I just finished reading some of Kierkegaard, the father of existentialist philosophy, and WOW. I was blown away, so I had to write - after jotting tons of notes in the margins, swirling all the ideas around in my brain, I had to get them on paper to sort them out and really think about them in their fulness. You know how that is? After reading the first two parts of Fear and Trembling, here are my thoughts. I'd love to know what you all think too! He's definitely raised some compelling questions.

To Kierkegaard, the father of existentialism, faith is a complicated phenomenon.

According to Kierkegaard, faith is not the wide-eyed optimism of an eternal idealist, the roller-coaster thrill-spill ride of one who hopes for the best and is disappointed by anything less. It’s not this, he says (denouncing those who believe faith means never having doubtful thoughts. Faith, however, is also not closed-eyes resignation, (what Kierkegaard calls the “infinite resignation” the measured acquiescence of a man whose eyes gaze forever into the distance, seeking in the realm of the eternal what he cannot find in the present world. It is neither of these things, he believes – instead, it is both, and more.

To illustrate his idea of faith, he uses the allegory of a young boy, the “knight of faith” to be, a boy who adores a far-off princess he can never practically (in this world) possess. Still, he has seen her and loved her, and he cultivates this love to its fullest, drinking in thoughts of her at every moment, but making sure this is more than a mere obsession – he really thinks about if he wants this love to be “the content of his life,” and decides he does, having “imbibed all the love and absorbed himself in it.” This is what seems to be Kierkegaard’s first stage, that of possessing a hope, a wish, in which he can “concentrate the whole of his life’s content and the meaning of reality.”

In what seems to be the second stage, however, the boy realizes the truth that he can never have the princess (while still having decided to love her wholly, putting his soul into the love) and that in this life, the finite life, it is impossible to be with her. In this stage, he does not forget her, moving on (having so fully inhabited his love, he cannot move on) but neither does he languish in despair, denied meaning for the rest of his existence. Instead, his love takes on an eternal character, becoming “the expression of an eternal love,” expanding the concept from just “loving this particular girl on earth” into an eternal love that has validity and existence, even if it is just in his mind, in his soul, in some spiritual realm far from this world. In doing this, the boy recognizes that he cannot possess the girl on earth – but he realizes that his love still can find expression in the spiritual world. His love “now bends inwards, but is neither lost nor forgotten.”

Kierkegaard recognizes that some individuals choose to stop at this second stage, where there is “eace and repose,” this “infinite resignation.” Through infinite resignation, the individual goes beyond the temporal and the physical to recognize and accept the eternal and the spiritual, becoming aware of himself or herself as a spiritual being.

While Kierkegaard acknowledges that this achievement of infinite resignation is admirable and deeply significant, he does not believe that it is the endpoint in the individual’s journey, nor the signifier of faith. Instead, it is the necessary (but not the only) step that one must take to finally acquire faith.

To acquire faith, Kierkegaard poses the necessity of a third stage, the fabled “leap” based on what he calls “the strength of the absurd” – a concept that can best be described in his own words.

From Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling:
“The moment the knight resigned he was convinced of the impossibility, humanly speaking; that was a conclusion of the understanding… In an infinite sense, however, it was possible, through renouncing it [as a finite possibility]; but then accepting that [possibility] is at the same time to have given it up, yet for the understanding there is no absurdity in possessing it, for it is only in the finite world that understanding rules and there it was and remains an impossibility.”

Lost yet? I had to read the passage over several times before I finally think I grasped what he’s saying. The process of faith comes in three stages, (I’ll say it as a three-part argument, though the syllogism doesn’t *logically* work):

1. I have a wish, a deep desire.
2. This desire is impossible to achieve in the Finite. (K’s “infinite resignation,” first part)
3. However, it *is* possible in the Infinite. (K’s “infinite resignation,” second part)
To these stages, however, Kierkegaard adds another, the step of faith….
4. And so, I believe it is possible in the Finite. (K’s Faith)

After everything, Kierkegaard believes, after having absorbed a love completely, completely realized its impossibility, and completely realized its possibility and existence in the eternal/spiritual world, the individual *then* can gain the faith to believe in its possibility in the world of today, in “this life.”

Thus, after everything, the boy has created, resigned, and recognized his love’s spiritual dimension, and is now free to re-envision his love as something that he trusts may still come to him.

First, his love rested on the princess. Then, his love rested on the permanent, the spiritual. But now, with the act of faith, his love rests on the promise, the strength of the absurd, the melding of temporal and eternal, spiritual and physically real – a union and a paradox at once, which is true faith.

Interestingly, Kierkegaard says what most people call “losing their faith” (an act which many – and maybe myself – would say that I have done, in changing my beliefs from my childhood religion to a more deistic conception of God – is really actually the act of teetering on the edge of “infinite resignation.” What we have lost, in “losing faith,” is not our faith – it is the loss of the naivete of our earlier fully-felt wish, the thing that we hoped to grasp, but now know it is out of our reach. What we should do, at this point, according to Kierkegaard, is make the movement into “infinite resignation,” winning “myself in my eternal consciousness, in a blessed compliance with my love for the eternal being.” Next, however – next, after infinite resignation, is the stage of true faith, the one I can’t say I fully understand, even in his explanation, but the one I want to. I really do want to. (And Kierkegaard did too, as he admitted he could describe it but did not himself possess it).

On this journey, we have, we resign, and then we receive – we gain “the whole of temporality on the strength of the absurd,” the ability to live life with a knowledge of our deepest want and our inability to have it – and the ability to truly live even then, believing that still we will have it, even if it is “impossible.”

Faith, then, is not mere idealism, which does not dare resign, cannot “look the impossibility in the eye.”

It is not mere resignation, which does admit the impossibility, but stops there – that cannot conceive of anything further.

Instead, it is faith – what other way to describe it – that says I love this, I know I can never have this, except in the eternal realm, but still I trust for it in the physical realm – because I have grasped the paradox, and still take that leap.

I still don’t know quite what that means.

Whatever it is, I know it’s what many philosophers have pondered, what thousands of theologians have talked about, still without one clear definition – but it’s an ultimate goal, or it was for a while.

In this age, Kierkegaard says, we skip through all the thought-passages of human history and seize upon skepticism as the goal of philosophy, ignoring faith as either the domain of the ignorant, the deluded, or the superstitious – and false forms, whether in religion or elsewhere, do fall into these categories. But should we dismiss faith so glibly? For Kierkegaard, it’s the journey of a lifetime. It’s the journey that most are never able to achieve. That he himself was never able to achieve, but could only stand at the gap of infinite resignation and see the other side – but not touch it.

Knowing this, is it something we want to achieve?

Do I want it?

I have not yet read enough Kierkegaard to know if he offers a method to achieve such faith. I would be skeptical if he did, as that would seem to reduce his work of philosophical depth into a mere cult-handbook, promising yet another formula for faith-in-six-months, some simplified rule-stratum that distills the complex workings of the human soul down into something that sounds like a diet program –

And yet.

Something in me wishes there were such easy answers.

But Kierkegaard, like other philosophers, like all those who delve deep into the realms of human thought and infinite mysteries, does not offer a universal formula for achieving anything, but recognizes that the process must be individual – but still tie into universal truths. True to what would become an existentialist tenet, we must make our decisions ourselves, undertake the journey ourselves.

We have freedom, in this – sometimes terrifying, sometimes awe-inducing, freedom.

But will we act on it?

I saw the art of Phil Hansen for the first time last night, and it’s beyond amazing! See his work here: [link] and on his site, [link]

One series of his pieces, called “Goodbye Art,” feature him creating (at fast-forwarded speed) huge works of art using the most unlikely media – from french fries to candles to frozen wine, his work shows the potential for artistic symbol in everything – even chewed Starbucks pastries.
My family was wondering: why does this artist create such amazing works, then destroy them? He calls it “Goodbye Art,” emphasizing their transient nature – but when he can create such incredible pieces with any medium at hand, why does he then demolish them?
I was thinking about this, and figured out a few possibilities – I’m still not sure, as he leaves his work open to interpretation in his YouTube videos, but here’s some of the things I thought about:

First – everything he does expands our concept of art, what it is and what it can be:

- He creates from any medium, from frozen wine to fries to candles to Starbucks pastries to dirt to chalk on asphalt.

- He integrates several forms of media into each work, appealing to more than just the eyes, incorporating video, sound, and music into the presentation of each visual-arts piece.

- He films his entire work, recording the whole process as art rather than just the finished product – we see him at work, the process sped up on film so we can take in the act of creation, seeing the artist’s vision literally come together.

- All of his work is transient in some way, from the frozen wine which he carves into a face and then watches as it melts, to the intricate chalk patterns which are washed away by the next rain.

- Not only does this transient nature show how much of even classical art is temporary (even over centuries – think of the pieces that have been painted over, lost in fires, been forgotten, been destroyed by censors or others), but it also makes us wonder how much of “every-day art” we miss – art that is seen by far too few eyes, but created with just as much vision.

I went on Phil Hansen’s site, and interestingly, he posted a video showing a collage of his Goodbye Art, stating that he is now finished with that part of his career and plans to move on to more permanent works. Although he says he finds himself “with few words to say about” his decision, other than that it helped him “develop… ideas of medium,” I think his revolutionary works say so much already, by raising these kinds of questions in the viewers’ minds, expanding our definitions and concepts of art – and pretty much making our jaws drop off the floor

Here’s some of his awesome videos:

- Here, Phil takes on the Facebook “war on nipples” (controversy over women posting their breastfeeding photos by creating a nipple piece of his own – a giant face, made entirely from photos of mens’ nipples. [link]

- Here, Phil makes a bust of Jimi Hendrix entirely out of matches – and then sets it on fire. [link]

- Here, Phil creates a face entirely out of candles: [link]

- Here, he makes a high speed painting of Bruce Lee
[link]

- Here, he makes a portrait of McGuire out of baseballs and paint – and then sets it on fire!

- Here, he creates a portrait out of frozen wine. [link]

Hi all! Merry Christmahannakwanzaaakah! Whichever holiday you're celebrating, I hope you're having an amazing time with family & friends and enjoying warm houses (yay, heaters!) and a beautiful view out the windows (Yay, photos!).

Well, the contest results came in for ATK! I really appreciated that the judges put so much thought and time into their comments, and considered a lot of aspects of the entrants' stories! This final round, between (character Subaru) and (character Idesta), turned out to be a great one for both - we both got to develop our characters so much during the course of the contest, and it's been an awesome run!

Congratulations to for her Subaru's win on this final round! Her entry was a dramatic and action-filled piece that developed the contest's tea-kettle character Tsushi wonderfully, incorporated a stunning scene where Idesta's plant powers got put to use uniquely, and ended the fight with a strong finish. Her entries were well-drawn and written both, and I admire her skill for writing action! Congrats to Feral for this win - yay Subaru!

Although I was disappointed that Idesta didn't win, I understand the reasons the judges gave for my entry being given less preference. I'm glad they wrote them out, too - they helped me understand the reasons behind the judges' decision, and confirmed some of the things I've known I need to work on in my writing.

One said that my entry lacked its usual clarity and structure, which others have cited before as a flaw in some of my writing. Structure's always been a point I need to work on, and I've tried to amend this during the contest. My original work featuring Idesta was a bit of a stream-of-consciousness piece heavy on the imagery, atmosphere, and inner life of the character, while light on the clarity of the story and the format of the narrative.

Even in this contest, I've still been experimenting with form - my entries have moved from the first-person intro and first rounds with clear physical victories, to limited third-person in the next few with forays into Idesta's consciousness and ambiguous interpretive endings, to the last round with the form shifting from third-person description to stream-of-consciousness almost-verse, ending in a firm alliance that deviated from set tournament structure. Unfortunately, a judge disliked this style of ending, preferring a more concrete Win for the ending. I can see that, as this was a tournament-style contest.

Another judge disliked my Tsushi, whom I agree was underdeveloped in my piece. As the central figure of the contest, her complexity deserved to be given a greater place than the largely symbolic-abstract one I designated to her in my entry. In portraying her as Idesta saw her, through a lens colored with her own perceptions and connections to philosophical issues (responsibility, the value of life, utility v. exploitation, ends v. means), I neglected to portray much of her depth. In this light, I should have balanced the Idesta-centric pov with a portrayal of Tsushi that went deeper than the symbolic, recognizing her as a character with her own thoughts and complexity, for the audience, at least, if not for Idesta.

Another judge's problem with my entry can be summed up in the title of a musical's song: "Too much exposition." In this regard, I tend towards Umberto Eco's propensity to describe a door for six pages - and then describe the experience of opening it for seven more. Although I admire Hemingway greatly, I have yet to grasp his talent for packing meaning into just a few sentences - describing the action while hitting the reader with the force of the meaning behind it. When reading, myself, I tend to find depth in the details, and I think this translates to my writing, which can be both a strength and a failing. However pretty the exposition, there is such a thing as too much. In my writing, I need to apply that.

On the other hand, I got some really positive comments on my writing, which I appreciate too! The judges' comments were truly constructive criticism, providing insights that will help me improve and compliments that help me realize my writings' strengths, as well (which are sometimes just as hard to realize as the weaknesses, before someone points them out)

Almost all of the judges loved my atmosphere and the forays into the mind of my characters. I have to say, those are the parts I have the most fun writing! I love character interaction, too, and hope I do well in that area (though I can always improve). One of the judges disliked my dialogue, but thought my characters' actions "brought them to life." I can't ask for a better compliment than that! I think that's the hope of every writer, to create living characters. I'm so glad you thought they were!

At the end of this contest, though I didn't win, I gained many insights from both myself and others about my characters and writing style, was able to develop Idesta beyond her own world, work with others' fantastic characters, and proved to myself that I can meet writing deadlines and construct a coherent story (which I was unsure about before, as I only wrote small short pieces, though a lot of those). I think how this contest turned out connects with what my Idesta resolved, too - even if you don't win, you've learned a lot along the way, and can work from your experience to achieve victories in the future. I think that proved true for both of us. Yay for both the plants and the pen!

Finally, I can't end the contest without mentioning all the awesome opponents Idesta got to face along the way: :iconFlamingScorpion:'s suave half-demon Lokin, 's conflicted Andrew and Votch, his taunting shadow, 's quirky and creative LeJuix and Warmy, 's formidable assassin Derek and his dog Cerberus, and finally 's determined warrior Subaru. They were all amazing opponents, and it was such an honor to be able to work with their characters! You guys are awesome - and I can't wait to read/see your new work.

Thanks a ton to and too - the creators of this awesome tournament! You completely rock!

And a huge thanks to the readers and friends who followed Idesta to the end in this tournament - I really appreciated your comments, reactions, impressions, and support! You really provided a lot of help for me as a writer, and I hope to write more of Idesta in the future! If I do, I'll post it here - so keep an eye out

All in all - yay ATK! And happy holidays to everyone - hope yours are amazing!!!!


You can view the results from the judges here, with their comments: [link]

So the title of this journal is Yay! for several reasons, chiefly (man, I can never spell that word right on the first try) it's winter break (Yay Christmas!) and I GOT ALL A's this semester!!!!!!! I'm so excited! I'm not trying to brag, that's not why I'm excited, but I haven't been able to get that since freshman year, and with 18 credit hours I was worried about how it would turn out (especially Shakespeare, where my first draft of the term paper got a very *detailed* critique - but it worked! Yay! I'm so relieved.

And another yay - I just finished the final round of the Amaranthine Tea Kettle contest, the amazingly fun original-character tournament into which I entered my character Idesta. I joined in the summer for a chance to develop Idesta, whose story I'd started but not gotten far on, but it ended up being so much more - through the contest, I've been able to see some truly stunning works of many dA writers and artist, as well as toss Idesta together with some unusual situations and unique characters and see what she'd do! The answers sometimes surprised me - but now I know more about Idesta than I thought I did. And that contest - so much fun!!!! And so creative. All the combatants rock!

I also just got a car, again, after the accident! Yay for insurance - they really came through, which was wonderful, and I just got the car today, the same type as I had before, though it'll take me a while before I'm comfortable with driving again. I'm still jumpy riding in cars, and I think all trucks are going to look ten times bigger and faster to me for a while still... but I have a month to get re-adjusted to being behind the wheel. I can do that. *hopes*

And YAY my boyfriend is awesome! He just got me the Metallica CD "Master of Puppets" for Christmas... despite being an avid Metallica fan for a while, I had actually never bought that album (just heard a couple of the songs - I'd pretty much stuck to the Black album before). It's great, so far! Wow, the guitar on those tracks... unbelievable.

Next week one of my college friends and I are going to start work on a new story, a collab between us called Excellens Fortuna, a sort of coming-of-age discovery-adventure narrative set in a utopia-turned dystopia where things... definitely aren't what they seem. Wow, that's a lot of hyphens. It should be a lot of fun - we both created the characters, he's writing the plot, and I'm writing the style/description. So that should be a fun project!

Speaking of projects, I'm working on a huge collage of Obama material - covers from magazines, parts of posters, photos, articles, etc - that we're putting together in celebration of the historic election. My mom had the idea and got the materials, and I thought it was an awesome idea! We both volunteered for the campaign, and admire Obama immensely, so we were so excited when he won, and wanted to make something to commemorate the election. I'll probably post it here when I'm done with it - it's turning out well!

And wow, I saw IKEA for the first time today. We went shopping for some drawer organizers, and wow... my mom described it as a "zoo for furniture," and that's pretty accurate - but also, a museum for modern interior decoration. It was incredible! The creativity of the designers and the arrangers is amazing. The only part of the experience I didn't like was that I was walking around the huge expanse of the store wearing heels... which I'm not used to. At all. After a while, I thought my feet were going to liquefy and be forge into a Barbie-foot mold. No wonder all Barbies have that pained expression. But aside from that, the store was awesome! It must be fun to arrange everything there, and create the designs. I love the names, too. They all sound like aliens. If IKEA was a musical, it would have to draw from both Beauty and the Beast (yay for singing furniture) and Star Trek. It's got the chairs down already.

And I started exercising! Seriously, now, not just walk-around-campus or wander-into-the-campus-gym exercising. I hope I stick with it - I want to! My arms are noodles at the moment - I need muscle

And yay for the bookstore! I just got "How to Read Novels Like a Professor" by Foster, and couldn't put it down. It's such a great run-through of literary theory, the last two centuries' great works, what makes a novel a novel (at the end of the book, still wasn't sure) and all told in a funny and insightful narrative that added about 25 new books to my to-read list. Yay for break - I'll be able to read them!

Though I should go to bed now I just emerged from that book in about the same way as people come out of a movie theatre in early evening: "Wait, it's dark now? It's only... *checks watch* - Oh. I'm disoriented..."

Hope everyone else is having a good break too (or if yours hasn't started yet, that it starts soon ) Have fun!

Aaaaaand still working on ATK... man, it's getting complicated! It doesn't help that I got ideas for the end of this round before the beginning, so I started writing it in the middle... it's 4 single-spaced pages now, but needs tons more to be finished. It's due Friday, so I'm trying to finish it in time... I love 's character, Subaru - she's amazing! They're having an interesting battle...