SCHIZO TALK / Ivan

[Guest guest]

Hi Ivan,

 

Good to see you like the chatty ones

 

Here is a bit more chat.

 

 

On Mon, 06 Nov 2000 23:09:56 Ivan Frimmel wrote:

>(I): That's one very important realization in life: that different

>people will see you and describe you differently. The question that

>should follow this realization is something like this, especially if

>you (like most of us in our childhood) try to form an opinion about

>yourself on the basis of other people's opinions:

>

>Whose opinion is it, out of the whole wide variety of their differing

>opinions and perceptions, that I am going to accept (or reject, if

>you dare)?

 

Yes, that was a difficult one and one I'm not sure I solved it at all.

But I did find out that people will think whatever they do think about each

other, no matter what you do or say, so you can just as well do and say what you

feel is appropriate and right for yourself at any rate.

 

I did not manage to follow this idea consistently either, but it took some of

the consistency wish away.

And it's a more generous answer to the consistency wish than the wish itself.

 

If you have a perceivement of a person as boorish, or nice, or enlightened or

what have you and get these perceivements strengthened enough over time and in

addition, wish to stay with these perceivements, for various reasons, it's going

to take something for the perceivements to be permanently changed. And most of

the time, I do not have the energy or the time to bother to change or manipulate

these perceptions in others.

 

>(I): Me, too. For a very long time. Trying to be consistent in my

>behaviour, holding on to the idea that I MUST be consistent, logical

>and predictable to myself, for the sake of my own sanity and for the

>sake others, and to be acceptable and lovable.

 

Yes, the loveable idea is a big ingredient in the consistency wish. As I see it,

it revolves around wanting that there is something lovable that does not change

and stays loveable all the time. Others, or me, or perhaps God.

>(I): Hey, Amanda, you finished this chat a bit too quickly. Are you

>perhaps leaving the really important stuff for later? Do you know

>there is more and are shy to say so? - or you don't know there is

>more (or less, depending on the way you look at it)?

 

I did not quite realize that that was a quick finish.

 

And I wasn't leaving anything important for later.

I think.

>Who or what is aware of the whole parade, or charade of personae?

>Who is "deciding" which mask to wear for which occassion, which war

>to wage and which to ignore?

>Who is the general of your army?

>Who are you, really, Amanda?

 

No problems in trying to answer these questions in public. I think the list will

make a fine chaperone if that is needed.

 

I found out today, and this is going to sound strange, but there it was, I found

out that I am a topographical map. A topographical map has terrain objects A, B

and C etc mapped out in relation to each other, based on the relations these

objects have to each other in the physical world. The topographical map is a

reconstruction of the spatial relationship between different objects in nature,

and it is made for navigational purposes. I do not think I have any navigational

purposes, but perhaps more slight executive purposes, like those of a puppet,

perhaps.

 

But anyway, the topographical map of the mind is not only a 2D spatial

representation of the objects in the terrain, like a drawn map is, but a full,

4D representation of the terrain, including all directions and with time as

fourth dimension. It is a veritable polygon pusher, as computer jargon puts it.

This 4D representation makes the expression "the macrocosmos reflected in

the microcosmos" come to mind. This map can also represent emotions in the

terrain, objects that are more elusive than physical objects, but it does

represent emotions just as well as it does physical objects. All in all, objects

of all kinds are transformed into and represented by the topographical map, and

the update speed of the map compared to the objects which it represents, may

actually be instantanous, because the map is a 4D one and not simply a 3D one.

 

So, this means, for intents and purposes, I am a 4D topographical map.

 

>Are you one of us yet?

 

Are there anyone who isn't one of us now ?

>As Dan said recently:

>the game to end all games is really no game at all

>(or something similar).

 

The war to end all wars is really no war at all ?

 

That's a nice armistice, I'd say. I'll got for that.

 

 

Love,

 

Amanda.

 

 

 

 

Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com