#and isn’t that all the perfect representation of the divide between generations in reality?

[kaybaeisgay]

no but really let’s talk about the dynamic between the older gen spideys vs young gen spideys for a moment, because it’s really got me fucked up.

miguel and all the older gen spideys seem so entirely accepting of all these “canon compliant” rules, because those rules absolutely validate the trauma that every one of them has gone through. the idea of “oh our pain had a reason, oh our heartbreak was for something after all” is a VERY powerful notion that—understandably—they welcome with open arms because they have already lived it.

but the younger gen spideys…. yes, most of them have bought into miguel’s logic for most of the movie, because of course you’re going to listen to the 1,000,000 adults all telling you the same thing when you’re fucking fifteen and desperate for any semblance of mentorship. and it sure does make a lot more sense when you yourself have also experienced a similar trauma to all the others.

but that’s exactly it, isn’t it? they’ve all experienced the same trauma—

that miles and pav have not.

so, no. actually, fuck your rules. and really, fuck your demands that i must suffer what you suffered just because you cannot accept me without it. and good on miles for saying it—good for all of the spideys who realized he was right—realized he was asking all the right questions instead of drawing all the wrong conclusions.

(yet. for all my anger i feel towards the older gen for pressuring him in that way….i also understand why they cling so desperately to these stupid “canon” rules. because, if miles can manage to resist it—if he or gwen or pav can escape what they never could—then suddenly, they have to ask the question of:

“what didn’t i do right?”

and

“was all that pain really for nothing?”

and accepting your life after having to ask those questions instantly becomes much more difficult.)

[leebird-simmer]

Intro to Film Studies, Ch. 11: Gender & Film

- As humans, we are interested in who we are and how we are defined. One of the primary ways we define ourselves is through gender.

- Judith Butler argues that the body is a “variable boundary, a surface whose permeability is politically regulated, a signifying practice within a field of gender hierarchy and compulsory heterosexuality.” {Note: Why is Judith Butler’s prose style so hard to grasp, while interviews with her make perfect sense?}

- The way gender is portrayed in film reflects a society’s fears and concerns.

Feminism: the belief that (1) we live in a society where women are still unequal to men, socially + politically + economically and that (2) this is not good for humanity.

Women filmmakers, from early cinema to the present day

- From the beginnings of the film industry in the late 19th century, it was common for women to work in non-technical areas (such as continuity and makeup, or as production assistants), but they rarely worked as producers, directors, editors, or writers.

Early 1900s: American film industry expands rapidly

         - On the one hand, it was a competitive and brutal industry.

- On the other hand, it was much more receptive to change than the European film industry and there was significantly less discrimination against women.

- There were at least 26 women directors in the US before 1930, but there were probably many more.

- Between 1911 and 1925, women wrote half of all copyrighted films, whereas in 2001 only 21% of contracted scripts were written by women.

Late 1920s: Talkies arrive. This ended many women filmmakers’ careers, because only the bigger studios could afford expensive sound equipment, and most women in the industry were working for small indie studios.

- In both Britain & the USA, there were more opportunities for women in the documentary genre. Many filmmakers involved in the early documentary movement went on to make propaganda films during the war.

- Before 1970, very few women filmmakers in Britain or the USA could be considered commercially successful. During the 1960s, it was virtually unheard of for women to work in technical areas (such as sound or camera), although women art directors and film editors were not unusual.

- As of 2006, women accounted for 10% of screenwriters, 7% of directors, and only 2% of cinematographers.

Feminist film theory & how it has developed

- Feminists generally believe that media is a factor in perpetuating a narrow range of stereotyped images of women. How women are represented in the media may encourage particular expectations of women in real life.

Stereotyping: A quick and easy way of labeling or categorizing the world around us and making it understandable. Stereotypes are learned but aren’t fixed, yet they are often resistant to change. They tend to restrict our understanding of the world and perpetuate beliefs that are often untrue or lacking nuance. Stereotyping isn’t always negative, but it tends to be concerned with preserving and perpetuating dominance hierarchies in a society. It is in the interest of the powerful to continue portraying “lower status” groups in a negative light, because that justifies the status quo.

Representation: The media presents information to its audience, who are encouraged to see these images as reflective of reality. Representations often make use of stereotypes or tropes because they are a quick, easy shorthand.

Patriarchal society: A society in which men (on average) have more power and control and women (on average) have less.

Alternative cinema: Thematically and/or visually inconsistent with the codes and conventions of mainstream narrative cinema.

Avant-garde cinema: essentially non-narrative in structure and often intellectual in content, working in opposition to mainstream cinema. Avant-garde film is often self-conscious and “breaks the fourth wall”.

Independent cinema: may be divided into two areas…

(a) independent mainstream cinema, which aims to compete with the big studios, a difficult task without significant financial investment

(b) filmmaking outside the mainstream sector; for example, film workshops, avant-garde film, feminist film, etc.

1972: formation of first women’s film group in Britain, London Women’s Film Group (LWFG). Their goal was to spread ideas about women’s liberation and help women learn film-making skills.

- The ideological sense of purpose and political debate behind feminist filmmaking encouraged the development of a film theory.

- In the early period, feminist film theory was especially concerned with representation, sexuality, and power relations within a patriarchal society. The biggest contributors to this development were Laura Mulvey & Claire Johnston.

Claire Johnston, “Women’s Cinema as Counter-Cinema” (1973)

- explains how women have been stereotyped on screen since the days of silent film

- argues for a film practice that questions and challenges the patriarchy while also being entertaining

Laura Mulvey, “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema” (1975)

- emphasizes importance of camera’s patriarchal viewpoint (“the look” or the “male gaze”)

- argues that identification is always with the male (protagonist), while the female is often seen as a threat to his success

- two roles: (1) erotic object for the characters in the fictional world and (2) erotic object for the spectator

Psychoanalytic theory: based on the theories of Freud and (more recently) Lacan. Feminists argue that aspects of psychoanalysis are questionable because they are based on patriarchal assumptions that women are inferior to men.

Scopophilia: Freudian term meaning the sexual pleasure gained from looking, introduced to film analysis by Laura Mulvey, who pointed out that women are usually depicted in a passive role and are looked at, while men take on an active role and do the looking.

Structuralism: a movement based on the belief that the study of society could be scientifically based and that there are structures in society that follow certain patterns or rules. Initially, most interest was centered on the use of language. Saussure (the founder of linguistics) argued that language was essential in communicating the ideology of a culture. Structuralists have applied these theories to film, which uses both visual and verbal communication, and pointed out that the text conveys an illusion of reality, thus conveying the ideology of a society even more efficiently.

- Classic narrative cinema is based on a philosophy connected to the literary realist tradition. Many feminists argued that film should break with this tradition to avoid perpetuating dominant patriarchal perspectives.

- Some feminists felt that avant-garde films were ideal for this purpose; others felt that avant-garde film was elitist and of no interest to a wider audience of women. Basically, they said “please keep this stuff theoretical” LOL

1981: Mulvey drops the sequel “Afterthoughts on Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema”

- examines whether female audiences can gain deep pleasure from a male-oriented text (can they occupy the spectator position?)

- explores how the text and the spectator are affected by the centrality of a female character in the narrative

- marks a shift from representation à women’s response to films

- discusses role of melodrama (traditionally considered “the woman’s genre”)

- specifically name drops Lacan, for “emphasizing the fictional, constructed nature of masculinity and femininity”

During the 1970s & 1980s, feminist film theory was dominated by a psychoanalytic approach, which has proven to be insufficient.

Cultural studies & other theories concerning gender & film

- shift away from Freudian & Lacanian theories à cultural studies (black feminist film theory, lesbian feminist film theory, etc.)

- shift from studying the encoding process (how are messages produced?) à studying the decoding process (how are messages received and understood?)

Semiotics: Ferdinand de Saussure (the father of linguistics) argued that the meanings of words are not natural, but learned and socially constructed; therefore, the meaning of a word (or in film, an image or sound) may be complex and layered.

Polysemic: a text with a multitude of possible readings.

         (1) dominant reading = what was intended by the producer(s)

         (2) negotiated reading = text generally accepted, but challenged in some areas

         (3) oppositional reading = viewer challenges the intended/dominant reading

Hegemony: a set of ideas, attitudes or practices which have become so dominant that we forget they are rooted in choice and the exercise of power.

Marxist theory: argues that those who have the means of production have control in a capitalist society. The dominant class have an interest in perpetuating the dominant ideology. More recently, exponents of Althusserian Marxism (particularly post-1968) have argued that mainstream narrative cinema reinforces the capitalist system and that a revolutionary cinema is needed to challenge the dominant ideology.

Masculine representations on film

- Masculinity associated with voyeurism, action, sadism, fetishism and the controlling narrative

- Femininity associated with passivity, exhibitionism, spectacle, masochism and narcissism

Voyeurism: the sexual pleasure gained from looking at others.

Fetishism: Freudian theorists argue that fetishism is linked to the castration complex and is a form of male denial of the threat and fear of castration by the female. The female is made less threatening, more reassuring, by substituting her lack of a phallus with a fetish object, or turning her into a fetish object by exaggerating or fragmenting parts of the body.

- Male hero in classical Hollywood cinema usually recognized as powerful. He signifies omnipotence, mastering the narrative, being in control, sadism > masochism.

- the masculine body as spectacle with a performative function (key theme of 1980s action films)

1980s & 1990s: portrayals of fathers and their families; common theme of father replacing the mother or of mother being marginalized/ignored

1990s: masculine anxieties caused by economic struggle; more representations of men in crisis, dysfunctional men

- more men presented as paternal, domesticated, even feminized

- unease, discomfort, even envy of women’s reproductive powers

1990s: masochistic spectator position, in which horror audience takes on a passive (classically feminine) role, identifying with the protagonist’s pain & suffering

[tomasorban]

THE ZODIAC: GEMINI THE TWINS

Date of Rulership: 21st May-22nd June; Polarity: Positive, male; Quality: Mutable; Ruling planet: Mercury; Element: Air; Body part: Arms, hands, shoulders, collarbone and lungs; Colour: Yellow; Gemstone: Agate; Metal: Mercury.

In the first two zodiacal signs, we saw raw formative powers associated with the beginnings of complex life. Like all rudimentary organisms, Aries set the wheel of heaven into motion with a Big Bang of pure spontaneity and creative activity. Taurus then neutralized these fiery irruptions of vital life force by stitching together an earthenware blanket that funnelled them away from the rest of the cosmic banter, enough to stubbornly work up a sense of self-discipline so that Life could achieve some multiple and visionary aims. Whatever else they may be, Ares and Taurus are intensely self-focused, self-styled, self-serving, and self-motivated. For General Aries and Commander-in-chief Taurus, it’s all about self and satisfaction of self. This all changes with Gemini, a sign which forces a binocular split of life’s hitherto monocular vision; pure instinct has now relegated its position to a rudimentary intelligence acquired through observation and past experience.

Facilitated by a split into two distinct entities than inhabit the space of one conscious being, this formative power is all about mental dialogue and communication. It orientates itself in the world by observing the actions and reactions of others around it, pocketing them into airtight pigeonholes as past memories, and then calculating the direction and angle of its own movement accordingly. Gemini is uninhibited, brave, experimental and multidimensional in its habits. Why race along a straight line at the speed of a bullet train like Aries or dawdle along a perpendicular one to that like Taurus when there are innumerable other options available. Gemini won’t follow a tribal leader or top dog or father figure when it comes to paving out its own life path. Instead it might take a few vigorous little steps forward, take a lunge to the side, trace out a zigzag course diagonally and then proceed to trace out circles on the spot. It needs to experience things from different angles and vantage points; Gemini might start off swimming across an uncharted ocean one minute before deciding that’s its best to grow wings and fly over it instead. Minutes into the flight it might decide that sailing, an endeavour that didn’t quite appeal at first, is indeed a superior option. In the end it decides it doesn’t really want to embark on a lengthy journey to a foreign land and so transmutes itself into a feather which floats about for some time before settling on the surface of an oscillating sea. At any rate, the courses of action it chooses never quite last for extended periods as such, for consistency and method bore the mercurially-natured Gemini. This zodiacal sign exudes mutable energy and derives from ethereal air, and so people born beneath the stars of its constellation are likely resemble breezes and tempests, scattering bits of themselves everywhere but never quite committing or infusing themselves wholly into one specific avenue of inquiry, goal or task. Like air, the “souls” born under Gemini can be wistful, light-hearted and frivolous or tumultuous, dangerous, blind and irrational, depending on which way the daily current blows. And like all lovers of brain noise, they love talking to themselves, to one another, and to everyone else, irrespective of whether their listeners are attentive or not.

“Why would you want to be an Arian or Taurean when you can be me,” says Gemini. “I’m quite the bargain you see. I’m double trouble, two twins that think they’re the same person. With me, you get two pairs of hands, legs, brains, and anything else that tickles your fancy. You’ll never be bored, not even at Sunday Christenings or conventional weddings. Sometimes, you might even feel like you’re an honoured guest at the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party. Of course, I’m the one who gets to pick the roles and tell everyone how it’s going to work; I get to play the Mat Hatter who entertains everyone with my nonsensical riddles, entangles myself in a verbal labyrinth of speaking out aloud, and laughs at my own jokes. You, my friend, can be the passive observer who doesn’t utter a word yet pretends to be interested. Okay? A little bit of this and a little bit of that will keep things interesting and our bodies looking youthful, so let’s get stuck into it.  When I want answers about why things are the way they are make certain that what comes out of your mouth is short and sweet; I don’t have the patience for verbosity, longwinded soliloquys or esoteric philosophies for that matter. I find academics, intellectuals and anyone with depth to them intimidating and sometimes excruciatingly boring.  I’m a bit like a dogmatic religion sometimes; anything that stands outside my sphere of knowledge frightens me so. Hihi… I know I can be an annoying pain in the neck but I’ll make up for it by acting as your third eyes and ears. You’ll be the first to know the latest gossip on what your enemies are all up to, and that way you can remain that one step ahead of them and look twice, if not four times as bright. When I’m feeling blue, you’ll start getting all the “why” and “what” questions, one after the other. But don’t worry, seldom do I have downers and you’ll love my blasé attitude to the human condition. What of the human condition could ever be of any importance anyway…?’  

Gemini is all about the law of twos–dual states of consciousness and mind, a propensity for double vision. One is inwardly turned, tuned into an internal world of thought, memory and imagination, and the other is outwardly turned, thriving in the exterior realm of verbal communication and physical contact. Geminis have an innate talent for living in both at the same time, and can flit between the subjective and objective planes as effortlessly and mindlessly as a circus clown juggling a quartet of coloured balls. This indicates a profound talent for mimicry and deception; they can counterfeit the emotions, feelings and images projected by others to perfection and wear them with such authentic conviction as to attract an Academy Award nomination. Hence Geminis usually make good actors and actresses, and can be quite successful in the denomination of visual arts.

The eternal unrest of their dual vision confers a supernal power seldom realised by any of the other zodiacal archetypes; the ability to chance upon reality through sheer intuition, or to encounter it with the aid of scientific instruments and measurements. A young Gemini is just as likely to become a shy and unobtrusive female artist as it is a dominant and poised male scientist. Sometimes, he or she might turn out to be a bit of both. In fact, the duality of being can be such a dominant characteristic in their psychic makeup that one can easily be fooled into thinking that there’s two individual and well-developed personalities trapped inside the same body. In encompassing polygonal and multilayered views of reality, they come equipped with a valuable philosophy that is easily transposed to a more practical level. Gemini understands that rationality offers the best lens through which life should be viewed. Rationality bestows upon its viewer a sense of providence, the feeling that life is a previous gift not to be wasted. Physical or emotional ideals distort it and imprison one within their own worries and troubles, so much in fact that one might begins to feel that life isn’t quite worth the struggle or effort anymore. Gemini’s inclination to avoid this way of thinking makes its existence a happy and harmonious one.      

If Gemini were to be represented by a different totem, it would no doubt have been the butterfly. The latter is a symbol of transformation; it begins life as larva, grows into a caterpillar, and eventually undertakes a major transformation to become a butterfly. The soul of Gemini is like a butterfly, a light-hearted and transient winged entity that flits about here, there, and everywhere, never quite knowing what to do or where to stop. Wings imply breadth of experience and freedom, a quality quite dear to Gemini; freedom abhors law, especially laws of censorship that restrict its self-expression and development. The way of Gemini is not compatible with conservative views, or moral ones even. Like the ephemeral butterfly, people born under this sign can display flashes of ingenuity but rarely does it last. This is probably a by-product of its ruling planet, Mercury, which renders it restless, somewhat unstable, volatile, and most importantly, protean.

Like Aries and Taurus, there are also two symbols associated with the zodiacal sign of Gemini. The first, a pictorial representation of two figures holding hands, has been a subject of some controversy. Astrologers can’t seem to get their heads around whether the pair are two males, two females, a male and a female, androgynous beings, and what the nature of the relationship between the two actually is; are they fraternal twins, identical twins, or unrelated lovers? The ancient cultures were just as divided on this issue as we are today: the ancient Babylonians and Greeks perceived the respective constellation as an image of male twins; the ancient Egyptians, on the other hand, were convinced it was a male-female pair; the primordial Indians saw star-crossed lovers; and the Imperial Romans saw their gods, the Delphic twins Apollo and Diana. The renowned Tarot identifies them as two lovers. Irrespective of gender or relationship status these figures were always depicted with their arms interlinked, illuminating the concept of harmony, internal and external cohesion, and requited love. The second symbol is a shorthand version utilized by astrologers in the creation of horoscopes and is comprised of two upright columns conjoined along the top and bottom. This sign, as the exposition has thus far revealed, has everything to do with duality of being and with the conunctionis or marriage of opposites. Esoterically, one might choose to view this glyph as a conjunction of the Chinese yin and yang or the alchemical mercury and sulphur.  It is also a fine representation of an inexplicable link between an upper, heavenly realm of spirits, ideas, and telepathic communication and a lower, earthly plane of concrete and clearly demarcated physical forms.

Both signs draw attention to the fundamental nature of complex life. The one becomes two and the two become one again. Everything that exists in the cosmos seeks contact, union, and co-existence with an immediate likeness without having to forfeit its own identity or personality in the process. Both signs represent opposition and conjunction, and both draw attention to a mortal state of division whose primary purpose is to reconcile all opposites within itself and unite with God. Of course the condition of being alienated from one’s source also has the adverse effect of inciting restlessness and mental agility.

[vintagepaintbynumbe-blog]

My Paint by Numbers

What a superb method to catch the genuine love of your dearest pet. This custom canine representation, feline picture, horse representation or picture of some other pet will be an inestimable present for yourself or somebody exceptional in your life. Prepared to begin your portraitOne spectacular pastime from the 1950's has made an arrival as a vintage stylistic theme thing just as a collectible in its very own right—the paint by number artworks. This superb side interest has turned into an  extraordinary method to balance genuine artistic creations on your divider vintage paint by numbers without paying high costs for it. These pieces are commonly entirely moderate, and a lot to an authority's joy very numerous individuals are prepared to dispose of them. So looking in upper rooms, insect markets, yard deals and dumpster plunging are the most ideal approaches to gain these fun society pieces and there are a great deal of them to be found.So once you've obtained some paint by number artistic creations, you're prepared to hang them. Enriching with paint by number works of art is a touch of an artistic expression in itself—however have no dread—anybody can do it. The paint by number works of art will be most engaging when shown together in a gathering. So every one of them integrate them, have a go at adhering to a bringing together topic, for example, feathered creatures, hounds, steeds, view or blossoms. Hang these on an extensive open region on your divider and the outcome will be a genuine friendly exchange just as putting forth a major expression. 

These depictions are genuine society craftsmanship made an age or two back by individuals simply like you and me.Painting by numbers was once so unfathomably well known (Nelson Rockefeller, J. Edgar Hoover and Andy Warhol all painted them) that the Smithsonian included a display from April 2001 to January 2002 praising their intrigue. You can see incredible instances of paint by number works of art and read progressively about them as a social symbol just as a fine art here.The directions said to coordinate the paint shading number with the bed zone number and apply the coat equitably without intersection lines. Throughout the following half a month, I watched Dad fastidiously change both white canvas sheets into lovely gems. He was glad for his creation as was I, as confirm by my showing them on my room divider for quite a long while.

 Culmination of a unit was not a pointless medium-term undertaking; it took a long time to complete one, particularly in the event that you wanted to edge and balance it on a divider or use it as a blessing. In reality, its actual esteem was estimated by the individual who painted it. Not at all like watercolors that we wound up familiar with as youngsters, PBN units used oil-based paint requiring the client to practice alert so as not to get paint on everything. Brushes must be kept in mineral spirits when not being used to keep them from getting to be dry.

 One trap was to picked a shading and paint every one of the areas on the canvas that contained that number. Legitimately done, the wonderfully dried painting was a declaration to the painter's patient endeavors. My initial two depictions as I review were "Blue Boy" and "Pinky," famous subjects of that time. Neither of them at any point graced anybody's dividers.

 PBN packs did not enchant everybody. A few pundits saw them as a type of thoughtless consistence of the majority by making a halfhearted effort of repetition and blank work that completely expelled the painter's innovativeness from the condition. Be that as it may, others found the ventures as interesting acquaintances with painting for individuals not comfortable with utilizing oil-based paint.

 As a general rule, the units offered a sliding scale trade off between complete imagination of painting freehand and having the security of a layout. Numerous individuals intentionally adjusted the guidelines and deliberately painted over lines, expelled explicit items from scenes and even changed shading plans, in this manner infusing a touch of creative energy into the task.

 The relationship with numbered sketches stretched out to the Eisenhower White House when then secretary Thomas Stephens gathered PBN compositions from staff individuals and companions and showed them in a West Wing passageway.

 The Paint By Number marvel began in 1950 when a Palmer Paint Company worker, Dan Robbins, conceived a shrewd method to enable his business to move more paint. It came at a helpful time on the grounds that after war America was encountering a sweet taste of the great life – extra time, expanded wages and a hunger for diversion.

 After a rough starting laden with various issues, the item encountered a transient move in prominence, moving in excess of 12 million packs somewhere in the range of 1951 and 1954. It was evaluated that amid this time American homes contained more PBN pictures than unique centerpieces.

 In the mid 1990s, following quite a while of decrease, the item turned up at ground zero and hinted at fame indeed. Today, the do-it-without anyone's help units can be found in the specialty segment of a few stores. Vintage artworks as often as possible are shown in old fashioned stores, scrounge deals, bug markets and sell-offs along these lines exhibiting their life span.

 During the 1950s, numerous Americans experienced passionate feelings for paint units called "paint by numbers" or "number painting." The packs accompanied a numbered easel that gave the craftsman directions on where to paint hues to make a picture. Would-be craftsmen would then drape their fine art in their homes and show them gladly to guests. A long time later, old paint by number works of art were concealed in carports or upper rooms to be found by who and what is to come. In the event that you have as of late rediscovered an old paint by number picture, clean it and hang it up.Lay the work of art on a level surface like a table. Work under great lighting. Outside lighting functions admirably for this venture.

 Lay a drop material on the ground around and under the table to gather the bread pieces.

 Fellowship into equal parts. Haul out the inward piece of the bread, the milder the better.Rub the artistic creation with a little bit of bread, beginning at the upper-left corner utilizing light weight. The soil will gather on the batter. Keep on utilizing bits of the batter, not the covering, to clean the depiction tenderly.

 Brush the whole painting with a delicate, unused paintbrush to expel crumbs.Behind a cascade dresser in my office, I have a little however developing gathering of paint-by-number workmanship. Why? Since sometime in the not so distant future, when our storm cellar remodel is finished, I plan on showing them, display style.

 I saw the thought in a home stylistic theme magazine a couple of years prior, and it made me grin. Paint-by-number workmanship has that impact on me. Its somewhat shortsighted version of lovely scenes and simple to-perceive style has a fun loving method for saying, "Truly, I am workmanship anybody can paint — even you!" However, for my situation, it would not be me. I'm aesthetic with unmistakable mediums, similar to texture. In any case, put a paintbrush or pencil in my grasp, and the completed item isn't fit to hang in a third-grade classroom.

 The moving article highlighted an originator's home. He had filled a divider behind the lair sofa with paint-by-number bits everything being equal and topic. It was comfortable in a very kitsch way.

 My gathering started with a little secured extension painting I found at a neighborhood thrift shop, and it's becoming gradually — supported by an ongoing Hidd.

The authorized Paint Liner Kit is the easy to use paint system that gives you capable looking results and extras you up to 70% off of your paint time. Achieve amazingly sharp corners and edges with the Paint Liner Kit. The liner is free, re-usable and mobile to make capable looking results the width required so your corners are continually accurate and clean without using veiling tape. The Paint Liner Kit roller featuring a secured edger empowers you to perfectly connect with the liner. Fill the roller with paint and make the perfect edgeNo painting aptitudes are required to start painting without DIY painting packs. Our Kit contains all that you need to start whirling the brush around. Lets disclose to you the most ideal approach to get started.Order a unit. Normal size for most painting units is 40X50 Cm or 16X20 In. You will get paints, brushes, canvas, screws, catches and guide card. It is recommended to mastermind a packaging with canvas.tretch the canvas. Set up your instruments. Have a bowl of water close by for washing brushes. Match the number from the canvas with the paint and start painting. Starting from the most elevated purpose of canvas is recommended.Step by step and number by number when you have completed it, you will be stunned by its perfection. Packaging it, hang it, see it and smile :) charitable better trust it, make sure to send us a photo review.What is Painting by Numbers?

  Painting on a canvas by numbers is essential and extraordinarily ground-breaking activity. The pioneer of this activity is the outstanding Leonardo Da Vinci. He asked for that his understudies organize the paints with numbers and complete crafted by workmanship. This exhibits practicing a workmanship is progressively valuable in learning it when appeared differently in relation to getting some answers concerning it.Put your gave canvas on a table. Take out the gave paint, brushes and present yourself with some coffeeTake your time and paint inside the numbered fields on the canvas. Loosen up and see your creation come to lifeDecorate your receiving area with your canvas or gift it to a sidekick. Incredible work!Canvas DIY Paint by Numbers Kit is the perfect preamble to painting to anyone paying little admiration to the age and experience. Paint your own one of a kind divider craftsmanship and edge them to be a stunning accent to your home or officeOur pets are such a fortune to us! I am pet expert and I warmly hand paint awesome custom pet pictures from a photo, paying little mind to whether it

[redantsunderneath]

Critical Accommodation

The first forum thread I ever started, on some televisionwithoutpity-type forum, was on the topic of simultaneously overrated and underrated art/artists.  Now, I don’t know if I expressed my ideas clearly or not, but in the email exchange subsequent to a strangely angry moderator deleting the post, clarity didn’t seem to be the issue as much as a failure on his part to admit to the idea that the relationship between quality and popularity could somehow be multivalent.  At the time, I probably used Radiohead or something as an example – underrated by any sort of mass audience but overrated by what you might a few years later have call pitcthforkers – but maybe Serial is a good modern equivalent.  I doesn’t hold enough interest for anyone who has seen more than 3 Datelines and thinks the idea of NPRing the concept up is boring, but elicits a little too much ado from the Slate reading contingent who, maybe, believe True Crime as a genre just got invented.

 I kind of lost interest in this as a concept as, after a while, all you can see are the social signaling aspects of this multi-audience interaction, maybe thanks to hipsters turning countersignaling into a game of chicken where they threw their steering wheel out the window. But it seems that multiple axes of “is it good” that coexist have become more obvious lately, and not just because people are starting to notice that everyone lives in a bubble. Case in point: I was involved in an exchange recently about the movie Suicide Squad, with a poster claiming that the response to the movie showed how pronounced the divide was between critics and the casual audience.  I had to ask what this meant because the critics I pay attention to have been very positive about Suicide Squad and the DC movies in general (in relation to the Marvel movies especially) and dismissive of the sea of internet opinions that call the films garbage.  The person bringing it up was talking about the actual moviegoing audience which made the movie immensely profitable because they weren’t told they were supposed to hate it vs. the majority of internet based and payed critics who poo-pooed the movie as you would expect.  Both of these critical-mass divides were true at the same time, but each of us preferentially saw one.

 I’ve written a lot about textual story and subliminal story in an effort to pick at the meaning of entertainments of all kinds.  But all this is making me think about the fact that there are more levels than just above and below and various audiences are habituated to look for satisfaction at a certain level. One problem is that no matter how smart and attentive the audience member is, they tend to privilege this one layer and, as a result, this strata is optimized for by producers (via a complex Darwinian system) if they are viewed as the primary audience.  So the actual most complicated and interesting multilayered stuff is going to suffer for any specific audience in that it will not be “the best possible thing” at the level they are trained to value the most.  The funny thing is, this system more and more doesn’t favor people who focus on depth and complexity in producing a serious work, but artists who are profoundly unhinged at some level who are willing to operate at the most superficial levels primarily with the deep stuff inadvertently spilling out like piñata guts.  These movies often don’t make intellectual sense.

 I think in order to consider this, text and subliminal aren’t going to cut it.  There is a superficial or visceral level of engagement – incident, big emotion… the action movie thing, but also at a different pitch the romantic comedy thing.  Crowd pleasers that satisfy the lower levels of Maslow’s pyramid – oral (safety, threat, need, good/bad) and anal (dominance, desire, will).  Then you have the mid level engagement of the genital (intricacy, complex relational, intellectual satisfaction) and basic social consciousness (mid to upper Maslow) which is common internet aesthete and print critic land.  If there is talk of screenplay structure or complex characters or representation, it is in this middlebrow-that-thinks-it’s-highbrow area. The Oscar zone.  

 There is another level, though, which me might call the ineffable, the preconscious, the deep structural, the semiotic, the transcendent, or the sublime.  People who I usually pay attention to are focused on this later level to some degree. The thing that ties these people together is an emphasis on visual storytelling (or poetics if we are talking about print) and a philosophical bent.  The escape of conscious forms, of spoken language and structure, receiving symbolic content and using that to construct meaning.  There is a lot of theory in this zone… it is not not intellectual, but rather senses something hidden or unintentional and wrestles that into the zone of language and reason.  This includes primal unexamined societal impulses where the motivations for politics and hatred lie.  

 So group 1 are the conscious experiencers (popcorn moviegoer).  Group 2 are the social intellectualizers (the maven or critic).  Group 3 have found some way to touch an unmediated submerged experience and bring it up to examine, which oddly gives them more in common with group 1 (the dredgers and deep divers).  Everybody at a higher number level has some experience with the lower numbers but what I have noticed is that most people in this hierarchy tend to limit focus to their preferred layer and stick there, losing the ability to really engage at the other levels with something that doesn’t satisfy on theirs.  I do run into more people who are able to put a foot on 1 and a foot on 3, people who go deep on trash cinema for instance, but these people usually take a shit on level 2.  Many of these people hate prestige TV very viscerally.  Others stick to 3 and tend to close read based on one particular “deep topic” like capitalism or gender.

 This leads to extremely insightful people who have a fixed level of focus.  I almost said “myopia” but a better ophthalmologic analogy is loss of lens accommodation, a common problem of age (the need for reading glasses after you turn 47 is this).  With this condition you can be nearsighted or farsighted or have 20/20, but you can’t focus very well outside of a narrow range of your focal length.  My very favorite writers on narrative art are able to focus up and down the scale and, importantly, experience the piece as a blank slate, so the reading can be guided by the piece and not a bias as to level of engagement.  Zizek is great, but I’d prefer it if he seemed to be able to be exhilarated, have fun, recognize bad pacing, or appreciate an actor/actress performance without making these a function of some Marxist/Lacanian equation.

 The good reviews of Batman vs. Superman I have seen dwell on the visual composition and fuck off attitude, but also focus on the movie as a critique of a kind of moral simplicity implicit in nerd/internet culture who can’t see what these characters are really up to.  The film is deliberately provoking the group that generates all the reviews.  Superman is an alien who is hyper aware of the conflict between humanity’s potential and its reality. His choice to act for the good in Man of Steel is that of a god in absolute agony as he has to take the war into himself, killing because moral choices are horrific and don’t have the external consequences they should in a just universe. Superman knows he chooses his path to suffer and serve the good and the universe could care less (Nietzsche’s Ubermench, anyone?). His suffering imposes a moral order on the universe.  In BvS he confronts the prospect of progressive inaction, the Obama path, do no harm because everyone seems to want you to be blamed, shamed into will-less-ness… one of the failure modes of the current American (masculine) spirit. Batman represents the other failure mode, the wallowing in the anger at traditional American values violated by the rise of selfishness and me first mentality.  Of course they need to fight – they are primal opposites: deflated optimism vs. pessimism on steroids, past vs. future, sun vs. void, naturally gifted immigrant vs. driven legacy born on third base.  

 These are gods, and are presented like gods, in a series of mise-en-scene straight ripped from renaissance paintings. It is wrong to speak of subtlety, because subtlety is the opposite of the point.  Look at those (Turin?) horses, gaudy symbols like oranges in the Godfather! The structure of the story is a mess by normal metrics, but there is a shape there, and that is enough when you are dealing with art film rules.  The collision of two celestial objects, awaiting the feminine to mediate their Hegelian synthesis and convert their masculine valances to the positive.  Dwelling on act structure is stupid.  Recognizing that they failed to make this a conventional narrative is useless.  Citing plot inconsistencies, “X wouldn’t do that,” and calling it emptyheaded and over the top mean you are watching a movie you can’t handle.  This is a skilled, smart but “off,” bodily centered outsider artist grappling with shit that is really, really big and deep.  It isn’t perfect, but no one should want that out of this (there are countless clockwork left brain things to watch)… you should come to this wanting a mess, gods of ideas punching your midbrain, opening you to experience the catharsis of basic archetypal struggles in the world.  You know, like superheroes work.  It is wrong to privilege level 2 which, remember, is where mass of expressed “learned” opinion is.  This is where the DC Verse lives.  Marvel is centered in DC’s hole, and it is right to talk of story as structure.

 My point is that the best thing you can do is learn to focus where the thing is most ready to connect with you and be flexible enough to let the thing tell you how to read it.  There is a lot of crap, but there is a lot of good stuff that gets critically ignored because too few are focusing in the right areas.  If you like more stuff, if you find everything more interesting and complex, you win. Not everything is good, but you can almost always find a way to engage it at its best.  You can say many bad things about the book Twilight, but damn if there isn’t something there about the subject/object struggle of being desired as a young woman, the disconnect of inner and outer experience, and the consideration of the choice of traditional-relationship-as-road-to-marriage in a modern context.  If you smirk and say Mary Sue, you have failed.  

 This three cluster model isn’t perfect, but explains a lot why I see lumpy, weird high budget stuff with the high viewership (mass audience), pissed off forums and think pieces (critical consensus/perceived audience if you live online), and elated jaded curmudgeons (deep critics) troika so often.  I think this is more than just a status economy (though that is clearly involved) but the production system has adjusted so that the qualities of the output levels align to the audience expectations.  The most interesting stuff is that which crosses levels, which requires risking a product that will probably seem suboptimal to everyone.  So, let’s have a toast for the auteurs who don’t fit, making movies that are a scrum of potential meanings that require you to get dirty and renounce the tyranny of “the way it should be done.” And I mean Michael Bay as well as David Lynch.  If they seem insane, it’s a feature not a bug.

[koiandjelly]

In regards to my long fucking essay on all things I could think of for everything I think people might wonder about Etheri, Etherivium, the Void, and just... so many goddamn things...

That’s the first draft, please keep in mind as you navigate it. And it’s all based on, in simplified words, how a perfect entity embodying all of existence works if it is influenced by a single exception to its rules (Infinity -1 Paradox, in which the Concept of Absence is removed from the would-be Infinite pool of Concepts available to Etheri without breaking its ability to function via its own Law, nor creating any Paradoxes involving Infinity’s status as being truly Infinite. Hence it being dubbed: the Infinity -1 Paradox.) as well as how it behaves in a way that defies all logic as we understand it, despite AND also because of the nature of Paradoxes and Concepts and Counterpart Concepts. I also tried to explain in a semi coherent way how the Void is both a concept of Absence and the Absence of a concept, which makes it a Paradox of sorts, but because it is the Void, and it already is the Absence of Concepts as a defining thing, it doesn’t collapse the Domain, but it does also have equilibrium with Etheri in terms of Purest of all Destruction (i was going to reiterate that it’s the goddamn Void, but I think y’all understand it well enough by now for me to skip further reminders that despite everything it could mean and should do, its definitive trait is that stuff cannot exist in it, ever, at all, without that golden combo of Concepts only Etheri has ever made, and imma cut it short this is getting rambly)

Anyway, the Void’s “Destruction” in the form of only being an infinite expanse of theoretically infinite outward expansion within the Domain’s theoretical limit to keep it from being a canon crossover eater of worlds (Domain being, as a reminder, the term I created to give a name and lore friendly reason for why an Author’s creations can be canonically contained, because I don’t really want a possible future in which a possible fandom meme of “canonically the Void could extend into X fandom’s world and delete everything!!” And then there’s a plague of Thanos Snap type memes about Winnie the Pooh getting eradicated by Void invasion— just. I needed a lore friendly reason to have an ultimate limit to an infinitely expanding Void apocalypse, which ended up being not just lore-friendly, but also potentially useful to prevent other creators from getting upset over it if it’s interpreted as like... rude or something? I don’t know, whatever.)

Aaand since Concepts typically form in Counterpart pairs, the Absence of All Things invokes the presence of the Existence of All Things, which in turn is why I have the Infinity -1 Paradox in place, which theeen connects to the equilibrium of Concepts, Counterpart Concepts (which are actually the Primitive, Specific pieces that individually actually have the opposite effect with the Concept they match, as all together would be the Absence Concept which makes the singular Void, but since they are the specific sub-definition Concept form, rather than overwhelm through a Structural Collapsing Paradox with the supermassive Existence Concept, they work like how pruning a bush’s dead leaves helps it, despite removing its one living limbs which out of context sounds bad. But in context, with each Concept forming a Counterconcept, they find equilibrium that forms the overall Concept of Destruction, which is in turn a part of the Core Concept of Chaos, which most significantly brings about change, as it and the Concept of Order are both Concepts representing within themselves an equivalent presence and absence of all that they mean. This is a definitive part of what identifies the Core Concepts, as they are very broad, layered Concepts that have counterparts, but share equal function in presenting their own set of concepts and applying an abstract concept of absence that, because they are always formed as once Concept that then split perfectly. They are more fundamental in the structure of most of Universes born within Etherivium, because they are stable bundles of everything that the Gods (upon their creation by Etherivium) need to build their Multiverses and then Universes, and then all that goes within them, to form the circumstances of everything Bounding Beyond the Stars will be about. Core Concepts, in short, are equal counterpart pairs of many bundled Concepts that balance each other out through shared roles of give and take occurring between both definitions of those Concepts, as opposed to the majority, singular Concept type which are more specific definitions, thus are many more times numerous than Broad Concepts, which all are different from Core Concepts also due to being pairs of the Presence of a Thing, and the Absence of a Thing, in pairs where that is the easiest path of balance, (I specifically emphasize this because Concepts go down to the smallest scale possible, but Core Concepts are always a culmination of many concepts forming a general definition, in addition to the other described distinctions. This is relevant in terms of them being tools noticed and utilized by Gods for their initial purpose of being sort of like Repair tools for Etherivium’s structural dilemma.)

The only Core Concept pair that lacks the equivalent push and pull split among both Concepts is the Light and Dark pair. Light is a representive, easy to say term for Energy (of all forms), and by extension its presence, whereas Dark is more accurately represented by the literal name, the Absence of Energy.

In their derivative forms, such as the Concept of Kinetic Energy, which invokes the presence of the Concept of Heat, the Concept of Absence of Heat is what specifically is present on the Universe’s most basic level (layers of reality start at conceptual basic level, then move upwards in layers in a sort of specification of complexity, sort of. The plane we live on is one of many forms of interpretable results of concepts all existing in a logical manner, notably in physical form. Interaction with different layers of reality means access to all sorts of manifestations of conceptual structure, at least in a vague sense. It depends on so many factors. Shit’s complicated, but compare it to an ascending structure of sieves that eventually divide into the finest of things at the top, with Core Concepts at the very bottom.) and whatever other factors are present result in the counterpart concepts finding balance, which we interpret as rules and laws we can make sense of. Skin your knee after sliding on the carpet, and you experience pain and heat and— well all those things, behind the scenes, are Concepts all working together to create that.

So... where was I going with all this.

Tldr; The Ashen Dominion and all the stuff I’ve made in it have a very particular system that I’ve spent many fucking hours that I don’t regret but do acknowledge— (deep inhale) I put time building this stuff. I want my High Fantasy world to mesh nicely with Science Fiction so that I can have intergalactic crimelord Goddesses with planet busting guns that exist because of, specifically, Concept based reality weaving, and all sorts of cool shit in which even mortals like Humans who suck at spellcasting magic, but have that power of teamwork and thinking hard, to be able to figure out how to munchkin their way into deciphering Reality themselves! Which, significantly, is something Humans are not meant to do. But I digress: All this long as fucking hell geek-babble (based on a 20 year old girl’s interpretation of frequent googling of universal theories, who I’ll mention, has no college experience or any formal education on the subject, so ya know, it isn’t meant to be anything relevant to the topic of actual irl creation theory, it’s just a grandiose fantasy setting with some broken logic and personal theory mixed in (and most importantly, the presence of magic as a force as omnipresent as gravity and is used as a vital building block in many many parts of the Ashen Domain. Magic is the big fucking thing that will eventually be the topic of many long essays worth of text) and all this is for the main purpose of setting particular rules and limits and explanations so that, when those rules and stuff are broken or altered, y’all who understand the context of their being the way they are will understand it to be the significant thing that it should be.

Gotta have rules before you break any. If Magic Character 1 stops Time with magic, then whatever right that’s cool, but if it is clarified that what happened was a Magic-based interference with the Core Concept of Time in that universe, then it’s a bit of a bigger deal. Context is important stuff, so I very much so want to put effort into providing it.

[thejkrschild-blog]

“Driven By the Heart”

Originally, I thought it fitting to call it: The Married Man. But I didn’t. I didn’t name this story, my story, The Married Man because that insinuates his role in the tale as dominate. This story isn’t about him. It’s about me: The Other Woman.

So often these love triangles follow the same, predictable pattern. There’s the cheater, the guiltless victim, and the vile temptress. Guess who typically bares the majority of the blame? Yes, of course the cheater holds some responsibility, but the cheater and the victim are always portrayed as humans. This makes it easier to forgive the cheater, for he is only human and incapable of perfection. But that vile temptress, if it wasn’t for that third party, we wouldn’t be in this mess. The mistress finds herself a separate entity, an object, an idea in some far off land. Therefore, placing blame on her and her alone, tends to serve as the diabolical scapegoat. To resolve the guilt, she is generally painted as a despicable human being. Her sole purpose is destroying relationships, marriages, and families. From this the real pleasure arouses and the poor cheater merely fell victim to her devilish ways. With this scenario in mind, the couple finds a way to exorcise the vile of the affair and potentially mend their sacred bond. It was just a bad dream, a distant memory. No one is to hear of it again. Until now.

I have been the “other women.” While I never condone my actions sprawled throughout this tale, I feel a fair representation of this third party deserves recognition. Like most committed regrets, it was driven by the heart.

I could spend the next several pages rambling with detail in each and every interaction as it rings clear and true in my memory. Each passing flirtation accompanied by flushed cheeks and racing hearts, before we know it, we’d have a novel. While these feelings hold power in my individual experience, I find infatuation a human condition and therefore, pointless to detail what everyone knows. Think school girl crush. Though I admit, there are a few fundamentals deserving recognition for this particular tale.

When we began, I was 19 and he was in his early 30’s. A full time student, I required a job that would not interfere with my studies. I applied for an overnight position. This man was my boss. My boss was married with his first born on the way. This was unbeknownst to me at the time.

While my initial attraction sparked the during the interview process, it’s hard to say when the affair officially begun. I suppose with a series of text messages, one weekend, when I was off. In fact, I spent the weekend helping my brother move into his apartment. I couldn’t decipher whether or not he was just a young boss forging genuine relationships with his staff, or if something dubious lay behind the obvious unprofessionalism. Before skepticism set in, my mind justified the conversation as the former, and continued development into a mistake.  

A few days later I was back at post: 8PM to 4AM by myself, and he was to relieve me at the end of the shift. Often I chose to stay around a little longer. Again, originally this was an innocent act of a hard working employee. I constantly made sure I communicated everything I felt necessary and didn’t leave until I felt everything was under control. However, after the slightly scandalous conversation of the previous weekend, there grew a tension between us.

We both went to the back room; me to collect my belongings, him to gather supplies for the shift.

There was a moment.

In the darkness there was a tense silence, and an extreme heat resonating between the intimate space of our bodies. And he looked at me. Somehow, in the dark, his eyes cut through the blackness and lit my soul afire. It’s that look when you’re 13 and you like this boy, but have never been kissed. You think it’s going to happen, you want it to happen, but you are nervous. You don’t know what to do.

But I was not a child and therefore, knew exactly what to do: I ran.

“See ya tomorrow!” Breathlessly I scurried out from underneath his presence.

If only I kept running.

It was almost 5AM by the time I reached my apartment. I needed sleep; school started at 9AM.  I checked my phone, no surprise he texted me.

“I was so close to grabbing you and kissing you.” My heart raced. Moral dilemma gashed my soul into two painfully divided pieces. One side lusting after the adventure and affection of this man and the ethically sound side sat as two peaks polarized by a vast valley of uncertainty.

“I know. It’s a good thing I ran away.” I kept it safe. Resisting temptation seemed the only way to avoid the inevitable. My head spinning with exhaustion, I silenced my phone and put my head to the pillow. It wouldn’t happen again.

By this time, through a series of casual conversing encounters, I learned about the wife, the baby, and the marriage woes. Seeing as I’ve never been a mother, or an expecting mother, I could not precisely assess the root of her emotions. But I could make assumptions. They married young, too young to know any better, I suppose. This man held some sexually deviant characteristics, and these traits were buried deep in his own self-consciousness. So she married him, unaware of his needs, desires, and degree of hunger. When this heavy fact came to light, the discrepancy in each other’s preferences caused a turbulent ride to pregnancy. Now that pregnancy was upon them, the sexuality component diminished even more. Instead of practicing self-control, he chose to appease his appetite elsewhere.

He confided in me intimate details from his past and I talked him through his thoughts. Hearing about the marriage problems, and a developing interest in his well-being, I honestly wanted to help. I remember a few particular times offering advice in igniting some magic back into their lives.

He actually took my advice. I guess that’s where my selfishness set in. I felt important. I served a purpose, no matter how menial. I meant something to someone. My infatuation was stronger than I.

We kissed.

He was irresistibly intriguing, the way he would saunter into the store every morning, at least 10 minutes late. Jet black hair, constantly disheveled—evidence he slept late and rushed out the door. His shoulders slumped heavy with the weight of his own problems. He was broken. I was charmed. My heart warmed every time our eyes met, and through his sadness he managed a smile. I was selfish, I rationalized to myself, “If it wasn’t me, it would have been someone else. At least I can make sure he’s safe and look out for his well-being.”

A ridiculously arrogant sentiment from a teenager.  

I looked forward to work every night now. I knew each isolated, chore filled night, lead to an infectious connection the next morning.  As the burning orange greeted the deep indigo for a lilac horizon, our time together grew short. Soon, the next shift began. Avoiding suspicion amongst coworkers, my presence always expired before the next crew manifested. Our ever-expanding mornings together seem nothing more than a surreal fantasy now. This was the last time I remember prolonged, utter bliss. That’s the problem with intoxication: with every high comes a painful low.

Guilt along with lack of sleep broke me. The night before spring break I passed out, forcing a collision between my cheek and bathroom counter. For my personal health, I decided to quit. Painfully, I presented my feelings and reasons behind resignation. I planned to run away from it all and spend spring break in Texas with my parents. If only that was the end of this nightmarish wonderland. He wouldn’t let me go, he asked me to come back to the store and talk. Of course, my resistance (or lack thereof) reputation proved itself true, and I met him.  

After all this, I returned to him. To gaze at his face in the sunlight, to witness that sparkling warmth of his eyes for the very last time.

His shift had finished and he took me away from the store front, again to avoid suspicion. I sat slumped on the curb of the parking lot; defeat enveloped my whole reality. He squatted down, meeting at eye level. Even still, after it all, he stole my breath.

“Don’t go.” He implored so softly. He scooted closer, as if to fill the empty space left by the silence.

“We need you here. You do an amazing job.” His voice paralleled the strengthening degree of his persuasion.

Again, silence.

Sighing, he dropped his head as if there was a contagious aspect of my defeat.

“I need you.” To this, I began to tear up. Sleep deprivation has a way of making one weak in every situation.

“I want my mom.” Was all I could say in return and this was the truest of sentiments I expressed in a concerning amount of time. Secretly dating a man in his 30’s, while still technically a teenager, tends to age a person. In his eyes, I was an adult. More than the legal sense, but in the soul sense. I like to think I served more than a sexual thrill to him, but an actual companion. A person concerned for his welfare, and him mine. Someone offering understanding in a way he never before accepted.

“Shit” he muttered with exasperation and running his fingers through his mess of a head, “I forget how young you are.” He scooted me over and placed himself on the curb. I stared at the blistering asphalt. I forgotten how everything looked during the day. It felt completely alien, which only further my desire to extinguish the conversation.

“How about this,” he interrupted my examination. Curiosity brought my eyes to his gaze, “You take a little break. Go see your parents. Come back, refreshed and we’ll fix all of this. I just can’t lose you.”  My heart melted in his seemingly obvious truth. Though overdramatic, I believed his enticing plea.

This, of course, was not the truth. Only a bold-faced lie could manifest from such a fantastic fairy tale. He may have not recognized the malicious inevitable, and blindness overwhelmed me. Thoughts of visiting my family drew focus from the irresistible immorality.

Only hours pass before I boarded the plane, texting my anxious mother of my traveling status. With brief “I love yous” and “Can’t wait to see yous” from both the parents, I set my phone to airplane mode.

There was peace—a  relieving sense of invincibility high amongst the clouds. No communication with anyone on the ground, I found freedom to think and feel and examine without regard or priority to anyone but myself. I should have hidden in the starlight forever.

A sick irony stirred on the ground. Once gravity got the best of me, I immersed myself in the chaos of airport pick-up. Desperately searching for the comfort of my parents, I simultaneously struggled for my luggage. My tired and aching body ran on adrenaline. The tank was almost empty. Only the face of my parents granted a surge of energy as I approached the couple. Once settled, my parents suggested an outing to iHop, considering the late hour and lack of options. On the way to the magnificence of their house, we stopped.

Entering the establishment, my phone buzzes.

I read it.

The world stops.

“My wife found our texts while I was sleeping. She’s really upset this time. She’s never going to let me see the baby. IDK what to do, I feel like driving off a cliff.”  

Sitting in a diner booth, the insane ride finally came to its predicted crash and burn ending. I just never assumed it would all end in a diner, hours away from home. I take note of the world as I knew it. And I didn’t know much anymore. But I did know I was in Texas, in a diner, in the middle of the night. A twisted paradox arose from the discrepancy between my inner chaos and they chaos surely happening at home against the beautiful simplicity of the current setting. I gratefully examined the beaming faces of my excited parents. The restaurant glowed with a serene warmth as customers quietly enjoyed their comfort food and whispered amongst themselves. Even the harsh cold of that night’s twilight seemed miles away once a steaming cup of mocha found its way in front of me. I concealed the heart-wrenching effect of that written message. Smiling and conversing with my parents pleasantly, I ached from a depth within I never knew existed. The pain resonated from every joint, grappling my chest and poisoning my stomach. I hurt because I knew this was the end. But it was more than that. I hurt for him. A man I honestly loved currently enduring an extreme crisis causing panic, mayhem, and of course, pain. I longed to offer aid. But how can you help the sick, when you’re the disease?

I responded after my head ceased the sickly spinning.

“It’s going to be OK. Don’t do anything until I get back. Just wait for me.”

That’s all I could offer. The next morning, however, I was greeted by this man’s message, asking me to quit. I did as requested. I emailed the other boss, spelling out a bogus story of my immediate resignation. Something along the lines of “better for my mental health.” Fortunately, I was met with understanding and condolences.

It was over. Just like that, an infatuation grew into a love and died a lone soul. I was alone, hundreds of miles away, and there was nothing I could do about it. Words simply demean the painful concoction of the next few days. I never spoke to him again. I guess the worst part of being cut off is the waiting. That damn little sparkle of hope that things will mend. You’ll get a message. He’ll want you back. So you wait awhile for a miracle to happen.

And it just doesn’t.

You transition from the hopeful to the realistic. Reality brings home your rational side and you understand that the miracle won’t happen. It still hurts though. What was once in your grasp is nothing more than a fantasy. You wonder how you’re going to live with yourself? How are you going to heal from a situation that argues you deserve the pain?

I don’t condone my actions. I believe I am forever bound to shame. I am not looking for justification, validation, nor pity. I just hope this serves people. Either as a cautionary tale, or an understanding of those who feel alone and ashamed. I understand you are hurting. I understand you have been shattered by yours or someone else’s actions. That’s the problem when we disregard realistic repercussions, especially when our actions are driven by the heart.