meant to sway the mind of those inattentive or with poor memory; how much is it just that the leadership is as nutty as the base? (This could lead to a discussion of "Patriotism", which could be interesting because in some it doesn't exist).
"Alito mum on abortion." Fine. The hope is that in the Judiciary hearings there will be an open discussion of the role of the court and what constitutes a constitutional decision. The hope is that it will be a "teachable moment" --and that the Republicans will maintain spine.
"Chirac Addresses Nation" --I made that headline up. What a weak fish. He has no idea what's going on. This actually is a very interesting conflict, in that it's a conflict between two religions, Islam and Christianity. The difference is that Moslems know they're Moslems, and know that their values and desired social structure are Islamic. Christian France on the other hand, pleasantly denies it is Christian because it is so pleasant to deny God --which they do very well-- while not recognizing that their values and social structure are a creation of Christian tradition, so that they are, as a nation, properly seen by the Moslems for what they are, as infidels and enemies. It's not a fair fight. Moslems know who they are and thus each individual has force, purpose, plan. Chirac? Villepin? These poor guys have their backs to the enemy and don't even know it. --In this respect at some time I should discuss a little more some points made in Bush's Veteran's Day speech (I've said this before) where it seems he's getting closer to an accurate description of the struggle.
...But just a little bit more on ma. The personality as I knew it is pretty much gone. What's happened to relationship? What's happened to the soul? Christianity teaches that man is not man except as he has both body and soul. This is why they teach the resurrection of the body. For Man there is no such thing as disembodied spirit. Man can not be Man before God without flesh and blood and bones. Ma's neurological flesh is about gone --or at least badly diminished. So what has happened to her soul? Or more properly, what has happened to her humanity, the combination of the two? It is diminished. There is no other way to look at it. Put bluntly: she is less human than she was. So how to deal with it? --Suffer. There is no other answer. Body and soul are still united, regardless of how imperfectly, and there is no diminution of duty. Relationship? Mother and son? In as much as that means "both ways" it's pretty much gone. There is a hope for lucid moments, and they may happen, but that's the extent of hope. But there still is the day-to-day contact, there still is "relationship". I find this a difficult concept. It has to be developed, it has to happen, but in thinking about it, it's like imagining the sound of one hand clapping.
But of course such chat is never the sole intent of the blogger. To be involved in blogging is to have an aspiration. That aspiration can vary perhaps as widely as there are individual bloggers... but there's always something out there, and the drive to say a few words about it.
As a new blogger my aspirations are very simple. First, just to get used to the idea of placing my thoughts in a public domain. You get used to it by doing it, but it still feels very odd. To argue via email makes all the sense in the world. I argue with my friends and my friends are wrong about everything, but to just put out an idea and let it drop... What's the point?
One point is clarification of thought. This is the main point. To publicly express an idea in such a way that a stranger can understand it is a discipline not natural to the private man. The entire burden of clarity lies within the words chosen. I can't grunt to make a point, and I can't assume specific proclivities, or information beyond general knowledge.
Or is it necessary to assume these very things, and thus address a specific audience? Do I just worry about this too much? Do other bloggers worry about it at all? Or should this just be a matter of "Let the chips fall where they may?" If a thought is carefully written it will be understood by those who care to understand; and since it's my conviction that I've never in my life had an original thought but only sometimes a "different" thought (given a "different" personality), perhaps by that reasoning I can assume that this whole consideration is pointless: Whatever I clearly express will be understood, it's only necessary to have the right reader. --There still though, is the desire to communicate to the largest range of personality possible, and that means having the right writer, and it's in this respect that I'm still not sure of myself. I do know that I don't want to discuss just politics.
But politics: "To say that Bush lied is to lie." Obvious. The interest here is in following the force and scope of the Bush counter offensive, and perhaps in examining the pathology of the Democrats. How much is this an unprincipled political calculation, meant to sway the mind of those inattentive or with poor memory; how much is it just that the leadership is as nutty as the base? (This could lead to a discussion of "Patriotism", which could be interesting because in some it doesn't exist).
"Alito mum on abortion." Fine. The hope is that in the Judiciary hearings there will be an open discussion of the role of the court and what constitutes a constitutional decision. The hope is that it will be a "teachable moment" --and that the Republicans will maintain spine.
"Chirac Addresses Nation" --I made that headline up. What a weak fish. He has no idea what's going on. This actually is a very interesting conflict, in that it's a conflict between two religions, Islam and Christianity. The difference is that Moslems know they're Moslems, and know that their values and desired social structure are Islamic. Christian France on the other hand, pleasantly denies it is Christian because it is so pleasant to deny God --which they do very well-- while not recognizing that their values and social structure are a creation of Christian tradition, so that they are, as a nation, properly seen by the Moslems for what they are, as infidels and enemies. It's not a fair fight. Moslems know who they are and thus each individual has force, purpose, plan. Chirac? Villepin? These poor guys have their backs to the enemy and don't even know it. --In this respect at some time I should discuss a little more some points made in Bush's Veteran's Day speech (I've said this before) where it seems he's getting closer to an accurate description of the struggle.
...But just a little bit more on ma. The personality as I knew it is pretty much gone. What's happened to relationship? What's happened to the soul? Christianity teaches that man is not man except as he has both body and soul. This is why they teach the resurrection of the body. For Man there is no such thing as disembodied spirit. Man can not be Man before God without flesh and blood and bones. Ma's neurological flesh is about gone --or at least badly diminished. So what has happened to her soul? Or more properly, what has happened to her humanity, the combination of the two? It is diminished. There is no other way to look at it. Put bluntly: she is less human than she was. So how to deal with it? --Suffer. There is no other answer. Body and soul are still united, regardless of how imperfectly, and there is no diminution of duty. Relationship? Mother and son? In as much as that means "both ways" it's pretty much gone. There is a hope for lucid moments, and they may happen, but that's the extent of hope. But there still is the day-to-day contact, there still is "relationship". I find this a difficult concept. It has to be developed, it has to happen, but in thinking about it, it's like imagining the sound of one hand clapping.
posted by mouse at 3:44 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home