Healthier notes

Top left: "When at cusp of ambiguous commitment to action, meaning and zeal will be found by leaning into the ambiguity and ensuring that you choose to commit to those actions in alignment with your greater sense of purpose/intention."  e.g. not sure how you feel about something you claimed you'd do/losing sense of purpose about doing it. Assumes clarity one's own intention/purpose already established/underway or at least nascent outside of the particular situation.

Midsection: distinguishing kinds of discomfort in ambiguous situations. Side note lower left corner on ambiguity/uncertain risk references this guide to embracing complex systems with risk governance.

For examples with context, note post on desperation. Summing them here:
Intrinsic discomfort: am I willing to forsake something good enough most people try to rely on--though evidence and experience points to it not working--and believe that a better way for living exists?
 
Circumstantial discomfort: if desperation constitutes the core subject for laughter and ridicule in the film among viewers, and an individual actually lives under the same stresses created by those circumstances--is it better to stay in hopes of learning something new or leave to preserve peace of mind?
For both the guiding question might be "what is the courageous choice?"


Upper right: A=Anxiety D=Depression S=Shame
All three link into a negative self-sustaining loop. All three have near-term
potential tactics for intervention.The note on "Healthy forgiveness" references this particular interpretation of forgiveness.

You can click on the images to read in full size.

Desperation, "American Beauty"

I saw American Beauty for the first time this weekend at a house screening as a friend's guest. The person who chose the film explained it was "a classic", and another mentioned it was a "dramedy"--humor to be found in the absurdity of emotional extremes.

Desperation was a key theme to a lot of the behaviors that drew most of the snickers and laughter. If willing, conscientious choice is fundamental to dignity desperation then serves as its converse.

Example: an insecure suburban WASP mom archetype forces a smile and recites capitalistic mantras for success as her work in real estate continues to fail.

For those who rely on one belief or another as a way for finding self-worth and meaning in life, ridiculing desperation quickly skirts the line toward becoming a demeaning and disempowering act. It's mean-spirited if not cynical humor shrouded in the laurels of being an iconic film for mainstream U.S. Cinema.

It's also a negative feedback loop [here's a place better suited for diagrams than text]:
A desperate individual's chosen actions for self-preservation are demeaned when subject to ridicule (bullying). If it's vicious enough, giving up on the practice out of fear becomes a probable outcome, further reducing their choices for a willing existence.

Also, what happens when the topics and subjects of laughter are current and real for members of the audience?

For the sake of self-preservation, the characters are constructed to have little to no choice--they operate from a default stance of desperation--and as a result, little room for realizing dignity. The few who embody a glimpse of dignity are killed or kicked out from families unable to cope with the way their perception of the world unfolds around them.

It's not far from me either: what difference does it make if someone like me ascribes to outdated religious and moral codes like Bushido, or draw from Buddhism's principles, or Christianity's in the hopes that ancestors and family knew what how to cope with their reality in resilient grace?

The answer comes from asking another question I've overheard Cesar Gonzalez emphatically ask: What is the courageous choice?

The courageous choice doesn't involve choosing a particular religion for the sake of having to believe in--unless you have to. If one recognizes holes in any of the religious and spiritual frameworks above, it is courageous to forgo holding onto an ineffective and rigid belief for the sake of faith in oneself and one's capacity to engage the future by embracing the present.

As easy it is to write, that's a tall task for one, myself included, to instantaneously take to heart and keep.

Similarly, is it better to leave a familiar source of suffering for peace of mind or choose to endure it for the sake of seeking meaningful actions out of repetitious exposure?

Side note:
Circa 2011/2012 I adapted Hamilton's Rule from evolutionary biology:
(Relatedness * Benefits)-Costs >1 for altruistic behavior to be likely
as a way to roughly rank experiences with a film:
(Relevance x Benefits) - Costs > or = to 1 for a good film

If it's really relevant, and it benefits you in some way which outweighs the costs of cognitive/emotional/time/physical load, it's a good film.

Definition: good? I'll reference Aldo Leopold's characterization of good:
A thing tends to be good when it preserves the integrity and beauty of the human and biotic community.

American Beauty, at least on first impression, does almost the exact opposite. We find glimmers of hope in one or two individuals, not the community.

Originally I adopted the rule out of anger at Pan's Labyrinth--which takes viewers through a fantastical and terribly oppressive world, and the end reward for the audience is a glimpse of the protaganist entering eternal life as she leaves the rest of the real world behind to carry on in dystopic chaos. It was a disproportionate benefit and the movie left a bad taste...

Just as Pan's Labyrinth, American Beauty was a relatively disempowering film. Yes, grace in American Beauty could be found in the protagonist's moment of transcendent acceptance (to paraphrase: "there's so much beauty in the world, you just have to let it flow through you"), and two teenagers deciding to leave abusive households. However, the overwhelming chain of events in the film lead to negative and destructive fragmentation of many relationships and some resulting in killing. The reality depicted in the film echoes much of what we already see in the world or grow up with. The emotional impact calculus burdens the viewer with more vivid problems than they can engage or resolve, and the "one to many" nature of communicating content in film and television to large audiences more often than not makes it an isolating endeavor.

Honesty without humanity is brutality, to paraphrase...

O-Vals

O-Vals (Non-Waltz)

Having this tune run through your head even in the midst of somber and really saddening events is a blessing and a gift.

Creating an environment that cares that I care

"'You cannot teach courage. But when it's scaffolded, it's encouraged.'
Will you create an environment that cares that you care?" -circa January

I'm willing to live up to my question now.

Demands vs. Guidelines for Justice

It's easy to demand better work. It's challenging for others to meet that demand. Likewise, it's easy to demand social justice. It's challenging for others who might not know what social justice means to you, and what it looks like when they're doing it right.

Herein stands my claim that guidelines are easier to use than demands, less confrontational, and more likely to see action earlier on.

What might guidelines for social justice look like?

How might we implement and integrate them into our businesses and institutions?


I can guess the UN and human rights organizations have plenty of declarations. Those can provide the desired "whats." What we need most today however, are clear "hows" put into action and exercised on an operational basis.

Organizations which champion those guidelines can also share a certification--it's certainly something worth taking pride in.

Of course, we have every right to demand dignity and respect from ourselves and one another.

Art guidelines for the uninspired

"Artist friends,When you are feeling hopelessly uninspired (and frustrated/desperate enough about it to post a Facebook status asking for help), how do you fix it? Any and all advice appreciated." -K

I take comfort in the following guidelines when making art for myself. Hopefully they're useful in showing possible paths to making meaningful work for others and pulling the uninspired out of their ruts:

0) Approach art as a form of communication that stirs curiosity and wonder. Curiosity for yourself, or for others--it's up to you.

How? Choose one, some, or all of the following as a start:
1) suffer and/or empathize
2) explore, experiment, play
3) mix all of the above

0) Consider art a form of communication that evokes a deep curiosity—about yourself, about the world around you.
Do you have something to say or convey to the world? Make it so.

“Art ain’t about paint. It ain’t about canvas. It’s about ideas. Too many people died without ever getting their mind out to the world.” — Thornton Dial, SR.

1) Suffer or/and empathize
If you find nothing compelling within your imagination and memory, then expose yourself and empathize with genuine suffering or an injustice that can capture your heart's attention. OR re-imagine something familiar from a different perspective or through a different medium. It might be an analytic endeavor at first, but sometimes those will yield artful discoveries too. In any case, find the contents of a story worth telling/making/re-presenting.

In the sense of finding and creating stories worth sharing, good artful acts of creation can exist in conversation too.

2) Treat creating as an act of play or experimentation--where the process of exploration matters more than the outcome [1], then revisit with intention.

3) Sometimes, you'll mix all of the above, or discover integral themes emerge, or poetic parallels.I may hear a snippet of melody that compels me to experiment. At the same time, I may witness or work on something that galvanizes the idea in time with current events and overarching themes of human endeavor [2]. I then set out to bridge meaning between the two. Sometimes it's an organic blend from the start, others I force together before they melt into one, and sometimes, it's creation without attachment or any explicit meaning necessary.

Angular study in azure--familiar subjects and experimentation.

Compelling outcome? Perhaps not to most.

I did, however, learn that corners of rooms can be

interesting for experiments with image composition.

[1] I really enjoyed hearing Eric Gordon's characterization of play (where process matters more than the outcome) at the IADB's 2014 Demand Solutions summit in DC. Imitating play (whoa, meta!), by playing around with odd notes on a piano? Yes, you can do that too!

[2] Emotive Mechanics started with me pondering experiences in life, and then sitting down to improvise on a tune of mine as my mind processed the ideas (see video description for initial circumstance).

Edit: I recently read Sabina Berman's [most excellent] novel, "Me, Who Dove Into the Heart of the World" and really appreciate the notion of "letting the world think through you." That's exactly what I'd use as the core principle for the above: let the world think through you. That said, I believe my guidelines can remain useful for retroactively thinking about what you've done or getting into a frame of mind that allows creative processing.

Strategy beyond swords

A simple parallel between strategy for swordsmanship and strategy for most endeavors. In brief,  it roughly points out the need for vision and mission.

Distilled from early on in samurai and artist Miyamoto Musashi's book, go rin no sho (the Five Rings):

"It is not difficult to wield a sword in one hand; the Way to learn this is to train with two long swords, one in each hand. It will seem difficult at first, but everything is difficult at first. Bows are difficult to draw, halberds are difficult to wield; as you become accustomed to the bow so your pull will become stronger. When you become used to wielding the long sword, you will gain the power of the Way and wield the sword well.

...there is no fast way of wielding the long sword. The long sword should be wielded broadly, and the companion sword closely. This is the first thing to realize.

According to this Ichi school, you can win with a long weapon, and yet you can also win with a short weapon. In short, the Way of the Ichi school is the spirit of winning, whatever the weapon and whatever its size. 

It is better to use two swords rather than one when you are fighting a crowd, and especially if you want to take a prisoner." - Miyamoto Musashi, in go rin no sho (the Five Rings) on one school, two swords

It's the same for developing and championing one's vision in any endeavor.

We train and practice for the long-term.  Engaged with the rest of the world however, we're mindful that our reaching and immediate needs--the long and short--alike are instrumental to success only when clarity of intention and purpose remains central to your actions.

Carrying one's vision broadly for all to heed, and keeping tangible details close go hand in hand. We see this when making professional introductions and business pitches or making persuasive statements. What draws the attention of most people in any introduction comes from the bigger aspirations which take place in the initial introductions--that's the long sword to wield broadly. Skeptics are either repelled or drawn closer to you, for which you can share the details with greater detail.

Truths however, unlike swords, can be shared and work best when used without malice.

I've no parallel to the line about taking prisoners as of yet though... perhaps captivating hearts happens when people discover meaning through both?

For a translation of the text online:
http://www.uvm.edu/~asnider/IDAS_2011_CD/Teachers/Steve%20Llano's%20Materials/Strategy%20Books/Book%20of%20Five%20Rings%20-%20Musashi.pdf