?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Two sounds and a thought





I am having trouble posting--not technical trouble; inside-my-head trouble. Nothing is in my Goldilocks zone. It's either too one-thing or too another-thing. WELL GOLDILOCKS, I'M ALL OUT OF LUKEWARM PORRIDGE SO YOU'LL JUST HAVE TO ACCEPT THIS.

Sound One is the dawn chorus of fishes, which ann_leckie reblogged on Tumblr. How about that! Fishes sing to greet the day, just like birds. I am sure there are places where people set out in boats before dawn to hear those songs.

Sound Two is the woodcock. He's doing his mating call (peeent, peeent) and his mating dance (a twittering, spiraling flight up into the air) already, earliest I've ever noticed. One of my favorite memories is going out with the healing angel to witness the dance. The woodcock is such a sweet, shy, dorky-looking bird; I'm glad his mating ritual is such a grand display.

The thought has to do with law-breaking and hypocrisy. I wrote a whole entry on this and then deleted it. Here's the executive summary: There is not a driver I know (including myself) who doesn't sometimes drive faster than the speed limit. This is, however, a crime. People's excuses for their behavior fall into the everybody-does-it category, the the-posted-speed-in-this-area-is-ridiculous category, and the I-normally-don't-but-today-I-was-late/it-was-urgent category. Whatever. The point is, people are willing to break that law for, essentially, no good reason whatsoever. It's not like exceeding the speed limit offers the possibility of freedom from a life of hardship and deprivation. Nope. People just... do it. And yet speeding--especially if you go considerably above the speed limit (which, admittedly, not everyone who speeds does) makes you an actual threat to people--like, your likelihood of killing someone goes up. You know what doesn't increase your likelihood of killing someone? Crossing a border without papers in hopes of gaining work. So. No one who speeds should ever use "but they're breaking the law" as a way to condemn undocumented immigrants.

How's that for mood shift! Goldilocks has her head in her hands. Sorry, kid.





Comments

( 32 comments — Leave a comment )
roseneko
Mar. 1st, 2017 10:52 pm (UTC)
I had no idea fish used sound at all! How fascinating! And what a strange and otherworldly sound...it reminds me more than a little of the sounds the aliens used in Arrival, which I'm sure was intentional on the filmmakers' part.

I think I understand what you mean about difficulty posting. It's hard, when one is (understandably) upset, not to turn a post into a rant...and yet, what does that even accomplish in the end, other than (especially with politics) potentially starting fights alienating people? Certainly it's unlikely to change the issue in question. And yet, to ignore the subject means tacitly denying the existence of a significant chunk of your mental cycles.

I hope that you find your equanimity again soon. I miss your lovely posts.
asakiyume
Mar. 1st, 2017 11:01 pm (UTC)
I really want to see Arrival! I'm hoping to watch it on Apple TV this weekend.

... and the thing about political rants is, even people who feel the same as you can become exhausted from them (at least, I become exhausted from them). And yet, as you say, not talking about the subject means ignoring a lot of what's occupying my mind.

roseneko
Mar. 1st, 2017 11:06 pm (UTC)
I suspect you will love it. :) It was one of my favorite movies I saw last year.

I've been juggling that conundrum myself. I don't want to be a drain on others' energy, but I also don't want to feel like I'm papering over the very upsetting events I'm preoccupied with. So in true millennial fashion, I tend to focus on myself - dissecting my own reactions and figuring out how my brain works. It's not necessarily ideal, but it helps me stay sane and feel a little more in control.

asakiyume
Mar. 2nd, 2017 05:05 am (UTC)
If it helps you stay sane, it can't be too bad :-)
asakiyume
Mar. 5th, 2017 03:14 pm (UTC)
I saw it last night! I thought it was very beautiful, visually: I liked the alien writing system and the aliens themselves, and the protagonist's "memories" of her daughter. I wished for a bigger role for the physicist--it all seemed to come down to the protagonist herself. I didn't mind her having the special, intimate relationship that she ended up having with the aliens, but I would have liked his contribution to be more (I was happy that he was at least given the realization that the splurge of information had to do with time).

It was a little bit slow in the beginning, for my tastes, and I found it interesting that it didn't come up whether or not knowing the future allows you to change it. But my quibbles were not as large as my delight in the aliens themselves, and their communication.
roseneko
Mar. 5th, 2017 03:51 pm (UTC)
Hrm. My initial reaction was that the story's setup implied strongly that knowing the future didn't allow you to change it - if anything, it disallowed you from changing it, in much the same way that opening Schrödinger's box collapses the uncertainty waveform, or the Heisenbergian principle where knowing an electron's rate of travel disallows you from knowing its position, and vice versa. But then I recalled Banks' beautifully heartbreaking monologue at the end, where she talks about how she chose to undertake the path despite knowing how it ended, because she felt the journey and (implied) who it made her as a person made it worthwhile. But on the third tentacle (says the lawyer's daughter, trained from childhood to argue all sides), I've long reflected that predestination isn't necessarily a matter of no choice, but (as in the best, most Shakespearean tragedies) a case where, given the circumstances and personalities and experiences of the people involved, there's really only one way a story can play out, despite those people theoretically having the ability to make a different choice.

I actually have a whole blog post floating around in fragmentary form in my head on precisely this paradox, as well as (what I see as) the most fundamental difference between comedy and tragedy - in comedy, a character changes, whereas in a tragedy, a character fails to change. This, I suspect, is why comedies are so often love stories, because love is one of the strongest forces for change in a person's life; this is also, I suspect, why comedies are more often about younger people of lower social class, who are more mentally flexible and have less to lose by making a change, whereas tragedies tend to be about older people who're higher up in the social strata, and thus are more set in their ways and have more to lose (and thus the prospect of change is scarier to them). Someday I'll actually write it all out...but not right now, because I have yoga class and then Brian and the teacher (who's also a good friend) and I are all going to see Hamilton. ;)
asakiyume
Mar. 5th, 2017 04:50 pm (UTC)
Actually you should just take this last paragraph and post it--it's brilliant! I like what you say about change and failure to change--that really does seem true--and also the way you link it to youth and lower social class/less to lose. Great insights!
sovay
Mar. 1st, 2017 11:32 pm (UTC)
And yet, as you say, not talking about the subject means ignoring a lot of what's occupying my mind.

If that's the calculus, I would talk about it. You can always put it under a cut-tag. People who are exhausted can skim by. There is no point in your being both exhausted and choking.
asakiyume
Mar. 2nd, 2017 12:53 am (UTC)
Good idea re: the cut tag.

heliopausa
Mar. 3rd, 2017 06:35 am (UTC)
I've seen Arrival once, under very funny language difficulties: the sound was out of synch by several minutes from the the visual, so we only saw some minutes later what the voices had mysteriously been talking about while the screen-people were doing something different altogether. But! the film was subtitled! Which should have made things much easier (and it did help) but the subtitling was in Spanish, which I could sort-of follow... but only sort-of. :)
I thought it was great to be watching a film about communication with such barriers to communication.

(But now I have lashed out and bought a DVD of it, and if I have a couple of hours free this weekend, I'll have seen it again under better auspices by Monday.)
asakiyume
Mar. 5th, 2017 03:17 pm (UTC)
Did you get to see it on DVD? We did, yesterday! I wrote about it (v. briefly) here.

It really was funny, thinking of you watching a movie about time and communication, with the particular barriers you were describing.
heliopausa
Mar. 8th, 2017 01:38 am (UTC)
I haven't seen it yet - and this weekend is taken up already with non-stop action. :(
But maybe the weekend after that. I can hope, anyway!
sovay
Mar. 1st, 2017 11:30 pm (UTC)
Sound One is the dawn chorus of fishes

Yay! I have heard fish calls before, but not this particular set. They are working some nice electronica there.

The woodcock is such a sweet, shy, dorky-looking bird; I'm glad his mating ritual is such a grand display.

Aw. Can you take pictures of him sometime?

You know what doesn't increase your likelihood of killing someone? Crossing a border without papers in hopes of gaining work. So. No one who speeds should ever use "but they're breaking the law" as a way to condemn undocumented immigrants.

That is a reasonable conclusion.

Why did you delete the entry? (It works fine as a summary, I'm just curious.)
asakiyume
Mar. 2nd, 2017 12:52 am (UTC)
Goldilocks said it was simultaneously too political and not political enough; too much your slightly-out-of-it, tea-drinking old auntie saying in breathless tones, "And you know what else? They are opposed to marmalade"--as if anyone cares about that particular detail.
sovay
Mar. 2nd, 2017 08:01 am (UTC)
Goldilocks said it was simultaneously too political and not political enough; too much your slightly-out-of-it, tea-drinking old auntie saying in breathless tones, "And you know what else? They are opposed to marmalade"--as if anyone cares about that particular detail.

Goldilocks should take fewer notes from Tiny Wittgenstein.
asakiyume
Mar. 2nd, 2017 12:33 pm (UTC)
She adores tiny Wittgenstein, sad to say. In slightly more humorous news, I often feel like Kierkegaard in this comic, except without the delusion of the last panel (not, I hasten to add, vis-à-vis my friends list ... more just in my daily meatspace life).
sovay
Mar. 2nd, 2017 05:34 pm (UTC)
In slightly more humorous news, I often feel like Kierkegaard in this comic, except without the delusion of the last panel (not, I hasten to add, vis-à-vis my friends list ... more just in my daily meatspace life).

That is a great comic about Kierkegaard!
yamamanama
Mar. 1st, 2017 11:35 pm (UTC)
I'd like to see a video of the woodcock dance.

We see them occasionally at the wildlife center.
asakiyume
Mar. 2nd, 2017 12:55 am (UTC)
There are some good videos out there! I like this one because it's good on sounds, though it's not so good on visuals--they're only active with the mating song and dance after the sun goes down: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta1fxy0MR2c
sartorias
Mar. 2nd, 2017 02:03 am (UTC)
I had no idea that fish made sounds. Well, I knew about whales and porpoise but I thought, they are mammals . . .

Good thought, that, below.
asakiyume
Mar. 2nd, 2017 05:06 am (UTC)
I didn't know it either, about fishes. It makes me happy, thinking about it.

And thanks re: the thought. It really bugs me that people can say self-righteously "that's breaking the law," when they break it all the time themselves.
mount_oregano
Mar. 2nd, 2017 05:13 am (UTC)
VOICE? Give me a fucking break. This is evil. Lying, stinking evil. I've been thinking about how to focus against the Trump administration, since there's so much wrong, and this might be it.
asakiyume
Mar. 2nd, 2017 12:28 pm (UTC)
I'm sorry to be so incredibly thick, but I'm not sure which thing you're thinking of focusing on? But Trump's stance and actions against undocumented immigrants are definitely evil, and anything you can do to oppose it, I cheer.
mount_oregano
Mar. 2nd, 2017 03:33 pm (UTC)
Sorry. It's a proposal to create a Victims Of Immigration Crime Engagement office. That is, to find a way to highlight how (supposedly) horrible immigrants are and how much havoc they (supposedly) do so it will be easier to demonize them.

Here's a link about it:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/28/politics/donald-trump-voice-victim-reporting/
asakiyume
Mar. 3rd, 2017 04:26 pm (UTC)
Ughhh, just awful, awful
amaebi
Mar. 2nd, 2017 12:04 pm (UTC)
Grousing from criminous Goldilocks
Throughout my pastoring I would periodically announce myself as A Criminal, on the grounds of my habitual, inveterate, intentional jaywalking. Just because of how people in public and private talk about Criminals.

And people would be all shocked, and occasionally we'd have a But That's Not What I Mean (and what exactly do you mean then?) conversation.

And then, I expect, they forgot all about it.

And so people who get all indignant about Bad Laws in one place class others as subhuman for disobeying immigration law, in another....
asakiyume
Mar. 2nd, 2017 12:45 pm (UTC)
Re: Grousing from criminous Goldilocks
Yes: I think differences of opinion come down to what we classify as similar and what we classify as different, and I think our analogizing is us trying to make others understand why we see things as similar or different. But lots of pixels have already been committed to why this rarely works.

In the case of traffic laws and immigration laws, people who oppose illegal immigration put a lot more weight on the importance of the latter, I imagine, which is why they'd find my drawing parallels a waste of time.

People who are happy to see long-time, hardworking undocumented people sent back, who harden their hearts when they hear about the consequences of this, who even would send DREAMers back, don't understand that to truly stop people from seeking refuge here, you have to turn this place into a worse hell than the one the people are leaving behind. Actually, no: they think they can make it a hell just for the immigrants. They don't yet notice that it becomes a hell for everyone. It is becoming a hell for everyone.

When you grip tightly, you can't hold much in your hands. It's only if you open your hands that you can hold stuff in the palms of them.

Edited at 2017-03-02 12:46 pm (UTC)
amaebi
Mar. 2nd, 2017 01:08 pm (UTC)
Re: Grousing from criminous Goldilocks
Yes.

Though I think that send-them-backs also seldom think of sendees as humans. Just game pieces or cardboard cutouts.

And I think that they are typically quite dishonest to themselves about why they hold the views they do, and that it shows up in these inconsistencies.
heliopausa
Mar. 3rd, 2017 06:51 am (UTC)
Thank you for those sound-stories. They're both beautiful, but the wood-cock's dorkiness transformed into pure amazing whistling spiralling energy is just lovely! :)

The other side of things - yes. Humans. :( And I like humans! I am one! But no denying we do hypocrisy reflexively, again and again and again.

***
editing to add: two days ago, I was listening to someone working in wildlife conservation, waxing very lyrical about the dawn chorus of gibbons! :D How lovely to think of the dawn rolling across the globe, being greeted by all of these - chaotic euphony!



Edited at 2017-03-03 06:58 am (UTC)
asakiyume
Mar. 3rd, 2017 04:27 pm (UTC)
How lovely to think of the dawn rolling across the globe, being greeted by all of these

Yes ♥ All of us singing to our star.
dudeshoes
Mar. 3rd, 2017 08:31 pm (UTC)
This is a time of extreme moods.
asakiyume
Mar. 5th, 2017 03:17 pm (UTC)
Truth.
( 32 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

September 2017
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Paulina Bozek