We the Choir Gather and We Learn to Sing Together

[Sacred Fool]

 
It appears to me that my post and those responding to it have opened up a rather complex discussion of identity.

To Patrick: If I felt revulsion at this thread, I probably would not post on it.  It is not my intention to reject anyone else's reflected identity by choosing to not use them as mirrors to define myself.  I would try to learn from them, but not define myself by them.  And that's not because I have an identity as an almighty adept, this is merely the structural disposition I find within.  If you wish to go all lovey-dovey, more power to you.  It's just that I would identify you as someone who chooses to do that, rather than as someone whose identity is particularly defined in that way.  And I would try not to identify myself, necessarily, as someone who would never do that.  That is, I try not to take such identifications personally and I try not to project them personally.  (Naturally, I have a significant failure rate, but that's another matter.)

OES: Thanks for trying to understand.

Diana: I can certainly relate to that way of being misunderstood in a social context.  I have a lot going on under my hat and much of it is self referenced and not appropriate to share.  I don't mean that I'm entirely in another world, but that I'm trying to learn from the catalyst as we go along as best I can.  And when people do not receive the expected social cues, or when they see someone who is decidedly self-referenced, they can be threatened by it.  Frankly, I can have that feeling about others myself sometimes.  A lack of conventionality can put people on their guard, and I am not all that saturated in conventionality, if you can believe that.

Gary:  My sense is that my vibratory signature is little different from yours, and that this difference offers us different perceptual experiences.  The kumbaya reference was meant to be descriptive, not antagonistic.  Referring back to Patrick's comments, I do not find this sickening, AND I might suggest you not burden yourself by projecting identifications upon yourself based upon how you guess that I identify you.  (I hold no antipathy towards you, btw, that I'm aware of.)

I'm not sure you're correct in what I take as an implied contention that humanity moves forward best by everyone joining hands and walking and singing together (kinda like The Sound of Music).  I expect that's true to some extent, yet there's an additional factor which might be more important, viz., we're not going anywhere physically, and we're not going all that far emotionally nor mentally.  That proverbial journey of 14 or so inches from the head to the heart is a largely internal process of balancing the animal self and accepting the angelic self.  In my view, for the most part, beautiful choral singing--something I do know a little bit about--is the RESULT of the journey or the journey in progress, it does not precede the journey (except in certain musicals).  Depth of meaning comes becomes apparent to the self after passing over various inner thresholds of self-awareness.  Ergo, by that measure, the best way forward is to lead the way across those various thresholds.

Or maybe not?  Maybe I'm reflexively justifying my own biases?