The second one was on Thursday and it went a lot better. We had a keyboard player with us, which really filled out the sound nicely. Too bad there were even less people at that show. But once the word gets out about this fantastic band he's got backing him...
Alison has started teaching her class again. Seems like a similar bunch of people to last time. But she's a little better organized this time around, and a little less nervous. Now if she can just figure out a way to make them do their homework.
["God" by John Lennon belongs here. I can't put it on yet because Castpost is down for maintenance. Grrr. Please hum it quietly to yourself while reading the following paragraph.]
This song has been in my head a lot lately, so I thought I'd put it on the old bloggio. It's kind of how I feel these days: a combination of Richard Dawkins' unyielding atheism and Krishnamurti's distrust of all spiritual precepts. I'm quite content right now to go around trying to find my own answers to the great and not so great mysteries, and undiscouraged if they're not forthcoming. The meaning's all in the search. (I like, by the way, how "Beatles" is the most shocking thing Lennon can think of not to believe in. I guess it probably was at the time.)It is kind of bothering me, though, that most people seem unwilling to take their own searches very seriously. Not in an individual way, mind you: I completely sympathize with how much effort is required of a person to constantly question the nature of things in this powerful self-propagating culture we've created, even given the belief that the unquestioned life is ultimately meaningless. More in an oh-no-the-entire-world-is-screwed-unless-everybody-starts-thinking-very-differently-and-I-don't-think-it's-going-to-happen-soon-enough kind of way.
Maybe the answer is to think of the human species as a failed evolutionary experiment. Or a biological example of Gödel's incompleteness theorem, which states that any mathematical system powerful enough to express anything interesting will be able to express propositions about itself that prove it either internally inconsistent or incomplete (i.e. unable to express other propositions that it should be able to express, because they would render it inconsistent). The biological analogue would be that any species smart enough to communicate intelligence intergenerationally will evolve ideas that either conflict with the species' own evolution or prove that it is not really all that smart after all. It's all language's fault, I'm convinced. Maybe homo mutiens will have a better go of it.
So, what else is going on? I'm working on some tunage with a couple of guys I've played with before, and that's hopefully going to develop into a serious musical project. More bass. I'm really having a fun time playing bass, so far. Could be I've finally found my instrument. Or more likely I've finally found my instrument of this week. I've also been contributing to some collaborative recording that Rich is working on. Speaking of which, it looks like the band is going to get to play at South-by-Southwest in Austin in March! We'll be down there for three days. If the other two times we've gone down are anything to go by, that'll be a complete blast. I'm already having olfactory hallucinations of cheap and delicious Tex-Mex.
I had a performance review at my job on Friday, which went very well. Nothing really to tell there. The work continues to be suspiciously fun and Satan has had no complaints yet about the soul he's been purchasing on layaway from me. Sorry, that sounds like I'm being insultingly metaphorical. Please understand that I'm talking about the ACTUAL Satan, and not any mere mortals.
Speaking of underworld-dwellers, we went to see Pan's Labyrinth with Meg and our friends Ron and Kristina on Friday. It was pretty good, I guess. Quite violent in the "realistic" parts. I don't know, maybe I'm missing some fantasy-enjoying neuron or something, because I just can't seem to get into the genre. I have no particular bone to pick with it or anything, but the fairy tales for adults just never really do anything for me. Is it the linearity of the plots? Their heavy-handed allegorical nature? Or the fact
that once magic has been introduced to a story all restrictions are effectively removed, making surprise impossible because ironically anything is possible? I can't say. But, as I said, I have no bone to pick with the infantile, unicorn-and-fairy-loving genre.That's enough for now. Gonna go play some MYOOOOOOO-zik! Cheers.
- Andrew
5 comments:
So, your diatribe would indicate that homo mutiens has yet to evolve; perhaps not a bad thing.
I think Dawkins is more about rationalism than unyielding atheism. He seems rather upset by the complete lack of reason in theological thought and rails most against the introduction of magic - much like your objection to other fairy tales for adults.
The reasoning in "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" is similar: resorting to magic nullifies everything. However, the thrust of "D D I" is there are no failed evolutionary experiments. Evolution has neither reason nor values. Some paths continue longer than others, nothing more.
Good news about Austin. Say "Hi" to Willie. Maybe by then you will be playing perch.
"Failed" only in the sense that human beings will cease to exist. I know evolution doesn't care about this. But I do. My (only partially facetious) point is maybe I'd be better off learning not to.
And Dawkins is pretty dang unyielding re. atheism. We should be rational, and if we are we must realize not only that God does not exist, but that believing He does is one of the more dangerous activities civilization has come up with.
I can't find any free way of putting audio files on the blog anymore! Blaaaargh!
- Andrew
In reverse order:
* Can you upload an MP3 file and call it a picture? Or resort to learning HTML (before MS makes it obsolete) to cause the "picture" to execute?
* Note the "And Dawkins" para. The focus is the rational, and, yes, all the rest falls from that. The irrationality of the true believers is at fault, but we have true believers because "You can't handle the truth."
* The Romantic poets had a similar problem. After extolling the virtues of Ma Nature for many years, a couple of them woke up to understand that Ma really doesn't give a shit one way or the other and is truly La Belle Dame Sans Merci (not sure of spellings). Drove at least one somewhat mad (or to cocaine). Just keep reminding yourself that Ma N doesn't care whether you care. And that is the part religion tries to cover over because most cannot deal with it.
Now for some veggie chili with chocolate infused therein.
* No.
* Yes, but this particular book is more about the corollary than a defense of the (near axiomatic for a scientist) thesis from which it is drawn.
* I shall remind myself as I jump off a tall building tied to a few complete strangers that gravity doesn't care what speed we are going when we hit the ground.
- Andrew
What are we talking about?
Mum
Post a Comment