Secret Agent Man

 

Possession

The conceptual framing of one’s experience into spatial designations of ‘inner and outer,’ ‘self and other,’ ‘me and not me,’ ‘real and imaginary,’ shape, categorize, which through the force of habit and time coagulates into an assumed identity referred to as ‘me.’ Inversely, out of all that remains, the discarded elements of raw experience become what is not me; the dispossessed, unseen, invisible, incomprehensible “other.” Possession is the coagulator of the psyche’s primary boundaries that form an identity.

 

The_Wounded_Angel_-_Hugo_Simberg

Hugo Simberg [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Influence

Extending outward from one’s identity, the habit of ownership eventually include one’s experience, as it is put to memory, and the reflections absorbed into the private realms of awareness. As we come into contact with others who inhabit public or shared places a consensus, or shared reality then affirms and negates their accuracy and value. Our subjective states categorize the world, both private and public, into, among other things, truths and falsehoods predicated upon our buy-in to the consensus experienced within a cultural context, invisibly absorbed, contained and supported. One’s internal, private divisions tend to reflect and reciprocate public, external divisions. Private and public are then, two aspects of a dynamic pole defining both our individuality and the culture that often reflects the loudest and most resonant ideas and beliefs – devaluing or rejecting what lies on the perimeter and beyond; invisible, discarded, unacceptable or unbelievable according to the consensus as one experiences, absorbs and understands it.

Ideas about ourselves and others, rather than remaining fluid, tend to congeal into static objects by the force and habit of our mental states, thereby cementing for each of us a personal ‘self’ that negotiates definitions of “others.” Beyond, a privation or abstraction of a larger boundless reality remains hidden from awareness and sometimes denied any existence at all to the degree that consensus belief, opinions and buy-in influence the permission given for consideration and valuation of the private states we all experience.

The inability to incorporate and validate the existence of private experience constitutes a loss of dimension and depth, and risks reducing what is by nature fluid into static events and figures of ‘me’ and ‘you.’ What I am then becomes defined by what I censor and can articulate from experience – through the skills, body image, gender and generation that contextualize my experience. What I am not remains dispossessed, unknown and can only be seen by what is rejected – including how others are perceived to be, or to have, that are not mine. The eyes become I’s, the nose no longer knows, and the ear cannot hear.

Consciousness then, abstracts experience into concepts of what is real and imaginary, mine or not mine, friend or foe, true or false. Because our modern myth deems it culturally unacceptable not to accept, believe or buy into the existence of a one true objective reality, imagination is rarely understood as that primary aspect of each person’s experience which apprehends; filtering according to the habits of one’s culture, time and place, but rather is believed to be a special instance of ‘creativity:’ a gift that we either have or have not.

256px-Fleming's_paperback_Bonds

Agency

The more one’s agency looks to the consensus for validation rather than to one’s experience, which may not be consensual but rather deeply private and subjectively interior, the less agency one might avail towards the more interior realms of experience. Without a sense of one’s own agency, and its direct access to a reality less censored by either one’s own habits of filtering, or influence from the consensus, we in turn risk denying the existence of agency to other beings. Agency here is understood as the source and ability to apprehend and that which enables us to experience at all – to reflect, evaluate, reveal, hide and express. The less we can distinguish between our private direct experience and consensual filtering, the less agency available to us.

It’s no wonder that both the invisibles; God, or the gods, or even the visible living have become dead to us. Rather than experiencing any direct communion with the invisibles, it’s replaced with belief in ideas or opinions shared among visible beings and approved through a consensus of public agreements, however we come to define them.

Without acknowledging direct, private experience we submit our agency; our ability for true communion, to the human level of the so-called experts of our time, place and public opinion. As we seek for knowledge and power outside the agency of direct experience, the experts proliferate as god-like voices that provide a shared containment for an agreed upon objective reality that serves to validate our deprived and seemingly hopelessly subjective self.

 

1024px-Clonfert_angels-_south_(adjusted)_2006-06-21

The less we avail ourselves to direct experiences of private states in which we encounter all that visibly or invisibly influences us, and in turn give full agency and permission to have these direct encounters, the more we fall prey to influence as it appears to us in any form; invisible, human, or consensus opinion. The power of unseen influence is then replaced by consensual sources within the visible, human world – making heroes, villains, saviors and saints out of those affirmed and believed to literally have power. Through consensual experience we reject any notion that power might come from unseen, invisible sources. We then look to humanity for power, placing our devotions at the feet of individual public figures, crowned as leaders, professionals or experts, rather than understanding the human condition through an ongoing personal practice of expanding one’s apprehension and senses born of subjective experience. The idealism, perfection, purity once belonging to the gods, is now a choir of fallen angels echoing god-like voices in the human world, placing an impossible burden and expectation on people just like us; limited, frail and faulty.

 

Beware of pretty faces that you find
A pretty face can hide an evil mind
Oh, be careful what you say
Or you’ll give yourself away
Odds are you won’t live to see tomorrow

Johnny Rivers

I’ve Just Seen a Face…book

Ahhh Facebook! In response to my post yesterday in which I announced the creation of a Facebook page for The Ptero Card, Don, a fellow blogger over at A Candid Presence, said he’d love to hear my thoughts on Facebook, so, here goes…with one huge disclaimer:

At one time or another, with the exception of playing games, I have participated in every aspect of the Facebook experience – from mudslinging in the comments section to hit-and-run posting. Perhaps the captive audience that Facebook presents to each of us places us in unfamiliar territory and by communicating to everyone at once (all of our friends, each of whom we know in very different and particular ways), we lose the sense of tailoring our speech to any one particular person. And although I no longer regularly post on Facebook, every criticism noted here just as easily applies to myself as it might to others. I’ll end on a positive note by summing up what I see as a few of the potenial benefits that Facebook does provide.

I’m probably not alone in appreciating that Facebook, like a lot of internet technology, brings us ways to bridge geographic and chronological distances, while offering all of us an opportunity to create a public square of our own making. But knowing people on Facebook is very different then knowing them offline or through the blogosphere, which I see as spatially different.

On WordPress bloggers meet each other in the semi-private and personal places of their blogs. It’s more like visiting someone in their home. Bloggers find each other through common interest discovered online. That might be why people are, for the most part, a bit more respectful and kinder to each other here. I’d love to hear any thoughts my blogger friends might have on what makes the atmosphere here different from Facebook.

If WordPress resembles a visit to someone in their home, what kind of place does Facebook resemble?

File:Pointe-a-Calliere Public Market 2012 - 44.jpg

Courtesy of Wikicommons, Jeangagnon

Participating on Facebook feels as if I have walked outside my house, into the street that is now a public market.  But no matter how near or far, all of my “Friends,” along with their friends, are also in varying degrees, present there. What we find in this shared place is a trail of conversations, some already in progress, – check-ins, memes, games, and photos, all with their likes and comments trailing behind them. Spatially, except for private messaging, it is a public place and always looks just like Facebook wants it to look like; very impersonal and very collective, because Facebook does not allow customization of their pages the way that WordPress and other social media software do.

So we meet our Friends in a public market, only we’re not necessarily buying and selling, we’re sometimes there to let others know that we’re not there, via the Facebook check-in feature, or we’re there to participate in game apps or to let others know how we feel politically, or about social causes and issues. But instead of presenting an idea in our words, we borrow someone else’s meme.

Perhaps for some of us, it feels safer to post memes to our newsfeed because they carry the weight of collective opinion with them. I get it, but…should we at least drop the pretense that we want a world in which we think for ourselves? Memes are kind of like creativity condoms, they keep a certain amount of creativity from being born. But, do we really want the wellspring of human talent to be reduced to what can be said in 2 x 2 cartoon, one that usually ends up getting shared only because of its viral nature?

On Facebook there are no introductions between your friends and friends of friends, or other’s friends of friends. We all just show up at the market place wearing our name tags and doing as we do. We freely not only talk to strangers, but sometimes even argue with them.

Facebook offers a prompt to help us post – in case you’re not sure of what to post, but you want to post something. “What’s on your mind,” or “How are you feeling today,” are the auto-generated questions that show up in the posting box at the top of my news feed.

MR MAGOO READING COLOR CROP Every time I post to my newsfeed I wonder if there’s anything I really want to say to all 134 friends of mine at once. There are no visual clues as to who you’re talking to when posting to the newsfeed or who is even listening. It’s something akin to playing pin the tail on the donkey, you post and when someone likes your post or comments on it, you know you found the donkey. So the face-to-face contextual relationships that we experience offline are abandoned for something a little more impersonal. Scary for some, freeing for others.

On Facebook I am often surprised at how willing many people are to show sides of themselves that are not often seen offline. I’ve known many of my Facebook friends for a long time and had no idea what political or religious affiliations they have. It truly seems as if people use Facebook to say things they either couldn’t put into words, didn’t have the nerve to say to your face, or perhaps say things that are not aimed at anyone in particular because maybe no one ever asked, so now we have a place to unload all those things that we really do want to say to each other or at least to some cumulative sense of humanity that we think needs to hear us.

Okay, before you all unfriend me, here are the things I do like about Facebook:

Staying in touch with friends and family who live far away.

Getting reaquainted with old friends and family.

Seeing friends’ photos of places I’ve never seen and perhaps never will. Seeing photos of friend’s families and kids.

Knowing when people are having a difficult time and in need of some words of encouragement or prayers.

Being aware of creative activities that friends are involved in – from music performances, crafts, writing projects, graduations, community involvement or news of family and friends or the passing of a loved one. The creativity and generosity of my friends never ceases to amaze me. Like.

According to CNN, CEO Mark Zuckerberg is the 2nd largest philanthropic donor in the US:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/12/tech/social-media/zuckerberg-top-philanthropist

Facebook

I have created a Facebook page to link my posts to. I see others have done this and have decided that it’s a good way to stop publishing my blog posts to my personal page.

IMG_20130824_091450_273I am not a big user of Facebook, for a variety of reasons, and perhaps someday I’ll write about that!

A big thank you to all of my dear followers and readers for making WordPress my favorite online place to hang out.

Peace,

Debra