What to let go of

I'm continuing to do surprisingly well -- enough so that, even when I hit a few hiccups in my hopes every now and then, it doesn't seem to be hurting me too much. Which actually occasions a little introspection, because I'm surprised that I *am* doing as well as I am. Why is that?

One of the basic principles of Buddhism is that misery arises from attachment -- that our unhappiness generally comes from our expectations not being met, from loss, and so on. I think that's at the core here, but forces me to ask how. I mean, my attachment to Jane was deep and abiding: in a very real sense, I've been defined by our relationship. The person I was can't simply let go of that.

And that's the key. I've been realizing the language that I've been using with myself in recent months, and it's very consistent: it all boils down to the simple fact that the person I was essentially died with Jane. I think that's more literally true than I'd been giving it credit for. It's not that I've let go of Jane -- it's that I've let go of *myself*.

That was more accidental than intentional, but it's curiously therapeutic. Somewhere along the line, I really internalized the notion that my life ended in January. The result is that I'm not so much picking up the pieces as starting over -- finding and building a new person. It's not from scratch, by any means, but all assumptions are on now on the table, and there's something very freeing about that. I have no idea where I'm going to wind up, but walking that path is strangely refreshing. And while I will undoubtedly eventually develop attachments that I am afraid to lose, for now I find that fear is remarkably boiled away...

What to let go of

I'm continuing to do surprisingly well -- enough so that, even when I hit a few hiccups in my hopes every now and then, it doesn't seem to be hurting me too much. Which actually occasions a little introspection, because I'm surprised that I *am* doing as well as I am. Why is that?

One of the basic principles of Buddhism is that misery arises from attachment -- that our unhappiness generally comes from our expectations not being met, from loss, and so on. I think that's at the core here, but forces me to ask how. I mean, my attachment to Jane was deep and abiding: in a very real sense, I've been defined by our relationship. The person I was can't simply let go of that.

And that's the key. I've been realizing the language that I've been using with myself in recent months, and it's very consistent: it all boils down to the simple fact that the person I was essentially died with Jane. I think that's more literally true than I'd been giving it credit for. It's not that I've let go of Jane -- it's that I've let go of *myself*.

That was more accidental than intentional, but it's curiously therapeutic. Somewhere along the line, I really internalized the notion that my life ended in January. The result is that I'm not so much picking up the pieces as starting over -- finding and building a new person. It's not from scratch, by any means, but all assumptions are on now on the table, and there's something very freeing about that. I have no idea where I'm going to wind up, but walking that path is strangely refreshing. And while I will undoubtedly eventually develop attachments that I am afraid to lose, for now I find that fear is remarkably boiled away...

Your Highness

A few of us just went to see the current film Your Highness. Capsule review: it wasn't as bad as I expected.

Now, that's a pretty low bar to crawl over, and no one should take this as some sort of real recommendation. I don't feel that I wasted my money or time, but I'm easily amused.

In discussing the movie, we agreed that it read like a D&D campaign crossed with a renfair, with a sense of humor that is just a bit more lowbrow than South Park. Indeed, if they'd targeted a few more of the jokes at the over-13 crowd, it would clearly have been more fun. On the plus side, Natalie Portman essentially wanders in from a completely different and much more earnest movie, and the interactions between her character (equally stereotyped, but much more serious) with the rest of the cast provides an incongruous note that is sometimes pretty funny.

Overall, though, there's no particular reason to see it aside from the fact that there's an overall dearth of decent-looking movies to provide a better alternative...

Your Highness

A few of us just went to see the current film Your Highness. Capsule review: it wasn't as bad as I expected.

Now, that's a pretty low bar to crawl over, and no one should take this as some sort of real recommendation. I don't feel that I wasted my money or time, but I'm easily amused.

In discussing the movie, we agreed that it read like a D&D campaign crossed with a renfair, with a sense of humor that is just a bit more lowbrow than South Park. Indeed, if they'd targeted a few more of the jokes at the over-13 crowd, it would clearly have been more fun. On the plus side, Natalie Portman essentially wanders in from a completely different and much more earnest movie, and the interactions between her character (equally stereotyped, but much more serious) with the rest of the cast provides an incongruous note that is sometimes pretty funny.

Overall, though, there's no particular reason to see it aside from the fact that there's an overall dearth of decent-looking movies to provide a better alternative...