Friday, February 22, 2002
I was so excited about this site when I finally checked it out... like Hotmail only with an audience. WOW. But I haven't written anything all week and it's largely because when I actually get some stuff posted up here I do intend to send the site out to my friends in the hopes that they aren't so sick of my essay-length emails and still find something interesting enough about what I have to say that they might pop in from time to time to see what's new.
But I've spent the whole week censoring myself in anticipation of these people who I will direct to this site, "No, I won't say that in case so-and-so actually reads this," or "Hmmm, I could only talk about that in a general sense because so-and-so might read about it and get upset..."
What a drag.
I mean, what's the point, really, if I spend all my time trying to find the PERFECT thing to say. Guess I set high standards for myself with the name, which ironically only ONE (1) of my friends will get anyway. Okay, maybe two, but probably only one.
So, today's perfect thing to say really not so perfect at all. In fact, it's what I'd call one of my half-cracked theories. Everyone I've talked to today is groggy. It's a Friday, but more importantly it's a wet, um, high-or-low pressure Friday. (I get them mixed up). Anyway, there's a storm today that moved in with gusto yesterday and it seems to have left everyone sort of, well, groggy today. My half-cracked theory is that people are far more affected by barometric pressure than we acknowledge and the really half-cracked part is that I think doctors and scientists KNOW this already, but they don't publically admit it because then it would legitimatize everyone feeling pathetic on overcast days. Instead they just let people think things like "oh, I'm having a bad day".
So, hmmm, why would you want to read that at all? I don't suppose you would. It's not all that interesting except maybe for some insight into my little world of gentle paranoia. But the point is, now it's here, here on the big big internet and I can retrieve it next time I need an example of one of my half-cracked theories.

Friday, February 15, 2002
I started spiralling downward last night some time; I have been trying to tell myself that it's not because of stupid Valentine's Day. Seems so trivial an occasion to feel so hopeless. I sent out a Valentine of sorts - a link to a site called Loveblender that features quotes about love. True love, obsessive love, unrequited love, animal love - every kind of love you could imagine. I think that was the fatal slip that started the spiral - I was reading these quotes from people like Matt Groening and Dan Savage about how love isn't something that has to "work out". It can be ludicrous, poorly-timed, inappropriate, and in bad taste. Getting love "right" isn't necessarily about waiting for exactly the person to bring you eternally fulfilling happiness. It's about spontaneity, the moment, passion, choosing against your "better judgement"... at least all of this was true when I was 18. Now I'm only 27 and already I'm looking for that OTHER kind of love. The one that people tell you is healthy and lasting. The one where you CARE about each other after the romance and passion have subsided. What HAPPENED to me? When did I start prioritizing smart love before fun love? Why did I start blaming passion for failed relationships? And who first wrote those words, "and they lived happily ever after. The End." Did they realize how they would influence an entire civilization that if love doesn't live happily ever after then we all somehow feel we've failed at it? Have we?

Thursday, February 14, 2002
I am working with a friend to create business cards for a new photography business that he is trying to get off the ground. We are working on a logo and he told me he was looking for something abstract. I started thinking about ways to get him to think about himself in an abstract manner; I came up with this.

"In English lit there's a term used for a literary device. Check it out.

Main Entry: syn*ec*do*che
Pronunciation: s&-'nek-d&-(")kE
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, from Greek synekdochE, from syn- + ekdochE sense,
interpretation, from ekdechesthai to receive, understand, from ex from +
dechesthai to receive; akin to Greek dokein to seem good -- more at EX-,
Date: 15th century
: a figure of speech by which a part is put for the whole (as fifty sail
for fifty ships), the whole for a part (as society for high society), the
species for the genus (as cutthroat for assassin), the genus for the
species (as a creature for a man), or the name of the material for the
thing made (as boards for stage)

What part represents your whole?"

It made me stop and think about the same question for myself. What part represents my whole?