As My Attorney

[Mr. Duke and His Attorney]

2013-05-12

 

I think I have a ton to say. But, I won't. Er, I will point out I've switched up my life plans a bit and intend to go to grad school earlier than previously thought. This means: Time to start getting into a Literature masters program! [if anyone has any knowledge of grad school, hit me up!] Outside of the GRE, I only have a vague idea of what I need to do.

 

Daoism and Buddhism are still neat, and I think they help out immensely with this. Especially in showing me just how scattered/unfocused my mind is, and how much better it use to be (Don't smoke weed, kids! It may not have much in the physical damage department, but it can condition your thought patterns! I'm looking at you, Methos!).

 

This next part is important for everyone. So, I've been looking into Buddhism, and found some very relevant, helpful, and enlightening (heh) information. It was that old cliche about the means, the ends, and the walk. Everyone is always in a hurry, focusing on getting somewhere (the ends, the future), and don't focus on the walk to get there (the means, the present). So, their mind is "like a cassette tape that is always running, day and night," filled with a lot of useless/empty thinking. The moral is, that you should focus on the present moment (the means), because that is all there is/all that exists. The means should exist for their own sake.

 

Well, I've finally had that realization for forcing. This is why forcing is like pulling teeth for so many people. Forcing is a means to an end: You do it in order to get a tulpa. You force visualization. You force personality. You force voice. Hell, it's even called "forcing", as in, "to achieve or bring about something by effort." Well, this sucks. As a philosophy for life, and for tulpa-creation. You need to enjoy it while it is happening. When you take a walk, you should let whatever it is you are perceiving energize you. You'll need to find the ways those particular things can do that. For you, it might be the colors of the leaves and trees, while for your friend, it might be seeing the people pass by doing whatever they're doing. When forcing, this is a bit harder because the perceptions are essentially invented, so I think I may be able to do this much better open-eye, a la NLD. But, this will vary person by person, the main idea is to enjoy forcing for forcing's sake.

 

Whatever that entails. It reminds me of when I use to play more videogames. I didn't play just to beat it, I played for the sake of it. I took forever to beat Ocarina of Time when I was a kid because I just went wherever in the game. It wasn't a beeline for each objective/temple/dungeon. I meandered through every game like this. Super Mario 64, Banjo Kazooie, Pokemon, Super Mario World, GTA3 among tons of others. Normally, I would eventually beat them, but I didn't particularly care if I never got around to it. I lost this attitude somewhere. In games, and in life. I feel a lot of people do. And, it needs to come back. Everyone who reads this, and treats tulpaforcing the way I did, should consider asking themselves if the same applies to them.

 

I need more written accounts of what I've been up to tulpa-wise, so I had intended to just stop in to remark how I've been personality forcing lately. The long and short of it is that I need to force more often. When I'm correctly "listening," I can tell I'm a lot farther along the whole tulpa process than I think. But, it is hard to maintain that connection during the day.

 

I take a heavy ~~symbolism~~ route. This is because symbolism is best Ism. It is also uniquely human. See, I believe melodrama is one of the keys to life. If I don't make or see as much of what I do as epic as possible, I may go insane. It makes life much more enjoyable, in any case. Walking is better when you are doing it martially, and shipping/receiving is better with a tactical knife. Climbing in, or jumping out, the receiving door, is better than taking the stairs, and jumping down or barreling up the stairs is better than walking on them. I'm digressing, but that was important in regards to how I force personality.

 

So, I mentioned that I use the core essences of a number of characters over listing traits for personalities. This kicks the shit out of the trait lists, and the MBTI or Jungian archetype function things. As far as I see it, it is much more intuitive, and is already a formed "core" in my head. What I do is spend a decent amount of time ruminating on the important traits of two opposing yet complementing characters on my list (such as Hiro and KOSMOS or Scott Pilgrim and Cassandra). I go over the stories/events where these traits are best exposed/espoused, and build/remember the overall nature of the character.

 

During this, I suppose you could say I am sitting, or something like that, in the center of my wonderland, Aletheia. My Attorney is floating above the custom flower patch in some kind of bitching pose (like the teleportation poses in FF13), under the tree, with her eyes closed, with a number of these kind of stardust, chi-channels flowing into her. They draw in all the light as well, so this process is normally pretty dark, save for the channels/dust. This cuts down sight of everything else in the wonderland. A simple area is generally more useful, anyway.

 

After I finish one character, I'll create a life-size stone statue in some cool pose and set it down near the flowers. After I finish the second character, I'll kind of synthesize and blend the traits. This is generally about envisioning how they work together in My Attorney. Then, I kind of float the two statues up and dissipate them into her. Everything else slows down and dissipates, and she floats down, and that's just about the end of the session.

 

I should still point out that this is not stupidly vivid, but gets better every time I do it.

 

I still enjoy musical forcing as well, maybe I'll elaborate a bit more on that later.

 

Ah, I also read the "final" chapter of Claymore. My mind is still reeling/exploding. Norihiro Yagi is a brilliant rat bastard and I must meet him some day.

 

#demagnetizingthecassette #romanticizeeverything

 

PS. I think I needed to call out Sands, but I forget why. I'm definitely calling out Flex, in a "what you want to know 'bout chi," kind of way. And Lacquer, what do you think about this? I think that may be the way you treat forcing, but that also may work out fine for you. No reason it can't work. On the other hand, it definitely contributed to my general avoidance of forcing.

[Lacquer]

>And Lacquer, what do you think about this? I think that may be the way you treat forcing, but that also may work out fine for you. No reason it can't work. On the other hand, it definitely contributed to my general avoidance of forcing.

>this

>that

>it definitely contributed

 

Specifically what part are you talking about? I was planning on responding to earlier bits before I read this, but now, I'm not sure what you mean by this. I'l still responding as I planned before seeing this, but this confuses me a bit.

 

>This next part is important for everyone. So, I've been looking into Buddhism, and found some very relevant, helpful, and enlightening (heh) information. It was that old cliche about the means, the ends, and the walk. Everyone is always in a hurry, focusing on getting somewhere (the ends, the future), and don't focus on the walk to get there (the means, the present). So, their mind is "like a cassette tape that is always running, day and night," filled with a lot of useless/empty thinking. The moral is, that you should focus on the present moment (the means), because that is all there is/all that exists. The means should exist for their own sake.

 

Journey, not the destination, just like I've been saying. Too bad not enough people understand this idea.

 

>Well, I've finally had that realization for forcing. This is why forcing is like pulling teeth for so many people. Forcing is a means to an end: You do it in order to get a tulpa. You force visualization. You force personality. You force voice. Hell, it's even called "forcing", as in, "to achieve or bring about something by effort." Well, this sucks. As a philosophy for life, and for tulpa-creation. You need to enjoy it while it is happening. When you take a walk, you should let whatever it is you are perceiving energize you. You'll need to find the ways those particular things can do that. For you, it might be the colors of the leaves and trees, while for your friend, it might be seeing the people pass by doing whatever they're doing. When forcing, this is a bit harder because the perceptions are essentially invented, so I think I may be able to do this much better open-eye, a la NLD. But, this will vary person by person, the main idea is to enjoy forcing for forcing's sake.

 

What I thought when reading this, especially the bold parts, were a couple fleeting thoughts on why I haven't started. When forcing, I am (or will be) not doing it for me, but instead for my tulpa. That's why I'm afraid of making the first step in creating her, because at that point, if I don't force, I will be neglecting her. This has a silver lining, though. Thinking about it like this results in a sort of forced "journey, not the destination" mentality. If I'm not doing it for myself to get a tulpa, what's the alternative? It's working together with my tulpa. This is why I've set my goal of seven straight days of fourty minutes or more spent inside my wonderland before I can feel comfortable enough with my ability to take care of my tulpa. It almost echoes those women who do a so-called "12 month pregnancy", in which they prepare their bodies for a few months in advance before conception even takes place. I want the best for my tulpa, and as of now, I can't give it to her, but I will, when I can.

 

---

>See, I believe melodrama is one of the keys to life. If I don't make or see as much of what I do as epic as possible, I may go insane. It makes life much more enjoyable, in any case. Walking is better when you are doing it martially, and shipping/receiving is better with a tactical knife. Climbing in, or jumping out, the receiving door, is better than taking the stairs, and jumping down or barreling up the stairs is better than walking on them. I'm digressing, but that was important in regards to how I force personality.

 

Bleh bleh. 2fun4me

---

Also, good luck with grad school!

[Sands]

But my OCD won't allow me to go straight to the next main story mission before I've done all the sidequest I can at the moment. Not possible in games like Morrowind but still, you have any idea how long it takes me to actually finish the main quest in that fucking game every fucking time I start going through it? It's madness. And I must explore every nook and cranny. Tupperforcing for me isn't very go straight for whatever goal you got either, so maybe there is a connection there woah whoa. I'm a pretty strict meh no symbolism thx though. I noticed that symbolism helps, but I also noticed that symbolism is nothing but getting you in the right mindset to make something possible. You can do the same by just thinking hard enough that you will do something, so it will happen.

[Mr. Duke and His Attorney]

Symbolism is a way of life for me, so, as per your connection between Morrowind and forcing, it's the same for me. That's the simplest way I can describe it. Symbolism is in every word and gesture of existence (built in by definition), so I up the ante in every facet I can. Because of this, it affects every part of forcing. Since I love it so much, I don't try to hold it back.

 

>This, that, and my inability to type coherently

 

Heh, I wrote that end part right after typing one of the middle paragraphs, so it made sense to me. It was something about the goal-focus. I don't really remember, but you DID answer it in your response.

 

My hesitancy to start was identical. And it's true: When you stop/if you consistently lack sessions, regression occurs. But, um, it's scary how quickly you can regain what was lost. It's as if it was never lost at all. And, uh, how quickly you can... replicate it... See my comment on the article in the post-script.

 

I recommend starting asap. Also, a coerced journey has a much better chance of being unable to be fully-enjoyed. But, that's only if it feels coerced. Which will be your judgment. Neglecting sucks, but be careful, because this fear of it could postpone your start another year. And that cancels out the negative utility of neglecting tenfold.

 

To add a bit to the 2muchfun, climbing up shelves with your bare hands rather than a ladder. This is the first time in my life I've had muscles, and holy shit is it awesome.

 

And thanks! I'm going to hunt down a grad school and hopefully get tips from some of the professors currently working on metamodernism. Alternatively, it turns out there's a famous manga artist living right the fuck in Chicago. Gonna write a letter asking for tips from her!

 

 

 

Particularly number 7 is apt here, to tulpas. This is the True state of things, from my point of view. This is academia's Way. At the very least, it is how I will conduct my synthesized writer/scholar career path.

 

For the most part, the way people view "science" on this site is a viewpoint that is far, far too old.

 

Metamodernist Manifesto

 

1. We recognise oscillation to be the natural order of the world.

 

2. We must liberate ourselves from the inertia resulting from a century of modernist ideological naivety and the cynical insincerity of its antonymous bastard child.

 

3. Movement shall henceforth be enabled by way of an oscillation between positions, with diametrically opposed ideas operating like the pulsating polarities of a colossal electric machine, propelling the world into action.

 

4. We acknowledge the limitations inherent to all movement and experience, and the futility of any attempt to transcend the boundaries set forth therein. The essential incompleteness of a system should necessitate an adherence, not in order to achieve a given end or be slaves to its course, but rather perchance to glimpse by proxy some hidden exteriority. Existence is enriched if we set about our task as if those limits might be exceeded, for such action unfolds the world.

 

5. All things are caught up within the irrevocable slide towards a state of maximum entropic dissemblance. Artistic creation is contingent upon the origination or revelation of difference therein. Affect at its zenith is the unmediated experience of difference in itself. It must be art’s role to explore the promise of its own paradoxical ambition by coaxing excess towards presence.

 

6. The present is a symptom of the twin birth of immediacy and obsolescence. The new technology enables the simultaneous experience and enactment of events from a multiplicity of positions. Far from signalling its demise, these emergent networks facilitate the democratisation of history, illuminating the forking paths along which its grand narratives may navigate the here and now.

 

7. Just as science strives for poetic elegance, artists might assume a quest for truth. All information is grounds for knowledge, whether empirical or aphoristic, no matter its truth-value. We should embrace the scientific-poetic synthesis and informed naivety of a magical realism. Error breeds sense.

 

8. We propose a pragmatic romanticism unhindered by ideological anchorage. Thus, metamodernism shall be defined as the mercurial condition that lies between, beyond and in pursuit of a plurality of disparate and elusive horizons. We must go forth and oscillate!

 

-Luke Turner, 2011

 

 

 

 

PS. I'm reading that article about authors and tulpas. Hell yes. Everything is becoming much clearer. And, um, I may end up with many, many tulpas. It seems almost effortless to turn a character into a tulpa and I may end up having a tulpa for every character I make. That being said, apart from My Attorney, none of them will be as constant. The article makes it sound like the author only interacts with them when they are summoned/pulled up/called up or when the author is writing. Not as much parallel-processing. The problem is, it seems way too easy to get new tulpas up to the exact same level as your current. That being said, I'm still in a foggy beginner stage myself, so I really have no idea. But, a well-made character takes easily as much time investment as a tulpa to make, and since I consciously know about tulpas and how to make them, I don't have the detriment that regular authors do in not knowing. This makes my character creation extremely more efficient. And, it makes it basically impossible to not create a tulpa when I'm creating a character. I'm a bit worried, because like Lacquer, I'm acting for them. I think it will all work out, though. This is really not something I need to worry about until some time after My Attorney can impose visually at will.

 

PPS. J.K. Rowling seemed to have a kind of Harry tulpa, at least. If I read this thing right, somewhere between 60-90% of full-time authors have at least some kind of proto-tulpa.

 

PPPS. Speaking of multiple tulpa and 2muchfun2handle, has anyone ever tried a megazord-style possession?

[Lacquer]

>My hesitancy to start was identical. And it's true: When you stop/if you consistently lack sessions, regression occurs. But, um, it's scary how quickly you can regain what was lost. It's as if it was never lost at all. And, uh, how quickly you can... replicate it... See my comment on the article in the post-script.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_recovery_(psychology) ?

 

>PS. I'm reading that article about authors and tulpas. Hell yes. Everything is becoming much clearer. And, um, I may end up with many, many tulpas. It seems almost effortless to turn a character into a tulpa and I may end up having a tulpa for every character I make. That being said, apart from My Attorney, none of them will be as constant. The article makes it sound like the author only interacts with them when they are summoned/pulled up/called up or when the author is writing. Not as much parallel-processing. The problem is, it seems way too easy to get new tulpas up to the exact same level as your current. That being said, I'm still in a foggy beginner stage myself, so I really have no idea. But, a well-made character takes easily as much time investment as a tulpa to make, and since I consciously know about tulpas and how to make them, I don't have the detriment that regular authors do in not knowing. This makes my character creation extremely more efficient. And, it makes it basically impossible to not create a tulpa when I'm creating a character. I'm a bit worried, because like Lacquer, I'm acting for them. I think it will all work out, though. This is really not something I need to worry about until some time after My Attorney can impose visually at will.

 

At that point, are they really tulpas, or something different? I find myself thinking, in many situations in which what others have/do may or may not actually be a tulpa, that they are using this idea of it being a separate consciousness as simply a way of organizing thoughts. As in, they aren't really a separate consciousness, but they are parrotted to effortlessly in the process of attempting to think like them to simulate them for the story being written, that it may appear as if they are conscious.

 

>PPPS. Speaking of multiple tulpa and 2muchfun2handle, has anyone ever tried a megazord-style possession?

 

What's funny is that I had originally pictured possession working like that, with a little "cockpit" in my head where I would be away from the controls while my tulpa is in the body.

---

Also, I have no idea what those metamodernist things were. Seems like just philosobabble from this point of view, but I'm sure it's different for you.

[Mr. Duke and His Attorney]

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_recovery_(psychology) ?

Could be, I'll really only know once I'm further in.

 

 

>At that point, are they really tulpas, or something different? I find myself thinking, in many situations in which what others have/do may or may not actually be a tulpa, that they are using this idea of it being a separate consciousness as simply a way of organizing thoughts. As in, they aren't really a separate consciousness, but they are parrotted too effortlessly in the process of attempting to think like them to simulate them for the story being written, that it may appear as if they are conscious.

 

I think it may be like that for a number of authors. But, in the article, a number of the accounts are far too similar to independent thought processes. Well, the article is called "The Illusion of Independent Agency: Do Adult Fiction Writers Experience Their Characters as Having Minds of Their Own?" So, it looks at authors who have to fight with their characters to write a story. And that the characters sometimes fight back pretty strongly, or have to be negotiated with. Such as one of the authors had to promise a character true love so the author could write a storyline where the character is tortured in prison.

 

As far as that goes too, I had a creative writing teacher awhile back who said she was so obsessed with a character based on her father, that one night it actually came and talked to her. I think she said it was like a shadowy figure sort of thing. Somewhat visually imposed I guess.

 

>Also, I have no idea what those metamodernist things were. Seems like just philosobabble from this point of view, but I'm sure it's different for you.

 

That's basically what it is. Makes a ton of sense to me, and I can connect it to just about anything. Should be good. I threw it out there because it's relevant to the way I operate. It's also an angry rebuttal to Postmodernism.