I write as myself. Sometimes I write "true" and sometimes I write "true enough" in the keywords, to keep myself relatively honest; that is, when I consciously alter facts or aspects, or make a writerly compression. As I write these words I realize: for some of my truest pieces, it doesn't occur to me to add "true" in any form.
One reason I track my words, check myself, is because I am, like everyone I ever met, read, or heard of, a liar. At times.
In my most ecstatic and broken-hearted and hope-drenched moments, I share the conviction that we are real here, behind the tappity-tap. Our words are transmissions from flesh and blood. To forget that is too easy, to flame and blame and scour each other too easy; to offer easy words of consolation and warmth is too empty. Sometimes.
The internet is more than a means for transmission of who we are (or pretend to be). It is a supercollosalhighwayterminuscircus of noise and flashing signals and pyrotechnics. In a crowded box of infinite size. We must pull over sometimes and get out of our capsules, remind each other that there is more than one speed, that some of us choose to peddle, not zoom.
But what an amazing place. If some choose to bling their packet, use tinted windows, drive in a second skin? It is what makes this place so extraordinary. It is both ancient and brand new, this sly human identity issue.
I think Spinoza is on to something when he writes of our conatus, the inescable me-ness that drives us. It drives me to write with passion, pomposity, and umbrage. Some call for revealing our true selves, for never forgetting the trembling selves of others. Their "me-ness" insists: it is good for me, for you.
Not for everyone. Not all the time.
We drink deeply from the same well, of our shared humanity. But I do not despair of the internet or experiments with identity. I believe in everyday life we ossify in our Identities, lose sight of our repetitious choices to be who we are. We just plod daily in our conatus coma.
The net has given us freedom.
The more Identity work we do, the more aware we become. Consciously choosing our Identity, evolving our persona-- these are liberating acts. It is anti-statist, anti-nationalist. I think it is a powerful way we can see ourselves as Identity-less, as one who shares a common Identity with all human beings.
Spinoza says, in fact, the next step is to shed the Identity altogether. Shed is not the word -- there is no paraphrasing of Spinoza; I weaken his words -- transcend, or absorb might be better. But he also means that Identity is a shackle to our humanity. The Buddha says this, too.
I love good writing. I can connect with anyone here solely through their writing, liar or not, avatarnished or not, constant and consistent, or devilish and sly.
This, OS in particular, is at once a brilliant cross-connectivity, a grand guignol theatre, a buffo opera, a quiet conversation at poolside, a dark whisper in a cheap hotel, a manifesto nailed to the church wall, a laugh at death, a rude gesture at eternity. A recipe for soup. News from home. Startling wit, deep pain, sacred joy.
I allow everyone. I allow all identities. I am not so sure about hierarchies, of enlightenment being a series of progressives steps. I doubt it. Am I further along than someone who writes under assumed names? Are they ahead of me, getting more out of the writing exercise that is all writing here on OS, by trying on Identities and Voices?
It is not about wrong or right, this Identity thing on OS. It is first about the writing. True Voice comes through, no matter what.
It is a choice we have, to bare ourselves, to be true and self-consistent. Who among us can do that, without fooling ourselves regularly? We can choose to try. I am drawn to this, the need to refute the smallness of my upbringing, to connect with humanity. The boy in me who felt so alone growing up, I guess; I feel a need to stand upright, and declaim. Usually. And bathe in the human voices who respond.
But we -- I -- can also try on as many Voices and Identities and Perspectives as email addresses allow. And in doing so, shed the ancient tyranny of our class, caste, means, introversion, arrogance, ethnicity, birthplace, fixed Identity. This is New. This is Good.
Our humanity is essential, and moronically predictable: a few simple shared needs and urges. Our humanity is also kaleidoscopic, colliding, nefarious, generous, costumed, sneaky, inventive, playful, wicked, and infinitely subtle.
Allow this, methinks.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Seer
daisyjane
The Good Daughter
Chicken Mãâàn
the traveler
Ashley F. Miller
Salon.com
Comments
He is so full of shit. He acts like he read every word of The Ethics and knows Spinoza. He's an auto-didact and a poseur, a pseudo-intellectual who should be working instead of dilly-dallying on OS.
Shh, he's coming back...
"This, OS in particular, is at once a brilliant cross-connectivity, a grand guignol theatre, a buffo opera, a quiet conversation at poolside, a dark whisper in a cheap hotel, a manifesto nailed to the church wall, a laugh at death, a rude gesture at eternity. A recipe for soup. News from home. Startling wit, deep pain, sacred joy."
Grand guignol theatre indeed. Thank you.
Nedwoc: As a half-assed buddhist I must allow the truth of this, and defer to your bajeeniussness, dark and harsh as it is. I...no, I will not defend myself. Humility is a good thing.
(prick)
ClarkK: Thank you. and pay no attention to Nedwoc. He's approximately right, but he has issues.
Surely would bump the ratings up with the opera buffa crowd. Then again, would that be a good thing?
i've never felt the need to ask someone if a written piece was"true". even if it is total fiction, good writing always contains some truth about the writer...its inevitable.
lorianne: well said. Literary conventions are instruments for us. Beautiful, powerful writing can play out to reveal larger, more pertinent, and subtler truths. We are homo sapiens sapiens after all, the ape who thinks about thinking. Our language is us, as much as our toe of belly.
And inevitable. yep.
thanks.
supercollosalhighwayterminuscircus~~~
and that's what i love about good writing on OS regardless of whose name appears at the top of the page or who that person is pretending to be. and this piece is really good writing, a great start to my day. thanks.
The beauty of these words make such a good case for Art, as it helps us get closer to truth in whatever iteration, during whatever time and with whatever eyes we find the vision and understanding to see it.
I relate with you...xox
And you've said it very eloquently -- that this is a "supercollosalhighwayterminuscircus" and we're all just players.
p.s. your evil twin -- brilliant use of the identity-transfer-split-inclusion
femme forte: what a lovely comment. Thank you.
ClarkK: he he. "you in the back, pipe down!"
Martha: someone once used auto-didact pejoratively and accurately about me in a comment. I winced a little. I am now happy that I have not stopped learning. Thanks.
Con: You are thinking about Rinsand Spinzola, the notorious drunkard and professional cockteaser. He wrote hectameter poetry that was "discovered" in the Princeton stacks, inserted into a volume entitled "The History of Groats".
Gary: Art is good. Art is deliberate, intentional. One can make deliberate art without being deliberately deceptive, even tho it is wholly illusion, yes? Thank you.
Robin: Thank you. Bathing in voices is a little weird I guess. But it says it, the intimacy of the commenting process here, at times.
skeletnwmn: i realize the acronym of that word is problematic: SCHTS.
what evil twin? oh yeah, him. He make me forget he exists. It's how he rolls.
jimmymac: hands down the best, most compact summary of my point.
" Am I further along than someone who writes under assumed names? Are they ahead of me, getting more out of the writing exercise that is all writing here on OS, by trying on Identities and Voices?"
I've asked myself the same question, in reverse. But for now, this works for me. I write my truth, such as it is, knowing that it may be proved false, as memories can be, and shielding parts of myself that I am not ready to see in print, or to have commented on, for better or worse. And sometimes, I just ramble.
Owl: I really appreciated Jeremiah's comment to Emma's post. Emma's post was the inspiration for this post, btw. Belated credit. Emma raised relevant issues, even when I did not agree with her position. Trust is very important here. But how do we balance the awareness of the human behind these words, and the sanctity of abstraction; that is, how writing must be allowed to be art? Jeremiah's perspective, as a professional journalist, is a necessary check to folks like me and O'Really, who write without recipes. OS allows and suffers and underwrites all of us, from the astute Saturn Smith to the ecstatic Art James to the troubled BBE to the lovely neighbor MaryT. We can't be isolated islands. We influence and balance each other. Jeremiah's point -- about responding to each other's confusion and hurt as a community -- is based on compassion, and no judgement or proscription about writerly freedom.
O'Really: yeah, Jimmy is pithy and unflinching. He writes with his sleeves rolled up, the dirt still under his nails, fearlessly, too. Glad you stopped by. Thanks
suzie: what a fine comment. Thank you. I considered advising you not to mix drinks/read certain people in sequence, or else you'll get a headeache: if I am red wine then ____ is scotch, ______ is beer, _______ is Torrontes white.
Then I sobered up: OMG, what a brewhaha(sic) that would start!
James
What J. Hart wrote.
Tom Cordel. Etc.,
Amen.
Allow this metoothinks.
We're so utterly, utterly safe really. Let's play the big game.
Natalie: thank you for this kind comment. and hey, thanks, re the banner art. my work, part of a quilt design. (and thanks ClarkK)
AtHome: this is an exceptional comment. You honor me. thank you.
J Hart: yeah, or when, misguided or not, we think it protects or preserves or betters us. Usually, writing is the only safe way to be honest for sake of it, for the sheer guts of it, or to serve human development by revealing reality. And ironically that requires a false Identity, for most of us.
Art: your briefest comment ever. I am touched, i think, or else I regret that I did not inspire poetry.
wow, you ARE growing on me.
Gail: love this: "Let's play the big game". thank you.
" Here we have a luscious assortment of college age up, lovelies, smothering each other with slurpy kisses.
The illustrations are clear full color photos, of which some are posed others are spontaneous. In some of the photos do the young women go a mite past merely kissing? Well, in some cases good taste lascivious touching makes it difficult to resist wishing it were a film.
If you enjoy the beauty of women preparing to make love to one another, you will love this book, however it really never crosses the line from kissing and some touching to full scale female lovemaking.
A book for MEN, or women who would like to kiss other women and not in a sisterly manner."
Your bio on Amazon says this:
"I am goosebrain, doodlehead, living in China I am a painter (feet only, architect (i build outhouses), sculptor (only in soap), ping-pong star. Am also a liberal Clideneest, who swears like a priest and prays on his knees (a description of Gen Patton. as well).
I love sports, women over 25 and under 125 years of age. I also design manhole covers. I buy lots of books on dweedling and I read 2-5 books a day, hoping to improve my own swearing a lot. I took an early retirement at age 18 to make films. I shall do a screenplay of my novel The Gleed of Wampneyhausen, next year."
I googled you and found endless claims, made by you or on your behalf. What school, exactly, were you Professor for? You are either a fabulist of the first order, have a chemical imbalance/mood disorder, or are, in fact, the most manic, gifted, eccentric human who ever lived.
The first, I think; probably the second as well."
Hey, thanks for the the all complements, I am certain you are correct. You must be because you certainly seem to believe that bipolarism is fun. You appear to be the sort who carefully chooses a target, but has no clue as to whom or what he is getting himself into. Good luck with that friendly sort of appraoch...
If you do not, though, and are truly all that you -- and apparently you alone -- say that you are, then my remarks stands, above: you are truly an astonishing person, and I will respect the peculiarities of your comments and posts as your entitlements, given the energy and brilliance that it would take to be all you say you are.
But someone as smart as you say you are must surely see, and, I would hope, have a sense of humor about, how the available evidence, such as it is from the internet, suggests you might -- MIGHT -- be a fabulist, a buffoon, a trickster, a bullshit artist of rare and astonishing complexity, and someone who completely misrepresents himself to OS. And if so, it is either a long-term
and deliberate prankster hoax that tests the limits of what my post here is all about, or you are taking advantage of people's gullibility.
It's easy to make me eat humble pie: professor where? of what? can you verify any of you many and conflicting claims? You don't have to of course. After all, who am I but some scholar wannabe, auto-didact, poseur myself.
But Professor Emeritus Peter Bagnolo, let me gently suggest: confession is good for the soul, and here on OS we deceive as writerly and personal protection, not to aggrandize ourselves and mislead our friends for our vain gratification.
If you have been inflating yourself for years, and write about it here on OS in a straightforward way, or even start to, attempt to, I guarantee it will be admired, respected and marveled at by all.
Since you deleted my comment from your post and pasted it here, you might not see this now, or care to respond. S'OK. In my posts I have spoken often about the need to avoid flame wars, to have one's say then retreat gracefully. I do so now.
"One reason I track my words, check myself, is because I am, like everyone I ever met, read, or heard of, a liar. At times."
I too lie, at times. I now can track two or three old blog posts and realize, in retrospect, that I wasn't being as true as I now think I should have been. Or, possibly I was being as true as I could have been for that stage in my life. I only pray that God and family and friends forgive my inconsistencies and faux pas along the way.
Thoughtful insight, Greg.
This entire post of yours is bursting with insight. Like you, "I love good writing. I can connect with anyone here solely through their writing, liar or not,..." That, my friend, is so true. OS, for me, is more about form than content. I must remember that, when I do not agree with a fellow writer's content, I may, at the very least, admire his or her way with words. After all, is not OS a forum for literary expression? I assume that is why my liberal OS friends are liberal enough to even embrace my attempt at expressing conservative values. As you said, "It is not about wrong or right, this Identity thing on OS. It is first about the writing. True Voice comes through, no matter what."
Finding one’s “True Voice”, of course, is not an easy venture. Our only real choice is the choice to try. To quote you again: "It is a choice we have, to bare ourselves, to be true and self-consistent. Who among us can do that, without fooling ourselves regularly? We can choose to try." For those of us who feel the need to write, we must risk and try. That’s all we can do. Occasionally, our efforts engender the kindness of fellow writers so we may “bathe in the human voices who respond”.
Well said, Greg.
Love and Peace,
Dave