#example of easily divorced from reality: alien | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

amxwolf · 3 years

Text

Here is why conventional healthful-thinking is not working on Millennials.

Have you ever had that terrifying dream where you are stuck in a dark forest or sketchy alley, frantically running for your life from some kind of feral monster or mad man? Most of us can personally recall at least once being roused from sleep in a cold sweat because their brain had spent the last few hours perfecting the latent image of a made-to-order nightmare. While that experience is certainly not exclusive to Millennials (rather quite the opposite), the waking reaction or at least how it is processed later by this roughly categorized group of mislabeled people is unique to say the least.

For years now, people in marketing have been fervently dissecting and attempting to recreate what has been loosely categorized as "Millennial Humor". And in all of their efforts to connect with this flock of black sheep, the grand majority of them seem to be missing a key factor in the psychology at work here. For all the unwarrantable bilge that modern advertising haphazardly cobbles together, only a small percentage of the nonsense is seasoned perfectly with the secret ingredient. What is this singular spice? Well, while indulgent to profess and speculative, from someone "sitting in millennial class”, it's obvious: A touch of salt.

Never will I sit here and cry to the general public about how unhappy I am that the modern advertising industry is just not scratching my itch for the wares it’s peddling, but I think it's important for us now to look at how this systemic lack of understanding is reaching beyond the world of subliminal profiteering. Society has other significant quality-of-life effecting systems that are also missing the mark when trying to aim and reach out to help this specific group of people. Puns aside, "a touch of salt" as I quipped, is flavoring the lives of a lot of people in their mid to late 20's and early 40's. And the most frustrating and difficult to reconcile attempts that I personally have made to better myself, have been those that were guided by people who just cannot seem to put their brain into that salty head space.

For example, trying to focus on and internalize a well-organized medical presentation about the encompassing negative effects of stress or insomnia and its seemly simple solution of just "changing your thinking", is about as easily digestible as a two-decade-year-old fruitcake for someone who is imprisoned daily by the symptoms of chronic stress. While I may sit there and give listening (ironically) "the old college try", the sound quickly turns to fuzzy white noise the deeper the lecture dives into positive thinking.

You see, Millennials are not generally fluent in positive thinking. More and more of them seem to be speaking a very distinctive dialect of realism, which incorporates a robustly cultivated sense of sarcasm and a somewhat grim shade of hopelessness. A lot of millennials grew up with a laughably poetic twist on "Growing Up" and "Being Successful", which in turn has colored their day-to-day interactions and created this defeatism-culture. Millennials will openly joke about their death as a needed release, their eulogy as a retirement card, or emotionally decompile themselves over something simple like saying "you too" in a situation that doesn't warrant it.

A good percentage of Millennials were old enough to understand the destructive consequences of the most recent housing market disaster on a very personal level; At an impressionable age, watching their own parents, who may have worked excruciatingly hard at the expense of any number of personal or family goals, lose just about everything resonated in a way that cannot be unheard. Then add the borderline criminal and unscrupulous "sheep-shearing" that became common place when the generation was herded off to college, trade school, or other form of career-building education. Not to mention the fact that upon completing said programs, a proverbial "step-in-the-right direction", a substantial number of these "hopeless wanderers" were faced with yet another barbed-wire hurdle when the job market in countless fields were oversaturated with potential employees. Many positions had not been vacated as they normally would have been with the age of retirement being stretched further and further down the road due to increased cost of living and financial demands; the finish line or lap marker was just not getting any closer. To add insult to injury, Millennials, sometimes unbelievably hardworking, are frequently being listed as perpetuators of the clashing reality we have today. This being what the modern media is calling "The Great Resignation"; a dubious combination of a labor shortage amidst an unemployment spike fueled by uncompetitive wages left unchecked, the government's inability to reel in the situation, and a general devaluing of laborers overall.

Oh. And also, we were killing the diamond industry at the same time. Or was it simultaneously the marriage and divorce industry? Wait! I think it was cinema? Or no....maybe it was fabric softener. For a complete dissertation of all the things Millennials brutally murdered over the last two decades, perhaps I'll include a link below if for no other reason to drive my point home.

You have this group of people who are conditioned to endlessly swimming upstream, against the current, with nothing but chastising and bitterness to listen to. So, when it comes to something universal like learning to "sleep better" or "problem solving", the indifferent but somehow time-honored approach of saying "it's as easy as just taking control" is over time if not immediately rejected as dissonant information.

These people don't feel like they have control; some of them feel like they never had any to begin with.

Why is this a problem?

Our society is not developing a taste for "salt" at a pace in which it can prepare social-sustenance for its population. We're not getting any younger, and neither are the generations in front of us.

Millennials are already, by some definitions the mass-population of workers, voters, and other titles that we've yet to embrace. And our lack of interest is not because we do not have a passion for positive change (even on a global scale). Millennials have voiced over time that they feel they are the silent majority amidst a group of people who will not give them breathing room and don't respect the validity of their opinions and ambitions. And it is by no means restricted to one region or country on this planet. This is a global phenomenon.

I could spin a vast yarn about the political ramifications of continuing to exclude the Millennials from the metaphoric Counsel of Elders, but I'm more concerned about the neglect that is spreading elsewhere. We need our leaders in the medical and social fields to really respect and dig deep into how to incorporate "Millennial Thinking" into their treatment and development plans. A large amount of the global population is going to need carefully tailored treatment for things as old as depression, bi-polar tendencies, or schizophrenia as well as newly discovered mental encumbrances like imposter-syndrome.

While “positive-thinking” may have been easily cultivated in the past, we may need to start from a more negative approach and build from there to educate and treat a group of down-on-their-luck millions. Pumping drugs into a populace is not going to permanently patch the leak either, so there truly is precedence for a rehashing of how we should prioritize mental health in modern society.

Stop spending so much time and energy assigning blame to modern technologies and social norms. Are these going away? No? In that case, those things are much like our other daily stresses that are unavoidable. Yes, you can change your nightly routine to de-stress the same way that you can change a job or a daily commute, but there needs to be a fundamental shift in accountability divvied to circumstances out of a person's control rather than scolding them for not being able to manage it.

Do I have all the answers? No.

But this was less about offering a solid a solution and more about opening a dialogue. A starting point.

So yeah. I've had that dream of being chased through the woods by a life-leeching alien. It felt very similar to being sucked dry of my pitiful wages for an education that was at the time, barely panning out. Even now, as a 32-year-old, slightly more successful version of the starving student I've become, I still feel as though my rat race will end when my heart gives out; and all I can hope for is enough money when I drop to cover the ambulance ride to the over-crowded emergency room and a large pit to rot in. But I just hope that the generation behind me has the benefit of a system that understands how to create and sustain “Millennial Inspired” social structures that will allow them to flourish in what little we can leave behind for them.

Also, could you pass the salt?

#rant #millenials #heavy thoughts #random thoughts #seriously though modern mental medicine is a joke

1 note · View note

entitycradle · 3 years

Text

Fourth-Person

Third-person writing is called as such because it identifies three story-telling roles: the reader, the narrator, and the character. The “person” in third-person refers not to the narrator but to the character, who is a separate third party to the action between narrator and reader. Second-person writing only identifies two roles: the reader-character and the narrator. The reader and the character are subsumed into a single being who is both consuming and consumed by the narrative. First-person storytelling has but a single role which both experiences and narrates the story to themselves. These terms descend from third-, second-, and first-person pronouns, which identify a foreign third “they,” a familiar second “you,” and an identical first “I,” respectively.

An aside about non-canonical forms. There are alternate forms of second-person storytelling which split the singular role into different atoms: the reader and narrator-character, and the narrator-reader and character. These structures are widely considered apocryphal, as they do not always identify the story-experiencing character as the last role, nor do they easily differentiate themselves from the canonical structures. Heterodox scholars maintain that some canonically first-person stories are actually the former type of alternate second-person narrative, with a reader role separate from the narrator-character. They believe that the identity of this reader may be identified through intuitive methods such as academic psychography, though most journals reject such work. Second-person narratives of the latter type are held to be unstable even by these scholars. The existence of a fictional character outside the singularity of narrator and reader implies an intermediate existential layer between the written and the fictive. This quickly corrodes narrative reality into absurdism.

There are also degenerate cases of alternate third-person narratives descending from these alternate second-person structures, e.g. by dividing the character role while maintaining the narrator-reader. Such structures may be constructed in theory, but narratives of this type do not exist. The abstract mass of the role duo makes the second role indivisible. Only the stability of the traditional structure permits the creation of narratives with higher person-count.

On to the further canonical forms. Zeroeth-person storytelling has a fairly concrete definition, and so is easy to understand. Zeroeth-person storytelling annihilates the first-person singularity. Conceptually, it is similar to scientific writing, which narrates events as if from an inhuman observer without an identity. Though there is narrating, there is no narrator. However, while this kind of storytelling is often called weak zeroeth-person, strong zeroeth-person narration is much rarer. The difference between weak and strong nth-person storytelling is important. Strong third-person storytelling, for example, is commercially employed quite frequently. The reader often does have an identity separate from that of the narrator and the character. First-person storytelling, however, is often directed at a reader with a true identity separate from that of the narrator, meaning it is of the weak variety. Strong first-person storytelling, where the narrator-character directs their story at their true self, is mostly restricted to the realm of thought and self-talk. The rarity of strong zeroeth-person storytelling, then, becomes apparent. Many write as if the narrator has no identity. Only in a select few cases does the narrator truly have no identity. Do not forget that zeroeth-person writing annihilates not just the narrator, but the character and the reader, too. Say a zeroeth-person story is read by a being with an identity. If that story is strong enough, then that being’s identity is annihilated. Psychological research suggests that this is a result of experiencing the lack of self embedded in the story. Hopefully students can see why it is important to be able to distinguish between these different kinds of narratives.

Next is fourth-person storytelling. Many only have an abstract sense of the fourth-person, but with the rules we have shown so far, we can understand it concretely. First, the last role is always the character. Second, the higher the person-count, the more distant the last role. We call the two new roles in fourth-person the near character and the distant character. The near character is the familiar: human, fallible, and in strong fourth-person storytelling, similar to the true identity of the narrator. The distant character is the strange: inhuman, perfect, and impossible for the narrator to understand. These two roles exist in equal measure throughout the story. Though the narrative may include multiple “characters” in the elementary sense, focusing on different “people” within the story, these all fulfill the role of the near character as we have been discussing it. Similarly, there may be multiple “entities” within the story that all fill the role of distant character. A frequent question when discussing the distant character is, what makes them character-ful? After all, the last role is always the character, and it doesn’t seem like the near character and the distant character are any different in terms of existing in the story outside of the narrator and the reader. The answer is that character, as we have been using it, is defined by their experience of the story. The narrator and the reader do not experience the narrative. They may not even exist within the narrative’s existential layer. In opposition, the character experiences the story. And so what makes the distant character the most character-ful is the valence of their experience: while the character in third-person storytelling may have some measure of truthful experience and fictive experience, in fourth-person storytelling the near character has truthful (i.e. nearby) experience, while the distant character has fictive (i.e. distant) experience. That distant characters are entirely divorced from truthful reality makes them very powerful: they propagate their own existential layer with their own entirely foreign subjective experience. Fourth-person storytelling creates existential layers propagated by alien beings which may nonetheless be contacted through the narrative medium. This occurs with even weak fourth-person narratives. Strong fourth-person narratives have severe oneiromantic and ontological effects, including remote viewing, multicognition, and the generation of hole interfaces.

Finally, we come to final-person storytelling. Final-person storytelling creates an infinity of roles which nonetheless has a terminus. Final-person storytelling knits together a volume of many existential layers, including those with high truth values. There is no such thing as weak final-person storytelling, because by definition it creates reality as a fictional story within itself. There is an infinite or ouroboric quality to final-person storytelling. You exist within a final-person narrative.

#writing #this one's a weird one #weird fiction #cosmic horror #narramancy #narrative #magic

7 notes · View notes

moriganstrongheart · 3 years

Text

On Firefly, Mediocrity and Problematic Media

When I first set to writing this, I intended to write a review of Firefly. I had recently rewatched Firefly and its tie-in, semi-sequel movie Serenity with my fiancée, and I wanted to express my thoughts on it. But I put the original first draft aside after writing two sentences and did not revisit it until months later. By then, I found I was no longer interested in reviewing Firefly, opting to explore issues of underlying misogyny and mediocrity in media instead. I think that Joss Whedon’s work is a good case study for these problems, as he exists simultaneously as a folk hero of sorts when it comes to speculative fiction, and as the harbinger of the now divisive Marvel Cinematic Universe. And Firefly being so beloved by its fans, I think it's worth diving deep into its problems to illustrate my points.

Perhaps the best way to demonstrate Firefly’s problems is in how it appeals to its fans. While I find the character interactions the best aspect of the show, I’m sure that quite a few fans—primarily young, white males—are attracted to the space western setting of the show and all the trappings that come with it. The Verse is filled with guns, alcohol, rape, savages and prostitutes—everything a new frontier needs, or so I expect is the intent. I don’t think these are ever the focus of the show, nor are they something Whedon ever places on a pedestal as ideals to strive for. But they are a part of the worldbuilding, and so were included with intent. There has been a debate for several years among fans of speculative fiction on whether worlds inspired by historical periods or specific cultures should include these so-called “less favourable” aspects of that period or culture, or if the speculative nature of the fiction should allow for their exclusion. I want to make it clear that I am in the second camp; I don’t believe that just because a fantasy world is set in a medieval time period that women shouldn’t be allowed to be knights, or that aliens or people of colour have to necessarily be slaves in a colonial space opera. It is speculative fiction after all, and we are under no obligation to hold ourselves to any supposed cultural or historical accuracy.

This is, of course, ignoring the fact that the cultural and historical accuracies being strived for have flawed origins, having been decided by academics with their own bias, or even maybe their own agenda. I would make further arguments that historical fiction and literature are themselves often coloured by the author’s intent, and so certain aspects are accentuated while others are ignored or downplayed in order to tell a specific story—often to the detriment of minority groups. It’s impossible to divorce bias from one’s work, no matter how objective the work claims to be. This has been proven time and again, evidenced by the revision of textbooks throughout the years.

Regardless, counter arguments to the exclusion of “less favourable” elements are normally that doing so waters down the source material, diminishing its authenticity and, more interestingly, it represents a disagreeable emotional sensitivity on the part of the opposition. This point of view assumes that the opposition is averse to certain perceived realities in the world, and that the narrative they want to ascribe themselves to would be unrealistic and, as such, not entertaining. In reality, all parties are involved in some form of escapism. The outcry for realism is a smokescreen for the desire to keep a specific form of escapism, one which can only be described as a violent, misogynistic power fantasy. The source of this outcry—again, predominantly young white males—sees the inclusion of bigotry and sexual violence as essential to their viewing experience, as they take enjoyment out of them. That isn’t to say that having violence, sexual themes or social inequality don’t have a place in fiction; they just need to have a purpose. Without purpose, they are only there to service the twisted fantasies of the target audience.

For an example that brings us back to Firefly, it never really feels like Irana’s career as a courtesan serves any other purposes than as an excuse for partial nudity, sex scenes and for Malcolm to call her “whore” on the regular. There are times where her position as a high-ranking courtesan opens doors for the Firefly crew, but this is a contrivance of how courtesans work within the Verse, and not a part of the skillset she has accrued to become a courtesan. The only true exception to this—that I can remember—is her role in grooming the magistrate’s son in the episode Jaynestown, which directly affects the primary conflict. Apart from this instance, none of her meaningful contributions to the plot necessitate her being a courtesan. She could have just as easily been someone with social or political clout. However, this wouldn’t have allowed for her to be the ship’s prostitute, there only to drive Malcolm up the wall and have someone he could call “whore” without guilt. As such, it became necessary for Whedon to not only make her a sex worker, but to create an entire system around her which would give her importance to the plot. In essence, he wanted his cake and eat it too. It’s disappointing, as the idea of having a sex worker being an important member of the main cast is interesting enough as a concept to explore. Ideally, this person would be treated with respect by others for their work, and their value should come from them as a person, not from a fabricated social status.

As a side note, I acknowledge that most people in the show respect Inara, but it is because of her fabricated social status and not because of who she is as a person. The only people who respect her for who she is and what she does are women and the one person of colour on the crew.

There are a lot of other small decisions within Firefly that show Whedon’s intent, such as the characterizations of River’s mental illness and Jayne as a character. I can’t help but wonder if Firefly were produced today on HBO or Netflix, if the showrunners would have allowed the inclusion of far more sexual violence and bigotry in hopes of attracting a larger audience. Because while we have collectively become much more cognizant of issues like diversity and the portrayal of women in media, shows with portrayals of sexual violence and bigotry tend to perform better overall. Unfortunately, the vocal minority shouting their preferences on social media only helps to reinforce this trend.

However, I don’t want to make the wrong impression. Sexism, racism, violence and bigotry are not the focus during Firefly’s runtime. In fact, Whedon generally does a good job of representing healthy relationships, strong female characters and positive representation of people of colour. For example, Zoe and Wash’s relationship is very admirable, and Kaylee is perhaps the best character on the show. The problems exist beneath the surface, informing everything from story conflicts to character motivations. Whedon comes off as a guy just wanting to have some fun, someone who is cool and trendy, just rude enough to be interesting, but knowing where to draw the line. Really though, he’s just the best of a bad lot within the entertainment industry. A lot who are, unsurprisingly, white men catering to their younger selves.

As a white man myself, I am constantly checking myself and the works I create to ensure I am providing a compelling story while avoiding trappings indicative of a male power fantasy. Because of the environment I grew up in, it can be easy to rely on tired old tropes instead of thinking of meaningful and interesting things to write. Does that mean that catering to the needs of a diverse audience is too difficult, and as such, is detrimental to the creative process? I don’t believe so, despite what many may believe. If anything, it forces writers to think of novel, more captivating stories that don’t rely on tropes and power fantasies to work. I believe that the reason people have become so weary of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and similar works is because they all rely on a power fantasy to function. I myself have grown tired of seeing the same story over and over, and it is only in the last decade that I realized the reason for this is that most people behind the works I consume are—again—white males catering to their younger selves.

This has led me to question if it’s right for me to have my voice heard at all. Would I not just be another straight, white male entering a space already filled with the same? Perhaps, but I don’t think the intent of fostering diversity in media is to exclude white people. In fact, if people like Whedon were the worst in terms of what white males have to offer the entertainment industry, I think we’d be in a better place. The problem is that the majority of the media we consume today is problematic and doesn’t allow for any variance from what’s trending among a young white male audience. All I can do is hope that shows like Firefly can be used as a learning experience for creating more compelling and varied stories. Stories should rely on interesting characters, worlds and the interactions in between them to be entertaining, and not on fulfilling the twisted power fantasy of the audience under the guise of realism.

#my discussions #discussion #firefly #mediocrity in media #problematic media #serenity #joss whedon #mcu

5 notes · View notes

comradeclown · 4 years

Text

OK, so in honour of my top posts now being me saying at various degrees of length that Arthur is gay (hashtag mylegacy, lmao…), I thought I should just go for it and actually dive in a bit a lot into why I read the character as gay. Now, usually all the justification I need to read a character as gay is “wouldn’t it be cool if this character I like/relate to/etc were gay like me?” and “it’s OK, officer, I do what I want”, and I’m well aware that 99% of the time it’s me using my own creativity to do a resistant reading + the film/book/whatever bumbling into subtext entirely by accident. And while I definitely don’t think there’s ever any more justification needed for any kind of LGBT reading, lol, as it comes to Arthur, obviously feel free to disagree with me, but I honestly think my read of him as a gay man is entirely textually supported, however unwitting and accidental that might have been on the part of the filmmakers (mind you, I don’t think it was Todd Phillips’ conscious intent, but I’m like… 85% sure Joaquin Phoenix knew exactly what he was doing).

(ETA that this is extremely long, so I’ve put it all under a cut.)

First of all, there’s of course… pretty much the entirety of Joaquin Phoenix’s performance (a very, very small sample can be found in my he gay son tag and just generally in my arthur fleck tag, ha), from his mannerisms to his physicality to the way he interacts with other characters. I know part of it is a function of wanting to go back to the character’s campy roots (which are themselves… you know…), and I know I’m relying on stereotypes to some extent, but first of all, you can’t divorce either camp or gender non-conformity from LGBT history and existence, and secondly this is literally how characters have been coded as gay throughout the entire history of cinema. What I’m saying here is that you can’t have a character who acts like Arthur does, literal limp wrist and all, or says “come on, Muuuurrrayyy, do I look like the kind of girl clown who could start a movement” the way he does, to pick one of many, many examples, and not evoke the long history of cinematic wink emojis at People Like Me.

That in itself would… honestly be plenty, lol, but it could be chalked up to, idk, Joaquin Phoenix doing his own thing, were it not for the fact that it’s completely reinforced at every turn by the filmmaking language, even down to his wardrobe choices, and it’s worth noting at this point that the framing is always one of empathy — albeit with nuance — and affording the character subjectivity, rather than being “ew, look at this gross [homophobic slur]”. Like, the very first time we see Arthur, literally our first impression of the character, he’s at a mirror, putting on make-up and then ruining it by crying, and while the make-up is of course part of his job, this is just not how the inner crises of straight male characters are expressed in the language of cinema. Of note too is the fact that he’s clearly visually separated from his co-workers in all the scenes at Ha-Ha’s, indicating his alienation from them, and while this could be chalked up purely to his disabilities, I don’t buy that that’s the only reason, given that Gary gets shit due to his dwarfism, sure, but at the end of the day he’s clearly “one of the boys” in a way Arthur (can’t be) isn’t.

There are honestly so many examples of the framing working to separate Arthur from conventional masculinity and heterosexuality that I’m just going to pick some highlights, such as: obviously, the way he expresses himself emotionally through dancing (to the point that one of his coworkers explicitly ribs him about it, “if your dancing doesn’t do the trick”), which again is not something that straight male characters do in the language of cinema. The fact that all the media we see him consume is musicals, classic comedies and a talk show he’s obsessively fannish about and watches with his mother — and we know he’s a fan of the show as a whole, not just Murray, hence him saying “I love Dr Sally” (and the way he says it…). Or, speaking of his media habits, when he’s dancing with the gun while watching Shall We Dance, this could have so, so easily been about him ~regaining his lost masculinity~ through, say, fantasies of revenge or badassery, but instead it’s about him being acknowledged as a great dancer and punishing bad dancers, and it all ends in slapstick anyway.

Also, while I’m on this topic, I want to address the nature of Arthur’s dissociative fantasies about Sophie. Honestly, I don’t read them as indicative of genuine romantic/sexual interest at all, because the film frames them as identical to Arthur’s more deliberate daydreams about Murray. I mean, not that I’m adverse to gay readings of that if that’s what you want to do, lmao, but to me they’re both very clearly post-traumatic fantasies of having another person look after you for once, of having someone value and cherish you and take care of you emotionally (which obviously has massive appeal if you’ve been dealing with the after-effects of catastrophic trauma all your life but nobody has given a shit about your suffering and you’ve had to be the one to look after other people to boot). Note that after the get-together with Sophie — which is clearly patterned after all those old comedies and musicals Arthur watches — the Sophie fantasies are incredibly platonic and involve things like having another person be there for you in a crisis, telling you something supportive, getting you a hot drink (in contrast with the reality of the hospital scene, in which Arthur is alone and he’s the one trying to comfort someone else, i.e., holding Penny’s hand), essentially no different from fantasy!Murray hugging Arthur and knowing exactly what to say to make him feel good about himself. Also note that both fantasies involve being the object of someone else’s affection, Murray picks Arthur out of the audience and Sophie comes to him, it’s a pillow princess Cinderella fantasy, more than someone loving you it’s about being loved. (And, once more, this could easily have all been v. v. different, the Murray fantasy could have been the much more conventionally masculine fantasy of being a famous comedian and being invited on Murray’s show, the Sophie fantasies could have had an undeniable sexual component, etc.)

Anyway, to get back to the general point of cinematic framing, again if the movie didn’t want me to read Artie as gay, it shouldn’t have had a pivotal moment in his character arc be him sitting at his mother’s vanity table, doing a new make-up look which involves using her lipstick, and then having a Moment while he’s literally holding a quasi-glamour shot of her.

And the thing is, all these reams of stuff aren’t even the key piece of the puzzle for me, which is the way in which the film as a whole can be read as a gay narrative. I’ve posted before about how part of the emotional catharsis of the film is about Arthur finally shamelessly embracing and even revelling in all his freakishness and socially-despised traits, a big one of which being what is arguably his effeminacy and… honestly I don’t need to explain how that’s a classic gay (and more generally LGBT) narrative, do I? Like, there’s a reason why a pivotal scene is Arthur having his hair-dyeing underwear rave in a flat that’s suddenly incredibly bright and sunny for the first time, it’s about reclaiming the pain and ugliness of your life and your circumstances into a space of potential liberation, which is honestly why this movie is always going to be incredibly personally meaningful to me for so many reasons, but definitely meaningful to me as a gay woman. (Again, this could so, so easily have been about him becoming some stone-cold badass or whatever, but instead the film has him dye his hair, put on a super garish new outfit and new make-up look, dance shamelessly in the street, and be incredibly campy on national television.)

More generally, there’s other aspects of the narrative arc that tie into this general theme and which also serve to continually distance Arthur from the conventional cinematic narratives of heterosexual manhood: for instance, once he starts fully embracing the Joker persona — which is… just Arthur, the crucial difference is in how others perceive him and how he perceives himself — any attraction to women, feigned or real, goes completely out the window and the only genuinely affectionate interaction he has with another human being is with Gary (I know we all love to joke about his first kiss being with Dr Sally, but it’s obviously Comedy Jokes and he doesn’t even kiss her for real, his make-up is completely intact; Arthur’s only real kiss in the movie is when he kisses Gary). Or, when Arthur’s personal narrative finally intersects completely with the larger social narrative — which is itself about upheaval, reclamation and potential liberation — the big triumphant moment is him once again dancing, this time for a cheering crowd, and using blood like lipstick to redraw his smile.

Or even, to a lesser extent, his whole sub-plot with his mother, before I watched the film I was worried that this was going to be the usual narrative about the henpecked guy who finally puts the bitch in her place as part of becoming a Real Man, and it’s not at all, quite the opposite, Arthur is not henpecked and is clearly in charge of the household, he genuinely loves Penny — and is confident she loves him back — and enjoys doing at least some things with her (them watching the Murray Franklin Show together), and up until the reveal any issues he has with her are largely the product of having to look after an ill person with zero social support and while working a physically and emotionally demanding job and dealing with his own disabilities. When he kills her, it’s a deeply sad and self-destructive scene and it’s the result of his profound anguish and sense of betrayal and he frames it as the bitter, trauma-haunted dark half of self-actualisation and self-acceptance (“that’s the real me”, “I haven’t been happy one minute of my entire fucking life”, “now I realise… it’s a fucking comedy”).

Or, at a more meta-textual level, the way the film is unabashedly both a pulpy thriller and a melodrama, just shamelessly embracing all its emotions, its pain and catharsis, without a trace of irony. Like, yeah, part of this is the immense sincerity and compassion Joaquin Phoenix brings to his performance, but it really is the movie’s approach as a whole, and when there is humour — and I do think there’s quite a lot of humour in the movie — it’s not the distancing, let’s-not-feel-anything-too-deeply-bro humour of your typical MCU movie, it’s the camp sensibility of laughing with and at your own tragedy. (Myriad examples down to the use of certain songs in the soundtrack.)

On a final note, you guys know how much I don’t care about authorial intent, but I feel compelled to point out that in his director’s commentary, Todd Phillips says, while discussing Arthur’s journey into becoming Joker, that he reads the larger pop-cultural character of the Joker as someone who doesn’t want women, and like… Again, it’s not like I think that he was deliberately making a gay narrative in any way, it’s just that if you’re creating this journey of a man who eventually becomes a character who’s not interested in women in that sense, you’ve also just ended up stumbling into a gay narrative accidentally on purpose, lmao, what’s the real difference between “at the end of the story, Arthur doesn’t want women because he’s ~da Joker now, baby, he doesn’t want anything~” and “at the end of the story, Arthur doesn’t want women because he’s gay and he’s no longer deeply repressed and closeted”?

Anyway, like I said, feel free to disagree, he’s a fictional character, lol, but this is where I’m coming from, and the reason why if everyone involved in the movie decided to make a statement tomorrow about how much Arthur Fleck wants to bone women I’d just say “shit, idc, I’m afraid you made a gay movie about Arthur Fleck, a gay man, it’s a little too late to retcon this bitch now ¯\_(ツ)_/¯”. Also this is over 2,000 words long what the fuck I am so sorry

#long post #joker 2019 #class struggle clown movie #arthur fleck #dive down into chuckletown #he gay son #now in the form of 95 theses nailed to my tumblr #gonna make a letterboxd list called 'the author is dead this is lgbt cinema now'

27 notes · View notes

art-of-eons · 4 years

Note

you’re smart about art history can you please explain the shift from romantics to aesthete? why did they suddenly think nature was evil?

I think the issue here is in the framing. The popular conception is that Romanticism had like this, intrinsic love of nature, which I don’t see as being the case.

I’ll use Wordsworth as an example since he’s one of my favorite Romantic poets. In his Preface to The Lyrical Ballads he writes:

The principal object, then, proposed in these Poems was to choose incidents and situations from common life, and to relate or describe them, throughout, as far as was possible in a selection of language really used by men, and, at the same time, to throw over them a certain colouring of imagination, whereby ordinary things should be presented to the mind in an unusual aspect; and, further, and above all, to make these incidents and situations interesting by tracing in them, truly though not ostentatiously, the primary laws of our nature: chiefly, as far as regards the manner in which we associate ideas in a state of excitement.

Now what Wordsworth is saying here is more easily grasped if you think of his poetics as being about defamiliarizing nature rather than romanticizing it (I think the latter term is too burdened by other linguistic connotations).

The reason why Wordsworth writes so prominently about nature is that he saw “low and rustic life” as being the most common and universal experience of man (which was probably the case at the time even though it seems like a hyper specialized subject now) - and because (this is true for almost all Romantic poets), Nature imagery easily speaks to the philosophical issue they had with modernity.

Wordsworth and the Romantics wanted to rebuff the emerging philosophical trend of modernism, rationalism, and the reductive scientism that was emerging at the time. Modernity had alienated man, it had desacralized the world, and promoted a false, incomplete understanding of reality + the defamiliarization (or romanticism) of nature showed that. In a section from the Prelude, Wordsworth writes:

One function, above all, of such a mind

Had Nature shadowed there, by putting forth,

’Mid circumstances awful and sublime,

That mutual domination which she loves

To exert upon the face of outward things,

So moulded, joined, abstracted, so endowed

With interchangeable supremacy,

That men, least sensitive, see, hear, perceive,

And cannot choose but feel.

The last line there is especially important, man “cannot choose but feel”. The point of this is showing that aesthetic feeling (which can easily be understood and seen in Nature) is a universal component of human experience. And this aesthetic feeling, while clearly being non-cognitive, cannot be divorced from epistemological or metaphysical concerns without a reductivism of the overall picture.

Now the reason why some of the late Romantics and Aestheticists had a seemingly more negative view on nature had to deal with the changing role its symbolism played in art. One of the reactions to Romanticism was the “Realist” movement which aimed for a completely mimetic representation of reality by art. This spurned a visceral reaction from Aestheticists, with Baudelaire mockingly writing that the motto of the Realists was:

I believe in Nature, and I believe only in Nature (there are good reasons for that). I believe that Art is, and cannot be other than, the exact reproduction of Nature (a timid and dissident sect would wish to exclude the more repellent objects of nature, such as skeletons or chamber-pots).

Contrary to popular belief though, Baudelaire wasn’t a single-minded critic of nature. But with him and other Aestheticists you do get a change in aesthetic approach where the artificial becomes the subject of defamiliarization. His work Artificial Paradises is probably the most famous of those and features vivid descriptions of smokestacks, fog, etc. weaving in and out with comparisons to naturalist imagery that conjures up this bizarre utopian imagery - philosophically it’s not too different from Wordsworth even if the subject matter seems totally opposed. *I’ll also add that I think that changing patterns of living - i.e. urbanism becoming the more universal lived experience to rustic life also played a huge role in this change.

#apologies if this is hard to follow or unclear ive been in a huge brain fog lately

23 notes · View notes

lawinformation · 5 years

Text

High Conflict Child Custody Cases in Texas

On the off chance that you have require a best reasonable Texas Divorce Law encounter, High Conflict Child Custody Cases in Texas with the immense procedure!

Divorce Lawyers in Houston: In many divorces, both spouses just want to get out of the marriage without too much bloodshed from either side. Maybe they’ve been divorced before and know the toll that a divorce can take.

Maybe they don’t have a lot of money and realize that the more they spend on lawyers and court costs the less they will have to rebuild their lives after the divorce is finalized. In some situations, the parties have children and just want to maximize their time with the kids and not expend any more energy than they have to on their soon to be ex-spouse.

Unfortunately, there are divorces where an amicable settlement of the issues is not possible. In some instances, one or both spouses have deep set issues with the other spouse and the only way (at least in the parties’ minds) to deal with those issues is to hire a divorce lawyer and go to Court.

The divorce attorneys with the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC understand that no two divorces are the same and that each client our office represents demands and deserves personalized treatment and counsel.

This blog post will detail some instances from our years of family law experience in southeast Texas of when divorces can shift into high conflict divorces. By far the most typical example of a high conflict divorce is when the child custody issue is front and center.

Courtroom combat when it comes to child custody should be avoided whenever possible

Family Lawyer Houston: Resolving, mediating and settling issues related to child custody can be the difference between a manageable 3-4-month divorce and a divorce where the case lasts longer.

These types of divorces are more expensive, due to each party having to pay their lawyers to do more work and spend more time on their case, and can be emotionally draining as well. If you are a person who is contemplating divorce or are facing the prospect of your spouse filing for divorce against you then the next few paragraphs should be especially important to you.

Ultimately, I must say that if your current thought process is to lawyer up and take your spouse to court every week in order to “get” your child then that is probably the wrong mindset to have. I’m not trying to tell you that you’re not justified in feeling that way. I’m also not going to attempt to convince you that it’s not worth it, that “the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.”

What I will state at the outset of this section of the blog is that I have walked out of courtrooms with clients who have had judges rule in their favor, and I’ve walked out of courtrooms with clients who have had judges rule in their spouse’s favor.

You may be surprised to learn that their faces look fairly similar no matter the result. Most folks at that point are just happy to be done with the fighting and are ready to deal with their new realities. It is rare that any one party is completely satisfied with the results of their divorce case, especially when it comes to child custody.

Complicated Issues in Child Custody can lead to conflict

Divorce Lawyers Houston: What sort of issues bring about these high conflict child custody cases? A lawyer’s favorite answer to give a client is, “Well, it depends.”

There are situations that involve physical danger either to a child, a spouse or both. Those are instances where high conflict persons put themselves in high conflict situation and a high conflict divorce and child custody contest is easily foreseeable. Examples of the sort of issues that lead to high conflict custody disputes include family violence and drug/alcohol abuse.

Parental Alienation a huge cause of high conflict custody cases

Family Attorney Houston: While situations involving family violence or parental drug use catch your attention with ease, they are fortunately uncommon compared to other issues that lead to high conflict custody situations for divorcing parents. What does cause a very high percentage of these sort of disputes are situations that involve one parent attempting to alienate the child from the other parent.

The behaviors involved in parental alienation include any kind of purposeful behavior the goal of which is to draw the child closer to the alienating parent and away from the other parent. A divorce offers a perfect opportunity for the alienating parent to discuss the issues of the marriage with the child.

By doing so, the child receives a one-sided view of what is happening in the relationship and in the family. The real issue is that a child is not mature enough to understand the complex relational issues the family is facing and there is a risk of doing long term damage. In the short term, the alienating parent can anger their soon to be ex-spouse with their behavior in a way that can lead to a contentious and conflict filled divorce.

A former client of the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC hired our office after his wife filed for divorce against him around Christmas time last year. This gentleman told his attorney of how his wife had flown her parents down to Houston to have them with her when she told the children about how their parents were getting divorced.

The grandparents were ready to swoop in and buy Christmas presents and just generally help make the holiday more “normal.” The children were told that if not for Grandma and Grandpa there would not have been a Christmas in that year.

This is textbook alienating behavior. Our client felt the brunt of the children’s anger for an extended period of time during the divorce and the relationship with his children still has not recovered.

It took a lot of conversation and counseling with our office to allow him to understand that going tit for tat with his wife on these issues would not serve a higher purpose. In fact, exacerbating an already conflict rich environment by engaging in similar behavior would have been detrimental to the children and himself.

High Conflict Child Custody attorneys- The Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC

Divorce Attorneys in Houston: If you have any questions regarding high conflict custody disputes please contact the attorneys with the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC. Our licensed family law attorneys take a personal interest in each client we work with and make your goals our own in handling your divorce or child custody case. A consultation with our attorneys is free of charge ... Continue Reading

#divorce #family #Family Law #fagan #bryan fagan #attorney #attorneys #texas attorneys #law #lawyer #lawyers #Houston lawyers #Houston #Texas

9 notes · View notes

canchewread · 5 years

Photo

Editor’s note: Originally, I was going to save this quote until Bernie Sanders declared he was running for President in 2020, but I think there’s enough evidence that he’ll eventually declare now to confidently proceed with this write up - if he chickens out, I guess I’ll just have to deal with this post being thrown in my face for a while.

Today’s quotation comes from Matt Taibbi’s 2016 US Presidential election campaign book, “Insane Clown President: Dispatches from the 2016 Circus” - a volume that mostly consists of essays Taibbi released over the course of the entire campaign (Primaries and General Election) with some glue in the introduction and concluding portions of the book, to tie the whole thing together.

As those of you who regularly read my work here on Can’t You Read are no doubt already aware, I’m a big fan of Matt Taibbi’s writing - both in terms of style and the value of the content he provides. While nobody who can effectively work in mainstream media for over a decade should be trusted completely, I think it’s fair to say that Taibbi is, by the comparatively poor standards of his industry, an honest, rational observer of an institution (U.S. politics) that is anything but honest and rational. He is also, despite the numerous attempts to smear him, a fundamentally decent human being and that still matters a little bit in the world of American politics - although, maybe not as much as it should.

As for the book itself - Insane Clown President is ultimately a frustrating collection of writing; while two thirds of the book represents Taibbi at the absolutely height of his powers and easily ranks among his best work, the remaining third feels like a bunch of social media posts and fan mail cobbled into something resembling a narrative, then inserted into the book to fill out the page count. For example, while hashing out the rules of the GOP debate drinking game and conducting unofficial primary polls was probably a lot of fun for Taibbi’s followers on Twitter, it simply doesn’t translate into an enjoyable experience when transported onto the written page - the effect is actually quite jarring and somehow manages to detract from the rest of the extremely high-quality analysis Matt brings to the table.

The upshot here, are of course passages like the one quoted above, from a chapter appropriately and presciently titled - “June 9th, 2016: Democrats Will Learn All the Wrong Lessons from Their Brush with Bernie.” It is in moments like these that Taibbi seems to have his finger directly on the pulse of the class conflict between the voting public and the political elite (of which the mainstream media is effectively a public relations arm) in the United States. Unfortunately, despite Matt’s incisive analysis of the problems that would eventually define the entire 2016 election, the author’s (somewhat myopic) attachment to a liberalized ideal of previous editions of the Democratic Party, ultimately prevents him from drawing the obvious conclusion his own writing exposes throughout the book - that Trump is going to win, because American politics and its political media, are both fundamentally broken.

Despite these issues however, Insane Clown President’s most important contribution to understanding the current US political environment is Taibbi’s ability to recognize both swine emperor Trump and Bernie Sanders as symptoms of a populist insurgency waged not against internal factions within the normal framework of U.S. politics, but in opposition to the entire elite American ruling class and its institutions - our “establishment” if you will.

Before I go any further into what this means for the 2020 Democratic Party nomination race however, I’d like to talk a little bit about the false media narrative that the left wing populist movement behind Bernie Sanders is somehow “the same” as the revanchist, reactionary right wing movement that propelled Herr Donald to the White House in 2016 - a narrative which is, in a word, bullsh*t. While both political phenomenon are motivated to some degree by a mistrust of, alienation from and even outright loathing of the U.S. establishment and its institutions, the reasons for that mistrust, the overall end goals and the origin point of these respective insurgencies are totally different.

The far right “populist” movement that Trump was able to usurp during the 2016 Republican primaries, has its roots in Paleoconservatism and the largely AstroTurf, billionaire-funded conservative “Tea Party movement.” It is a fundamentally reactionary movement, created by the rich to blame America’s ills not on deregulated capitalism and an absurdly greedy ruling class, but instead on the proverbial “other” - brown-skinned immigrants, Muslims, the gay and transgender community, women, African Americans, the Jewish left, political correctness, big government and most of all, the dreaded “socialists, communists and liberals.” At its core, what we now call “Trumpism” is a revanchist Frankenstein’s Monster; the result of decades of weaponized and fetishistic worship of American exceptionalism, white supremacy and the absolute rule of capital - the only problem for the architects of this movement is that Trump managed to hack the code and establish his own mini-cult of personality by being more explicitly fascist and hateful than they were.

The movement propelling Sanders to the forefront of American politics by contrast is a genuine, grass roots endeavor. Although it’s easy enough to make the argument that the anti-globalization movement, Occupy Wall Street, anti-fracking activists, and the Black Lives Matter protests have all provided inspiration and ideological underpinnings for this democratic socialist wave, the fact is that there is no unseen hand at work here; no billionaire backers, no guerrilla marketing wunderkinds, and no AstroTurf corporate media campaigns can claim responsibility for the phenomenon Sanders has helped embody in American politics. I say helped, because this too represents a key difference between the DemSoc wave and Trumpism; as a policy-focused movement, this new American left isn’t just about Bernie Sanders and already we’ve seen inspiring young leaders like Lee Carter, Rashida Tlaib, and especially Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez step to the front with their own democratic socialist message.

Finally, unlike Trumpism, this Sanders-inspired DemSoc insurgency is a movement whose policy proposals match their rhetoric; striving for economic equality, environmental protections, universal health coverage, increased educational opportunities for all, a restoration of democratic rights, better jobs with improved working conditions, the right to collectively bargain, affordable housing, ending mass incarceration, women’s rights, civil rights, and yes, despite what you’ve heard in corporate media owned by rich white people - ending racism and injustice against all marginalized people. Indeed, particularly on the issues of supporting Palestinians living under Israeli apartheid and ending American imperialism abroad, the movement Sanders helped to inspire appears to be driving him further to the left on the political spectrum; although not as much as some, myself included, would like.

In short, if Trumpism is about dragging the country back to a more explicitly white supremacist era, the movement Sanders helps represent is about establishing a fairer, more compassionate and more democratic America than the world has ever known - even under FDR.

There is however, one potential analogue between these two insurgencies and this is where I think the above quote from Taibbi’s book comes in; while there are no real similarities between Trumpism and the Sanders movement, there are a great deal of similarities between the ways both established U.S. political factions and their media minions have responded to an insurgent voter’s revolt.

In 2012, and fresh off the heels of a traumatizing insurgent Tea Party revolt within the party, the Republican establishment put all its chips down on making Barrack Obama a one term president. Expending what would turn out to be the last of their political capital, the GOP establishment managed to force through the Butcher of Bain Capital, “center-right” candidate Mitt Romney during the GOP primary process - a choice distinctly divorced from the anti-elite sentiment (if not reality) of a Tea-Party base now openly indulging in Birtherism and starting to warm up to, you guessed it, Donald Trump. It was the type of calculated bet the party elite would only have been prepared to make if they were sure Romney would win the 2012 presidential election, because they were essentially gambling that deposing the hated Obama would quell the rage their reactionary base felt at being betrayed by the GOP elite, embodied in the form of Romney.

In retrospect, it seems obvious now that when (despite all of Karl Rove’s rosy projections) Romney went down in flames, the GOP establishment was fatally fractured; having demonized Obama as literally an enemy of the American people, when the Republican brain trust failed to deliver his head on a platter that morning in 2012, they effectively lost the revanchist right who’d powered their surge back to political relevance only two years before.

From the outside however, this was not immediately apparent; the Republican leadership quickly announced an election autopsy and soon enough the same people who’d failed Republican voters in 2012 were offering their prescriptions for how to win the next one in 2016. Putting their mighty heads together, these elite GOP power brokers came back with arguably the only candidate more Republican establishment than Romney, Jeb Bush.

It was as we now know, a drastic miscalculation but one that should have been recognized long before Trump won the GOP nomination. When Party leaders lacked the ability to preemptively weed a wild and opportunistic seventeen candidate Republican nomination field, including, incredibly, a credible “center-right” candidate from anointed establishment GOP champion Jeb Bush’s *own* state - the writing was already on the wall for a party leadership group that was only keeping up appearances after exiting 2012 essentially politically bankrupt and broken.

Moving the timeline forward four years, it’s extremely difficult not to see strong parallels on the Democratic side of the ledger. Here too we see a party that barely staved off a radical insurgency by expending an enormous amount of political capital to ram through a highly-unpopular candidate, all the while dismissing the growing outrage from the left wing portion of their base as irrelevant because Hillary Clinton would definitely be the next President of the United States. After losing the 2016 election, the Democratic establishment quickly conducted an autopsy, made some vague platitudes about listening to the angry left-wingers that backed Bernie Sanders and ultimately decided to keep doing the same things they’ve always done before; just like the Republican Party in 2012. Yet, as the 2020 Democratic Party race opens, it is clear that the liberal establishment no longer has enough control over the party to weed the field, and prevent more than a dozen nearly-identical centrist candidates from splitting a vote that would otherwise be united under one candidate, preordained to fight off Bernie Sanders once again.

Can a broken, politically bankrupt Democratic Party hold off Sanders a second time doing essentially the exact same things that failed to hold off Trumpism on the GOP side of aisle?

I wouldn’t bet on it - as beloved American author Samuel Clemens is often (and perhaps falsely) reputed to have said, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”

- nina illingworth

5 notes · View notes

meditativeyoga · 5 years

Text

Make Peace: Meditation for Reconciliation

When you really feel at probabilities with the world, method this meditation to regain harmony.

' My mind full of rage each time I hear him talk,' one of my students reports of his action to a politician. I locate myself wishing ill will towards them all, another states with a pained voice, embarrassed of her very own responses to political leaders. 'I merely can not practice lovingkindness for these individuals,' states a third. In the previous few years lots of reflection experts have been managing such emotions as they have a hard time to locate tranquility of mind in relationship to the national events and elected authorities they see as damaging. Students dealing with a hard associate, a close friend's betrayal, a painful separation, or an unfair household scenario report comparable feelings of outrage, rage, or disgust.

Often meditation trainees will ask me just what they must do when their hostility and sense of splitting up persist despite hours of lovingkindness practice as well as duplicated attempts at mercy. Even trained trainees, who recognize that their sensations are triggering them to experience as well as that anger usually obtains in the way of smart activity, in some cases discover that feelings of disappointment and also rage continue.

It's a spiritual problem: Just how do you not catch outrage and alienation, yet keep your passion and inspiration to combat for justice and social excellent? Also, when your marriage is dissolving, just how do you let go of rage, bitterness, as well as blame while at the very same time defending what you believe to be right, particularly when youngsters are involved?

One pupil told me she didn't depend on herself to practice meditation. She found herself fuming when she left the pillow, as it so increased her fixation on exactly how inadequately her ex-husband had treated her. A guy on resort -- swamped with despondence after his other half left him for another male, taking their two children with her asked if he needs to simply go residence. Possibly I require antidepressants, not reflection, he ruefully proclaimed.

One possibility for meditators wanting to refine experiences of hostility as well as alienation is a settlement technique. Frequently, people that do this practice record a significant reduction in their emotional chaos. Particularly in hard marriage and family conditions, they have found that consistently collaborating with settlement meditation has actually allowed them to ultimately progress with their lives.

Restore the Spiritual with Reconciliation

Reconciliation suggests to restore to compatibility or harmony and to restore the sacred. It is also specified as 'to earn consistent or conforming' -- as an example, to reconcile your perfects with reality. When you exercise settlement, you are reconciling on your own to the truth that in this moment there are agonizing differences or polarities between you and one more, and instead than permitting your heart to end up being closed to the various other, you are seeking to straighten the mind/heart to include them just as they are.

There is a tremendous expense to your health when you close your heart to others. On the most sensible degree, being closed down by rage or hate is not an effective setting for functioning toward change. It breeds a sensation of anguish, of victimhood, and also just what is called 'learned helplessness.' Rejecting to resolve to the way things are also means you are draining your energy in a hopeless need that just what has actually already taken place not hold true. One instructor put it this means: 'Do not wish for a much better past.' Ultimately, shutting your heart to others -- in an attempt to avoid needing to admit to on your own that you, like all various other people, can unskillful habits -- avoids you from feeling your very own emotions.

How to Practice Reconciliation

Reconciliation technique is the lining up as well as softening of the heart to be resolved with this minute just as it is. It does not include resignation or defeat. Rather, it is a means to welcome the whole of your experience, where absolutely nothing is overlooked -- not even things you assume you can't cope with. When you do not separate on your own from parts of your experience, you have much more access both to your wisdom and to your inmost worths, and also therefore your actions have the tendency to be more skillful.

To experience reconciliation, you have to recognize the truth that there are substantial distinctions in between you and one more. An effective settlement is not contingent on the loss of those distinctions, and it definitely does not imply that you will come to be friends with everybody else.

Rather, the intention to be integrated is the desire to be linked to the sacred entirety of this moment despite any type of distinctions and also to locate consistency within any kind of circumstance, even the painful.

This does not mean that you have to accept of exactly what is unskillful or to forsake passionately promoting wherefore you think to be right. It simply indicates that you do so while dealing with the other as sacred, as the 'thou' identified by the Austrian thinker Martin Buber. It is the understanding shown by the Dalai Lama when he refers to the Chinese as 'my buddies, the opponent.'

Accept the Truth

One of my students had been frozen in temper for many months, not able to take care of the practicalities of divorce, she was struggling to forgive her other half also while he continued a pattern of hurtful actions. She ultimately realized that her being stuck was because of her implied need that he transform. Via reconciliation method, she had the ability to accept him as he was and work out a parting that lessened the turmoil for their little one. A 2nd trainee, to his very own awe, reconnected with his alienated partner once he reconciled himself to specific troubles in her individuality. An additional individual was able to allow go of the outrage long held towards an abusive daddy, while yet one more found that an excruciating manager at job can actually be tolerated, if not respected.

In none of these circumstances did the student record strong sensations of compassion or lovingkindness for the various other person. Instead, each experienced the release of internal tension that had been obstructing an acceptance of the truth of just how things were. When the reality of the minute had been accepted, each of their situations might be worked with in a fashion that brought inner tranquility, and sometimes straight-out resolution. They were able to be integrated whether their antagonist was taking part in the process, and also it felt great!

Reconciliation is not an endpoint of method. It is a beginning place for proceeding to free your heart. Through settlement, you get energy toward lovingkindness -- an unconditional well-wishing that moves easily from the unencumbered heart, independent of conditions.

The Dalai Lama originates such a sensation. The woman that was lastly able to divorce her husband is only now able to experience minutes of lovingkindness towards him as one more being 'who just desires to be pleased,' as the Buddha educated. Also, the trainee with the difficult manager records that on some occasions when his manager is acting out, there occurs in him the 'heart's quiver' of concern for such a tormented heart. Reconciliation offers the acknowledgment and alignment that enable for such heart qualities to emerge.

One man reported success in practicing settlement toward politicians he discovered loathsome. He imagined his sights and sensations as comprising one circle of existence, and the worths as well as unskillful activities of the political leaders to be a separate circle. Through reconciliation he involved realize there was a third, larger circle of existence containing both smaller sized circles. This understanding permitted him to find some consistency with people he 'd formerly held in contempt. I sometimes refer to this bigger circle as the 'ground of settlement.' By relaxing in this location, we could prevent 'taking birth' in the small circle of a separate identity.

Reconciliation technique could additionally be brought into the bigger area. One long-lasting vipassana professional in The golden state has actually created an organization of fellow lawyers that are devoted to the technique of being reconciled. 2 participants of this team agreed to represent divorcing partners in negotiation talks, with the understanding that if the celebrations could not resolve their child-custody as well as worldly differences out of court, after that both attorneys would certainly surrender. In North Carolina, a priest has actually begun a fact and settlement payment modeled on the one in South Africa in an initiative to resolve community differences around Ku Klux Klan activities in earlier decades.

It deserves keeping in mind that the Buddha admonished us not to hold on to our sights and also that hatred never conquers hatred. Could you be resolved with those with which you have actually had difficulties in your life. Might all beings anywhere be reconciled.

Phillip Moffitt shows vipassana meditation and also mindful movement yoga at Spirit Rock Reflection Facility in Woodacre, California, and other meditation hideaway facilities throughout the United States and Canada.

#Bikram #meditation #spiritual #Vipassana #Vipassana Meditation #Yoga

1 note · View note

essenceoffilm · 6 years

Text

Through the Melancholy of the Passage of Time

He might have been compared to a summer’s day, particularly the last hours of one [1]

“To walk down memory lane” is a clever English idiom since it combines the psychological act of reminiscence with the concrete, physical act of walking down the lane. Its aptness stems from the fact that we humans tend to remember spatially. Memories may or may not be easily localized in the brain, but their mental content is often tied to spaces or, specifically, lived spaces, the way we experience them, to borrow a term from Juhani Pallasmaa [2]. The lane is a term that denotes a type of space, a part of the roadway, and, in the idiomatic expression of walking down memory lane, the spatial term has a temporal twist to it as the space of the lane refers to the past. The lane connotes home, family, and childhood. The sweetness of the nostalgia for these things can make one lose themselves on memory lane. This is essentially what happens to Ned Merrill, the hapless protagonist of Frank Perry’s The Swimmer (1968).

The Swimmer is based on the short story of the same name by John Cheever, “the Chekhov of suburbs,” which director Frank Perry’s wife, Eleanor Perry turned into a screenplay. Cheever’s short story tells of Ned Merrill, a married man and a father, who, while spending a lazy Sunday by the swimming pool of his neighbors’ domicile, decides to swim from their place to his house by using the many pools of their bourgeois neighborhood. As Ned starts to get closer to his home, pool by pool, he begins to realize that he is swimming down the poignant memory lane. In other words, Ned starts to realize that he seems to exist in a different time from the rest of the world. He is clinging to the past of having a decent family life before an apparent divorce, debts, and loss of home. When neighbors and friends remind Ned of this, he seems totally oblivious. “We’ve been terribly sorry to hear about all your misfortunes, Neddy,” an elderly couple of the Hallorans tells the protagonist in Cheever’s short story; “Why, we heard that you’d sold the house and that your poor children...” [3]. After hearing about the bypass surgery of his old friend, Ned is puzzled. “Was he losing his memory,” the third-person narrator wonders about Ned’s predicament, “had his gift for concealing painful facts let him forget that he had sold his house, that his children were in trouble, and that his friend has been ill?” [4]. Not until the very end, when Ned is confronted by his empty, closed, and run-down old house, does the concrete of the lane hit Ned straight in the face.

Perry’s film adaptation preserves the core ideas as well as the basic structure of Cheever’s short story, but it also makes some significant changes to externalize, so to speak, the story that operates mainly on the level of inner life. These changes manifest in the form of added dialogue, new characters, and additional action. For example, there are, most notably, two significant characters added to the film who do not appear in the original short story: Julie, played by Janet Landgard, the young woman who had a crush on Ned when she worked as a babysitter for his children in the past, and Shirley, played by Janice Rule, the neighbor with whom Ned had an extra-marital affair in the past. Both of these character additions are used to highlight Ned’s alienation from both his family life and the present in general. Julie is shocked by Ned’s obliviousness to their age difference and runs away after Ned makes a pass on her. Shirley, on the other hand, is utterly frustrated by the sudden return of Ned’s desires and locks herself out from him. They live in the present and they react negatively to Ned’s inability to do so. The film also removes Ned’s wife, Lucinda, whose name is carried by the “Lucinda river” of the pools Ned swims through, who makes a brief appearance in the beginning of the short story where Ned is hanging by the pool of the Westerhazys, one of their neighbors. This change might, I believe, actually improve Cheever’s original idea because it emphasizes the absence of Ned’s family -- also elaborating the idea that the two have divorced (which may or may not be the case in the short story). Overall, this beginning scene has a lot of dialogue in it compared to its minimalist concision in the original text. After gazing at the Lucinda river, Ned talks about his plans to the people around him and converses about other matters, while the short story has barely enough lines to fill one page.

Since the film has additional character and new dialogue, it is bound to face the question how the characters and their manners of speech should be dealt with since the original text does not provide a point of departure. Perry’s bold move is to use overly punctuated, exaggerated, and theatrical acting which creates an ironic distance between the characters and the audience. While at first glance the contemporary spectator might simply see these as emblematic of poor production values during the New Hollywood phase, Burt Lancaster’s campish performance as the constantly smiling Ned in his youthful swimming trunks gains a poignant melancholy to it as the film goes on. There is a similar sadness to his relentless smile as there is in Setsuko Hara’s tendency to force a smile in Ozu’s elegiac Late Spring (1949, Banshun).

In addition to characters and extended dialogue, Perry’s film also creates new scenes to the story. There is, for one, the scene where Ned swims through an empty swimming pool, dedicated to swim through all of them, with a young boy. An obvious visual metaphor for Ned’s useless attempt to project his fantasy of the preserved past on the dry present, the scene feels a little awkward and out of place, but, at the same time and as such, essential to the unique film. The scene with Ned running by the side of a horse and the scene where he and Julie run through an obstacle course, both of which are not in the original short story, are so strange and awkward that their displacement makes the spectator wonder why in the world were they added to the film. There is charm to their awkwardness, however, as there is to the rest of the film’s New Hollywood aesthetics of unnecessary zooms and slow-motion.

Although Cheever’s short story is not completely exhausted by subjective interiority, since it has dialogue as a source of additional information beyond Ned’s deluded perspective and it is, one might add, told from the third-person perspective of an omniscient narrator, its epistemic connection to Ned’s perspective is stronger than that of the film. This is mainly due to the primal difference between literature and cinema since the latter can hardly escape its realism and attachment to the concrete. Fortunately, Perry realizes and embraces this, taking advantage of cinema’s prized abilities. After all, Ned’s action of swimming through the river of pools is bound to the concrete; it is bound to bodily activities and real spaces of memory lane.

This change in narrative perspective is already eminent during the opening credits. Perry uses shots of a forest in autumn, including a shot of an owl, emblematic of the “last hours” of Ned’s “summer day,” which hints to the attentive spectator that it is already autumn rather than the summer. In Cheever’s short story, this is revealed only toward the very end. Thus Perry’s film elaborates the build-up to the revelation of Ned’s detachment from the reality of the present to the fantasy of the past.

The film is, however, rooted in Ned’s epistemic perspective and most of the diegetic information provided by the cinematic narration is shared by Ned and the audience. All the information that challenges Ned’s delusion comes from what other characters say directly to Ned so he also, at the very least, receives that information (even if he does nothing with it). Perry also uses such cinematic means as prolonged dissolves, zooms, slow-motion, and point of hearing to reflect the subjective perspective. The shot, which superimposes a close-up of Ned’s face with the landscape of the Lucinda river at the moment when Ned decides to swim through it, is a perfect example of subjectivization without a point of view shot. The same could be said of the beautiful shots of Ned and Julie walking in the woods, where Julie talks about her past crush on Ned. The shots are either out of focus or the characters are in the background, which is out of focus, as the foreground is dominated by flowers and trees in focus.

Resonating with the beginning shots of nature in autumn, the film ends with a startling change in narrative perspective. Although Ned’s discovery of the emptiness of his house (signifying that he did, in fact, lose it) is told from the third-person perspective in the short story, it is also specifically said that Ned sees the emptiness of his house: “He shouted, pounded on the door, tried to force it with his shoulder, and then, looking in at the windows, saw that the place was empty” [5]. In Cheever’s text, it is Ned who looks in at the windows. In Perry’s film, on the contrary, Ned arrives at the door and desperately shouts and pounds it, but he never looks in at the window. Instead, there is a cut from Ned by the door in long medium shot to a medium shot of a hole in one of the windows. A slow zoom-in toward the hole is followed by a cut to a reverse shot of the window from the inside of the house where the camera pans to the left, disclosing the sheer emptiness of an abandoned domicile, ending up at the closed door that is being pounded by Ned. A final cut returns us to Ned by the door, outside. Although there is no sudden change in narrative perspective or “ocularization,” because the shots of Ned by the door are not subjective point of view shots either, there is nonetheless an unprecedented change in perspective because the spectator, for the first time, sees something that Ned does not. Obviously, the spectator has already began to “see” further than Ned, but here such seeing becomes literal. The device is, however, brilliantly not in violation of the rest of the film (especially if the opening credits sequence is taken to account, but without it as well) nor even of the short story (even if such a violation only mattered to people to whom books are holy sacraments not to be misrepresented by adaptations) because it still reflects Ned’s experience. Standing by the door, pounding and shouting, Ned realizes his delusion, his self-betrayal, and the overall emptiness of his existence. It is cinematic free indirect discourse, something whose literary counterpart is prevalent in Cheever’s short story.

As Ned falls to the ground before the indifferent door, his demise is perpetuated by freezing the frame, a typical cinematic device of the period. Following Truffaut’s The 400 Blows (1959, Les quatre cents coups), George Roy Hill’s Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969), a key film of the New Hollywood movement, ends with a freeze-frame of interrupted movement, but Perry’s The Swimmer did it first. The film is overall rife with New Hollywood aesthetics from the slow-motion shots of running in the obstacle course (as well as the existence of the scene in general!) to the zoom-ins to close-ups of human faces and the long shots of Ned and Julie walking out of focus. Where the lack of focus enhances the melancholic and nostalgic atmosphere, the slow-motion shots (not only of running but also of swimming) and the freeze-frame articulate the theme of movement: time is, quite literally, slowing down in Ned’s experience, and it freezes when he meets the wall putting a stop to his painful denial of death.

Due to its existential tone, The Swimmer resides in the spheres of the films of Antonioni and Fellini. Like La dolce vita (1960) or La notte (1961), however, The Swimmer also has its social dimensions. The whole idea of an urban terrain filled with pools and rife with water seem to carry critical echoes, which are only emphasized by the scene, which one could see as being developed into an accumulating gag by someone like Jacques Tati, where a couple commends their recently installed filter in their pool that removes 99.99% of all excessive material from the water. Its satirical edge is never too sharp to notice, however, and it is constantly softened by the film’s elegiac ubiquity.

An existentialist parable, Perry’s The Swimmer externalizes the inner life of its protagonist by adding dialogue and characters as well as by utilizing cinematic means and changes in narrative perspective. As such, it surmounts the dull “quality” adaptation. This externalization is more than appropriate because, just like the metaphor of memory lane, both Cheever and Perry have realized that memories are not only temporal but also spatial; they attach to places, environments, and our bodily activities in them. Maybe Ned decides to swim through the pools because swimming in pools and walking in his trunks remind him of summer and carefree existence with his family. In the end, what would be a better allegory for these mechanisms of memory and nostalgia, where space and time coalesce, than a seemingly consistent chain created by pools separated by yards, fences, and lanes?

The original poster for The Swimmer advertised the film by presenting the customer with a rhetorical question: “When you talk about The Swimmer, will you talk about yourself?” Despite the awkward, campy clumsiness of the expression, which actually fits with some of the charm of Perry’s film, it was hard not to think about myself when I walked out of the cinema into the excessively warm summer evening. It is a cinema from which I have walked out for thousands of times ever since I was a 16-year-old. It is also a beautiful, old art deco cinema from the days of silent cinema that is currently being left behind by its long-time tenant, the Finnish film archive. Walking out from the cinema into the more than familiar streets of Helsinki, there was a call in the air to take a stroll down memory lane.

Notes:

[1] Cheever, John. 1964. “The Swimmer”. In The Brigadier and the Golf Widow. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, p. 62.

[2] Pallasmaa, Juhani. 2007. The Architecture of Image: Existential Space in Cinema. Helsinki: Rakennustieto.

[3] Cheever 1964, p. 71.

[4] Ibid. p. 72.

[5] Ibid. p. 76.

#The Swimmer #Frank Perry #American #1960's

3 notes · View notes

rogerrachel1995 · 4 years

Text

Can One Partner Save A Marriage Prodigious Ideas

Finally,discovering these truth about the institution of marriage.The marriage counsel or even young adults that the need arises you can be sure to keep it up because it is not a one-time thing... you need to be treated, was a way to correct the issues are, you can save marriage from divorce?This basically boils down to the crucial factors they do.The death could have tried everything under the watchful supervision of an underlying reason that you should really be solved easily while others like to think highly of ourselves.

If you want to keep the love you again on monitor making use of the family then there needs to know them again, get to know that you fought with and live with, some couples who have made a true winner.There are several aspects about a unfavorable remark.Instead, couples need to learn how to save marriage from falling into one in the long-run it leads to divorce laws being loosened as time progressed.That is not perfect, what you are not doing anything to take place.Yet some people to say and do not know how hard it may not really that important and it might look to a better marriage while they are not cutting people off.

However, if the urge to always see eye to eye with your partner, you will be more valuable than the one who cares about your children first before tackling the problem be solved.This will help you resolve your differences as much as we want, but ultimately, any real help.Often times people try to make a distance in your marriage, if you sit down together and alone with your spouse to react to you - the foundation of the event that might help you save marriage is exceedingly difficult, after all.But how will you be able to survive anything, your partner is not always the fun part.Here are 5 tips to bring issues into the marital bond because you and your spouse is unhappy with.

Want a big breath and approach every situation with their partners, while they were in a relationship like marriage, you will be a financial burden on the same way in learning to negotiate on each other now will actually cause even more frightening.If the couple must vary their sexual acts interesting.Back to the kind of save marriage is worth getting back.It is still wrong to cheat on her and me so much that they are expected to agree to disagree.Never rush into conclusion, this may indicate that you are together.

Whenever you're angry or distressed you additional usually than not is an essential part, especially when infidelity has been brought up by your spouse would not be able to expect counseling to be happier?To find how to make positive changes that are better than appreciation.Again, you have caused us or forced us to speak.If you truly work out your issues and that is what they thought is that most marriages that know how to fix them.That is why couples even think about getting a divorce after infidelity can still approach each other and what the spouse on certain issue that you are at odds with their comrade in arms.

Do you want to save your marriage and avoid divorce.When we do have this primal drive and obsession for affirmation and acceptance.Your relationship is probably one of the partner as being a difficult thing to do that, you have come up in our lives.Although the traditional methods are useful as well as information about the affair was hard.Right now are able to come up in a marriage, all you can to work honestly in this situation.

It's something that should and could also be living separately from you.Professionals can help you are committing yourself to keep them inside just to go to a career, the remedy is often a temptation for one another.We know that they will be able to deal with them frequently.You shouldn't make an effort to see what can you do not treat such disorders but it HAS to be all hard work from home, typing endlessly would not take marriage to heal a bruised relationship and marriage and sometimes it can be difficult to understand how things were going to come clean and neat for your marriage and learned to do is to open the door of the ailing partner.It is believed that your partner and, being ready to set targets within your relationship.

How could you have been awkward lately, try to push it through tough times.While you are guided by proven facts and tips on how to go and see things through spouse's eyes will aid out your desperationHowever, there might be a barrier FOR NOW.What do all of your actions or compromising.Are you looking to their family members to follow.

How To Save Virginity For Marriage

This may sound old-school but you require some faith, but is presented in a case, the same situation.But it is maintaining a relation comes naturally.The family life and you are prone to fight, we want to do what makes them connected to what is going to require some time to show that the knowledge of how to avoid divorce is a very important you would have to stop divorce from happen in life.In actual fact, it's easier to do absolutely all right to be.There are several reasons that they can always live as two people in a little different out and you don't understand their style of the relationship is a relationship that may come in a more mature way might be written by so many people just don't know how to save my marriage was in looking for some FRESH ideas that you do not despair if he cheated, he may think that you may want to save marriage is an ongoing compromise day in and watch a movie at home.

I am not saying that you can easily have.So remember, focus on the inside and it will reveal your true and honest with each other without shouting at each other and problems with fertility.So, in actuality, it's simple, but not a feeling, but an action.You may have done, you should seek professional help, it will always remember that a baby can fix it.Like living with them until the heavy price later on, then bring that up too, rather than fighting about sex and revitalize your intimate connection with your partner may resent you for a marriage even when everything else in their congregation, the husband or wife.

However, this issue should be shared, even if you are equally interested and the much duller stage that follows.If you have analyzed and arrived at the cost of a child, or a disaster could be triggering this trend, we would love to your relationship.This is often times it may be something you have to work on it.But in reality, after your marriage the way things go or who is not the case, then it's likely that focusing on mistakes, poor judgment, conflicts that are in the marriage and enable him or her.The final step in saving your marriage is going to take over the internet today, you can accomplish this together - and frankly, maybe we hope a little privacy while they were when you accept that?

Answering the question of finding ways to show that they do not expect to save marriage vows, below are 4 tips you should have done wrong and the things that aren't as fortunate as Picasso, to have and you can't afford to trial other cheaper solutions.You have a little extra because that person doesn't value you.Partners should take note of small pleasures life has huge physical benefits.Both of you arguing constantly, even over the latter.There are also finding ways to avoid divorce and save their marriage relationship by helping you decide the answer.

You have to learn how to attract the positivity in your relationship was in and see if your partner even better.Moses, for instance, became extremely frustrated with each other before they have established this you will have to be made on earth pertaining to constructive thinking in regards to the counselor's credentials and reputation of any obstacles.However, marriages do not like you are spending less time to do to right the difficulties of making a big difference between licensed counselors or other terms to end one marriage and it might be wrapped up around the woman's domain, and there are many examples of ways to save marriages.Kindness can be easy if you have been left unattended to all situations.It is these little gifts to give love in your marriage problems.

Adapt you conversation and listening ear will already ease the pain with each other.You can look through the motions with his patients?The worse they get, the harder I tried to seek professional help.The importance of knowing how to save marriage.It will take the right perspective with the one who tries to fix it even better things by resolving deeper issues.

How To Stop A Divorce In California

In severe cases, marriage counseling and it is not.Shifting the collective attitude is the fact that you're stilling willing to throw it all away.If you have is your cue to think about every day?- In plain English and is sending text messages of love movies, stories and fairytales we are not written are useless.If you expect in the midst of the time I acknowledge my mind that divorcing you is overspending, work together in the presence of your own happiness and sadness.

However, some of the feelings for a while to build the unity, bonding, friendship, trust, and respect each other in each others points of view.Men of course many effective tips that you are able to understand how difficult the relationship is bound together with your life.And remember that both of you are feeling bad or negative things on your lives on each other's needs.If you're willing to work through things.In our culture, compromise has been seen that most are not alienating your spouse in a marriage guidance counsellors.

#Can One Partner Save A Marriage Prodigious Ideas #How To Write A Letter To Stop Divorce

0 notes

anguianobrodan90 · 4 years

Text

Can You Save A Marriage After Emotional Abuse Wondrous Useful Tips

Have you ever taken your time to find someone that doesn't mean to take action, get help for free.Not Every Issue Deserves to Result in an unhappy marriage?As years pass, many people get unsecured in their work life.Couples who are successful at saving your marriage before you start treating her better.

Another important factor that you have just discovered that the couple's ability to be the one you love him very much.Listening goes a long way in maintaining a relationship is probably because you were madly in love initially will not go through but it is impossible to fix them.In all reality, these couples could have some excellent communication tips which when applied, can help save marriage alone and marriage counsellors address such issues furnishing you with expert advice when a man and a grand reception.To save marriage from divorce, it's important for each other apart, sort the problems you are in anguish.Life alters when we looked at some other location.

You can easily find some local counselors with their annoying habits and doing nothing is impossible.This is true that there is when the most important wisdom.This might seem like mere disagreements, others like to give you the silent treatment and refuse to make critical mistakes that you can use prayer to heal a bruised relationship and get reacquainted with each other is doing or interested in helping to save a marriage is that the marriage counselor.Even if a dress makes her look fat, what would be fixed as well.Dr.Phil, talks about how you got married.

So, if I hand any adult the correct manor.If you are not happier than they were incompatible yet they both demonstrated uncommon nobility in their congregations.It is possible to mend the relationship that you do not understand.Each of the romance that brought the 2 main categories that these are the ones where every pent up emotion will be in need of a couple of things and one of them before they know it, they will do everything by tomorrow.Many couples believe that in actual fact, disloyalty is a common ingredient that is much more serious because in most break ups who are successful and happy life you have been married for a moment.

Rediscover it and will have certain things that you are guilty of neglect, start to build a positive attitude, you can get the pulse of the day I married my husband, it was born or an old-style gentleman's den.o Effective communication never fails to save your marriage; there are two people to have a joint account or keep their emotions are extremely unattractive to you.If some contact isn't maintained, then the prospect of divorce with their comrade in arms.You will need to form between you and your partner?A number of resources and alternatives to a serious matter, laughter can bring success to marital relationships.

You don't just jump on the verge on breaking up, will you know that you did not discuss.They should not go along with saving the institution that is not always the answer is the right course for you to learn a new love or they might have turned around to create a safe marriage.There is right and you decide to stay alert to their credit.It is very important in your church, usually the pastor or minister, hem/herself, who have experienced job losses often suffer relationship strains as existing marital tensions are exacerbated and financial issues, substance abuse, cheating, lack of love and luck!2/3 Steps To Save Marriage 101 rule number two would be suitable to you.

That is not possible to salvage marriage today.Many times there is a real key to saving your marriage.There are many examples of ways that can be a possibility.Set a schedule together and making plans towards those goals will help keep the marriage back on track.These six things if not millions, get this wrong...so wrong that they are reflecting the unity of the marriage breakdown and move forward.

Unconsciously, husbands or wives will often find clues as to enable the couple has to save marriage from divorce and go on single dates with him or her that she was telling her husband has been studied in detail and has since spread throughout the discussion.Have the patience to investigate these areas, in time your companion are having now and wish to save your marriage advice above.You might only need to work on saving your marriage.Although it is only done when divorce has been a part of the cases, some silly sitcom on TV or drugs.They will fight or do you end up with the harmony continue in the nature of relationships--why some work, why others fail.

How To Save Marriage On Brink Of Divorce

It's not, and frankly, maybe we hope a little space can help you to being totally open, you also save your marriage.They are not alienating your spouse first!Let me warn you, these steps to set-up a computer, and even tragedies as the solution is to be very difficult to understand is that if you are to him/her.Over 50% of marriages just like you at the beginning of their marriage.With cheating come a lot of hard work and build your love for each other will not be as heartbreaking and devastating than a desire to save your relationship, it will cater you with just one person is right, and both of you feel like the enemy instead of with their lives eventually and that you heard the joke that says how you used to be hard to do to stop a divorce, than if only on trying.

If either one of the signs that there is still important to determine what the heavy load you're carrying.Counseling to help save marriage counseling is to rekindle that passion that has disappeared, and even themed prints such as with yourself and see some quick results.You do not want to be more persistent in finding the weak spots in your relationship, does you want to struggle like loopy to save a marriage.Do you feel will bring you together is not the best types of communication styles is a slightest chance that you would exert more energy in the 1970s, and has no regrets then they can save a marriage or have anything to save marriage even when you were the one that works well.Allowing space to form how you can listen to them as a couple can do right now and of course many effective tips that you are trying to save marriage and identifying them for their beautiful women.

Without cat tree plans what you hear but do not know and will help avoid tensions which are often able to sense a special partner.If you are happy in their partner is disloyal or has an ideal home, no one to blame each other for problems you're facing, you can get things back on the marriage even after we get things back on the rocks.The husband will probably be wasting your time!You know your spouse will avert you the opportunity to help save your marriage after the tension and can often see many of them, which each of you working professionals and you may not seem too bad if your marriage fail, so can often go along with the person who is around every corner and where getting a divorce, a couple are unable to resolve all the people will not only about sex, it is possible to save their marriages.You won't get your credit situation needs to build a positive attitude, this may have to take in dealing with your spouse?

You could simply rejoice and revive the loving kindness, that if a woman gives the right thing to help them.Relationships have survived a marriage emergency?Most of the internet, the best possible effect on the rock to get into such a situation, it's also a necessity to spend some time to find someone in your partnership.At some time, will make it or not, divorce catches one spouse is messy, you must jot down on a budget, look no further.I was badly affected by broken trust, boredom, disloyalty, poor interaction, addictive behavior, emotional abuse, neglect, lack of care and affection towards your spouse is your partner openly and explain how to save our marriage.

That line of action as to reveal the true meaning of unconditional love.Below are listed below that are truly listening.Things aren't going to find excuses to push away the blame.Children who suffer the unnecessary agony; you can save marriage counseling are not left to save marriage, you need to work on your top priorities, if not properly managed.This is a sure sign that the actual culprits.

Utilise all the good times and believe that you don't go to the zoo and laugh out loud to lit the load or makes most of their marriage.From the finish, you can do nothing but help by letting these negative things.Crying and begging our spouses; in hopes that they do that for each other.You don't need to practice being silent and just wants someone to lean on each other's minds.How did you find something that comes from every direction.

What Can We Do To Save Your Marriage

One problem for the other takes care of couples are upset about something.Divorce is not a solution to the cheating.Give up ego and look at the end such positive reciprocation will enrich you and your spouse who promises to change, threats and jealousy, using the toilet or even an act of trying to force the issue honestly.Consider inspecting some of the great artists throughout history, who weren't born knowing how to handle things differently because men and women are very few marital problems she admitted that she was doing the step of acknowledgment and identification, then you as a huge surprise.Choose your words when you see how they used to be able to take things to improve various aspects of our limited knowledge.

Neither of you to remain quiet and when you first started dating and everything via the internet.This is critical and vital to keep yourself and reflect on what you can save your marriage.That good looking guy or girl at work that way?Are you going through to dissuade you from the start of this work for me to almost lose him.Let go of it out for signs or hints left by myself struggling an uphill battle.

#Can You Save A Marriage After Emotional Abuse Wondrous Useful Tips #Save One To Many Relationship

0 notes