As I tend to do from time to time, I've just started committing my thoughts to paper (well, paper...), even though, or perhaps because, nobody will read them. As I understand it, my active watcher tally is currently two. I'm telling these two that they've got no social obligations to read this, or anything. It's just thinking out loud, which conveniently replaces that meme I've had as a journal for the last couple of months.If you DO read it, please forgive me any boring or whiny parts.
While writing this entry, the subjects in my train of thought are continually changing, starting with my last doodle (subliminal advertising), to social communities, as I call them, to the need to define yourself through others. Eventually I end up in a vicious cycle of accusing myself of being too faux-deep, but for the nonce I'm ignoring these accusations. Fashions in culture follow quick-paced and simultaneous chain reactions, so of course the tendency to think you're deep and interesting (stereotypically linked with emo's, I think) is swiftly followed by the rejection and ridiculisation of these people, which in turn is followed by the fear of coming over deep when in fact you're an immature twit. We tend to divide humanity in certain subcultures, the classical 'cubicles' as we call them in Dutch. How foolish this is I cannot say unbiased (I'm bound to change my opinion in a couple of days anyway), but I feel safe in saying a good part of it's truth is because we put ourselves in these cubicles. Considering a popular theory which I subscribe to, which is that animosity usually starts with a sense of 'us' and 'them', this cubicle system leads to adversity between groups like, also stereotypically, jocks and nerds, in which certain habits in the 'them' group are given a negative charge, (unconsciously) based on who does it rather than the habit itself. I feel that 'trying to be deep' is one such trait. I cannot speak for others, but I'm guessing many have felt the urge to try and be deep. Of course, for the aforesaid reasons, many do not act upon it, or only in secret (like in a real journal). Thus norms and values are born, based on a vague, groundless animosity, which might leave some people who don't exactly fit in their cubicle feeling a little cramped. This group of people might in fact be very large, or even include everyone everywhere.
So where am I going with this? I started out with the vague apprehension of coming over stupid because I'm jotting down my thoughts. Even as I'm writing it, I'm affected by this cubicle system. Now to be fair, I've always instinctively subscribed to a fair amount of anti-group animosity (I'm working on it). It might be an almost inevitable result of social inaptness. But although I consciously fight it, just knowing it isn't enough, even it is half the battle. While I'm thinking or typing, I'm still wondering if I should submit this at all. It might be full of very obvious observations, or worse, completely retarded ones. The point is though that I'm not TRYING to be deep. I would not say this is rocket science, but it's what's actually going on in my head. Relevant or not, it's real, it's, as they say, me. Now I don't like all the fuzz around around 'not being fake', but even though you don't need to act independent of who you're talking to you should not feel very ashamed for what occupies a big part of your conscious brains activity. When I look at what I don't like about 'trying to be deep', I think about poems and similar (which I mostly see flashing by here on dA), which look like it's been written by people DECIDING to be deep and write a poem about it. Thinking about it now, I don't even see why I should be against it, other than that the intrinsic value of the poem might be lower when the feelings described are made up (but who knows). But even if you make that distinction, you don't actually know that it was in fact a decision rather than real feelings they want to vent. It might just be an overhormonous teenager with naive ideas about his/her own emotional maturity, of course, but for THEM it's real. Who are we to think badly about them just because we believe them to be insincere, or just whiny? We might just not know an important piece of information relevant to the poem. The poet might just be very bad, who knows.
Maybe there is something to be said for rejecting faux-deep looking literature and similar, based for example on how much you can annoy people with it. But setting aside the discussion about that, which could very well go on for all eternity once started, since it's so subjective, I want to go back to the original point of this wall of text. Whether or not faux-deep should be avoided, how it s viewed now leads to a blurring of the line between faux-deep and 'real-deep'. People are afraid to write about things that are not humorous, or fictional, or light-hearted, because they don't trust themselves to be able to judge when they're crossing the line between those two (as I myself am still wondering). Yet as far as I can remember, some of the best conversations I've had have been about things like this, about the mind, and people around you, and the interaction between those two. Such a loss if these conversations got even rarer than they are now. Some people don't agree with me, never think about this, even look at you in a funny way when you try it out on them. I don't judge them, but they're not my kind of people. I have to pick my moments carefully (and I have, up till now xD), to find the right reception of my ventures in the deep, be it faux or real.
But writing this once again proves to me that I should not stop picking these moments. Maybe the angsty worrying during and afterwards will never go away, but, to say it faux-deeply: You should never stop exploring your mind, and freeing it of its unnecessary shackles.
As a last word, to anyone who might actually have read this: I don't know how much of this kind of thought I show to people, though I suspect quite a lot (I'm assuming you're one of my two active watchers, so you'll know me almost as well as anyone), but I hope there weren't any negative surprises. I've held true to my original claim that it's just thinking aloud, and I'm not going to proof-read it, so it might be contradictory, or nonsensical, or hard to follow. If you found it interesting, I'd be happy to hear it. If you didn't, I don't mind being told that either. The only thing that's important to me is that you don't think differently of me based on the ramblings of a late thursday evening when I should have been doing homework.
Toet Pwep Miauw.
Listening to: Lots
Reading: I can't read.
Watching: You, always.
Playing: A serious person
Drinking: bodily fluids