Envy of the Good Kind

There is an concept in Spanish, used by Mexicans, called "good kind of envy". Many argue that envy is envy and as such it's a negative emotion, so there is no "good kind" of it. However, when you interact enough with people from Mexico, or immerse yourself in Mexican Culture in any other way, you start to understand the feeling that lies behind this seemingly contradictory term.

Envy is usually paired with some sort of malice. You want someone someone else has, and as result you wish the person that has it to suffer or lose the given thing. Envy makes you have negative feelings for the person you envy. In the lightest of cases, envy makes you feel bad about yourself for not what having the coveted item. But what happens when you don't have that kind of negative feeling attached to the wanting of the item?

It is possible to want something someone else has or someone else enjoys and also feel happy for the person, or feeling good about yourself for the prospect of maybe getting that too. You experience good kind of envy when something good happens to someone you love. A loved one gets an amazing job, or wins a raffle, or goes on a superb trip, wins an award or a scholarship. This can be things you wish for yourself too, but it doesn't make you bitter that someone you love has gotten them. It makes you happy for them.

The concept of "good kind of envy" is buit upon the community feeling, where you can honestly be happy for others, enjoy the success of others, and share other people's happiness. A world too concentrated on individualism, where everything is reduced to a "zero summ" formula, with an us vs them mentality, this concept is alien, incomprehensible. But if we begin to see others as equal to us, and further realize that we are all equiped with the same emotions, then maybe we will also get to feel this good kind of envy. I know I'll keep believing in this concept with all my heart.

Pretense or Facts

Image is an important component of today's world. Many organizations and people devote a lot of time and resources to perfect their image and project with it the type of message to the world that they believe works better for their goals. It's kind of funny, when you think that the actions of whatever you want to be recognize, and the fruits of your effort should be the ones naturally creating that image. You want to reflect a certain attitude-likeability-level of success, you want to look like you have achieved something important. However, it happens today that everything needs to be aggrandized, hyped and exaggerated in order to get the message through and make it look worthy. Modest achievement - no matter the level of effort behind it - is not attention worthy.

If you look at influencers, they seem to have these ever-moving milestones that soon balloon into insane statistics and challenges and accumulation of whatevers that... can be faked. Amount of subscriptors can be faked, views can be faked, tricks can be used to get unaware or curious audience pulled to watch something that's not what it claims to be, and content can also be produced to take advantage of trends and build an image of being trendy.

Source: Property of
Stormberry

The thing that drives me to the keyboard today is bullet journaling. I hope I don't need to explain what bullet journaling is, but just in case, it's using a regular notebook as a planner/notebook, where you write down for yourself, in whatever shape and form it fits you, all your to dos, appointments, ideas and such. It's an all in one, and you make it as you need it. Kind of like a no-rules kind of planner.

Bullet journaling has become trendy and has dripped out of the planner communities and soon was in the messenger bag of any influencer that whishes to look independent, enterpreneuring, creative and what-not. Yes, it can be a great tool for just about anyone, but it's not for all. And it's great when you see more and more people showing the idea - specially one that, for once, actually doesn't cost much - but then there are risks too.

A bullet journal is supposed to keep you organized, to remain on top of your priorities. The bullet journal, as a thing of trend, is a tool used for enhancing your social network image. It's beautified or perched up in this or that way to reflect the type of lifestyle you want your audience to imagine. Instead of a tool for organization, it becomed a bulleting board of art and a display of a particular kind of life. Does it work as a tool of organization? Well, I can't be the judge of that. I would certainly miss my tasks amid the collage of barista coffee pictures, tea tabs and washi tape displays. That's me, though. I like tight and cramped (and colorful, so I can spot by color the topics amid the tight blocks of text). Surely, minds are different and some might like putting together foreplanning with notes of the day. A sort of planner+journal, which surely makes the bujo they keep a better record of their lives. But then again, often what we see is a notebook carefully curated to be IG-postable.

Is that wrong? Not at all, as long as people looking at it know it is an artistic rendering. See, the problem with the augmented images of today is precisely that: the audience loses touch with reality, and fall into an empty image, place their trust and their believe into something that's not real. I have known of influencers who recommend twenty books and have read none. People who advise others on this or that life practice that they themselves do not follow. The most recent: people who go big on bullet journals, recommed the system up and down, and yet do not keep their appointments, make promises they don't deliver on, rope others into projects that never go past the proposal, are constantly late or rescheduling (often because they reschedule an appointment that has been agreed on in advance, but they prefer to take a meeting that just came up), and use the bullet journal and the task lists in it to justify (excuse) how busy they are.

This thing I recently knew of about someone, made me realize that this is also something a lot of people do. There are people who like to create the image of success or efficiency or cosmopolitan life that does not really fit with who they are and how they live. They are always troubled with something, but constantly tell others how blessed they are, and whenever they have to actually answer for the image their have created - show those amazing skills at organizing a trip, pull those contacts to create an event, put together the plan for that class in that topic they are the best at - there's always something that alas, keeps them from showing their greatness.

The dangers of this is the effect of the disappointment. The system of believes of the audience take a blow, and suddenly cloaks in the light of fakery other people that might actually be doing things honestly. The effect of the disappointment can even taint the system, the book, the skill sets and anything related to the offered or promoted image, making people walk away from something that might actually be good for them. Specially in the cases of novelties, where the amount of third hand experience might be limited.

With so many aggrandized images of everything bombarding us, where there is a strong perception gap created between "regular people" and known people, between audience and infuencers, these hyped constructions set a large peopulation in the road for disappointment. Here, as a witch, I advise everybody to take everything with a grain of salt, think things through, don't believe all you hear and wait to have as much information as you can gather before you pass judgment on some topics.

Deckle Edges

Before you ask, this year I have not bought as many books as last year. Compared to this point of the year. Well, I think. I wasn't in Hungary this year, so yeah, my book-purchase so far is still low. Of course, that doesn't mean that I will stop buying (or reading) books. I think it's more likely that I get off buying food than buying books.

When it comes to books, I don't discriminate between books on paper and e-books. Yes, some I like to have in physical format, specially if the topic is one I would like not only to highlight but also to make annotations on, and possibly reference in the future. History, philosophy, politics, economics, religion are usually among the subjects I prefer to have on physical format. Others I like more on e-book format, such as books on a language I'm learning (German) as Kindle allows me to have the meaning or translation of a word just by tapping it. In the case of LGTBQ+ romance books, having them on e-book format is more convenient, truth to be told. As for the rest, whatever format it comes in and is more convenient for me (cheaper, available) is what I pick.

Source: Google Image Search

Regarding the physical books, I usually tend to prefer paperback books because they tend to be cheaper and are less heavy than hardcovers. And for someone who destroys books the way I do (by jamming them into my bag), paperback is always better. In general, the format of the book and the binding of the book are not very important for me. Sure, I also judge a book by the cover, but I only buy it if the blurb convinces me, or if I already know the author and I know I can blindly trust them (a.k.a. Arnaldur Indriðason). However, a couple of years back I discovered a thing I can't stand when it comes to physical books: deckle edges.

I'm not sure, but I think the first time I came across a book with deckle edges was during my trip to Salem, Massachusetts. I was checking books at a bookstore (what else would I be doing?), and I found a book I found interesting. It was a hardcover, with nice, sturdy cover (the kind that's usually bound in linen, not paper), dust jacket, and as I turned it, the endges of the pages were uneven. I found it odd and ugly, because clearly a lot of throught and process had gone into making the covers and the dust jacket, and then the edges of the longer side of the page were rough. It was an instant pet peeve.

Source: Google Image Search

First I thought the book was defective, but then I saw that all other copies were just like that. It didn't make sense for me, because if they wanted to cut costs, the publisher would have not gone with the hardcover or the dust jacket. Then, why go with cut edges on the shorter sides and leave the longer one with the rough, deckle edges? Well, it turns out that deckle edges are a trend, and there's people that like them. Yes, take a moment to let that sink in.

Deckle edges have been a thing that has deterred me from buying some books. Currently, I think I only have one book with deckle edges, and that would be The Beguiled. I've been going round and round with this book. I didn't want it as much as to go and pick it up from the Kindle Store, but everytime I saw it in the bookstore I wanted it. I would pick it up, hiss at the edges, then read the blurb. Damned, I really wanted it! I think I may have been courting the ugly-edged book for over half a year. It even got missing from the shelves, so when I saw it again, I thought "what the fuck", and bought it. Deckle edges and all.

Source: Google Image Search

The thing that drives me mad about these edges is the feel of it. Not only are they rough, but they feel cutting against the pads of my fingers. The unevenness of them gives a catch that's uncomfortable when you are turning the pages. For instance, normally when reading, I tend to pass the page from upper or lower side of the page, but when I open the book, I use the longer edge. Also, when a book is a page turner, usually I stick my finger between the right side page and the next, so part of the longer edge will be resting on my index finger's second minute. The roughness of these ripped pages irk me.

Sorry, I don't get the appeal. I will still buy books, but this... this just drives me up the wall. Publishers, please get over your shabby chic phase. You want my money, don't you? Then stop upsetting me with his silly edges.

Ides of March

First of all, let's celebrate the Ides of March and conmemorate the assassination of Julius Caesar. No, I'm not a member of the Cultus Deorum, mainly because a) it doesn't really go with me, and b) there is nothing as far from my nature as any sort of organized religion. And this inspite of the 75% of my gods being Roman. However, I bring forth the matter of the Ides of March and that fateful day of 44 B.C., because it is something that needs to be remembered.

I'm not very versed on Roman history (or any sort of history, really. I'm an economist, Jim, not a historian!), but from what I remember, (no, I wasn't there either), Julius Caesar was a laureated general of the Roman army, who brought much glory to the Empire and who managed to climb to power (somewhat also thanks to the legions loyal to him), and eventually reversed the republican structure of the empire and crowned himself as emperor (or Caesar). As his power grew and he was pushing the senators out of it, these found his actions unsettling and dangerous for the more "participative" form of government Rome had been advancing towards to (and themselves, let's be honest). And so, on March 15th of 44 BC, Julius Caesar was stabbed to death at the Senate.

Today's world showcases a number of powerful figures that also seek to grab power for themselves and dismantle check&balance mechanisms, take away the independency and power of other representatives and institutions, and silence or take away the power of the people they rule. A book I read recently from Madeleine Albright, titled "Fascism", gathers a recount of a handful of XX-XXI century rulers that have sought to absorbe the totality of State powers into themselves, erecting themselves as unquestionable sources of all justice and authority. After the harrowing events witnessed in the last century - and we may also add the horrors witnessed in this one - many understand the dangers of letting one person rule unchecked upon a nation. Furthermore, in a world as deeply connected as today's, political disturbances in one nation can easily ripple through the entire planet and disrupt many more.

However, as we conmemorate (those who do) this ancient religious day, in its great tragedy, we can also remember that it is also humanity's nature to rebel, to put a stop and seek to restore order. As Natura restores order in herself, Gaia regenerates and the Green Man sprouts and grows again, so humanity - as an undetachable part of nature - also follows this path. Dictators, tyrants and Caesar's rise up from time to time, but as humanity comes fed up, as a Senate we raise and strike them down (hopefully not through murder, though, but through law and/or pressure).

The mean is dark, I know, but as in Tarot the card of Death is one of change, I would like to offer this ancient, painted card to the world to remind them, on this day of blood, that we are the Senate and we are the ones that can change the things wee don't like about our countries and their politics.

Please, do feel free to correct me on any of the afore mentioned historical data, or expand on it. I'd love also to learn more about it.

Live and Let Live

One of my "staples" in video consumption has recently become watching people talk about cults, life in cults and their system of believes. I guess it's due to my location and the culture in which I am immersed, but nearly all of this stories pertain people leaving Mormon groups or Jehova Witnesses or the like. Save for the few well publicized people leaving Scientology, most stories come from these more extreme christian groups. 

The last video of this sort that I watched was from a girl who left one of this groups, but started explaining the case with an example, where the church's position was taken by a husband, and the believer taking the position of a wife. She went on talking about how one restricted the other, and to which extremes went the restriction of one over the other. Then she said "but imagine that she (the believer) doesn't realize what's really happening to her and is happy and believes she is happy!". This gave me pause.

The girl doing the video clearly fought to be free from the cult and had to leave her family behind, but as she spoke of the people left behind, how they needed to be saved, I wondered if she had truly left the cult. Why does she need to save those who are actually happy in the cult? Why to try and save those who don't want to be saved because the cult offers them what they have always wanted? This made me think of the childfree movement, and how there is people who can't possibly understand that someone could be happy without children.

Her speech also made me think that this type of attitude - the imperative need to "save" others from themselves and anything we don't like for ourselves - could also be leaking into today's politics and political stances. We are not taking the time to stop and consider that something might be good for others, even if it is not good for us. We are measuring everything based on what would we want and what we like, but not as a matter of consideration for other people's feeling, other people's opinions, other people's right, and also what are really the side effects and what could really be the damage dealt to us.

Coming back to the topic of cults and other such groups (because this sort of behavior isn't exclusive of religious groups), before trying to "save" someone from them (just as we don't like being "saved" by them and their insistence to joing their group), ask them if they are happy, if they are truly happy. If they are, please don't take their happiness away. Respect them as you want to be respected.