you don't say.

in redoing my research and focusing more on "secondary sources" i have come to a very interesting conclusion. all my ideas funnel through camus. my orginal quesitons and influences were all that of camus. huh. i wonder, do i like these writers/philosophers because of camus, or do i like camuse because of them.

ex. orwell. nietzsche. satre.

into the wild. out of society.

thanks to jules, i watched into the wild. i loved it. it scared me.
while i noticed many striking similarities between by evolving man and alexander supertramp, i also noticed many differences:

supertramp v. man

• influences - throreau, london, tolstoy v. wittgenstien, nietzsche, camus
  
• society - both want to leave
  
• path - reaches and evaluates goal v. just reaching
  
• goal - one v. none-ish
  

progress 5.

purpose: i intend to evaluate the level that symbiosis/language, time, and perception affect reality as seen in the interaction between society and man. in doing so, i plan to challenge contemporary social views on truth, madness, and tradition.

sources: (by theme, more or less)
symbiosis/language: hamlet - words. words. words;importance of being ernest - what is in a name; wittgenstien - no words; how the mind works - words

time: being and time - heidegger's philosophical inquiries;
perception/ truth: the stranger - what is true; doubt - what is?; chomsky on imperialism - the government; anarchy films - society without time;

madness: on the road - multiple characters; hamlet - do i need to explain?; metamorphosis - does madness exist; the stranger - society deems all; biography of wittgenstien - mad or genius; biography of nietzsche - mad to the death; anarchy films - mad because of antisociety

tradition: basic writings of nietzsche - inspiring :) ; reinventing the sacred - religion, reductionism; banksy - the counterrevolution; doubt - the place of doubt; chomsky on imperialism - the misconceptions; wittgenstien - change the face of philosophy; biography of nietzsche - God is dead; anarchy films - screw tradition; chuck close - reinvent

character: on the road - wanderer; the stranger - man; biography of wittgenstien - me; biography of nietzsche - another man; anarchy films - no where to go; rodin's statue - ribs; chuck close - sucess not measured by others

writing: the stranger - my idol; hamlet - the puns;wittgenstien - clearity; anarchy films - untraditional

reflection:

i am basicly inquiring into everything that defines me. i want to know where the lies the lies and truths - if any. i want to see things differently. i want others to think before they blink. i want words to mean something and words to mean nothing. i want to know why society defines me. i want to know how to define me.

i find creative thesises more appealing. i can think for myself rather than synthesizing those before. i hold my own credibility. i can redefine systems and rethink life, and thats okay. i don't need former works, although they are obviously helpful. whenever i lose my inspiration, i don't need to look at progress reports, just simply outside. i love how my sources can be anti-sources.


as an honors seminar project, this shows my urge to make something new. to say something insightful, not just mimick parrots. this applies to more people, but clarifies myself. this writing is not something that i just wish to throw together for an "honors" diploma. anyone can do that. i want something that is actually something. this ambition and desire make my anti-thesis thesis.


i want to face my fears, if, in the end, they are still fears.

groupies.

books:
being and time
on the road
basic writings of nietzsche
reinventing the sacred
hamlet
importance of being ernest
metamorphosis
banksy
the stranger [and other camus]

audio:
doubt
imperialism
wittgenstien
nietzsche

art:
anarchy
rodin
chuck close
insom.

gone with the wind.

i went and sat with patrick, max, andy. why?
despite the absurd nature of the situation, i was comforted.
they are free.
they are such interesting thinkers and individuals who share many of views on society. i plan on visiting with them more often. i bought them each a copy of the stranger. i don't know if it is appropriate, but i did.

the importance.

oh, i love the importance of being ernest. the neologisms and names <3.>

it matches on of my original ides - what does a name matter?

along the same line, i purchased pinker's book. pinker stinker.

i. he.

i have decided on the point of view:

i - night - alone - equal
he - day - social - denounced

30 points.

i hate the process. it makes no sense. i understand the point system is necessary, but to such an extent?

i don't understand why i have to explain every thought which runs through my head. the symbols, the words, the patterns - FOR ME. i want the work to speak on its own, isn't that respectable. how can brevity be punished? people bother me, quite frankly (no offense). i don't like sharing my thoughts. i have tried to express this via my blog, but i fell as though i am singing to deaf ears.

should i conform to meet the 30 point make of approval? should i stay with my brevity? does it even matter?

"do what we all do. make b.s. links."

if progress reports serve as inspiration, shouldn't i respond is an inspiring way. isn't inspiration arbitrary.

close to me.

i went to go see chuck close at the lasm. amazing.
they had photos, tapestry, and poems relating to his family and friends.
my favorite part of the exhibit was the one hour video on his painting style.
i really enjoyed the use of focus, grids (small abstract, large realism), and color.

painting pre-accident:
painting post-accident:

anarchy.

josh sissy and i went to an anarchy film showing at the baton rouge gallery. out of the two films, i enjoyed the second relating the events of genoa. i must research this more fully. while not endorsing anarchy, i enjoyed some common sentiments. lost. destination. exodus. fear. darkness.

i have recorded some initial thoughts.

progress 4.

sources: anarchy. me. me. me. chuck close. nietzsche. on the road.

reflection: this week has been trying, to say the least. i am really wondering about my intial story line. i don't know if it is right. i am beginning to take mr. engholm's advice - be a tad more structured and a tad less organic. i think my standards are standing as my biggest obstacle, at this point. i expect a noble prize. not possible. i think that once i find out what i want - really really want - not what i want others to think i want, then i think i shall be okay. one of my road blocks this week has been tense: third or first? i think i have settled on both - i shall explain on my blog. i think i have also made a very loose plot line, almost garaneeted to change. i am finding it hard to gauge my progress, i shall devise a system. that is all.

goals: write on paper. make concrete maps. stop thinking so much.