Talks

I had things to say but the process of choosing a name for this blog distracted my mind and now I kind of forgot. The main thing I wanted to discuss was basically the type of people who dismiss other groups or classes of people as a matter of course. Why do they think this is acceptable? A standard phrase uttered by these people is "Oh, Christians" or "Oh, screaming music," usually followed by "I used to be into that" or "I've read about that. [My opinion and thus dismissal of the subject]." The underlying idea here is that an opinion needs to be formed for each group, ideology, or social phenomenon that one hears about. That way you're an opinionated individual. Right?
You have neat little packaged segments of conversation ready to go. You know where you stand on all issues and probably can't be swayed.
Well here's how I feel (or don't feel). You can't sum up a movement in a sentence. You can't choose a single word to name a blog. You can't write a synopsis of a movie, and you sure can't tell me about a movie in a book. You can refer to it. That's what I dislike about film school. More articles to read than movies to watch. Writing is hardly related to film as a medium of expression. They are often paired, and especially so in the French cinephile community. Based on what I've heard, new directors are quizzed and interviewed ad nauseum about their cineliteracy and their reasons for making films. Many of them write articles for journals like Cahiers du Cinema before or after they begin making films.
Whether social traditions are wrong or right is another topic altogether, and undertaken with a great sense of weight and either vast ramifications in the time of an idea's ripeness, or no results in one's lifetime. A soul-splitting decision would need to be made in consideration of such a venture.
So one of my goals is to explore the legitimacy of mediums and placement of ideas.
I push aside offers of entry to groups and movements to see whether the social institutions that begot the controversy were really ever necessary. I question things at their most base level, far from offering conspiracy theories or arguing for a morality, I wish to examine the architects of modern consciousness.
I struggle to find words to describe the swirling ideas I have, but for the time being I think they are necessary. Why do we think so differently than we speak or write? If I created a paper the same way I imagine the ideas I am compelled to present, it would look more like an amorphous quilt than sheets of flat white material, crudely stacked on top of each other.
I stumbledupon a link recently that had a connection to sixth-sense technology and I became very interested in the thought process of the creator, more so than the creation itself. Can we rewrite our basic modes of interaction with the world? How much of what I am forced to endure in school is really necessary? Those two may not seem related but what I mean is; Is writing papers a truly valuable process? I hate it.
I think I'm done for now. I should be reading for school but I like to think I'm preventing "my schooling from getting in the way of my education." I want to do well this semester but I think some of my teachers are teaching because they wouldn't do well in the industry. I believe in the pragmatism employed in business dealings. It's the only true way to measure social interactions. Maybe I'll pick up there next time.