what to say...?

It's Spreading Like... Pogs!! Or Tickle-me-Elmo!!

2005-11-29T01:53:00.000-08:00

You can see it on the streets! At school! Within your group of friends! Even in your own home!! "Wow, Joanna, a new trend?? I did hear that edible underwear is finally making a comeback..." you say. No!! I speak of something even more fascinating, more far-reaching than chewy underroos. Should I say it? Do I dare risk putting forth an opinion?? It's a fear of action! And it's coming to a lifestyle near you. Now, I understand there might seem to be piles of reasons to huddle in a corner of the world in the fetal position, shunning life. In order to avoid getting up, we list off our phobias, our fears of consequences, our worries about responsibility, our social anxieties. We immobilize ourselves with thoughts of being inadequately prepared for all these hardships, for the scary nature of (screeeeeeaaaammmmm!!!) real life. My question to this, though: how might one go about becoming more adequately prepared, if not through practice? Really, failure isn't such a big deal, given the right attitude. But success? That is a big deal. Sartre believed that "man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself," a statement both calling for the abandonment of these excuses as well as the acceptance of responsibility for one's own self-confidence issues. The question is, after all: which is more embarrassing and fear-worthy? Trying and oops, failing... or rather being so detrimentally self-conscious that you don't even get that far...

Women need to roar LOUDER

2005-11-28T22:05:00.000-08:00

And it hits me. De Beauvoir's words spill off the pages, collect in my hands, and transform into angry hot lava fury all over myself and the world as I know it. Why? Because what she says rings true: "[Woman] is defined and differentiated with reference to man... she is the incidental, the inessential." Though in terms of the use of language, this argument is fairly obvious (the saying 'man and wife' reflecting, respectively, self-evident and dependent identities), my personal experiences with this have perhaps been of a more subtle nature. I possess my father's last name, and not my mother's. I am called masculine (or lesbian) if I decide to have hairy legs for a while, suggesting that the quality can belong only to a man. I have even recently been asked why (in the world!! Gasp!!) I don't have a boyfriend, as though I am missing some critical chunk of my identity (though I'm fairly sure that men are not asked the same question about girlfriends). The problem, however, is that the subtle nature of these experiences means they are mistakenly thought to lack any real importance... in fact, this is probably also the case for the resulting actions taken by today's feminists. It seems to me that maybe part of the problem with the women's movement is the failure to take drastic steps, to draw serious attention, likely as a result of the historically softspoken nature of females in society. Because it's subtle, and because we're quiet, we aren't being heard. But is this an excuse to fail, or a reason to progress?? Mental note to feminists, and hear me on this one: need to roar LOUDER!!

Footnote a la shameless promotion: for those interested in seeing a fantastic group of women who refuse to be defined as inessential, please come to UBC's production of The Vagina Monologues in late February of 2006. Oh, will we have a show for you...

The nothing nothings, as nothing often does....

2005-10-24T21:01:00.000-07:00

If nothing nihilates, what does something do? That is, if Heidegger is right to suggest that the concept of the Nothing is so daunting, so all-encompassing, that it creates a circular thought-pattern of realizing the void of our existence over and over again to the point of thinking ourselves perpetually homeless in our own worlds and minds.......... then what might we gain from considering the not-Nothing... the something? Arguably, this may be a Pascal's approach to the world; perhaps one who considers something is merely in search for diversion from our true placelessness. Or!! Here's a thought (and yes, it is something... so perhaps I am biased already towards the possibilities of this other option....): what if something opposes nihilation? That is, what if something... somethings?? If considering the Nothing leads in a downward spiral, perhaps considering the Something will lead to a thought-pattern that works its way up from one something to another, in the ultimate direction of realizing the saturation of meaning in our existence. Although it is still likely to be overwhelming, in the sense of being able to spiral endlessly from one thought to another, I must admit... it sounds rather rewarding!! Between falling into the void of the Nothing, and the height of the Something, it seems to me that thoughts upon thoughts about the things that ARE tangible, that ARE... something... may be the path towards a less empty sense of existence. Perhaps even a positive one! And in that respect... kind of makes these blog entries seem worthwhile, after all!!

Fight!! Fight!! Fight!! Fight!!

2005-10-24T17:16:00.000-07:00

Heidegger the philosopher says: science neglects the Nothing. Joanna the scientist says: wait a minute!! Science never did any such thing!! Science works to answer all, science is the triumph of the collective social mind, science is the light in our otherwise dark and tangled path through the confusion of.... oh, wait. Yes, science probably did neglect the Nothing... (I slowly place my foot into my mouth... and furrow my brow for pondering purposes). Though it is not necessarily the case that science neglects philosophy (disbelievers ought to seek out Hennings, MWF, and see what relativity does for one's view of the world), it may often be true that science puffs its chest towards the Nothing. A subject worth belittling, from the point of view of a whitecoat with a timer in hand. One, two, three seconds of Nothing... sound like a worthwhile scientific journal to you? If science has the goal of empirical measurements or even simple mathematical deduction relating to some observation, it may not be surprising if a scientist deems an experiment about something more worthy than one about nothing. But this is not to suggest the Nothing is not worthwhile philosophically, or that science is better than philosophy. It is, however, to suggest that Heidegger ought not forget the entire point of science: to show something, anything, so that in our place among a vast and swirling existence brimming with things we don't understand... at least we can have just that. Yes, folks, that's right... even science can be humble, too.

J & K Love Affair: Part 1 (read first)

2005-09-26T01:29:00.000-07:00

So one tends to hope they are the hard-to-crack type, a tough cookie whose sweet goodness is reserved for only the most intimate, long-term-type woos… but alas!!! Only page 2 and I think Kierkegaard may have just gotten to second base with me. He speaks of his search for singular truth in such a way that suddenly, my skepticism, my cynicism, my entire opinionless, indecisive approach is somehow validated. And we’ve only known each other five minutes. It’s as though question marks are the new wisdom, and ‘aimlessness’ is a direction after all. Forget solid stances (on weak ground); graceful strides through wide S-curves and abrupt switch-backs are far more important. Rejoice!! A 3 a.m. bike ride (with no helmet!!) proves this to be true. I can choose. I can choose to think. Or, better yet, I can choose to think about things and put off choosing due to insufficient evidence… and that’s okay too.

J & K Love Affair: Part 2

2005-09-26T01:26:00.000-07:00

But wait!! The bike ride’s finished, and I’m back to the book, Kierkegaard’s hand still in mine. When all at once, a deep intellectual connection becomes nothing more than two ten-year-olds in puppy-love. It dawns on me that I’ve been blinded by poetry and appeal, while telling my friends it was the support system I’ve been seeking. Wrong!! He says little I haven’t thought before, muscled up the strength to tell myself during my lowest moments. I know I can claim my thoughts to be a work-in-progress. I know my opinionlessness, my S-curves, are fabulous entities. So what’s the need for my words in someone else’s voice? That certainly isn’t the individual thinking I strive for, he promotes. That isn’t choosing to analyze. That’s just hypocrisy!! And so, the love affair between him and I must end its brief flame, as I venture forth into independence-land. Besides, it’s the way K would have wanted it…