The thing with fictional characters is that they don't come out of character to talk to the audience about themselves as characters. How do you fit that into this metaphor or whatever it is?
It also might be important for whatever i'm going through now that I take the mask off sometimes. Although, I'm sure that there's just another mask underneath it. And one underneath that. Who the fuck knows how many there are. Dozens? Is there even a way to take them all off? Maybe not.
I don't think I'll ever be able to figure it out if I don't keep writing and publishing though.
Maybe you could somehow get underneath all the masks and find the raw organism itself, but it seems to me the goal is to develop a mask that's flexible enough to work in all the situations you're likely to encounter.
My question is about who you're speaking to in this post. Like, you're not speaking directly to the guy who sent you that message. Nor are you speaking directly to anyone who wants to hear from the guy who wrote the previous post. It feels more like you're explaining yourself to some hypothetical jury who's not actually here. How do you see this?
But am I on the jury? I mean, I already know you're not guilty.
Even if you only need 12 people to move, how certain are you that there's even one of those people actually reading this? Or, is it more like you're putting on a mask that worked in the past and you're hoping it'll work again?
😂 I mean, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't putting on 'ol trusty to see how it fits.
I suppose what I'm hoping for is that the old mask will do something different as the guy underneath it changes. Or something like that.
(but I mean, I'm 100% certain that there's at least one of those people reading this. I've already confirmed it. Probably dozens, but I can't quite say i'm 100% on that -- i can go as high as 80%.)
Just to be clear, are you 100% certain that 100% of the words in this post are applicable to this one person, and 100% certain that this one person is on the fence, and 100% certain that this person is actually reading the post, not just subscribed? I'm being so specific because I'm trying to ascertain how tight the feedback loop is.
I don't think I was trying to "explain myself" so much as I was using the response to make a point. Or at least, that's how I felt as I was writing it... more like riffing crowd work at a transformation/comedy club.
But I can see how it reads that way -- that I was trying to explain myself.
As for the jury, I mean — I suppose you might be right. I might be explaining myself to a hypothetical jury. But they are "here." You're on the jury. I'm not doing it because I need all of them to exonerate me. I don’t need 12 (or 300) people to agree or like me… I might just be trying to connect with a few who will move out of the jury box and hang out at my place.
I mean, I think the truth might be something like "I'm still trying to teach things and rebuild my consulting business, but maybe i'm not smart enough yet (or a good enough writer) to accomplish my purposes without breaking character."
I can most certainly use parable and story to teach things, though. And I can do it without breaking character.
I'm curious what another version of the question would be... but i'm glad you asked. I will be thinking about it too.
Or maybe I should never be without a mask when i'm doing things online? Maybe if I figured out how to do that, I wouldn't be that interesting.
Maybe I can figure out how to take them all off in intimate, personal relationships. Maybe that would make my relationships better, stronger, more sustainable...
The thing with fictional characters is that they don't come out of character to talk to the audience about themselves as characters. How do you fit that into this metaphor or whatever it is?
It's some meta shit, man. A new kind of fictional character. Even I don't know what he's going to do next. (good question)
Yeah, definitely meta. I feel like there's a better way to ask my question, but I'm not sure what it is. Let me think for a bit.
It also might be important for whatever i'm going through now that I take the mask off sometimes. Although, I'm sure that there's just another mask underneath it. And one underneath that. Who the fuck knows how many there are. Dozens? Is there even a way to take them all off? Maybe not.
I don't think I'll ever be able to figure it out if I don't keep writing and publishing though.
Maybe you could somehow get underneath all the masks and find the raw organism itself, but it seems to me the goal is to develop a mask that's flexible enough to work in all the situations you're likely to encounter.
My question is about who you're speaking to in this post. Like, you're not speaking directly to the guy who sent you that message. Nor are you speaking directly to anyone who wants to hear from the guy who wrote the previous post. It feels more like you're explaining yourself to some hypothetical jury who's not actually here. How do you see this?
But am I on the jury? I mean, I already know you're not guilty.
Even if you only need 12 people to move, how certain are you that there's even one of those people actually reading this? Or, is it more like you're putting on a mask that worked in the past and you're hoping it'll work again?
thanks for the insightful questions, dude. I appreciate you being here.
😂 I mean, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't putting on 'ol trusty to see how it fits.
I suppose what I'm hoping for is that the old mask will do something different as the guy underneath it changes. Or something like that.
(but I mean, I'm 100% certain that there's at least one of those people reading this. I've already confirmed it. Probably dozens, but I can't quite say i'm 100% on that -- i can go as high as 80%.)
Just to be clear, are you 100% certain that 100% of the words in this post are applicable to this one person, and 100% certain that this one person is on the fence, and 100% certain that this person is actually reading the post, not just subscribed? I'm being so specific because I'm trying to ascertain how tight the feedback loop is.
I don't think I was trying to "explain myself" so much as I was using the response to make a point. Or at least, that's how I felt as I was writing it... more like riffing crowd work at a transformation/comedy club.
But I can see how it reads that way -- that I was trying to explain myself.
Agree 100% on the development of a flexible mask.
As for the jury, I mean — I suppose you might be right. I might be explaining myself to a hypothetical jury. But they are "here." You're on the jury. I'm not doing it because I need all of them to exonerate me. I don’t need 12 (or 300) people to agree or like me… I might just be trying to connect with a few who will move out of the jury box and hang out at my place.
I mean, I think the truth might be something like "I'm still trying to teach things and rebuild my consulting business, but maybe i'm not smart enough yet (or a good enough writer) to accomplish my purposes without breaking character."
I can most certainly use parable and story to teach things, though. And I can do it without breaking character.
I'm curious what another version of the question would be... but i'm glad you asked. I will be thinking about it too.
Or maybe I should never be without a mask when i'm doing things online? Maybe if I figured out how to do that, I wouldn't be that interesting.
Maybe I can figure out how to take them all off in intimate, personal relationships. Maybe that would make my relationships better, stronger, more sustainable...