re: mh, navel gazing stuff
Again, my analogy is;
I have been trained that if I strive to be (or if I am, my upbringing was real big on the idea of making it to the top through innate virtues) X Y and Z and do A B and C, then 1 2 and 3 will happen, when in reality is more like;
I am X and Y but maybe also J instead, I can maybe do B but don't get to do C and as a result do H instead, and external events L M and O happen, which means that maybe I get 1 and 2, but only for a short time, or maybe I get 3 and that gives me enough confidence to do K which leads to other stuff, and maybe I wind up at 1, 15, and 23 instead.
re: mh, navel gazing stuff
While up last night I ran into art by someone about their mother, and how their mother's similarities and age reassure them that things can work out for them. I now feel a certain amount of my personality - anyone's personality - is to say "I am different from you," which is something familiar to me from art. I have to say at some level, no I don't draw like Iain McCaig or Claire Wendling, I draw like me instead, but that is all right too.
Similarities are a passive assurance that I'm on the right track (I figured this out by studying my heroes and I trust it's worthwhile) so differences get really caught up with how this could be the WRONG direction. Driven home by being separated off to be bullied; driven home by catastrophizing; driven home by being handed dogmatism; worst of all, being driven home by being taught I am innately stupid, unlikable, evil, incompetent, ugly, etc SUCH THAT any different route I might take is doomed to failure.
And yet of course life isn't a toggle switch, again, there's no guarantee that if I zig instead of zag, wonderful friends and fabulous riches will follow. One example that comes to mind, when I found a list of Jewish Olympians and a not small number of them went from being literally the best athletes in the world to dying as traumatized prisoners in the 30s and 40s. Etc etc.
mh, navel gazing stuff
was thinking about the first noble truth
Essentially change will happen no matter what. Suffering will happen no matter what. I *am* going to age and die, my body *will* be or become what I would rather it not, a lot of both positive events and negative in my life would occur no matter what, because they're outside anything I control. My brain will connect up those two things to yield "change will bring suffering," the root of conservatism, which I know doesn't work on an external level far more than I know this is true internally.
Except some change "is supposed to" work, because of investment in ego. I would like to believe that I am good, smart, not a complete hack artist, etc, and that tries to make sense out of my effort and active suffering by saying it pays off.
For both a highly materialistic and highly moralistic society "pays off" is supposed to mean "considered good therefore valued fiscally therefore able to enjoy a high standard of living including independence." And yet as two examples, my expensive but never employed college education paid off in allowing me to build a much fuller personal life as well as be fairly happy despite the massive amount of depressive self-loathing I faced, those first years in Ann Arbor. My drawing has at best made me only a little money and recognition, but has also saved my life and I feel helped deal with PTSD at a physical level, given the connection of memory-making and spatial awareness.
related; I'd really recommend Donny Darko to anyone younger wondering what the 80s were like.
It really captures what the decade was like; something HORRIBLE is looming on the horizon, in fact horrible stuff is happening RIGHT FUCKING NOW, but the adult world doesn't want to even vaguely acknowledge anything bad or for that matter your needs (say, to get help for depression or be safe from bullies), instead you're supposed to cheer for the football team, praise Jesus, don't do drugs, enlist.
Thinking about nationalism in addressing WWII history while on the toilet
Tangent from reading about British aircraft.
Ultimately, the Allies won because (despite instances of American/British/Soviet bravery, strategic brilliance, and incredibly good designs) the biggest contributions of all three nations were essentially unexciting. The USA contributed overwhelming logistics from factories and oilfields which weren't bombed; the USSR was simply so *large* that with any logistical support whatsoever it could grind down a Wehrmacht successful in going after smaller countries; simply by being *there*, Britain pulled German and Italian energy that would otherwise be directed eastwards, and provided a valuable staging ground later in the war.
This is not something that gets your country into the history books for brave, tough military men commanded by legit geniuses and supplied with fantastic equipment. Especially since afterwards the USA and USSR are trying to indoctrinate kids while they build empires abroad, and Britain's dealing with the national embarrassment of no longer being an empire. (The first step, before you get to embarrassment of empire being not actually a good idea.)
This transfers undue attention to the Pacific theater for Brits (Slim and Wingate were legitimately brilliant) and Americans (tough Marines, Nimitz's incredible abilities, awesome designs like the Superfortress and F4U, without having to credit Brits, Aussies, Chinese or Sovs). Throw in subtle racism too if you're American (remember, but as soon as Asians got involved, the same rightwingers who were trying to keep us *out* of a war were suddenly on board).
"what your favorite composer says about your personality"
my favorite composer is Schostakovich, a man who HATED the regime he was obligated to work for with an incredible competency, who obviously would rather have been left alone to make his own stuff, sympathized with Jews and Hungarians as victims of the regime, and who was a neurotic enough wreck to smoke himself to death. I dunno, you tell me what that says?
"inside you are two game masters," said the grognard. "One keeps PCs mostly human; monsters remain quasi mythical, as the adventurers move further from the known medieval world into the cthonic unknown. The other runs the fantasy world as a cosmopolitan place where bullywugs, orc, tabaxi and aarakocra PCs rub elbows with more conventional elves and dwarves."
"Which one of them runs the game?" asked the new player.
"The one you brought pizza," was the reply.
Lots of random gunk, but some drawings and cooking talk too. Obsesses about DnD and related topics. Left-leaning/profoundly frustrated politics. Black lives matter; trans rights are human rights.
Occasionally NSFW art and discussion, please do follow if you're 18+.