How do I write?

  In one of the infinitely many universes someone has queried me and asked how I write what I write and what my strategy for discussion and thought is. I am very much a present writer, technicalities aside (like the nanoseconds between events and our actual sensing) I write things and experience my writing in much the same way that readers experience it. I really don’t know what is going to come next most of the time and I just go with the flow.

  Ever since I was young(er), to be more accurate 7 years ago, I have written poetry and fiction in almost the exact same fashion. I sit down and I write whatever comes to mind, I watch it unfold and I enjoy it as an experience even though I am the one providing that experience. For many years I’ve been interested in Psychology for no larger a reason than to just understand myself, it has slowly grown from that to trying to understand everything however without an understanding of the self I don’t feel it is fair to assume one can understand anything or anyone else.

  At any rate I write something once, I may read it once again after I write it, but I rarely-if ever-fix any mistakes in my writing. I’m more lenient in this system with fictional stories as typos can screw the entire meaning of something up and create pretty large problems for further chapters however in poetry I almost never look back. Once it is written it is complete, and it’s been something that I’ve always been pleased with. I think it adds a level of authenticity to my work, it helps show it as something that even I won’t ever fully understand, which in the case of a few poems is entirely true. I look back on them and I’m just in awe that I wrote them, not necessarily because of some sort of amazing quality, but because I can honestly not remember what I meant by them. I have a newfound interest in them and it makes me happy. I hate habituation and my writing style seems to help me avoid it to a pretty substantial degree.

  So for anyone who ever reads my fictional works or my poetry, keep in mind that you are seeing it likely from the same side of the table as I am. I don’t know if that adds or detracts from anything in the works but I hope it does give it another dimension that it didn’t formerly have. Many times the analytical me is trying to understand what the creative me is doing and its a very disturbing disconnect at times. If that makes no sense imagine watching yourself writing something and in no edge of your current conscious self do you see any blueprints laid out for what you are watching unfold in front of you.

  I hope this was at least enjoyable for some folks, it just seemed like it needed to be said, if nothing else so that I could read it later.

By | 2009-03-11T16:42:27+00:00 March 11th, 2009|Journal|Comments Off on How do I write?

Sweet Song

These soft
almost silent
swift winds
carry carols
the fatal
calling card

Death kisses
treats all
chocolate covered

so when
the whisper
comes calling
the strangers
an infinitely
dark embrace
a place
of infinite grace

By | 2009-03-11T15:52:04+00:00 March 11th, 2009|Journal|Comments Off on Sweet Song

Adam and Eve: God was a terrible Parent

   I think such a bold statement requires a bit of introduction so without further adieu here is “Adam and Eve” for dummies. I’ll then relate it with modern day and why I feel that God was a terrible parent.

  For whatever reasons, God created man from dust (or whatever silicone based material you fancy) and then made a fancy garden. After this God created a whole bunch of animals, if it was badass and fun to be around the garden had it. However none of these animals made a good friend for Adam, not even the cute Siberian puppies :(. Well God decided “Hey I got a great idea!” and knocked Adam out yanking out of Adam’s body one of his ribs (It was that one that the other ribs hated). From that rib God created the smoking hot Eve and set the two out into the garden to get with the multiplying and being fruitful. Now the rules were simple. “Alright you two. You can eat absolutely ANYTHING in the garden as long as you don’t eat from the garden of Good and Evil.” The two agreed and gleefully went around having fun. Indeed they were essentially utterly innocent (read: Gullible) adults.

  Now, as you would expect, a Serpent either got into the garden or was made when God was going SimAnimals all over. That slick little bastard went up to Eve and slyly tricked her into eating from the tree of Good and Evil. Essentially the conversation went something like this: “Hey you should eat some of that fruit.” “But dad said we can’t eat from the Tree of Good and Evil.” “Well yeah I know but that isn’t the tree, its just like, a similar one.” “Oh coolio! *munches*”. At this point she chucks one over to Adam who is likewise interested. “Hey this is good fruit right?” “Yes. It’s safe.” So he gobbles it down and now the two can see evil, hate their bodies, and God pops in and kicks their asses out. Also God forces women to have painful childbirth, just to make sure the message hits home.

  So for those confused on my point lets look at a modern example. You have a child, and you tell the child to not touch boiling pots. However you likewise do not tell the child exactly what a boiling pot looks like, you just say “all other pots are fine.” Now, you have no other job besides taking care of this child, however you leave a boiling pot on the stove and you go off to do whatever you are doing.

  Now the neighbor is an asshole and he comes in and tells your young child that they should touch the boiling pot on the stove in the following manner: “Hey little Adam you should touch that shiny pot right there. Your parent said it was ok to touch pots.” “But isn’t that the boiling pot?” “Oh of course not silly. The boiling one is…ugh…over there.” To which your child yanks down the pot horrible scalding them across there entire body. Now you return to find your child scalded, would you then punish your child with child birth pains and life outside of your home, or would you punish the neighbor for fucking with your kid OR would you punish yourself for not paying attention to your only child?

  This is not to say some ridiculously negligent creator doesn’t exist. But I would argue that if a deity like this cannot take care of two people, how on Earth do millions (if not Billions) of people honestly feel that this being is able to keep up with the everyday events of their life? Freedom of thought and action has nothing to do with proper protective care. This was nothing more than negligence that, given the powers of the parent involved, seriously requires involvement of some sort of inter existence court.

  Just seems like a pretty poor case to punish all further generations for. It’s certainly been a problem I’ve had with the entire story for a while.

By | 2009-03-10T20:47:57+00:00 March 10th, 2009|Journal|Comments Off on Adam and Eve: God was a terrible Parent


Dogs Dream of Silver Seamed
Bones buried beneath
Mounds of magnificent Earth
Indeed everything
With mind wide enough
Finds the worlds of night
Dancing delightedly
Within their heads
Eyes closed upon hope
that darkness brings sweets
Nighttime Nectar
Left with the sunrise

Dreams build bridges
between streams
unseemly boundaries
raging waters
of failure and fixation
upon misfortune
Dreams conquer
the weakened state
that is life
below the sun

Someday maybe
build a thing
a contraption of sorts
cogs twisting within the clouds
smiles churning like ice cream
pouring into bowls of diamond
crystal clear shining stars
billions battling
Galactic Gallery
then we’d see
that dogs dream

By | 2009-03-10T13:26:05+00:00 March 10th, 2009|Journal|Comments Off on "Dreams"

Comprehension: Color Blue Vs. God

  It’s official I have apparently hit a point where I set off at least one persons matchbox. So I figured I’d write a post on this topic so that when they get angry and Google someday they end up here ;). Likewise it provides all of you with something interesting (I hope) to read. Perhaps even a bit of redundancy once again if I brought it up before.

  Theoretically since before the beginning of time (to some folks) there was an entity or perhaps entities that defied all forms of logic and decided to create something from the vast nothingness in all directions. Certainly an intro that would sell a couple of books methinks. What we are to take for granted is that something so amazingly vast, powerful, seemingly the pinnacle of all thought power and any other trait humanity finds valuable, a convenient coincidence is an entity that we, beings with noses less accurate than dogs, ears less accurate than bats, and eyes less accurate than a verifiable arcs worth of animals supposedly have good sense enough to just ‘know’ that something out there exists. However I put forth, if we can understand something as vastly powerful and infinitely old as a deity, theoretically we should be able to “in words” explain in good enough detail anything else that is lesser than such a being. For it would come to reason that absolutely anything lesser than god would be child’s play in our hands if we can indeed grasp the thought processes of something that wouldn’t even (one would surmise) belong to any realm of understanding we have, seeing as this being or beings can overwrite or at the very least create laws that all things must follow (and thusly is freakishly gifted in possible activities).

  But I would like to take it a big step down, I realize that technologically its unfair to assume that we could explain any of the trillions upon trillions of things that exist outside of our senses. Sure we can’t see almost all life on Earth with our naked eye, but hey that’s just not as important as being able to sense the greatest form of life (well technically not alive in the conventional sense since living things are bound by natural law). It just seems incredibly naive of me to think that man can overcome arguably the greatest question that the universe has to offer yet cannot break down something as simple and elementary as color.

  Indeed I would argue that until a language has the power and versatility to describe a base color, without any visual examples (like showing a blue shirt), to a person who has never seen or knows blue, that that same language is entirely incapable of describing something more complex than blue. You can say that a color is merely a frequency of light, but that does nothing to generate the same mental image of blue in others as you. It’s not to say God isn’t real (however my personal belief is pretty obvious) but I feel that it is wrong headed to think that “Yes we can understand God…that’s easy peezy. But color, now THAT’S complicated.”

By | 2009-03-09T19:29:23+00:00 March 9th, 2009|Journal|Comments Off on Comprehension: Color Blue Vs. God