Interested in Dulce M Cardoso. Just because of 1 sentence

Sometimes I read a book just because of 1 sentence. Sometimes I’m interested in a writer because of just 1 line he/ she wrote. Right now I’m fascinated on Dulce Maria Cardoso. I read last week a review about her new book ‘Os meus Sentimentos’ (dutch ‘Violeta en de engelen’). The strange thing is I don't want to read this book. It’s about a very fat lady who looks back on her life while dying after a car accident. It’s about the dishonesty and cruelty in which “we” treat other human beings who are “ugly” & how they feel themselves. Well … ‘e isso ai’. For me no reason to read this book. I’m not interested in the subject.

I’m fascinated in the writer Cardoso because she said “I love just let time pass by” (dutch “ze houdt ervan haar tijd zo’n beetje te verdoen”). That is exactly how life feels for me. Just read a little, write a little, tweet a little, look out the window a little, watch a movie a little, think of you a little … just let time pass by. Not because I’m bored or not interested but because that’s what I like best. I don’t have to climb the mount Everest. I’m not interested to become next years gliderchampion. I just love to breath in and breath out. Listen to my own thoughts. Let the flow of my life float.

Lost world: the smell of woodfire

The world is full of little treasures. The world is full of lost worlds. If - and only if - we take the time to take a closer look. I descent from a family of farmers. My grandfather was a farmer. My grandgrandfather was a farmer. My father was the first one who broke the line. I descent from a christian family. My father is a christian. My grand(grand)father was a christian. I'm the first one who broke the line. I remember sitting alone with my daddies mum in the old kitchen of her. Silence. The clock tapping. The smell of woodfire. The smell of food on the stove. Jesus on a cross.

The smell of wood and the yearly routine of christians. It's lost for me. Ofcourse there is Christmas and ofcourse I light a big woodfire a few times a year but the necessity is lost. For my daddies mum it was just the way it was - without realising it - day in day out, year in year out. Wood had to be cut into pieces to light up the stove for warmth and cooking food. Going to church 4 or 5 times a week to celebrate her inner belief.

The world of woodfire is lost for me. Gather wood. Store up cut wood. Store up the twigs. Dry and wet wood. Wood of pine, oak, birch or aspen. How to light up a fire in an stove. How long a piece of oak or aspen burns. The smell of wood when it's wet. The light pinewood gives. How to regulate the stove for cooking. And ... - there must be more hidden treasures in the world of woodfire?

I like to take a walk in the fall and winter. Pass old houses where a woodfire burns. Mostly remembering my daddies mum and the world that went with her death.

P.s. I was talking about my fathers side of my family but the story is exactly the same for my mothers side.

What's your amount of being a stoic? Or on the stupidness of the #red tag.

I am always very afraid for 'Democrats' and other mono-theistic believers. Remember the #red tag of yesterday on Twitter for World AIDS Day? Still remember it or already lost it in a cloud of tweets? I considered the #red tag as stupid! It's fake and words only! I always get shivers for "movements" like this. It's too mono-theistic. Two weeks ago I wrote about 'Democray as a mono-theistic religion'. I'm not afraid for democrats - I consider myself as one too. I'm not afraid for discussions - I love to. I'm afraid for democrats who see their belief as the One and Only. What I'm most afraid of is the fact that they don't want to talk or discuss about their belief. They don't really want to discuss. For them it's not a belief. For them it's the One and Only way of life that does Right to all human beings. They simply can't imagine that not everyone shares their fair, honest, right, sincere, human and down to earth point of view.

To be more precise I'm afraid for democrats who see their belief as God = Democracy. I'm afraid for the stoic kind of democrats. The ones who say "All or Nothing". Read the quote below. After reading it you will find out that I'm an epicurean. I belief in the little and in small steps. The strange thing is I'm a mixture sometimes. Sometimes I'm in an "all or nothing" state of mind too. Well that must me the epicurean in me too. What about you? What is your amount of being a stoic (All or Nothing) or epicurean (step by step)? Did you test your future/ present partner on it?

P.s. If you can smile :) on this week's blog you are my friend. If you can't or feel like sending me hate mail -you will be my friend as well- than consider this blog as your mirror and please check your amount of being too stoic.

Quote:
"Some thoughts about the Stoics and the Epicurean
Who are nowadays the Stoics and the Epicurean? How can you recognize them? What do they look like? That isn’t hard at all. A stoic is an individual who obstinately beliefs in his moral mission: a mission he has to fulfil. He always is in need of a Great Plan that gives his life meaning, but in fear that it will actually be fulfilled, he chooses a very difficult, probably not fulfillable plan, that above all can not be fulfilled by normal human beings. What counts is to suffer in name of something that has moral meaning.
Everybody who believes in the one, eternal, indissolubable Great Love is a stoic. It is clear that they will never find that, but that doesn’t keeps them from furiously searching for it without compromising. There motto is: ‘Everything or Nothing’.
Christians, real christians are stoics. There final destination is Paradise and they will reach that by purification of the body and elevation of the soul. Their favourite slogans: ‘We are born to suffer’ and ‘The first will be the last’. Marxist are stoics: their destination is Justice for All, without any exception. They are also confronted with a destination that will not be fulfilled on short term: the Sun of the Future, the word tells it all, will be catched in Future. In expectation of it revolutions, dictatorship of the proletariat and other equally difficult phases are on the program.
Marco Panella is a stoic: he wants above all to solve the problem of Hunger in the World, in the whole World. If we would propose a less ambitious program, e.g. the hunger in the Napolitian quarter San Carlo all’Arena, he would refuse that immediately, probably because the target could be reachable. And because he lives in a country where tortures hardly exist, he is forced to torture himself and that is the reason why he fasts, he ties himself and suffers.
The epicurean is made of other stuff: because he is aware of the fleeting of life, he is targeting for goals who are reachable on short term.
An epicurean is an employer who will ask for raise of salary to solve a problem within a year.
An epicurean is someone who prefers to vote on a party who doesn’t promise him Justice, Freedom and Happiness, but a gradual improvement of his life, through a policy of step by step.
An epicurean is someone who will continue his relationship with his partner although he is no longer really in love, but who arranged living with his partner in which they agree to differ.
The advantages and disadvantages are equally divived between the two worlds of thought. On the whole epicurean are more serene, more in peace with the world, almost always cheerful. On the other hand stoic work hard: when they play cards they will do that with much dedication. Epicurean do hold politics in contempt and they will almost never succeed as big industrial: he cares more about his private-life than about society. To become Pirelli, Pirelli must have been a stoic: an epicurean would have been satisfied with a little tire-store.
It would not be a bad idea when partners, before they get married, instead watching the stars and there constellations, they would measure the amount of being a stoic or epicurean of their future man or wife."

Quote. Source: Luciano de Crescenzo, ‘Storia della filosofia greca, da Socrate in poi’. Translation by @JeanD99 from dutch into english.

Book review. Pamuk's Museum Innocence. Aren't we all surrounded by thousands of tiny little things of the ones we love(d)?

"What a bore is life and how predictable: to be born, live and die." This is what I told my grandma (from my mothersside) at the age of eight after reading next weeks TV-guide completely. She looked at me with a little mysterious smile and said "Yes, you are right". I was old at the age of eight. The strange thing is this feeling never really left me. In retrospect my opinion back than was only a part of 'homo sapiens' life' truth. In life it's not about milestones it's about all the days in between. It's not about being born, learn to ride a bicycle, fall in love, graduate at highschool, buy a house, become a (grand)parent and die. It's about the 26.000 days in between. Sometimes we think we will never really fall in love. Sometimes we are in doubt about the love we feel. Sometimes we hate our lover. Sometimes it feels as if we are not good enough for our lover and need above all affirmation. Sometimes it's a perfect day, full of love and being loved. Sometimes we don't think at all about our lover - and feel guilty when we realize that. What I'm trying to say is, we (better: I) live our life one day after another. In retrospect we can put milestones in our personal life but it's hardly sensible in the days we are living one by one. Yesterday is one day. Today is one day. Tomorrow and all the other days are one day.

All bookreviews tell more about the reviewer than about the writer of a book. I'm completely aware of that. Last weekend I finished reading Orhan Pamuk's (1952-) book 'The museum of innocence' (in a dutch translation). From a milestone point of view this book is a bore. 30 year old male Pamuk falls in love with 18 year female Fusun while he is going to be engaged in a few weeks with 26 (?) year old female Sibel. The setting is Istanbul, Turkey in the seventies (of the 20th century). Pamuk and Sibel are both rich and are the perfect couple. Fusun is poor.

I was completely addicted to the book after reading the first 20 pages. I knew - not really but I guessed how it would end otherwise there would have been no reason for a "museum" - how the book was going to end but I loved all those thousands and thousands of tiny, little, lovely details of a love. A love between Kemal and Sibel. A love between Kemal and Fusun. All the hesitations, the anger, the insecurity, the perfect moments, the jealousy, the lack of affirmation, the tears, the smiles and the feeling of happiness when you just can touch her or finally see her smile while she looks at you. I loved to read about all the "normal" days when Kemal was surrounded by things of Fusun: touching the saltshacker that once stood at Fusun's house, smelling at the red dress Fusun wore on the day of Kemal and  Fusun's engagement and drinking from a glass Fusun once drank out of.

This is it. This is life. For me it's a book of love in all it's tiny little elements. It tells it all: the hesitations, the good and bad moments and all the feelings in between. It's not a book of milestones. It's a book of all the days in between. For me personally to found a museum for the love-of-my-life is too much. It would be too neurotic. I'll never found a museum for the ones I loved so much and the ones I love right now. I'll never found a museum for the love-of-my-life but aren't we all surrounded by hunderds of things, books, smells, songs, thoughts and dreams of the ones we love(d)?

P.S. More bookreviews of this book can be found here.

Democray. It's a mono-theistic religion. History proves in the end it's: or belief in "our" God or extinct & die.

Let me first say this. I’m always fascinated on religion, on what the Book or books say, how texts are interpretated etcetera. Always fascinated and full of wonder! They are my others in whose mirror I look at myself and who tell me who I am.

A few weeks ago I filled in a test on ‘What’s your religion?’ My testresult: I’m an “atheist”. The result doesn’t surprise me but ... it’s only part of my opinion. I don’t believe in a jewish JWH, a christian God, or a moslim Allah. For me no mono-theistic religion! Why? Because it can’t explain the pluriformity of the human experience concerning God, gods and religion in general. For me religion in general is an invention of the species ‘homo sapiens’. One way or another a lot (most?) human beings need some external “being” to give their lives direction and meaning.

What do I believe? There is no God. There is no external “being” that created the world, that gave humanity “devine laws”. We are made out of tiny little elements when we are born and collapse piece by piece when we die. That’s all. We survive as species by reproduction: kids who become parents themselves etcetera. For me there’s no reason why we do need God or gods. It’s a dream. It’s an illusion. It's a human made construction.

What do I believe? I believe in the species ‘homo sapiens’. We do whatever we do -it’s just as simple as that- trying to survive as individual, as family, as group and as species. For me Democracy is another mono-theistic religion. We invented it! There is no ‘democratic inborn faculty’ in us. Democray is groupthinking and groupacting. Mono-theistic religions are dangerous because it's followers hate non-believers, non human at all or others. At first it always starts the smooth way, the non-believers are "invited" to step into their "perfect way of life" too. When there is too much hesitation slowly more group pressure. And in the end? History proves in the end it's: or belief in "our" God or extinct & die.

A boss' toolbox & personal mission statement 'fatherhood'

Last year I took Covey’s course '7 habits of highly effective people'. One of the things that had to be done was '360-degree feedback'. I had to fill in a list of questions. The same questions had to be answered (in my case) by a few of my staff, my boss and my wife. As predicted my self-image differs partly from the “others”. No big differences. No real surprises. Nice to have a mirror once in a while! I wrote a letter to my feedbackgivers in which I explained my point of view as a boss and as a human being. For me the most important thing in life is: my family. I want to give my children: food, love and a set of values ‘how to behave as member of our society’. To give them fish and at the same time learn them to fish themselves. I want to be a scout leader who gives his kids a toolbox and learn them how to use it in order to make it possible for them to live their lives independently from their parents.

I usually eat in a hurry. I hardly drink alcohol. Eat much candy. I like to take a 20 minutes shower. Try to watch 20.00 o’clock news everyday. My favorites on TV are 'Spoorloos' (in English ‘lost track of’) and 'Memories'. Love to watch a comedy. I read a lot of books. Usually books on a historical topic. I never analyze why I read the books I read. For me it's a long trail of books that bring up other books. When I read a book I always discover thousands of things and details I never thought of before. Details that shift my opinions, judgements, prejudices and assumptions. The details make everything fluid. One of my favorite books is 'Bello Gallico' by Julius Cesaer. It’s his report of his conquest of Western Europe. A beautiful and exciting story with it’s ups and downs. If you realize what happened to Rome, Cleopatra and the child of Julius and Cleopatra when Julius was murdered … everything blown away with the wind.

As a boss this is my toolbox:
1. There is not 1 way of organizing. How to organize depends on the organizational configurations, the life cycle of the organization and the environment it lives in.
2. There is not 1 way of leadership. Depending on the situation a certain style has to be chosen.
3. There is not 1 human being. All people are individuals and are therefore different.
4. Fog. Decisions always have to be taken with information that is not perfect, well balanced and completely validated. Sometimes I have to decide in foggy weather. In retrospect information can show up that tells me that in hindsight I should have taken a different decision.
5. People are people with their own dreams, hopes and fears. People act on their level of consiousness. Some come for the money. Others look for a teacher. Some look for spiritual challenges.
6. A constraint solved? The next constraint pops up. Not all constraints and problems have to be solved.
7. Final end. All people die. I will one day die too. I’m your boss now but will I be your boss too next year? The show must go on when I’m no longer here. The show must go on when an individual staffmember moves on.

The above toolbox ensures that I am not very straightforward in my conduct. Pragmatic or situational acting sometimes seems "old school" but it suits me very well. Sometimes I do this. Sometimes I do that. Sometimes I want to find out every tiny little detail of the incident. The other time I only want to talk about the proces to ensure that next time the same incident won’t happen again. To be short: let us keep on communicating. I’ll tell you what I’m doing. You tell me when something happens you don’t like.

Mission statement. Next to the 360-degree feedback a personal mission statement had to be made. I've been thinking a lot about it. One statement came back every time: "Fatherhood". For me this is the only meaningful image and metaphor of my life. Biological father to my children: one who gives and receives love, someone who teaches them ... and then set them free. Father to my staff: someone who gives priorities, makes decisions and takes care that the show goes on when I am gone.

On old stuff or Playmate of the year 1323 BC

Old stuff: old stories, old things, old maps, old landscapes and old people. That's what I like. I don't dislike the modern world or new stuff - I simply don't.

I love to look at the old stains, old cracks and wrinkles ... on all the properties that things or human beings get by getter older. Much older. Things that once were fostered, a few generations later neglected and end as "garbage" because "it's out of date".

Look at the goddess Serket. She was one of the four goddesses who stood outside the shrine of pharaoh Tutankamun' (1341 BC – 1323 BC) mummified internal organs. An unkown craftsman made this statue out of wood more than 3.000 years ago. Look at her! Look at her face, nose, breasts, belly and hips.

In my country 'homo sapiens' was making spareheads out of stone, put the ashes of their deads in cookingpots and burried them and were (totally?) unaware of any alphabet or written records. And in old Egypt? Some crafts(wo)man made a lovely goddess out of wood. A goddess that almost lives behind her gold coating. For me she is so real, so lifelike ... so much more interesting than a lot of worlds most highlisted "beautiful woman of the world". Why? It must be the wrinkles.

For man only: womanlike questioning & manlike problemsolving

It took me (a male) a long time. One universe. One planet Earth. One god. One democracy. One life. One species 'homo sapiens'. It took me a long time realizing that man and woman talk differently. For a long time - in retrospect too long - my assumption was that man and woman communicate exactly alike. I learned it the hard way that we don't communicate alike.

Man listen in a conversation to identify "what is the problem?". Woman listen in a conversation to find out "what is the question?" Example: my wife comes home from her work to complain about her boss. When I "listen" to her from a male point of view I'll ask question after question to peel off what the "key problem" is & finally proudly presenting her how to solve the problem. After done so I'll find out to my greatest surprise that she is dissatisfied with our conversation because "I didn't listen to her". Leaving me behind in wonder and being frustrated "Why?".

How to solve this - this is indeed manlike problemsolving? Listen to her. Really listen to her. A woman doesn't want to have her problems solved. She is perfectly capable doing that herself! She wants to talk to a man as she talks to a woman-friend. Question after question. Sharing the same old stories you heard at least a thousand times.

For man only. A woman doesn't want to have her problems solved. A woman wants to blow of steam! Listen to her. Ask questions. Listen. Give only your solution to the problem if she begs you to tell her your point of view.

Dance. Dance with you in this dance of loneliness

The music I listen to is filled with songs in which the singer shares his or her emotions of love. Listen to Ana Carolina 'Mais que isso', Luiza Possi 'Coração de papel', Chiara Civello 'Un passo dopo l'atro' or Maria Mena 'Just hold me'. 4 songs that touch my heart. Make me sentimental. Make me fragile. Thinking and dreaming of the ones that I once loved so deeply and the ones I love right now. Dreams of meu princesa distante. Everything passes. This includes falling in love with another human being. What is left if falling in love fades or faded away?

What I don't understand is how the singer feels if she sings for the 467th time 'Mais que isso'. Since 4 years I'm listening to the music of Ana Carolina. Listening and feeling the emotions of Ana Carolina. Wondering if the lover she talks about is still there? Was it a him or a her? Did they ever become a couple? Are they still a couple? Does Ana Carolina still dream of him/ her?

I'm wondering if the singer still thinks of the one she thought of when she originally wrote the song? Is it healing if you sing a song for the 467th time? Or just the opposite? My heart would break if I have to but how does a "professional" singer deal with that? Life is more than music on a CD or a song sang but what happens to Ana Carolina, Luiza, Chiara and Maria when those 2 worlds meet. Two worlds? When the "professional" singer sings on stage (world 1) her own most intimate song (world 2). First few times bit nervous I presume. What does she feel when it's the 467th time? What does she feel when the lover she sings about is passed long ago and replaced 5 times by another newer lover? What's my point?

Question: What does a professional singer feel singing a very private and intimate self written song of a love that passed - a song that's so successful and that has to be sang everytime on stage. Indifferent? Professional? Filled with gratitude? Embarrassed? Filled with love? A mixture? Or ...

Cursed, coined & crusified. Footnote on a song

Listen to the instrumental song 'Cursed, coined & crusified' from Gorky's Zygotic Mynci.

Did you listen? Where does the cursing starts? Any sounds of coining? Anyone hear the sounds of a hammer nailing someone on a cross?

'Cursing, coining & crusified'? Who are they talking about? About JC? JC as Jesus Christ of Nazareth ... but he was first cursed after that crusified and finally coined. It can't be him. JC as Julius Ceasar ... but he was coined first, after that cursed and killed but never crusified. It can't be him. I have no idea who they are talking about. Is there somewhere in history someone who was cursed first, made it then to the top and became coined and finally literally crusified on a cross? Spartacus ... but he wasn't coined. It can't be him. I have no idea about the history of crusifying and (worldwide?) use of this instrument of deliberatly let another human being slowly die.

Or is it only a joke? Is it a mirror? Is it an invitation to all of us to reconsider the way human beings ('homo sapiens') treat other human beings? If we skipp the christian terminology and translate it into "our" hedonistic and egocentric terminology of 2009. What would the title of the song be:"You are a stranger & I hate you by bias. I love you as myself. &Fuck up"?