Archive for April, 2006

links for 2006-04-30

April 30, 2006 at 3:18 pm Leave a comment

update on biology

and apparently a lot of that last post was false =)


April 29, 2006 at 2:54 am Leave a comment

biological indicators of neuronal problems

apparently cell death in the brain through Apoptosis has been linked to the experience of something “blowing” your mind i.e. being inconceivably confused at the complexity of a subject. In other words, we become dumber at times becuase portions of our brains die and regrow leading to changes in perception etc. The other day I was at the Chang-Kai Shek Memorial Hall and the immensity of the story overwhelemed me. This has been a fairly common occurence since the orlando days with my brain just phasing out of commission and back in (today I was playing counter strike and the amount of effort that went into the level amazed me). Not drifing out, but complete neuronal freeze in which the enormity of an issue just appears to be to much to me. Like any other human being, I am trying to ignore it, to get better, but it beckons the questions is this partially biologically? Cells break down due to a excess of hormones. wether it’s ingesting drugs, to much sex, or running to much, stressing your brain with heavy hormone usage can actually damage it. Everything in moderation I suppose. For awhile I’ve felt a need for a vacation while keeping busy. Is this a simulatenous need to develop new neuronal pathways while reducing the hormonal output that might have stressed them into descrution to begin with? Probably not. It’s probably physchological, and believe it or not our brains contain enough information to regrow what we need.


April 29, 2006 at 12:53 am Leave a comment

links for 2006-04-28

April 28, 2006 at 3:21 pm Leave a comment

links for 2006-04-27

April 27, 2006 at 3:22 pm Leave a comment

links for 2006-04-26

April 26, 2006 at 3:22 pm Leave a comment

links for 2006-04-25

April 25, 2006 at 3:22 pm Leave a comment

the crush

one of the greater problems of crushes is that you feel a certian way.
but the way you feel is powerful and perhaps at times a bit misleading.
the other party, the recipent of the crush, probably feels little if any desire towards you.
Hence you end up chasing a fantasy inside a flesh that isn’t aware of it’s existence.
We are in essence creating people with in people when we choose to become obssessed with “the girl next door”
or today seeing as how my dick hardly stayed in my pants all day despite the fact that I don’t even
feel a major affection or crush towards my roommate, one has to wonder do we have a choice or is it
that we’re programmed that we need crushes? Why do I continue to seek out affection and sex in people when
I’ve never managed to actually recieve any in return? I’m not even really looking for a girlfriend. I want someone who will love me for a short time and go away, that’s basically what everyone wants out an relationship I suppose, but it’s so hard to find, and when you do frequently the short time rule gets thrown out the window as one party becomes obssessed and the other party withdrawls. Perhaps affection is best felt as longing, to satisfy it would be to take away from the game of life, to reproduce would destroy a good amount of libdinal desire, and when u get down to it, fucking is a constant annoyance something like breathing that needs to be practiced daily, but requires such a large number of constrant (looks, personality, dress, genes, social standing, finaical stability if that’s important to you, sparks of hormones and slashes of flesh and entertainment) that is effectively becomes impossible to fuck in the way that nature intended (i.e. multiple parteners with little desire to stay on with you afterwards) and then requires a cultural submission (a relationship) to be maintained over one long time. Is the fact that I wake up everyday basically hyper-alert to the possibility of sex, watching every women on the subway, evaluating every employee that comes my way, fantasising about the girl not just next door, but the women down the street, my boss, multiple co-workers, girls at stores I frequent, students who walk back, people I see on my daily commute, friends of friends, and others somehow a defecient in finding love or sex? It’s strange that those who seek it the most, get it the least. Innonence and the ability to stay removed are commonly seen as signs of attractiveness, but who really feels this way? Who isn’t bustling to fucking the person next to them on the subway? Who doesn’t want a date with the person they bump into at breaks during work who is dating someone else that seems to make them unhappy? The problem with fucking is that we aquire it through friends, through people we’re talking to and making relationships with that aren’t intended to include sex in the first place, why are we fucking up one relationship when we’re sublimating the basic desires we all need? Am I to beleive that innonence is sexy? That the only two polemics of desire are: man basically sets your ass aflame or b. man makes good relationship and eases into sexual role? What’s the use? Where is this coming from? Why do we have to be friends? Can’t we just relationships form around our bodies and our expressions here in? Why do we need to talk? I don’t want to know about you, I want to feel you.

April 23, 2006 at 11:25 pm 2 comments

links for 2006-04-23

April 23, 2006 at 3:19 pm Leave a comment

Gnarls Barkley

The older I get the more I realize that I gew up in one of the worst peroids for music ever.

Not only did the eighties mark the effective end of anything interesting on the radio, but  I never even knew that in other countries the radio worked differently. The same alterna-wah has played on U.S. radios for like 10 years and in the meantime Danger Mouse and Ceelo’s new group Gnarls Barkleyhas set some type of record in England. Korean radio is full of german, american, korean, and other musics and well japan is like niche music heaven. My point being Ceelo has served his time and Danger Mouse has done some amazing things, and they might just make it in the U.S., but the environment for radio coming up now wether it’s the slow emo-i-zation of alterna-fm to winding path of indie hip-hop to mainstream is far more exciting and diverse than what was available in my teenage years in radio land (unless I tuned into the rice college station which usually was 2 guys sitting around talking about how no one was actually at the radio station etc.). Taking this a bit further, a lot of radio sucked because of Reagan’s removing of restrictions on media monopolies ( meaning clear channel could buy up a lot of stuff) while I’m off the opinion that much of Reagan’s economic reforms we’re fairly intelligent, it’s interesting how conglomerates really did manage to homogenize radio down to 50 song bands of stuff when the rules were all but taken away (although the FCC created a special license for small time broadcasters so they could continue to niche broadcast, but for the most part few people haven’t tried for these stations). So what does all of this have to do Ganrls Barkley? It’s rather good, unapologetically mainstream, and deserves to be a chart stomper, but will it get the chance? Has myspace really made it possible for a couple of slightly under the radar dudes to break free? The question is a little bit redudant, most of them already have.

technorati tags:

April 23, 2006 at 10:31 am 1 comment

Older Posts


April 2006

Posts by Month

Posts by Category