I hold “this” in my hand and I “feel” it to be what it is. Should I hand “this” to you, you too would “feel” it. What is it that we feel? We may note the objective nature of that which the object is comprised of or the hard or soft nature that we “feel,” however, what do we “feel” about that which we cannot hold or tell of in true form? True from being a form only relative to us when association is found and formed to bring us to a point where the “feeling” is intangible. It is a place we cannot point to nor transfer “this feeling” as there is no locale nor tangibility. Expression of such may be relayed to others via dialogue/correspondence, but the exact nature of “this feeling” is limited to self. ~ Arachne ~ December 26, 2010 @ 8:47 p.m. EST.
Inspired by Ludwig Wittgenstein
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Love/Hate~ (not posted)
Love/Hate is only divided by a fine line. A line so thin that the passion of each is strong enough to cause one to kill. In my personal opinion, hate can’t be maintained at a high level as it will consume the hater or will cause the hater to consume the one they hate via murder (premeditation).
Those that consider themselves a hater of a specific race cannot experience the pure type of hate that exists next to love. Actually, a racist could hate their brother, father, mother, sister, wife, or husband much more easily than a complete stranger. Perhaps a racists takes out his/her hostilities on strangers because they really want to kick the shit out of or kill someone they know (redirected anger).
Regardless of whom it is that we love, we know them or believe that we do. We are also close to them in some form and are thus familiar enough to cause the most damage. It comes as no coincidence after a murder those closest to the victim are subject to scrutiny. Sure it could be a premeditated event, but it could also be a crime of passion done in the heat of the moment: rage (crime of passion/manslaughter).
Usually, murder victims are killed by someone they know. Oh, this is not to say that murder does not occur to individuals that know each other not. It does happen. Look at serial killers for instance. They have no familiarity with their victims and because there is no connection save for the modus operandi, the murderer keeps on ticking until he/she makes a mistake. The same cannot be said about those who know each other as their business is known by someone. The taste of hate is not pleasant and I am glad that it is brief for me at least. ~ Maggie ~ December 14, 2010 @ 10:36 p.m. EST
Those that consider themselves a hater of a specific race cannot experience the pure type of hate that exists next to love. Actually, a racist could hate their brother, father, mother, sister, wife, or husband much more easily than a complete stranger. Perhaps a racists takes out his/her hostilities on strangers because they really want to kick the shit out of or kill someone they know (redirected anger).
Regardless of whom it is that we love, we know them or believe that we do. We are also close to them in some form and are thus familiar enough to cause the most damage. It comes as no coincidence after a murder those closest to the victim are subject to scrutiny. Sure it could be a premeditated event, but it could also be a crime of passion done in the heat of the moment: rage (crime of passion/manslaughter).
Usually, murder victims are killed by someone they know. Oh, this is not to say that murder does not occur to individuals that know each other not. It does happen. Look at serial killers for instance. They have no familiarity with their victims and because there is no connection save for the modus operandi, the murderer keeps on ticking until he/she makes a mistake. The same cannot be said about those who know each other as their business is known by someone. The taste of hate is not pleasant and I am glad that it is brief for me at least. ~ Maggie ~ December 14, 2010 @ 10:36 p.m. EST
Monday, December 13, 2010
The Marking~
I marked the building with Pentad on each column. Pentad might be thought of as a pentacle which it could be, but at the same time, in simple form, it is five (5). Imagine how a die looks when thrown to reveal 5. Marked like dice were they. Double were these to bring about Decad which equates to ten (10), but in simple form is Monad or ONE (1). Should one decide to look at Decad’s placeholder Uroborus (which is 0 (zero)), we see no beginning and no end. Could the same be said about Monad which is virtual in it point having neither volume, area, nor length? With each marking came my spoken words of intent. Burned were these marks whose ashes took time to fall away. Yet they held fast until I could revisit them for remarking my intent. Remarkable!
The remarking of intent:
Remarking can also be used in a two fold manner if looking at the prefix of “re” which means “again” in Latin. It would mean that I have marked it again. However, it also means “a comment” or “the act of noticing” which stems from the French remarquer “note again.” As for note itself, that too bears its form from the Latin word “nota” which means “a mark” and “notare” which means “to mark.” This does sound Uroborus in nature does it not? In this instance of Uroborus, my meaning is that of ad infinitum or circular in nature.
No longer do I leave my mark in such a fashion as I believe that I have obtained that which I had made my mark for. Might I add that the art of obtaining does not necessarily mean the art of possessing. For all intents and purposes, the meaning would be "established" that which I sought to "establish." ~ Arachne ~ December 13, 2010 @ 5:54 p.m. EST
Post Script: As each Pentad was separated by space, they held their own despite their duplication.
The remarking of intent:
Remarking can also be used in a two fold manner if looking at the prefix of “re” which means “again” in Latin. It would mean that I have marked it again. However, it also means “a comment” or “the act of noticing” which stems from the French remarquer “note again.” As for note itself, that too bears its form from the Latin word “nota” which means “a mark” and “notare” which means “to mark.” This does sound Uroborus in nature does it not? In this instance of Uroborus, my meaning is that of ad infinitum or circular in nature.
No longer do I leave my mark in such a fashion as I believe that I have obtained that which I had made my mark for. Might I add that the art of obtaining does not necessarily mean the art of possessing. For all intents and purposes, the meaning would be "established" that which I sought to "establish." ~ Arachne ~ December 13, 2010 @ 5:54 p.m. EST
Post Script: As each Pentad was separated by space, they held their own despite their duplication.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)