email mammal3050 at gmail for advertising inquiries

codi suzanne oliver — general relativity





1. I don’t believe in significance or insignificance. It seems like it’s a dichotomy derived from a modernist/outdated construct of universal objectivism.

2. Seems very silly that people often cite the size of Earth/human beings in relation to the universe as a measure of each human’s ‘insignificance’. There is no logic in correlating size with significance, especially seeing as how ‘significance’ as we understand it can only be related to humans.

3. Almost all of the universe is ‘insignificant’ because it has nothing to do with ‘me’/human life.

4. ‘Me’/’my life’ is the most significant thing in the universe because it is the only thing i will ever experience.

5. ‘My life’ would not be more significant if i took up more space in the universe.

6. I just corrected a typo in thought #2 in which i accidentally typed ‘internet’ instead of ‘universe’.

7. This seems connected to the idea of the ‘subject’/’self’ as ‘an intersection/node/crossroads of environments (environments being social environments, histories, social categories, geographical environments, economic environment, etc.)

8. This seems connected to my focus on large-scale human things; power structures, state, capitalism, etc.

9. Spent most of today on the internet flirting with/sexting/swapping nudes with a friend, texting my partner, drinking coffee, listening to music. I’m not wearing a shirt. I’m moving soon.

10. I would comment on correlation between writers who think human life is objectively/universally ‘insignificant’ and autobiographical writing that recounts the mundane and the trivial but I’m not sure if that is a real correlation. However, seems historically that people/societies that believe in human significance (Renaissance/Enlightenment, Classics) focus on ‘epic’ or ‘grand’ storytelling. Don’t know what i write about in relation to these two sub-ideologies.

follow codi on tumblr dot com, she blogs here

No comments :

Post a Comment