Comments on: “O man of two visions!” http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/ Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:58:40 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1 By: Original Sin http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5071 Original Sin Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:37:40 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5071 Very close to genius. Remove, put in in a drawer, re-read in two weeks, update, publish. /my €0.02 Very close to genius. Remove, put in in a drawer, re-read in two weeks, update, publish.

/my €0.02

]]> By: Mogogo http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5072 Mogogo Mon, 09 Oct 2006 15:12:13 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5072 prose-poem. prose-poem.

]]> By: Sanisha http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5073 Sanisha Mon, 09 Oct 2006 16:07:09 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5073 Saleem, this may not mean much to you, but I think that your showing us this side of yourself is really refreshing > honesty is often not appreciated, it exposes you, allows people to ‘see’ you and your fragility, and it reminds them of their own. I think that you describe the Fight brilliantly, it's cool that you can mark these stages in your life, and as a Bahá’í, by events around us which provoke thought ...of impending doom, of gaining power over oneself , and power in the world in general. Saleem, this may not mean much to you, but I think that your showing us this side of yourself is really refreshing > honesty is often not appreciated, it exposes you, allows people to ‘see’ you and your fragility, and it reminds them of their own.

I think that you describe the Fight brilliantly, it’s cool that you can mark these stages in your life, and as a Bahá’í, by events around us which provoke thought …of impending doom, of gaining power over oneself , and power in the world in general.

]]> By: Saleem http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5074 Saleem Mon, 09 Oct 2006 16:42:35 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5074 Hey, thanks a lot guys, I didn't expect it to be so well received and am very grateful. Sanisha, yes I suppose it's good to talk about one's concerns from time to time, and that's what was trying to write itself for the past two weeks, but it was all weak or I'd done it before. Only in the past twenty-four hours did I get some refreshment that helped me write this post. Hey, thanks a lot guys, I didn’t expect it to be so well received and am very grateful. Sanisha, yes I suppose it’s good to talk about one’s concerns from time to time, and that’s what was trying to write itself for the past two weeks, but it was all weak or I’d done it before. Only in the past twenty-four hours did I get some refreshment that helped me write this post.

]]> By: Humble Owl http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5075 Humble Owl Mon, 09 Oct 2006 17:35:54 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5075 The only thing I could possibly think of improving about this piece is the fact that you don't 'tap out' in a boxing match ( I like to see writers a little more consistant with their chosen metaphors otherwise it can look like they're not paying attention). Tapping out is usually done in wrestling bouts in which case it wouldn't be canvas but a mat....Unless it's WWE. Appologies, I commend you for this...(muddled fighting metaphors aside). I think you may have lifted the bar a little. The only thing I could possibly think of improving about this piece is the fact that you don’t ‘tap out’ in a boxing match ( I like to see writers a little more consistant with their chosen metaphors otherwise it can look like they’re not paying attention). Tapping out is usually done in wrestling bouts in which case it wouldn’t be canvas but a mat….Unless it’s WWE.

Appologies, I commend you for this…(muddled fighting metaphors aside). I think you may have lifted the bar a little.

]]> By: Saleem http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5076 Saleem Mon, 09 Oct 2006 18:02:14 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5076 Owl, many thanks as well, that's very very kind. Thanks also for alerting me to the mixed metaphor. Mixed metaphors are almost always bad (unless employed for comic effect) because, as you say, they detract from the internal reality of the piece. I shall endeavour to correct it with proper phrasing. Owl, many thanks as well, that’s very very kind. Thanks also for alerting me to the mixed metaphor. Mixed metaphors are almost always bad (unless employed for comic effect) because, as you say, they detract from the internal reality of the piece. I shall endeavour to correct it with proper phrasing.

]]> By: Sarmad http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5084 Sarmad Mon, 09 Oct 2006 20:58:48 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5084 The use of repeated sentences is virtuosic. Salaam. The use of repeated sentences is virtuosic. Salaam.

]]> By: Marshn http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5085 Marshn Mon, 09 Oct 2006 21:03:59 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5085 There is a reason I keep reading your writing. It's good. Thanks. There is a reason I keep reading your writing. It’s good. Thanks.

]]> By: Saleem http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5097 Saleem Mon, 09 Oct 2006 23:27:41 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5097 Sarmad, brilliant, well-remembered, thanks. Marshn, thank you too, very kind. Sarmad, brilliant, well-remembered, thanks. Marshn, thank you too, very kind.

]]> By: Mogogo http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5098 Mogogo Mon, 09 Oct 2006 23:29:45 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5098 Stop taking bows, you freakin dotard. Stop taking bows, you freakin dotard.

]]> By: Saleem http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5099 Saleem Mon, 09 Oct 2006 23:35:18 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5099 How unfair! There's a difference between taking bows and offering palms joined in namaste. It was a helpful thing to write and I'm glad people enjoyed it. How unfair! There’s a difference between taking bows and offering palms joined in namaste. It was a helpful thing to write and I’m glad people enjoyed it.

]]> By: Mogogo http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5101 Mogogo Tue, 10 Oct 2006 00:15:42 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5101 There's also a difference between offering palms joined in namaste and saying "it was a helpful thing to write" / "people enjoyed it" There’s also a difference between offering palms joined in namaste and saying “it was a helpful thing to write” / “people enjoyed it”

]]> By: Saleem http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5102 Saleem Tue, 10 Oct 2006 00:26:20 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5102 I'm not sure what exactly that difference is, but anyway I suspect you're right insofar as my intent has been misunderstood. I’m not sure what exactly that difference is, but anyway I suspect you’re right insofar as my intent has been misunderstood.

]]> By: Original Sin http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5112 Original Sin Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:47:10 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5112 /finds out what namaste means and chuckles http://www.answers.com/namaste /finds out what namaste means and chuckles

http://www.answers.com/namaste

]]> By: Sanisha http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5113 Sanisha Tue, 10 Oct 2006 09:23:11 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5113 As an appendix, Saleem, please elaborate... on why exactly is Mr Kim his own worst enemy? if we go back to the puppet show analogy what role might he be playing ? and is 'mutually assured destruction' ... a military term ? your <i> mutual </i> referring to North Korea and The World...or North Korea and Mr Kim …other? i don't quite understand what you meant in para1. ...what’s the deal there? As an appendix, Saleem, please elaborate…

on why exactly is Mr Kim his own worst enemy? if we go back to the puppet show analogy what role might he be playing ?

and

is ‘mutually assured destruction’ … a military term ?
your mutual referring to North Korea and The World…or North Korea and Mr Kim …other? i don’t quite understand what you meant in para1.
…what’s the deal there?

]]> By: Saleem http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5114 Saleem Tue, 10 Oct 2006 09:50:19 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5114 MAD, mutually assured destruction, is a political-military concept held over from the Cold War. It's the notion that neither side (back then, the Soviet bloc on one side and NATO on the other) would instigate a nuclear war, because it knew that the other would retaliate with equal or greater nuclear force, and everyone would end up dead. Destruction was assured by mutual capacity and willingness, in face of adequate danger. Meanwhile, Mr Kim is his own worst enemy because he's nuts. His country and regime suffer not because of the machinations of a correct capitalist empire, but because his psychotic ultra-Stalinist state is completely unfeasible for human life, and however well Mr Kim is insulated from the sufferings of his people at the moment, the conditions he (and his father before him) have created are completely untenable for the entire country. Further, the way I was using MAD with regards to my own entry and thinking was, I think, partly a joke: that if Mr Kim detonated nuclear weapons against his own people, it would kill them (which is what his economic and politic policies are already doing, albeit more slowly) but also, by killing them, kill himself. Finally, I think MAD applies to myself because there is a kind of madness in MAD (that's why it's such a good acronym) but when it's one's own assured destruction, self-assured destruction - SAD - then it's even crazier, even more mad. And by then including this notion of "o man of two visions", i.e. one person, two perspectives - in other words, a struggle within the self of the right way to see the world and one's life - the notion that self-destruction is the mutually assured destruction of two points of view in one person becomes very compelling simply from a literary point of view. Regrettably for me and you I've mangled it far more in this attempt to explain it, but in short, what I was trying to say is that there is, absolutely, a big battle to be had, but it's internal and unique to each of us, and that any big nuclear-esque deterrent that we might wield against ourselves is sad, mad and... bad. MAD, mutually assured destruction, is a political-military concept held over from the Cold War. It’s the notion that neither side (back then, the Soviet bloc on one side and NATO on the other) would instigate a nuclear war, because it knew that the other would retaliate with equal or greater nuclear force, and everyone would end up dead. Destruction was assured by mutual capacity and willingness, in face of adequate danger.

Meanwhile, Mr Kim is his own worst enemy because he’s nuts. His country and regime suffer not because of the machinations of a correct capitalist empire, but because his psychotic ultra-Stalinist state is completely unfeasible for human life, and however well Mr Kim is insulated from the sufferings of his people at the moment, the conditions he (and his father before him) have created are completely untenable for the entire country.

Further, the way I was using MAD with regards to my own entry and thinking was, I think, partly a joke: that if Mr Kim detonated nuclear weapons against his own people, it would kill them (which is what his economic and politic policies are already doing, albeit more slowly) but also, by killing them, kill himself.

Finally, I think MAD applies to myself because there is a kind of madness in MAD (that’s why it’s such a good acronym) but when it’s one’s own assured destruction, self-assured destruction - SAD - then it’s even crazier, even more mad. And by then including this notion of “o man of two visions”, i.e. one person, two perspectives - in other words, a struggle within the self of the right way to see the world and one’s life - the notion that self-destruction is the mutually assured destruction of two points of view in one person becomes very compelling simply from a literary point of view. Regrettably for me and you I’ve mangled it far more in this attempt to explain it, but in short, what I was trying to say is that there is, absolutely, a big battle to be had, but it’s internal and unique to each of us, and that any big nuclear-esque deterrent that we might wield against ourselves is sad, mad and… bad.

]]> By: Sanisha http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5115 Sanisha Tue, 10 Oct 2006 10:06:12 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-5115 rad! thanks. rad!

thanks.

]]> By: nemoDreamer http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-19661 nemoDreamer Mon, 05 Mar 2007 13:08:27 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-19661 Mogogo, I'm re-visiting Saleems greats, and this one is a shining example... Mogogo, I’m re-visiting Saleems greats, and this one is a shining example…

]]> By: Mogogo http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-19675 Mogogo Mon, 05 Mar 2007 20:10:53 +0000 http://www.neocrats.com/2006/10/09/o-man-of-two-visions/#comment-19675 prose-poem prose-poem

]]>