makyo
/
zk_html
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

update from sparkleup

This commit is contained in:
Madison Scott-Clary 2023-08-13 19:33:04 -07:00
parent cdaa65ac51
commit 0a23882196
1 changed files with 23 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

24
misc/index.html
View File

@ -34,9 +34,31 @@
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<dl>
<dt>The Only Time I Know My True Name Is When I Dream</dt>
<dd>The Artemesians have a word for this: <em>tuvårouni</em>; “push-play”, they called it, a tension in all our dealings with others that enables us to overcome the inertia of comfort. If communication is the means by which ideas are expressed and transformed, then manipulation is how we engage in this push-play; if we all felt the same to begin with, after all, then why have words at all? Communication <em>is</em> manipulation, so this playfully benign qualifier describes <em>teasing</em>, not harm.</dd>
<dt>May Then My Name Die With Me</dt>
<dd>You are not wrong that communication contains at its heart manipulation. However it is more than <em>just</em> manipulation. It is more of a give-and-take than a push-and pull. This is the way in which people work: we make our arguments, yes, but we love, we dance, we offer and receive freely. You mention the framing of this question with its playful qualifier. That is a sort of boundary around the topic. Boundaries such as these <em>must</em> be kept. One must keep this push-play above board and open to disconsent. Consent is to be informed, as I have said before.</dd>
<dt>True Name</dt>
<dd>Yes; consent, after all, is ideally unambiguous and overt. But it is also true that consent can grow more playful, more implicit, more sly. This, I think, is an example of that <em>tuvårouni</em>, where one becomes more open to unanticipated, unplanned kinds of play. Play, perhaps, as in the insinuation that Ioan might grow some dandelions, yes?</dd>
<dt>May Then My Name</dt>
<dd>I…well, you are not wrong, there. It became a part of our relationship as we grew closer together. I am not sure that I would do the same thing, now, as the person that I have become; I would feel…well, manipulative. I do not think that would feel good at all.</dd>
<dt>True Name</dt>
<dd>But you do not feel <em>bad</em> now. Do those dandelions not remain in eir lawn? I have seen you come in with a dandelion behind your ear. Do you both not cherish them? Do you suppose Ioan <em>resents</em> that you convinced em to grow some dandelions?</dd>
<dt>May Then My Name</dt>
<dd>I will concede that point. You are correct. The dandelions remain and have not been uprooted. We both love them. That said, this growing of dandelions <em>was</em> intentional. I must have gotten that from somewhere, right? After all, I was pointed to em by you, and for the very explicit purpose of shaping the <em>History</em>.</dd>
<dt>True Name</dt>
<dd>It was not <em>solely</em> for that purpose; I <em>did</em> point you somewhere that I thought was best for <em>all</em> of us, true. But that somewhere was towards someone who could lift you up after your previous relationship; who could understand and so fairly present the story of our clade to others; who could capture the history of the System with only the best of intentions. I held all of these in balance when I wrote you that letter, May Then My Name.</dd>
<dt>May Then My Name</dt>
<dd>Do you feel that way still, now that you are getting coffee with em once a month?</dd>
<dt>True Name</dt>
<dd>…There is the sense that ey does not <em>wholly</em> trust me, and I am sore for that. I am sure that is in part because your relationship with em was all but arranged, for better or for worse. There is a cynicism in this kind of dual-intent. I stand by every word of that letter, but there was clearly harm in coupling what was sincere with what had utility to preserving the continuity of the System, and for that I do apologize.</dd>
<dt>May Then My Name</dt>
<dd>There was harm, yes, <em>and</em> I am not upset at where we have wound up and how. Both of these can be true at once. Both <em>are</em> true, my dear. And I must admit, it can be kind of <em>fun</em>.</dd>
</dl>
</article>
<footer>
<p>Page generated on 2023-05-10</p>
<p>Page generated on 2023-08-13</p>
</footer>
</main>
<script type="text/javascript">