in the shower

[telepathiclinks]

i have been thinking more about identity, motives, sincerity, irony, and the like. and the following has been a sort of lightning rod for my thinking

Comments

very thought provoking entry

[pierrecoghil]

i never thought much about that movie ghostworld until this entry cousin. perhaps i shall watch it again and do some thinking.

Re: very thought provoking entry

[telepathiclinks]

i am still not entirely thrilled with this movie, cousin, but if i watch it with this theory in mind, it becomes a little more enjoyable.

[telepathiclinks]

you can't be funky if you haven't got a soul.

[primitives]

just wondering what about salinger..? i lost him in the last part.

[telepathiclinks]

haha, i lost him too. i was thinking it all out rather quickly and it was late, so i thought of adding the salinger connection in a new paragraph, but soon forgot all about it. i think about these ideas of sense of self and sincerity in relation to the glass and caulfield siblings. most notably of course, holden's crusade against phoniness, although the last time someone got too seriously into that, john lennon got shot. also: think of seymour glass and seymour from ghost world. they are both alienated characters who are not so different from each other. seymour glass married that blonde lady who is not on the same level as he is and seymour ghostworld dates that blonde lady who is not on the same level as he is.

kerry vs bush

[anonymous]

I don't approve of Kerry at all. "Anyone But Bush"--should that "anyone" include a candidate who is pro-war? Oy veh. And I really don't understand why radicals are pro-Kerry. Voting for him would be like voting for a face-lift.

---phil

Re: kerry vs bush

[telepathiclinks]

2004 is the year principles fly out the window. admittedly, i was on the "anyone but bush" train for awhile, but in the past few months i have come to my senses. too many people seem to have fallen into the gang mentality that is terribly present in politics. call me an idealist, but i like the idea of going with whoever actually represents my beliefs and ideas. it's depressing that radicals and progressives are bending themselves rather far in order to fit in with this fervent kerry support. however, i am not a nader person either. this goes back a bit too what i meant in this entry about roles. people who are afraid of the omnipresent terrorists run with the republicans, people who are afraid of what bush is going to do next run with the democrats, and people who are "independent thinkers" run with nader; everyone accepts their role automatically. really, what kind of choice is that? two major part guys and the other guy who represents everything else? i think i will have to write in trotsky. a blue jay was just chasing a sparrow

Re: kerry vs bush

[anonymous]

oh! in benicia this may when the redwinged blackbirds were konkareein' for mates all over carquinez strait, i spied one or two of them (so little!) regularly chase ravens away from their territories. woohoo for feisty small winged-ones!

--phil

[telepathiclinks]

transmission received, acknowledged, and destroyed for security purposes, agent code name: pancakes.