![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatDoing laundry - which makes it difficult to make dinner or take a shower until it is done. (It's in the basement and I'm on the third floor - and requires an elevator - and it's a shared laundry room with 77 other apartments in the building. Although at the moment it is just me and one other guy. And for the most part it's well maintained. Actually, it's the best laundry room/situation I've had since moving to NYC in 1996. I've now been without my own laundry machines far longer than I had them. There's pros and cons either way, as you all know.)
Anyhow just have 19 minutes and forty-eight seconds to go.
The laundry is now done and safely put away. Even though I had to navigate around a woman (who looked much like a kid herself), a baby carriage, and two toddlers to do it. She was speaking on the phone via her earphones and not in English. Dinner made and eaten. Hair washed and dried. Mother called. Soap watched. Lunch made.
Tired.
Been a long and busy week, looking forward to having a shorter week next week. I'm annoyed that the inauguration is on Martin Luther King Day, although I fully intend to ignore it (the inauguration not the holiday - which I thankfully have off) (I keep hoping the Doofus will die of a blood clot prior to it along with his potential replacement. Why can't the Monsters die of the blood clots as opposed to the nice folks? Probably because the universe wants to give them plenty of opportunities to redeem themselves and change? So, it won't happen, but I keep hoping.) I may even go to my church and do their day of service - my only issue is that I can't volunteer for the two things they are training for. 1) spending the night with immigrants in the sanctuary to protect them from Vice (I have a full time job), or 2) bystander training - putting myself in between someone and a potential attacker. (I'd do that anyway? But I tend to avoid those situations.) Told mother about what the training was for - and she's like, no, no, don't do that. That sounds dangerous. (It kind of is - if you don't have a really good support system and safety net. And I do not.) I wish they'd do something simple like hosting a soup kitchen or sorting donations to Gaza or a letter writing campaign. Although technically they already did the letter writing campaign. Yes, I'm wimping out on the day of service. I'm old. It's cold. And I have a full time job, and want a nice three day weekend. Supposed to be bitterly cold on Monday, with a potential of snow - possibly too cold for snow.)
In college, I had a creative writing professor who told me once that I was an interesting writer because I was interested in exploring the uncomfortable emotions and thoughts that most people veer away from. He'd picked up a pattern in my short stories. The one that won Second Place in a Literary Competition was a short story in the point of view of a business man on a plane. The man was annoyed by this chatty older woman sitting next to him - who reminded him of his mother. And his guilt at not knowing how to take care of her or what to do, and kind of wishing she was gone. But at the same time not wanting her gone. The woman dies of a heart attack as the plane lands, and he struggling with the aftermath of that, and the troubling mix of emotions. I called it Just a Bunch of Clouds. My father read it - and struggled with it - it hit too close to home. He felt he couldn't share it with his family. So, I veered away from writing anything like it again. Yet, I still find myself doing so - here, and well, in my other writing. I also find myself seeking out stories that explore those monstrous emotions. Because I think all humans have them, and understanding them - looking at them, helps not so much to combat them as to not to be drowned by them or overtaken, and in the end just to let them drift off like a bunch of clouds?
What I found compelling about the New York/Vulture article on Neil Gaiman, was not the women's allegations (which I pretty much already knew from the Tortoise Media coverage and other places and are just horrific to the point of making me cringe inwardly, not to mention unsanitary) - but rather the struggle he and Palmer had engaged in combating his urge to do it. (She tried to get him into therapy multiple times, until she finally succeeded with a couples therapist. And managed to get him to write about his traumatic childhood in a way that didn't make him curl into a fetal ball. ) And why he felt compelled to act on these urges - even though they threatened to destroy everything he'd built with Palmer and even though she did everything she could think of - to get him to stop and save him (and failed miserably, succeeding more in enabling his bad behavior than preventing it). And why Palmer over looked his actions or hand-waved them for a while, unwittingly enabling them and what finally caused her to break things off completely to the point of deciding to raise her son without him at great cost to herself financially. Also why people are attracted to people who have these compulsions. Why were women throwing themselves at him? Why did people put tattoos of him on their bodies? Why the worship of a human? Why is it that people with monstrous compulsions or have chosen to hurt others - have families, children, success, etc - while others who actively chose not to hurt others, and to help people - do not? What is it about charming toxicity that is so attractive? And how did people evolve to this point.
So many songs and stories state - a good person is defined by the people around them, the number of friends, family members, people who love them and those who come to their funeral? If this is true? Then how does it describe folks like Hitler, Trump, Whedon or Gaiman - who have all of that?
I don't know. I can't figure it out.
It's late. And I find myself with more questions this week than answers.
The other bit that I found compelling about the article - was it how it was written - and how much it reminded me of another article written in 2022 about another popular cult writer, in the same magazine. Both articles are written about popular and progressive cult writers, who framed themselves as feminists, yet treated others specifically women rather cruelly. And in both - the journalist uses three tactics to paint the subject in a negative light. 1) Uses the subject's own statements against them, or their lack of them. (They refused to comment, or they denied the allegations - stating yes, I did that, but not in that way or with that intent.) 2.) Provides damning information from "unnamed" friends and colleagues. 3.) Provides information from named victims, who bravely stepped forward. 4) Phrases or paints those who support them, in a negative light.
It's a journalistic tactic that I've seen used numerous times before. And it's not necessarily wrong. So much as questionable? I mean I know these people did these things? Spotlight - was about the priests molesting the boys, and the story came out by the Boston Globe. And the New York Times broke the Weinstein story - with a film that followed entitled She Said. Is this that different? Also, it's almost impossible to write these articles in any other way. You almost have to use these men's words against them.
I knew both writers (Whedon in 2022, and Gaiman now) were guilty when they attempted to excuse their actions. Gaiman's statement - yes, I engaged in sexual relations with my child's nanny, who was forty years younger than me and dependent on my employment and I had sign an NDA...but it didn't happen like that, made me realize, oh shit, it did, he just didn't perceive it that way and is completely unself-aware. And Palmer's song lyrics kind of drove that home. He's so self-absorbed that he honestly doesn't realize what he was doing was wrong and horrific. Same with Whedon - Whedon's justifications for what he did and explanations, made me realize, damn, he really doesn't get it? But the lawyer in me or rather the writer in me is at the same time - questioning the veracity of the phrasing and the writing. Whose perception of reality is real?
David Lynch died at 78 today. And he was the king of showing how reality can bend and twist in on itself. How our perceptions can lie. And often there is a nightmare lying beneath the pristine sunny surface. Fascinated with the dark underbelly of the human condition - he often explored it through surrealistic films. A friend of mine - loves the film Mullohand Drive - and has seen it multiple times. While my favorite film may be Blue Velvet - which shows darkness beneath the American Suburban landscape.
I'm thinking of him now, in the back of my mind as I write this. Because Lynch like myself was fascinated by the duality of the human condition, the dark and light warring for dominance, yin and yang. Seeing clearly the good and bad in humans, and how they can turn on a dime - falling into the abyss, with a single act.
Twin Peaks may well have been his masterpiece in that respect until it slid a bit too far down that dark slope, sliding into incoherence.
Is it wrong to ask these questions? To ponder these things? To look into the dark nether regions of the human psyche, from the safety of my arm chair? I do not know. And I often wonder if I repel you by doing so.
Anyhow just have 19 minutes and forty-eight seconds to go.
The laundry is now done and safely put away. Even though I had to navigate around a woman (who looked much like a kid herself), a baby carriage, and two toddlers to do it. She was speaking on the phone via her earphones and not in English. Dinner made and eaten. Hair washed and dried. Mother called. Soap watched. Lunch made.
Tired.
Been a long and busy week, looking forward to having a shorter week next week. I'm annoyed that the inauguration is on Martin Luther King Day, although I fully intend to ignore it (the inauguration not the holiday - which I thankfully have off) (I keep hoping the Doofus will die of a blood clot prior to it along with his potential replacement. Why can't the Monsters die of the blood clots as opposed to the nice folks? Probably because the universe wants to give them plenty of opportunities to redeem themselves and change? So, it won't happen, but I keep hoping.) I may even go to my church and do their day of service - my only issue is that I can't volunteer for the two things they are training for. 1) spending the night with immigrants in the sanctuary to protect them from Vice (I have a full time job), or 2) bystander training - putting myself in between someone and a potential attacker. (I'd do that anyway? But I tend to avoid those situations.) Told mother about what the training was for - and she's like, no, no, don't do that. That sounds dangerous. (It kind of is - if you don't have a really good support system and safety net. And I do not.) I wish they'd do something simple like hosting a soup kitchen or sorting donations to Gaza or a letter writing campaign. Although technically they already did the letter writing campaign. Yes, I'm wimping out on the day of service. I'm old. It's cold. And I have a full time job, and want a nice three day weekend. Supposed to be bitterly cold on Monday, with a potential of snow - possibly too cold for snow.)
In college, I had a creative writing professor who told me once that I was an interesting writer because I was interested in exploring the uncomfortable emotions and thoughts that most people veer away from. He'd picked up a pattern in my short stories. The one that won Second Place in a Literary Competition was a short story in the point of view of a business man on a plane. The man was annoyed by this chatty older woman sitting next to him - who reminded him of his mother. And his guilt at not knowing how to take care of her or what to do, and kind of wishing she was gone. But at the same time not wanting her gone. The woman dies of a heart attack as the plane lands, and he struggling with the aftermath of that, and the troubling mix of emotions. I called it Just a Bunch of Clouds. My father read it - and struggled with it - it hit too close to home. He felt he couldn't share it with his family. So, I veered away from writing anything like it again. Yet, I still find myself doing so - here, and well, in my other writing. I also find myself seeking out stories that explore those monstrous emotions. Because I think all humans have them, and understanding them - looking at them, helps not so much to combat them as to not to be drowned by them or overtaken, and in the end just to let them drift off like a bunch of clouds?
What I found compelling about the New York/Vulture article on Neil Gaiman, was not the women's allegations (which I pretty much already knew from the Tortoise Media coverage and other places and are just horrific to the point of making me cringe inwardly, not to mention unsanitary) - but rather the struggle he and Palmer had engaged in combating his urge to do it. (She tried to get him into therapy multiple times, until she finally succeeded with a couples therapist. And managed to get him to write about his traumatic childhood in a way that didn't make him curl into a fetal ball. ) And why he felt compelled to act on these urges - even though they threatened to destroy everything he'd built with Palmer and even though she did everything she could think of - to get him to stop and save him (and failed miserably, succeeding more in enabling his bad behavior than preventing it). And why Palmer over looked his actions or hand-waved them for a while, unwittingly enabling them and what finally caused her to break things off completely to the point of deciding to raise her son without him at great cost to herself financially. Also why people are attracted to people who have these compulsions. Why were women throwing themselves at him? Why did people put tattoos of him on their bodies? Why the worship of a human? Why is it that people with monstrous compulsions or have chosen to hurt others - have families, children, success, etc - while others who actively chose not to hurt others, and to help people - do not? What is it about charming toxicity that is so attractive? And how did people evolve to this point.
So many songs and stories state - a good person is defined by the people around them, the number of friends, family members, people who love them and those who come to their funeral? If this is true? Then how does it describe folks like Hitler, Trump, Whedon or Gaiman - who have all of that?
I don't know. I can't figure it out.
It's late. And I find myself with more questions this week than answers.
The other bit that I found compelling about the article - was it how it was written - and how much it reminded me of another article written in 2022 about another popular cult writer, in the same magazine. Both articles are written about popular and progressive cult writers, who framed themselves as feminists, yet treated others specifically women rather cruelly. And in both - the journalist uses three tactics to paint the subject in a negative light. 1) Uses the subject's own statements against them, or their lack of them. (They refused to comment, or they denied the allegations - stating yes, I did that, but not in that way or with that intent.) 2.) Provides damning information from "unnamed" friends and colleagues. 3.) Provides information from named victims, who bravely stepped forward. 4) Phrases or paints those who support them, in a negative light.
It's a journalistic tactic that I've seen used numerous times before. And it's not necessarily wrong. So much as questionable? I mean I know these people did these things? Spotlight - was about the priests molesting the boys, and the story came out by the Boston Globe. And the New York Times broke the Weinstein story - with a film that followed entitled She Said. Is this that different? Also, it's almost impossible to write these articles in any other way. You almost have to use these men's words against them.
I knew both writers (Whedon in 2022, and Gaiman now) were guilty when they attempted to excuse their actions. Gaiman's statement - yes, I engaged in sexual relations with my child's nanny, who was forty years younger than me and dependent on my employment and I had sign an NDA...but it didn't happen like that, made me realize, oh shit, it did, he just didn't perceive it that way and is completely unself-aware. And Palmer's song lyrics kind of drove that home. He's so self-absorbed that he honestly doesn't realize what he was doing was wrong and horrific. Same with Whedon - Whedon's justifications for what he did and explanations, made me realize, damn, he really doesn't get it? But the lawyer in me or rather the writer in me is at the same time - questioning the veracity of the phrasing and the writing. Whose perception of reality is real?
David Lynch died at 78 today. And he was the king of showing how reality can bend and twist in on itself. How our perceptions can lie. And often there is a nightmare lying beneath the pristine sunny surface. Fascinated with the dark underbelly of the human condition - he often explored it through surrealistic films. A friend of mine - loves the film Mullohand Drive - and has seen it multiple times. While my favorite film may be Blue Velvet - which shows darkness beneath the American Suburban landscape.
I'm thinking of him now, in the back of my mind as I write this. Because Lynch like myself was fascinated by the duality of the human condition, the dark and light warring for dominance, yin and yang. Seeing clearly the good and bad in humans, and how they can turn on a dime - falling into the abyss, with a single act.
Twin Peaks may well have been his masterpiece in that respect until it slid a bit too far down that dark slope, sliding into incoherence.
Is it wrong to ask these questions? To ponder these things? To look into the dark nether regions of the human psyche, from the safety of my arm chair? I do not know. And I often wonder if I repel you by doing so.
no subject
Date: 2025-01-17 03:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-01-17 11:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-01-18 12:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-01-18 02:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-01-17 09:22 am (UTC)