Treatise on Human Potential Part I: Language

Shortly after writing this, I, like many others, will face a committee in an attempt to justify myself through the imperfections of human language. Even now, as I type this, there is a futility that pervades trying to express the contents of my mind. Nonetheless, I shall try in vain to share my own perception, to add to our genetic oversoul. I say this not with pessimism but rather with an awareness of the limited ability of language. Language, in this case, refers solely to the sharing of experience and perception, not the mere scientific transfer of data to a different mental environment. But in the consideration of brevity*, I will describe these flaws from an Aristotelian standpoint; there are three points where language fails: the message, the sender, and the receiver.
To understand the message:
Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
Consider that the pipe that inspired his painting represents the human experience and the pipe within the painting a flood of transcripts, essays, and interviews. Clearly, even the best representations through language can only go so far to express whatever they copy. While this is not to say imitations do not hold their own sort of weight, language, as an imitation, can never fully match its inspiration.
To understand the sender and the receiver:
It is most important to know the discrepancy of perception. In other words, "is your blue my blue?" Just as one can wonder if colors are perceived the same way, other forms of language must be scrutinized. For example, the connotation of every word changes in the minds of each person, based on a number of psychological factors, including the influence of experience that affects the positioning of dendrites.
So what keeps us from drawing the conclusion that language is useless, given that it never succeeds? Language does indeed succeed in trying, in moving, and in storing the information and passion that defines the pursuit of purpose. It is our only tool. Without language, there is no human understanding...
*That is irony.

Heroic journey

Today, for the sixth time, I was told to "suck it up". The first five times, I arrived at false conclusions, believing that I had to accept that:
A. I'm inferior to Derek or Daniel in every conceivable way.
B. I was too innocent.
C. this is a trivial problem.
D. there is a certain order to society that I cannot break.
E. I'm obsessed with attention... so yes, I did consider it.
Today, I've realized that each conclusion has some merit, but none of them is really correct. Let me go through them:
A-Well, yes, I am physically inferior to them in both strength and looks. No, I am not intellectually inferior to them.
B-Yes, I was a little naïve in thinking I ever had a chance and in arriving at extremist conclusions, but no, I have a matter of self-awareness that exceeds most high school students.
C-This is not. It was important to me. It is to many people, but I perceive it as a grave issue.
D-Yes, white girl-asian boy is improbably. No, it is not impossible (or at least later on in life). And yes, people do function a certain way in society, falling for the more attractive or using women as trophies, but no, they either outgrow their stupidity after high school or die trying to keep it.
E-Yes, I wanted attention. I wanted someone on my side because I felt as though the world was mounting against me. No, I don't enjoy being treated in a pitiful way because it only reconfirms my pathetic state.
My real problem was wanting to let such a fantasy define me. I was angry at them mostly because they could easily be defined by their fantasies. They succeeded. But people do have value at birth. For a while, I've thought that people just make their own value. Indeed, I still think one can have more value than another by making one's life, but each person does have value at birth. Ambitions don't count for anything; it's success and the ability to achieve it. To cure myself, I guess I need to find my identity.
Before I begin, let me justify myself. I do have a matter of self-awareness uncommon at my age. I just don't know enough about myself to continue life. Why? Because I'm complex both intellectually and emotionally... yes, like a woman.

So let's start.
My name is not Martin Flanagan. I need to accept my real name.
I am Chinese. No matter how hard I try, I cannot will my hair to be blond, my eyes to be blue, my height to be great, or my anaemic body to be strong. This was pretty important for a lot of my life so I put it closer to the top. I have been using it as an excuse with every failed relationship I've known. I thought I was just not ready for it, but actually I was still more ready than most people.
I have a pale, anaemic body and I suck at literary thought.
I am so damn ambitious. I am more ambitious than my Asian parents ever intended.

Fuck, I hate myself. Let me continue later.

The Nightmare

Oh who cares about my reputation anymore?

Good morning.
I couldn't tell. It could be midnight or dawn but I couldn't tell. Above, a single lamp hovered precariously between the interviewer and myself. Its metallic cover reminded me of the apparatus people put on dogs who chew too much on themselves. As I looked around, I noticed men whose cold bodies were just beyond illumination, just in the domain of darkness. I probably would never have seen them if it were not for the guns they held that reflected the minimal light. I was so caught up in the description that I almost zoned out when the interviewer asked me the first question.
-you so interested in our university?
I stuttered out a few words before gaining some momentum. Faster and faster I could speak, knowing that I could see the approval of correct answers in the eyes of that old man.
Island game. Argentina, Boy Scouts, leadership camp.
...so tell me about any girlfriends, or boyfriends, that you've had.
Shit. But yes, something clicked.
Why should such an answer matter? Would it mean the difference between acceptance or rejection? I can say I've had friends who are girls. I can say I'm a heterosexual male who's definitely felt emotion... but I don't think I've been given the proper circumstances to cultivate such relationships. I'd say that I was looking for something more profound than what high school could ever give me.
It was then that I saw him quickly scratch down some notes.
You are excused.
I thanked him, but he didn't shake my hand.
I opened the door as the old man sat still in his chair. The mysterious guards seemed to vanish.
Upon opening the door, I was engulfed in a surge of light. When my eyes adjusted, all I could see was Daniel, smiling, and crowds coming to congratulate him.

I'll begin with some symbol analysis.
The light: The light is "muzzled" and fails to illuminate very much. It hangs between myself and the interviewer, suggesting that both of us are "left in the dark". He may be uninformed about who I am, so it is my responsibility to try to communicate with him. Still, college decisions might be more random than I give them credit for. Having a muzzle suggests a protective measure, as enlightenment may be seen as a danger or a threat.
The guards: This redefines that danger. I notice their guns above everything else, meaning that these fears are mostly threat and little else. Yet at the end, they disappear when I leave. The fear is not real, or if it is, it only exists as long as I am succeeding. It reassures me that I'm on the right path. Failure causes them to disappear.
The interview: Most people wouldn't get this, but it very much matches the way I do interviews in Spanish class. While I am usually competent, fear may hinder me.
The question: Here is one of my greatest fears. It is the most absurd idea to ever fear this, but it reflects on how much value I put into certain... objectives. I fear that these past incidents may jeopardize my chances with universities.
The crowd: I feel like the whole world is on his side. I fear that everyone is conspiring against me or for him. I feel like she's just a novelty to everyone. Whether she means more to him, people are so obsessed with this dollhouse relationship that they go out of their way to play with them.

Next, I will notice external patterns.
I cry in my sleep sometimes. Puddles sometimes form on the books that I sleep on. I wake up in a state of anger, my head throbbing with blood while my peripheral vision is severely limited. I utter some words that I remember and jot down.
Schutzstaffel.
I love you.
I'd give you anything short of my future.
The one thing I couldn't give you was probably why you chose him.
I want to go home and go to sleep. (What? I say this while laying on my bed.)
[Scream]
Go to hell.
What a douchebag.
Just make it 'til 5.
A-check, B-check, C-check...
Logic.
unhappybracketsmiley
These phrases are all based on academic and emotional desires. I prioritize emotion when I fail to satisfy emotion because I trust that my grades are more likely to stay afloat.

I can't lower my standards for relationships. Every reincarnation of the "immortal she" from this point on must create stronger emotions than ever before. Certainly, I'd just suffer more after this. But to compromise is to let them win.

I know y'all don't understand this. But in my mind, it flows like clockwork.

A Critique of American Fundamentalism

Let me start at the abstract. In America, Christian morals have dominated the political scene. In a large country greatly obsessed with being the most advanced, avant-garde society on earth, we have placed the Bible right next to our Constitution. We are the City on a Hill. But being one of the first countries to have a constitution, our society has been greatly based on interpretation of dominating literature. Consider The Verdict, a 1982 film about a trial. One of the issues that arises is the validity of the law. Especially in America, justice becomes more than just a set of values; it becomes volumes of numbered codes. Often, "upholding justice" becomes a matter of reading a book. But before I get into a critique of the legal system, let me bring this to the topic of Fundamentalism.
Fundamentalism is a literal interpretation of the Bible. For many, it is understandable why this is so appealing. America, of course, exists on Earth, a temporal realm infinitely insignificant next to Heaven. Obviously, there's good reason to do what Jesus said to seek eternal life. But like the "blue laws" of United States law, the Bible has a number of trivial rules like never wearing two types of cloth on the same day. Christianity, according to the Catholic authority of Los Angeles, is an expansionist religion, even more than Islam. So why do we never see people picketing "God hates zippers"? It seems like it would be easier to change fashion than to change, say, a person's sexual orientation, right? Thus true Fundamentalists are limited to a only a handful of Christians in America, those that don't really get a lot of publicity because they just look insane. Most cannot claim fundamentalism as justification for various forms of religious extremism or discrimination. In fact, I've never known of any real Fundamentalist activity in America.
Another problem behind fundamentalism for an expansionist religion is that it is detrimental to social morality. Morality must be defined by the "right" choices made freely, not just those bound by the laws. Just as Antigone fights the law to honor her brother, people must make their own decisions to be truly "moral". Morality cannot stem from Fundamentalism penetrating the United States system. Yet Christian fanatics not unlike suicide bombers in the Middle East are slowly gaining a voice in our political system. What do they fear if gays can marry? It isn't really morality, but more a loss of political capital. These people only claim fundamentalism as justification for a political power. Morality, as it was justice in The Verdict, is no longer real, but simply defined by words that few can really accept for literal value.

Thus, I propose the following:
A shift in the American legal system. It cannot be denied that government and law are tied closely together. To uphold morality and general sanity, we must rid politics and the bills produced of religious fanaticism. We must begin at the passing of health care. Doing so shall weaken the political capital of Fundamentalists who are currently dominating the Right. Once they fall, America will return an Edenic political scene when the Right was represented by Barry Goldwater's economy. Again, our debates will focus on real issues like the recession or the war in the Middle East or even North Korea. I accept that health care might cause some problems, but that's why it's necessary to pass. With more issues to discuss, relatively trivial matters such as gay rights will return to the hands of the people. In effect, this would allow gays to marry if they wanted because they would only have to find someone to support them rather than fight the government.

I apologize if I offend anyone, but let's really remember the point of our government. I fear it has become so much more than a tool of this nation's preservation. In Henry David Thoreau's discourse on Civil Disobedience, we learned of a fear of government becoming a living thing, something capable of and willing to reproduce itself at the expense of others. In other words, allowing the government to shape morality, as the Fundamentalists want it, is to allow it to destroy our morality just to reproduce itself. Let us welcome back the pastoral image of American politics.

Ibizan Transcendentalism I

First, why Ibiza? Because it's an island filled with posh society. In effect, it's Poly. Oh, it's also home to some house music, which I enjoy.

Point A. Point B. Our existence is very much dependent on connecting those points throughout various dimensions. In other words, ambition. We need ambition to live. Depression, and eventually suicide, is a result of either a perceived or real absence of one of those two points. For some, losing hope (the perception of an infinite gap between A and B) is justification for suicide. For others, a depressing "mid-life crisis" can be brought about by a lack of distance between the two or having only one point. Let me bring this to my first contention:

Humans can never be satisfied in life.

It is the gap that keeps us alive at all. Yin and yang. The opposite, or the absence of one, must be present to allow the existence of the other. Should humans manage to cover every square centimeter of this planet, they should look to the skies in order to avoid stagnation of ambition, which is the real extinction. The desire to do something is the first step to doing it.

Six Euros/La guerra sobre el grirklema

Some of you might recall that, not too long ago, I wrote some frazzled sparks of essays for a "Love is like fire" project (if you could call it that). Like photographs, I have to censor some of my worse work. I've decided to keep the rest of the garbage just to raise my self-esteem and see my progress. Wish me luck.

Hace una semana que estaba en esta isla. Desde el choque de 337. Eso es mi vida.. mi cuento. Hay una persona sobre esta isla que me puede entender. Se llama Ocho, pero a mí me parece una mentira. Él es intelligente y tan amable. Cada día me da unos pescados o otra cosa para comer. En esta isla, tenemos (tienen) un sistema económico establecido por el señor Seis. Pagan "el grirklema" por la comida, el agua, y la vida. No conformo con el sistema. El grirklema es una moneda---

6 tried to make an economic system to avoid power struggles on the island. I don't participate because Grierklem here isn't indicative of strength or usefulness, only social proximity towards 6.

Me parece interesante que Ocho usa el sistema y más que respete a Seis. Ocho no habla mucho, pero puedo saber que Ocho no está contento. Quizás tenga planos de luchar sobre el poder, pero lo dudo. ?Por qué? ?Por qué no pelea? La razón es Siete...