(no subject)

[adrienmundi]

I think most of my adult life has been focused on trying to identify the various things connected to or implanted within me, and then eliminating the unnecessary or unwelcome. Several definitions failed to make the cut: self as relational status; piece by piece, all mainstream labels of sexual identity; the man, and then woman label; as many layers of privilege as I can find and divest; religious/spiritual, (sub)cultural, political and national/regional identities. Some removal was easy, some more like chiseling away mineral deposits, and I'm starting to worry that much of it was/is like cutting at flesh with a sharp knife. I've often said that I don't believe in an essential self, and I still don't, but if all I have are low orbit personae, what will remain if I keep removing things external? Even if I do find something irredicible, will I have lost too much to be able to connect easily, if at all, to anyone else? From my current perspective, it seems like most, if not all, interpersonal avenues require bounding and defining by things I either have cut, or am in the process of removing. It still seems useful, if not necessary, but is it something that can't be recovered from?

Comments

[k-navit.livejournal.com]

Wow. I don't have any answers, but those are really, really good questions.

[adrienmundi]

And all that's the result of me having a good night's sleep. Freaky.

[gedanken23.livejournal.com]

Exhilarating, terrifying =)

What about the notion of a core personality, defined as the elements that cannot be voluntarily removed? Dont you think there are some things so basic that they cannot be chiseled away?

[adrienmundi]

That does seem to be the question, doesn't it? It seems like there's only one way to be sure, but what if it's a one way door?

[arjache.livejournal.com]

Think of identity as a flame. It grows by consuming new ideas, labels, and ideals. Some of these things burn longer than others. Some are just fads and go up in a puff of smoke. Some stay long enough to make a difference. And some are hardy, and burn with us for the rest of our lives. Even though they all become vapour in the end, every one of them leaves its mark on us - a mark of soot and ash, of things gone but still remembered.

[adrienmundi]

OK, but to run with that metaphor (rather than my paring), what if everything is consumed, leaving no source of fuel for the flame?

[arjache.livejournal.com]

I don't know. Perhaps even then there'll be embers from which to restore the flame.

[fairyhead.livejournal.com]

My first though, and I'm sure not all of it was inspired by my fire-bug-ness ... "That's ok, I've always got a big ol' gas can with me!"

While you may burn through sources, that doesn't mean that there won't always be new sources of fire, getting thrown onto the flames along the way. I think there will be fuel sources popping up that you can't even think of, right. (Aw, crap, who knew *that* was flammable?!?)

[adrienmundi]

I'm not sure I have your faith. I'm not sure I don't, but I'm not sure I do, either.

[skiadaimonos.livejournal.com]

The principle of the conservation of energy?

That is the whole point of the "essential self"--you are always you, whether in bacon-butter dressing or with a stalk of celery

[adrienmundi]

Something would (likely) remain, but would it be communicable, or even able to communicate?

And I don't understand the conservation of energy; you'll have to give me a little more to go on.

[skiadaimonos.livejournal.com]

Energy is neither created nor destroyed just transformed. Or something like that, according to the principle.

So i was gonna ask this on your newer post but sticking it here--why so much concern that change/flux/cycling will lead you somewhere that is a)bad and b)unchangeable? As common a trope as (sometimes one-way) "doors to somewhere" is, how much does it really happen in "real life" (aside From say, severe mental illness, which YOU DO NOT HAVE). Also, since the world of non-people is so kind to you, why would you be so afraid of hearing what it has to say and where it may lead you?
(not judgemental questions--genuine ones)

[adrienmundi]

It's not necessarily coming from not-people, this potentially impending new insight. On the contrary, it seems to likely have something to do with the world of people, me, and/or my relationship with it, and on that front, I think it is possible for there to be a great deal of not-goodness possible.

And, as much as it really pains me to admit this, the world of not-people has been largely inaccessible to me lately as well, alienation across the board.

[skiadaimonos.livejournal.com]

The question was on the perception of permanence

[adrienmundi]

That was one of the questions, yep.

I have issues with pragmatism; this isn't a secret, I don't think. I'm painfully idealisting, also not a surprise to anyone. I'm afraid of a chain of logic/reason that will lead me to conclusions that are inescapable, but unwelcome, that might make daily social life much more difficult. I'm also afraid that it may well come to the point that I'll have to abandon or ignore all sorts of things about which I strongly believe, and may even be correct about, just to be able to "get along". I don't know how I couldn't not take that as a betrayal of self and of principle.

So, maybe linguistically not "permanent"; maybe nonrecuperable, or devastating is closer to what I'm afraid of.

[servingdonuts.livejournal.com]

Trivial question, feel free to ignore: are the layers of privilege unnecessary or unwelcome?

[adrienmundi]

Extraordinarily unwelcome, predicated as all privilege is on inequity and unfairness. It bothers me, immensely, that I have more simply because others have less.

[skiadaimonos.livejournal.com]

what kinds of priviledge do you include here?

[adrienmundi]

Most, if not all, of the privilege associated with being in the assigned 'dominant' group of perceived class, sex, gender, skin color, birth origin, usw.