
LOL~ I feel like I'm contributing to the "delinquency" of a minor!

He knows we care.IntempestaNox wrote:I feel like we should send him a big fluffy blanket and his favorite ice cream.
It's probably one of the most difficult things to do. At least, to me it is. I tend to express myself, and then -- on occasion -- cringe in the light of the new day. Why oh why did I have to be that blatantly and boldly honest? People must think I'm such a fool/idiot/ass/whatever.begolden wrote:I think the most amazing thing about T.J.'s poem is that by posting it, he shows a willingness to share his most intimate feelings with his friends and fans...
Oh, I wouldn't say I don't have second thoughts.IntempestaNox wrote:Sherry - Good for you posting your thoughts and feelings without second thoughts or attempts at censoring yourself.
I wouldn't say we're a disinterested audience.ThyneAlone wrote:TJ is expressing his personal feelings, but the people to whom he is expressing them on MySpace are a proven totally sympathetic and disinterested audience; it's a genre of catharsis. I wonder if he would show it to anyone more 'involved' in the situation.
I don't mean that we are neutral, or even 'objective'. We are a disinterested audience in the sense that we are not involved in the actual, specific events that sparked this particular and moving level of creativity. Of course we have all had similar experiences and can respond to the universal in what he says.Sinkwriter72 wrote:
I try very hard not to write about people in my life, not online.
I wouldn't say we're a disinterested audience.ThyneAlone wrote:TJ is expressing his personal feelings, but the people to whom he is expressing them on MySpace are a proven totally sympathetic and disinterested audience; it's a genre of catharsis. I wonder if he would show it to anyone more 'involved' in the situation.If anything, the responses to his blogs seem to prove otherwise. Sympathetic? For sure. Faceless individuals out in the ether that he doesn't know or have to see in the flesh the next day? Definitely.
Ah yes, that's true. I'm sorry -- I misunderstood.ThyneAlone wrote:I don't mean that we are neutral, or even 'objective'. We are a disinterested audience in the sense that we are not involved in the actual, specific events that sparked this particular and moving level of creativity. Of course we have all had similar experiences and can respond to the universal in what he says.
I haven't had the time or inclination to re-read anything I've written in a long time. However, I do like to read some of what I've written in journals, especially the worst stuff, because it's a huge reminder to me of exactly how far I've come. When I forget and get hard on myself and feel like I am nowhere, I can look back at something I wrote ten years ago that was particularly dark or frustrated or agonizing and see clearly that I am not in that place anymore and haven't been for a good long time. Also, I am a bit of an analyzer (I know, you find that hard to believe, right?)ThyneAlone wrote:As to writing about people online. Never never. I barely reveal my own deepest feelings to anyone in my immediate life! I've been known to write a diary, but completely disprove that old truism that people who write diaries hope for someone to read them one day. They upset me to read back, never mind anyone else mentioned in them.
Say what? Slight? Assuredly not. Although I know what you mean; I have had at least three bad experiences when, lacking tone of voice and facial expression, I posted/emailed something that was misinterpreted as a put-down (ooh, yet another reason not to blog, blahblahetc...) and caused true havoc in close and valued relationships. I absolutely see what you mean. Difficult, as I think it depends what you intend by 'neutral'!IntempestaNox wrote: My thoughts on this last bit isn't meant as a slight at anyone, as we all react differently to what we encounter. Take it with a grain or two of salt.![]()
*considering befuddledly* Nooooooo, I don't think I did mean that. Disengaged is right, but not physically. Disengaged mentally perhaps, cos while we can all sympathise, even empathise, obviously get into that other person's mind and personality, we still cannot feel that original hurt. It didn't happen to us. The emotion is there, and genuine, but secondhand.IntempestaNox wrote:Now that I think about it...were yah thinking "physically disengaged"? Sorry...if a quandary gets stuck in my head (usually a question on a movie or song) I have to solve it. That or I ask others so they can end up just as befuddled at the lack of an answer as I.
I wonder if Jen means that we aren't there physically, as in we aren't actually friends of TJ's. We don't live near him, we aren't actual buddies, we don't spend physical time with him (get your mind out of the gutterThyneAlone wrote: *considering befuddledly* Nooooooo, I don't think I did mean that. Disengaged is right, but not physically. Disengaged mentally perhaps, cos while we can all sympathise, even empathise, obviously get into that other person's mind and personality, we still cannot feel that original hurt. It didn't happen to us. The emotion is there, and genuine, but secondhand.
Today I'm once again marveling at his ability to express himself in this manner, and post it for all to read. That's an extraordinarily vulnerable position to put oneself in, especially when you're already feeling vulnerable or emotional about the chosen subject.ThyneAlone wrote: Just realised this isn't an offtopic thread. OopsI guess it's still loosely related to TJ's blog. Maybe I should start an offtopic thread for philosophical and semantic discussions!