In This World (a brief poem)

In this world or in the next one, I am undefined. On this river through this forest, my soul is fed. On this train, on this passage, there are strangers. In their bags in their pockets, there are answers. Ask your question plainly phrased I'll understand. Send the message to the widow, undismayed. Seek asylum in the pictures on the wall. Your berth is ready for you down the hall. You are always welcome stranger to my dream. Enter without trepidation or esteem. You can surface if you wish it is no trap to keep you here. Your presence here is not required I only desired when we've retired to sleep, to dream, to persevere. Have you any of your own? Pleasant dreams that you can share? I will follow if you allow it. Different dreams are like fresh air.

Eric Talerico, January 2011

Here’s a movie I’d like to see

I’ve always wanted to make movies.  My high school friends can attest to that – I worked hard on a few very strange pieces of film while in Heidelberg.  Since then, I’ve spent so much time watching movies that I think I’ve been inside of theaters for more time than in almost any other location (not including workplaces and homes.)  As an adult I still daydream about it.  Sometimes for example in conversation I’ll preface a comment by saying “Here’s a movie I’d like to see” and then I’ll move on to describe said film.
So:  Here is a movie I’d like to see.
It is the distant future. 
One man has discovered on the universal web that back in the days before computers became common, one w0man had built one in her garage.  This woman was taught by God how to make the computer, and when she was finished, she also made a tiny data storage device.  God then dictated a new testament to her, explaining all aspects of reality and reconciling science with religion.  In it, it is rumored, all contradictions are explained. 
The computer was destroyed by a government agency, who feared that this woman’s machine was a weapon.  One of the agents knew otherwise, having had a revelation of his own.  Acting on this, he warned the woman in advance of the ensuing raid.  As a result, she managed to escape before the raid, and the data storage device faded into ignominy.
The man who discovered the story begins to research  it further – and discovers, in an online photo album from the woman’s time, a picture of her.  Around her neck, she wears a pendant.  In the legend on the screen, it says that the pendant is an onyx, a gift from a friend, but the intrepid research scientist knows differently.  It is the data storage device. 
The rest of the movie would outline the researcher’s quest to find both the data storage device, and the story of what happened to the woman after she went underground.  The two stories are then presented in parallel timelines, as we watch the amazing life of the prophetess unfold.  Meanwhile the researcher is unaware that some of his searches have alerted the authorities that he is looking into the mysterious data storage device and begins tracking him. 
So here is another movie I’d like to see:
A woman works at a grocery store.  She has a stable, happy family, makes enough to get by and even put something away.  He children love her, as does her husband.  Her neighbors are a lesbian couple with an adopted child.  This couple also lives happily and their child is both brilliant and well adjusted.  There is no conflict in the movie and no plot.  It is just a depiction of life lived as it should be lived – in contentment and fulfillment. 
So here is a movie I’d like to see. 
In 2012, Philip K. Dick, who has been dead since the late 70’s, walks into a small convenience store.  He aggressively accosts the cashier there, saying three times “VALIS is coming!” Then he disappears.  Later that day, the video from the store’s surveillance camera is aired on television.  During the broadcast, an image of Philip appears on the screen, repeating the message, and then saying “VALIS” has arrived.  The rest of the film would be an examination of the final years of Dick’s live, interspersed with segments about how interaction with VALIS has transformed the world. 

Freedom from Religion

I call this image "Modern Business Ethics".  I guess its a cartoon more than a drawing.  One building burns but a barefoot man seems ready to jump from a building that is not burning.

He is wearing a tie but that may not indicate that he is a business man.  He may be a singer or an artist. The costume is not the person and the map is not the territory. Sometimes the map doesn't even resemble the territory and sometimes the costume does not even resemble the person.

We don't know from the image just how high up he is.  For all we know, he might be on a small staircase, or on the low pedestal of a statue.  Things are not what they seem.

We don't know if the fire was an accident, or whether it was set on purpose.  Or perhaps I've painted a burning building because it was easier in my cartoon to use fire rather than showing a controlled demolition.  Who knows? Its art.  I like art that poses questions rather than giving answers.  If enough people ask the right questions, we will know everything we need to know.

They say that we have freedom of religion.  I don’t agree.  You may have freedom to choose a church, but if your church or beliefs are outside of the Judeo Christian model and you are open about it, people treat you badly.  Although people are tolerant on the surface, they will treat you differently when you are not there. 
They say that we have freedom of religion but what I’d rather see is freedom from religion.  The laws of a nation should, if the nation has a rational footing, allow people to not only choose between religions, but also the option to choose no religion, or to choose one that is not currently popular.  Why is it that in this country which holds its freedoms in such high esteem, members of pagan faiths are treated as if they are crazy and marginalized? Why are atheists reviled and agnostics kept at arms length? 
Even as our lives are ample evidence of the interference of some higher power, and even as it is clear that the response and understanding of a higher power is a very unique and personal experience, our society marginalizes anyone whose interpretation varies significantly from “God the father in heaven who will punish you if you are bad and reward you for worshipping and believing in him:. If you percieve the mystery as a goddess, a pantheon, a god even marginally different from the centrist one, you are never really a part of society.  In essence you are a heathen, one who lives outside the fold,. 
Who is your shepherd?  What gods do you see when the moon is full.  When you hear the whispers of the mysteries, what do you see or hear?  Is it science?  Is it Mathematics?  Is it Art?  Is it Politics?
Because of the focus on a single theology (my understanding says that Jews, Christians, Muslims and Mormons, amoung others all essentially subscribe to the same faith) and our refusal to recognize different responses to the mysteries, we have become blinded to the powers and intentions behind reality.  And being blinded to them means we cannot distinguish between them. 
Blake saw heaven in a wildflower and eternity in an hour.  Saint Francis saw God in acts of charity and kindness to all creatures.  The Bacchae saw miracles in drunkenness and excess. Are any of them correct in their observations or were they misled?
If you never confront evil, you can never defeat evil
If you hide the truth behind denials you have not erased the truth but only hidden it.
If you look for your gods not in books, but in the world, you will find evidence as compelling for the one idea as for the next.  If you look into your reality for evidence of gods, you have already taken a step towards misguiding yourself. 
If you hide the truth behind denials, it does not erase the truth. 
When you talk to most searchers, and ask them what they are looking for, they will preface their answer with “Well I hope to find that…”
Does this mind set, with its hoped for outcome, predispose the searcher to look only at evidence which reinforces the hope, or does the focus of the hope enable the searcher to better see what is there before them
What one person sees, another may see differently.  If I had your eyes, and you mine, would we see the same colors that we see now?  How do I know that what I see as red with my eyes isn’t what you see as blue with yours?  The shape, color and health of our eyes must, in some way, effect what we see.  What would it mean if what you see as blue is what I see as red, and yet we both call the color yellow?  How would we know?
Creatures who were created equal, change the minute they start gestating.  Each fetus has already developed some differentiation from its equals.  This can be effected by the quality of the sperm, by the quality of the ovum, by the health of the womb and the mother and her place in the world.  Once outside the womb, that equality is further erased so that by the tine we are adults, we are each radically different from our fellows.
We all enjoy a point of equality.  When the sperm enters the ovum, we have the same number of cells and a nearly identical physical identity. Beyond that point of conception we all differentiate and by the time leave the womb, we have already become unique, a combination of the genes and the histories of our parents and our families. 
As adults, some people choose to honor that moment of equality, but most, even the most liberally minded, make judgements about the quality of a person based on a template passed on by parents and culture.
Acculturation creates inequalities and politics fosters them.
All struggle is a response to inequality.
All struggle is a response to equality.
The bird of paradise entices a mate with a ritualized dance.  If his dance is found wanting by his intended mate, she flies away.  He tries again with another. 
Differentiation in these communities is determined by who mates with whom.
When humans court, men do a dance for the women, and the women do a dance for the men.  Although both genders partake in the rituals of courting, in the end the decision still lies with the female – whether to mate and bear children or to go in different directions. 
Recreational sex is nothing more than practice for procreation.  When the body decides its had enough practice, there is fertilization.  This is something that happens inside the body, beyond the realm of courting or choice. 
Some creatures mate for life.  Others only for a season or a second.  Some creatures eat their young, some creatures eat their mates.
Does a male black widow understand that he is to be sacrificed once he has mated?
When she devours his body, does she also incorporate his thoughts with her own?
Do male black widows ever survive the mating?  If they did, would they live long, or even live to mate again?  Is the death of the male black widow an inevitability?

Extreme Political Metaphors

A few stabs at a metaphor for the United States Government:
There is a long dark tunnel.  Its only wide enough for one person to pass.  After walking for nearly a day in different directions, with different destinations in mind, two people meet in the center.  They cannot pass each other. 
One says to the other “You have to go back, you are blocking my way!” The other one says to the first “No, you have to go back – you are blocking my way!”  Neither is willing to back down, so both remain standing there at the impasse, until they both die from exhaustion. 

Or:
There is a long dark tunnel.  Its only wide enough for one person to pass.  After walking for a day or more, two people meet in the center.  One says to the other “You have to go back – you are blocking my way!” The other one says to the first “No, you must go back, you are blocking my way!”  After awhile, one gets tired of waiting for the other to back down, so he takes out a baseball bat and knocks the other one out.  Then he can move on.  The other one, severely wounded, remains in the tunnel.  When he wakes up, he cannot remember which way is the right one, and eventually he dies because he can’t find his way.
Or:
There is a long dark tunnel.  Its only wide enough for one person to pass.  After walking a week or better, two people meet in the center.  One says to the other: “ If we both turn to the side, and slide past, we can both continue on to our destinations!” The other, being a rational man, agrees.  When they have traded places, one offers the other water.  They drink.  The other offers the first a bit of bread and fruit.  They shake hands.  Happily, they both continue on to their individual destinations.  
Or:
A man is walking in a tunnel.  It is a very long and dark tunnel. Behind him walks another man.  Near the mid point of the tunnel, the two hear footsteps coming towards them from the other direction.  The first man says to the second:  don’t worry.  He takes out a weapon and fills the tunnel in front of him with fire.  The footsteps in the other direction cease. The two move forward in the tunnel, where they find the cooked body of the one who was walking the other way.  Together, they feast on his body.
 
Or?

Curiouser and Curiouser

I remember studying the original painting by Jan Van Eyck in Ms. Mauck’s art appreciation class.  The images was nice enough – beautifully painted but just a pretty picture – until she started to explain some of the symbolism in it.  That was a chinese box moment for me.  Suddenly art wasn’t just fun or pretty anymore. It was also challenging, charged with meaning and secrets, a beautiful world all its own and a language as well. 
Well I was working on an image the other day – really just playing with the shape tools in Photoshop CS5, and making landscapes.  This particular one was crying out for something man made- a human presence to supplement the cold beach.
I went into my photo portfolio looking for a figure or two, but nothing seemed suitable.  I found a group of photos from a car show back in October, and one of the cars had a hand grenade welded onto the muffler cover.  I extricated the grenade from the photo and imported it into the landscape.  Now I had something edgy to work with.  The image implies something explosive about to happen.
Then I thought of marriage – my nephew married last April, and I th0ught of importing a pic or two of the wedding, but unfortunately had not brought the drive with my wedding snaps on it.  So instead I went online, where I found an excellent high res image of the Arnolfini wedding.  What’s more explosive than a wedding, fraught as it is with possibility and power?  Why a wedding with a pregnant woman of course.  The cake in the oven is an explosively attractive idea.  I loved the idea of the Arnolfini’s finding themselves in the modern world.  The only problem was the lighting – the Arnolfini’s were lit from a window in the Van Eyck picture. In order to explain the difference, I added a beam of light to my own landscape. 
If you look closely you can see that superimposed on the ground is a page from my book. 
These days, Ms. Mauck’s lesson still rings true!  When I paint or draw I always try to include some elements of vocabulary – they may not be coherent words, but even inarticulate ones communicate something. 

Happy New Year

Have you thought of a resolution?  I have too many to count, but most important is that I find a way to keep the Mind at Work Mind at Play project going.  I’ve made a lot of headway in 2010, and want to pick up the momentum in 2011.  In addition to the physical book, I’ve also done a ridiculous number of paintings in Photoshop (such as the one above)  which I’m beginning to arrange into a digital volume.  It would be lovely to have 2011 be the year that I really start to make the project shine! 

Happy holidays all around – Keep writing, drawing, running, diving, playing, whatever it is that makes your heart sing!.

Here’s to fixing the world this year.