Odjak

What if we celebrated all the things we don’t have?

I am sure we will be as happy listing what we don’t want to have as what we want to have.

I came up with a few items. You may be inspired to continue.

Illness, war in your city or town, all sorts of natural disasters, famine, debt, worries, stress, chaotic work situation, bad boss, husband or wife you can’t live with, prison sentence, tax audit, untrustworthy friends, bad luck, bad eye, envy, bad music, bad government, fear, greed, anger, pride, hope…

A cross to bear.

“If I were not a physicist, I would probably be a musician. I often think in music. I live my daydreams in music. I see my life in terms of music.
… I get most joy in life out of music.”
Albert Einstein

****

“I should account as the foremost musician one who knew only the sadness of the most profound happiness, and no other sadness at all.”
Friedrich Nietzsche

In anything we do with deep commitment we come face to face with self-censure.

Am I going too far? Should I go further? Am I in a delirium?

Am I going through a self-aggrandizing or self-loathing trip?

What will I think of myself tomorrow? What I think others will think of me tomorrow?

Will others like my work? Will they like me? Am I going to be ridiculed?

In all arts, sciences, and entrepreneurial endeavors, those who dare to break a layer of self-censure get a tiny bit closer to finding something real.

But self-censure has onionskins. We need to lift each layer one by one, day after day.

Doing so, we develop skills both in lifting the skins and in recognizing what we see underneath.

Then, there are those who make “critiquing” their life profession. Art critics, movie critics, music critics, literature critics, homework critics, you name it. Critics critique. That’s their work. They either worship or condemn other people’s work. Their opinions become the opinions adopted by the people who lack opinion.

Although we are inclined to, let’s not think that “critical opinion” is an objective evaluation of what we do. Critical opinion is an unreliable tool for the betterment of our work. It changes over time. Most of the worshiped artists and scientists of today have been criticized harshly, or ignored entirely at one time. The reverse is true too. How many movies will survive the next 10 years?

Critical opinion (positive or negative) becomes self-censure when we interiorize it and allow it to influence what we do.

Challenge self-censure daily.

Christianity gave Eros poison to drink; he did not die of it but degenerated into vice.
Friedrich Nietzsche

All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Friedrich Nietzsche

Two simple words: angel and sex.

It is unimaginable how much weight they carry.

Just look up on the internet and you will be struck by the intensity of their presence.

These words are loaded!

Had I added the name Freud in this mix, it would have become explosive.

You wouldn’t be allowed to take an airplane with these three words.

Searching for the origin of angels, I came across the ancient religion of Zoroastrianism:

The Good Religion.

“Worship the fire- The Sun.
Have Good Thoughts
Use Good Words
Do Good Deeds”

The rest is superfluous.

I had a sudden revelation during my walk.

In French, they say “angels don’t have sex” (les anges n’ont pas de sexe).

I realized I believe they do. Angels do have sex.

Don’t ask me why or how, I won’t be able to explain it. At least not yet.

But mark my words, Angels do have sex.

The invasion of Iraq started on March 18, 2003. At that time

the Dow Jones Average was at 7500, today it’s at 12270 (up 63%)

NASDAQ was at 1400, today it’s at 2430 (up 73%)

S&P500 was at 800, today it’s at 1400 (up 75%)

I wonder how much of the rise in stock markets world-wide is due to the war.

This news article is from bbc online:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6211250.stm

Excerpts from the “World Institute for Development Economics Research at the UN University” report:

The richest 2% of adults in the world own more than half of all household wealth.

The poorer half of the world’s population own barely 1% of global wealth.

What they mean by wealth in this study is what people own, less what they owe – their debts. The assets include land, buildings, animals and financial assets.

Wealth is heavily concentrated in North America, Europe and some countries in the Asia Pacific region, such as Japan and Australia.

These countries account for 90% of household wealth.

The study also finds that inequality is sharper in wealth than in annual income.

And it uncovers some striking differences in the types of assets that dominate in different countries.

In less developed nations, land and farm assets are more important, reflecting the greater importance of agriculture in those economies.

In richer nations, landowners can afford not to farm their properties.

In addition, the report says the weighting is the result of “immature” financial institutions, which make it much harder for people to have savings accounts or shares.

======================================================
In contrast, some citizens of the rich countries have more debt than assets – making them, the report says, among the poorest in the world in terms of household wealth.
======================================================

However, they are presumably better off in terms of what they consume than many people in developing countries.

Why does it matter? Because wealth serves as insurance against times when income tends to fall, such as unemployment, sickness or old age.

It is also a source of finance for small businesses, a particularly important point since it is the countries with lower levels of personal wealth which also tend to have weaker financial systems without the funds, ability or inclination to lend to small firms.

One of the authors, Professor Anthony Shorrocks, says it does draw attention to the importance of enhancing banking systems in developing countries to help generate the funds for business investment.

The following exerpt is from my favorite screenwriting book “Writing Great Screenplays for Film and TV” by Dona Cooper.

“Humans don’t experience emotions in isolation, but in context or juxtaposition with other emotional states. Therefore, knowing what emotional state you (the writer) ultimatley want your audience to have can help you develop a sense of what other emotional states you will need to provoke in them for them to experience your (the story’s) dramatic center.”

“For exemple, betrayal is a painful emotional state, and can therfore be quite dramatic. However, the actual moment of betreyal is only the end result of a series of previous emotional states, such as the pleasure of getting to know someone new, developing a friendship with that person, thinking that the person is trustworthy, taking a big chance with that person, and then finding yourself betrayed.”

I wonder how many stories an average person is exposed to each and every day?

News, ads, TV shows, films, song lyrics, political speeches…

How many times a day our emotional sphere is being invaded by the able and not so able storytellers, screenwriters, salesmen?

Wouldn’t you call this living in a state of continious mind f…?