Defined By nothing. Affected by everything.

In my previous blog we looked at how we lose touch and we figured out some ideas but we really didn't get to any solid conclusions.

The paradox that we did stumble across was: How can we lose touch with something that we have previously defined ourselves by?

The focal point of this blog entry is going to be the idea of definition and our relationship to it. It seems pretty fucked that if we had once defined ourselves by something then how can we lose contact with it? Wouldn't we then no longer be ourselves?

Two Years Later...

Is the problem in definitions or is it in things and objects? Or is it just a fucked amalgam of both? For the sake of absurdity I vote "Fucked Amalgam". Which I could argue is the base for every issue in the world, but I certainly digress.

Definitions are at the root of the problem. Take the punk rock idea for example. When one defines oneself as punk rock does one become inherently "punk"? Or does the purchase and gathering of punk objects create the "punkness" one strives to be? The short circuit is the space between the two and where we begin to see simultaneously the issue and the solution [thank you Slavoj Zizek for the use of the term short circuit]



[Video from the movie Zizek! completely unrelated to what I am talking about but entertaining]

The short circuit being the object before the definition or the definition before the object? If the object/objects exist prior to the definition then it is very possible to lose touch with what/who you were defined by. This is achieved by simply not using or relating to the objects you previously used. I guess this is what happens when someone gets a makeover. It is not as if you become someone else, you just get new objects and an orientation to those objects by being made over. This arrangement is essentially how I see modern consumerism to work: objects first definition second, helped along by marketing.

If the second premise is enacted then the perspective of the system will change. The anchor of the second premise becomes a base-level definition of the individual unchanged by the object. If this anchor is set the use of objects and subsequent definition based on them is not possible or there is at least some sort of pretension that betrays the anchor. For example I can say: hello I am Paul and I like punk rock. I am Paul prior to and after the liking of punk rock. There is a raw me-ness that is unchangeable. However my experience of punk rock is subjective and changeable.

Obversely if I were to say: I like punk rock, I am Paul. This states that punk rock is objective prior to my essence as Paul. This version of the problem is what modern marketing wants us to think. This is the "what do you do?" question that people will ask you when you meet them. If one says "I am a financial analyst" then it can be assumed that you have the essence of one. When confronted with this question I want to say "what don't I do" however people don't seem to like being answered with a question. If you latch on to the essence of what you do or what you think of yourself as being then it is very easy to lose touch with what you have been. This essence of punk rock or financial analyst is what becomes you and if you're not careful destroys the anchor of who you are.

In conclusion it would seem that it is necessary to never be in touch and at the same time lose touch of everything. If you see me on the street and ask me what I do, I will reply with "what don't I do?" My goal of being myself is to become nothing.

Whats age again? When you say stuff i think things...

Part I.

A few week ago a young woman came into my store she was dressed somewhat plain, like you would expect a librarian to be. She had a somewhat lost and confused look on her face. I offered assistance and found that she was shopping for her 12 year old nephew. Simple circumstances i can remember the general mentality of a 12 year old skateboarder easy quick sale for the woman and for myself.

This isn't out of the ordinary by any means but what sets this apart from other similar exchanges that i have had with people is that the young woman proclaimed that "I am so out of place in here and feel like I have lost touch." Still not that strange I do have many grandparents that come in under the exact circumstances with the same feelings. After the young woman said what she had said I asked her what he age was? She replied 30. I assured her that she was not out of place or possibly out of touch since I was 26 going on 27. We chuckled and she went on her way.

This situation however stuck with me: What is losing touch? How does one lose touch? Why does it happen? Can it be avoided?

The simple answer to the first question is the we simply grow up. We abandon our connection to youthful trends, interests and ideologies for those of the "grown-up" world. I think that most people would agree with me that this could be agreed upon as a suitable definition. Without getting too complicated we will use this definition, we could after all argue the idea of the "grown-up" world.

The blatantly obvious answer to question two is we get older. This shit happens to the best of us. I'm 27 don't know how the hell i got there but i did. Simple add age + "grown-up" world = lost touch.

Question three is where the fun starts. Why do we lose touch? We abandon connection and we age. Not so fast bucko we are not simple as that. These two are connected but we must deconstruct the reasons behind abandoning connection because age just happens and is pretty much an arbitrary number.

Deconstruction fun comes now: So say that in our adolescence we like punk rock and we spend hours listening to all the punk rock that we can get our hands on, we adopt political and social views that are in line with our favorite bands. we dress punk and so on. Essentially we define ourselves from within the definition of what punk is: we are punk. Then one day we grow up and abandon all of this for the life of a doctor or a financial analyst and we lose touch. This happens every day: go to a used record store on the right day and you can see this happen in front of your eyes.

Now that "former punk" current "financial analyst" has a conversation with his nephew about how his nephew really enjoys the new bad religion but the "financial analyst" can no longer relate to the band and feels that they have in fact lost touch. The "financial analyst" no longer has a connection to punk and it seems alien to him even though at one time he was almost explicitly defined by the idea of punk. So how can we lose touch with something that we used to define ourselves by?

The problem with this situation is that the "financial analyst" has a definition problem. Maybe he was just a "financial analyst" all along and never actually touched his "former punk" self. Did he actually have a connection to punk in the first place? Since: You can't lose touch with what you never touched in the first place.

Connections explored in the next part.

The New Season Of The Real World Is On!!!!

Creating a blog seems like a strange post-modern endeavor.

Well interweb of connectivity here is my first blog entry. One must excuse my lack of punctuation and sentence structure, this is meant and a stream of consciousness exercise. This is catharsis, not a graduate level thesis.

But what does the act or blogging say about us?

1. Man it is way cool that we control our own narrative and can create meaning and purpose out or experiences?

2. Holy shit we are narcissistic fucks and actually think someone gives a shit about our lives enough to read about them?

3. Damn we have lost all actual human connection with each other and only want to be spectators at life by reading about peoples existences instead of forging our own.

4. Who fucking cares? The new season of the Real World is on?

Well I think the realistic answer is number 4.

There really is no point to this and ultimately who cares?

Beyond that I think the very statement of "The new season of the Real World is on" says more about modern culture than any 10 dollar college words could say. Just the implicit irony in saying "The new season of the Real World is on" is sad enough.

So with that we begin our journey into whatever my "new season of the real world" might be.