I saw my wife reading Gretchen Rubin’s The Happiness Project and it was something I had stumbled upon on some book review site or summat at some point a while ago, and so when she wasn’t reading it I decided to skim through it as fast as I could. About halfway through I started getting bogged down with thoughts and decided I ought to write them down.
There are all kinds of simple ideas about happiness that hold true- I’m also reading Flow by Mihaly C at the same time and he writes about how nothing is new, everything has already been said, yet we’ve never really gotten around (until lately, maybe) to applying it systematically, to incorporating it into our broader systems… anyway the point is- as a species we don’t talk about happiness very much, we don’t do happiness very much as a collective- there have always been a few gurus and philosophers and wise folk who figure it out better than others (typically through experimentation and deliberate practice) and they tend to reach the same insights over and over again.
When you look at it that way, it’s almost ridiculous how primitive our (layperson) ideas are about happiness, and how we take it for granted- as though some people are just nicer and happier than others (and yeah, there’s some truth to that) and if you’re unhappy you’re more or less stuck that way… blah blah blah once you start this conversation you know how it goes (and it goes on for a long time, with questions and questioning-the-question and with observations and a-has and sighs).
This has been a long roundabout way for me to get to what I want to talk about- which is an insight I had lately as well as something that I’ve been noticing everywhere since I started looking for it: The importance of paying attention to your own mind, to seeing what you’re curious about, and pursuing that. I’ve written several things about self and identity and those are things that you can write entire books about- you could say that all of life and all of humanity is about the exploration of identity, and there’s no such thing a static self- a self is dynamic and constructed and complex and influenced by broader structures and other people, etc.
Despite all of that I think there is still some merit to the idea that there’s some sort of “Self” to be- the ideals that resonate with us, that we hold ourselves accountable to. Sure, it might be constructed and temporary and ultimately an illusion of some sort, but it’s still something we live with, still something we use day to day. One of the things about illusions is- even when you’re aware that it’s an illusion, you can still see it. Maybe that’s just me, but I believe that the magic is still magical when you find out how the illusion works- that adds to the effect, rather than subtracts. I saw a comment by somebody who said “Don’t study love, that just takes the mystery out of it”, and I found that incredibly ignorant (it literally is that- an appeal to ignorance). Scientists don’t appreciate the beauty of flowers any less because they’re aware of processes like pollination and fertilization, it only adds. How does it subtract? (Richard Feynman spoke beautifully about this).
Similarly, a careful exploration of what makes us human does NOT take away any of the magic or mystery or beauty of it all. Studying ourselves does not make us less human. (Maybe this is an idea perpetuated by the trope of mad/evil/crazy sociopathic scientists who approach people as meaningless digits to be played with. But this is often divorced from the reality of things, isn’t it? I can’t talk precise stats here, but from personal experience, anybody who’s exploring their curiosity in a subject matter typically gains more love for their subject, not less. Learning music theory doesn’t make you less capable of emoting. Learning science doesn’t make you any less able to appreciate art. This is an ugly, ugly misconception that needs to be killed. Knowledge is empowering and it allows us to have greater empathy… blah blah.
So I started writing this because I really liked Gretchen’s idea of “Be Gretchen”. For me, that would be “Be Visa”. In your case, that would be “Be Yourself”. Of course, by itself in a vaccuum that can be the most useless piece of advice anybody can ever give you. What does that even mean? They tell you to be yourself and then they judge you for not being who they want you to be. “Be yourself” is really just shorthand for “be sociable, comfortable, smooth, likeable, artful, skillful”. That’s what people really want. If “yourself” is narcissistic, needy, selfish, cruel, awkward, then nobody wants you to be that.
But if you dig past that- aren’t there certain ideas that just resonate with you, almost beyond explanation? The explanation seems to be after-the-fact. I often think about Calvin and Hobbes, and how I related immensely to Calvin, and how in a lot of ways I mirror a lot of his thoughts and behaviour. Now the question is- did I end up becoming more like Calvin because I read so much of him a a child? Or did I read so much of him as a child because something about him resonated with something within me, even back then? The causality probably runs both ways.
This is taking a little too long… (I’m planning to summarize all 1,000 word vomits into TL;DRs, if you’re wondering). I got around to thinking- so if there’s some idea of who Visa is, whether it’s emergent from what people have told me I ought to be, the books I’ve read, or something from within (or, most likely, all of the above), what is that idea? Sure, when you hold it up to intense scrutiny it all falls apart, but it does serve some utility…
TL;DR: I’m still not getting to the point, sorry. The point is that are certain things that I like the idea of doing, certain things that I feel compelled to do, certain things that I enjoy doing, certain ideas that I like exploring, and these things are closer to my “heart” than other things, and happiness is to be found in exploring these ideas and spending time in these activities.
One of these things is writing, so even if this entire post makes zero sense and makes zero contribution to the world, I’d feel happy for having written it because it is a part of a process that I identify with and relate to, that makes me happy. Sure, I’d still be me even if I never wrote a single thing ever again, but I like writing, and I think it’s important to know what I like. I like writing. I like singing, even though I’m not very good at it. I like music. I like playing guitar. I like having good, long conversations about life and meaning and art and communication and complex systems and management and decision-making and the organization and distribution of information and poker. I like narratives and storytelling and video games and words and characters and people. I like reading books and I’d definitely love to write books in the future. Yes. Yes. I definitely want to have a shelf of books that I’ve written. I want to build a tribe of people who care about big-picture things like space exploration and literacy and sanitation for all. I want to interview and have conversations with people doing awesome things. I want to inspire the people in my life to achieve their own greatness. I want to be smart and witty and funny and I like sex and dirty jokes and hearing about people’s lives. I talk too much and can get annoying and difficult and troublesome but I want to learn to be tactful and responsible. Routines and discipline were previously “not a part of me”, but now I realize they are a part of how I am to achieve the greater freedom and creativity and insight that I yearn to fill my life with. I want to leave a legacy of meaning and thoughtfulness and also fun and joy and kinky and sexy and beautiful.
None of this is new. None of this has been previously unsaid. I’m just meditating and focusing on what has always been within me, what I’ve always known, but maybe have been distracted from. If I like guitar and learning to play songs on the guitar makes me happy, then I should totally do that. I’m going to clean up my place a little, sort out my finances, do a little coding and take steps towards being the me that I want to be.
Imagination and conversation leads to a vision of what ought to be, grit and determination to commit to a struggle to make it happen, thoughtful contemplation and reflection to observe what works and what doesn’t, constant mindfulness and awareness to pay attention to see what works and what doesn’t, the scientific method we inherited (thanks, Francis and friends and predecessors) allows us to systematically accelerate evolution to create, in the world, from our minds, what we believe ought to be.
It’s exhilarating stuff. This word vomit has crossed 1500 words. Adieu. (Yeah the TL;DR wasn’t a real TL;DR but whatever man)
Pingback: summary of word vomits 51 to 60 | visakan veerasamy.