November 28, 2008
-
“In my head, there’s a greyhound station…”
The land of thought stretches far and wide, with many paths of thought leading to far off locations, some weird and eerie, some thick and difficult, some full of nonsense and silliness. The main metropolis is where most people usually are, wondering where they put their keys, what to have for lunch, how cold it is outside today, and all the practical thoughts which are bound to prompt our attention each day.
But the mainland gets busy and crowded, and young souls get bored and start going for a walk away from the city, skipping along, restless for something else. There are so many paths to take, as each thought we have is a turn down a more and more improbable path, until sometimes you end up in such an odd place you wonder, “Has anyone even been here before?”
Some thinkers have founded entire regions that you can visit by reading their works. And I certainly am glad that when I think about things other philosophers have, I am not lonely in exploring the terrain, but rather I have a friend who is well acquainted with the area there with me. They show me around the place—they are always the most hospitable hosts—though afterwards I often wonder what gave them the idea of settling down in such a place, and I will move on.
Many philosophy students today spend their time in philosophy doing this very thing, charting lands that philosophers have already explored, traveling back and forth between different ones, trying to explain the political relationship between the two regions. But I don’t find that very interesting—exploring is what I like to do.
Unless, of course, the land is not even real. Then it is very hard to think of it on your own. That is why we must let Tolkien, Lewis, Carroll and others lead the way to where they have settled, and we have much fun together indeed. Seeing where any author takes us, the world they have invented, is a most enjoyable adventure; they have spent much time decorating the place just the way they like it in eager anticipation of entertaining guests, and now they invite us in one at a time to show us their world.
But the best thing, I think, is when someone has lived a whole life that expresses one way to be, and you don’t have to be lonely feeling that way yourself sometimes. When someone else has expressed something in their art, their works, their life, you don’t have to feel illegitimate, for once they die and we have an idea of who they were, they stay in the place we imagine them. Hopeless romantics visit Petrarch, those full of wonder visit Pascal, the devout visit à Kempis, the adventurous visit London, and those marveling at life visit Dickinson. And how amazing it is to stand before a shelf of classics and stretch your arms out wide before it, exclaiming, “Oh all the places I could go!”
And that is why you must never feel too timid to settle new lands yourself, because you never know if someone else will thank you later, for when they wound up sojourning there themselves they were glad to have some company.
Comments (9)
Mwahahahahaha… another double-posting. Quite the cheater to your beloved Xanga, aren’t you? And with *Facebook??* I get it. She’s younger, sleeker, more well-liked. But poor Xanga has been faithful all along…and you double-post.
Good thing you posted on here first. That can be the prelude to the enormous diamond ring you’ll have to buy her.
On a serious note, you get an A+ for post-awesomeness. I was thinking something along this exact same line yesterday. Kudos for recognizing the importance of wonderful past thinkers and writers to future ones.
And my Xanga is sad and empty. *hint…hint…*
Glad to know that there are still explorers in this territory. For the very curious and restless here are a few lonely ones who have not had many follows: Maurice Blondel, the Catholic French philosopher who traveled into the immanent world (the indwelling) and who was misunderstood; Vladimir Soloviev, the Russian philosopher who dared to try and unite the Orthodox Church with Rome, and who’s thought is so pure… and he sees the world of ideas so clearly that I’m sure he has a front row seat.
Thanks in advance to anyone who’ll visit my lonely friends.
So… since your mind has a Greyhound busy station inside, tell me. What do you do with the hobos and drunkard that arrive? Just curious…
Again, you point out the second greatest thing of books! The world of words is a world all its own and it’s easily vast enough to get lost in. Although there are different countries, fiction or nonfiction, the world of words is the same when distilled. I think Stephan King explained it best: writing is telepathy. With combinations of 24 symbols, those are transcribed onto paper or stone. And from there, those thoughts span time and space to connect with people you’ll never know.
It doesn’t stop there either! Just as word trap a thought, words also trap a piece of the writer. For instance, you can come back and read my comment ten years from now. It’ll still portray the same thoughts, but they will be thoughts from a person who no longer exists. In ten years time, the writer (myself) would have changed and grow so much, I would be entirely different from the person who writes this now. If so much of time, character, and meaning can be caught in a simple comment like this, how much more in a two hundred page book, eh?
Through books, one can travel time, space, and place without leaving the comfort of the EZ-Boy chair and steaming teamug.
As for pioneering new lands? Ah, there is nothing more absorbing than a white, blank page of paper! The beauty of it cannot be pinned down with words, for how does one describe emptiness? Unimaginable potential? The boundless possibilities trill in silence, in darkness.
I wonder if God had similar feelings as He hovered above the darkness and waters at the beginning of the world. Gazing down, much like a writer gazing at a white page, I think He could see all of creation in His mind that would soon fill that emptiness.
Fantastic entry.
I grew up in the world of Roald Dahl. Ah.. I’ll have to revisit one of these days.
@monobeam -
Those guys look really cool! Thanks for pointing them out. It said Soloveiv was the inspiration for Alyosha in The Brothers Karamazov, which I have read, so it will be interesting to see if such a character can actually be real (he’s the incarnation of goodness in the book, practically).
@Yume_Shii -
In ten years a completely different person? You don’t think we have some essential unchanging essence that, although we do change, stays as the central part of you throughout life? For I think they are both true, that we change, but that we also are, such that when I remember things I am remembering things from my life. If I were a completely different person now, then it would seem like I was remembering events about someone else – but there seems to be a common denominator that makes it the same person.
It is good that there is so much variation possible. Every single sentence departs you that much further from what someone else would have written. At least there is one thing we need fear not – that someone else out there is writing the exact same thing as us. At least, depending on how long it is. But if you write a sentence with any sort of interesting content, it is probable that only you have written it, at least recently.
@yello_lego -
I never read more than a short story of his, but the Gene Wilder version of Willy Wonka is one of my favorites.
Maybe I’m not made for him, he’s made for me.
I don’t know how he feels, just me.
@StrokeofThought -
Sorry. I guess that was a sloppy use of the adjective “completely”.
Rather I should say, I’d be unrecognizable ten years from now; the same as I am unrecognizable from the person who I used to be ten years before, not only in appearance, but also in mentality and demeanor.
In all honesty, it’s difficult for me to tell whether or not a central unchangeable core exists within people. I see around me many people having a very cemented centrality. Yet, I do not. [By this, I hope you don't mistake me. I am not one to flit through various social definitions or subcultures. Rather by change I mean the unceasing race to better myself and my expand outlook; running such a race does change a person.]
Where do the barriers fall? What levels of being are there and what parts are only “surface” and “fluid” and what parts are “essential” and “eternal”? I need those definitions before I could talk much. However, I do agree with you. It’s not entirely a matter of either/or. A mix of solid and fluid make up the non-physical human being.
At the core of it all, God is the only One unchanging. So, Christians do indeed have an unchanging essence within themselves as Jesus Christ the Lord resides within them.