Untitled

   

How to approach this subject if not waiting for any number of years, and likely if saying it, whether it were one of any countless numbers in saying or not saying from a given experience.

How easy is it to stray into redundancies?  How easy it to relate a common experience that others would find in disparaging terms, or so often speaking of a common issue, and this leading to a series of strikes in comment.  At this point, humorously I think I may have spent the better part of some ten minutes, writing while framing the construction of an idea, but feeling my way around the idea that I would intend in framing, an emotional plea, conveying an experience.  In such defensive posture, for it seems this way in some manner of honesty, maybe there is too much of a barrier in the posture itself, that is without outright saying it, as is common by some affectation, some convention which prevents one from saying so.

Experience and social isolation

If there is abject honesty again, it is in the degree of sincerity in saying so.  I am not certain that there is exactly loneliness in writing, at least for me.  At least given to some active cognition, is active enough, in the process of constant revisions, and to this degree, when constructing some meaning, if ever apparently given and seemingly lost, returning back and then relating.  Not to say with some inset experience that ever a form of digress hadn't existed, and that following clarity weren't an issue.   I think intention if it is considered to the idea of an allowed freedom, at times, isn't so much constructed to the sense of writing with the expressed sense of selling anything, or conveying an idea that is exactly one felt out by some reader in the clearer sense.  At least imagining, in such freedom, should mean imagining without the clearest sense of empirical derivation to the degree of one writing.  That is, having spoken and spoken to others, testing self born or derived ideas by others.  Not haphazard, although one might see such a creative process as haphazard, and in this way I relate what it is that an individuality does in the process of an independence in doing so.  Testing ideas by others, is one given to the likely condition that were more or less communed upon, the idea of sharing an idea with others or that in such a craft arose, for instance, a character from a novel, an idea that weren't born in a vacuum, or at least as obviously stated, that ever any experience should have vacuous origins.  Here I am led to reconsider that an assertion weren't readily tested by way of some logical contradiction, some thought example, for instance, that contradicts a given claim, however often one might be engaged in the process of doing so repeatedly.  As given likely this sort of free form testing, as one should imagine, is like a right brain constantly being tested by a left brain, and existential construction is left somewhere in a middle region, a given compromise of sorts in the active consideration of thoughts.  I am not certain to revise the header, even if it hadn't seemed as obviously clear, but that in action I am found neither with certainty to the idea of where social isolation exists, but more certain that acquired experience had crafted this.  To this degree, at times, there almost seems an invocation by words of choice here, and in this sense emotion that might be encountered, although at times, this may likewise not be true, or that one may feel as lonely as one has allowed oneself in some manner.  Albeit, I would feel comfortable refraining in certainty, or at least in concession.

Meaning?

This header serves as a counter point, or the construction of a self query, whether this were something of self doubt that leads one to a given...words are sparing again in careful consideration.

Too soon and not too far removed?

This is another pitfall, among an imagined multitude of pitfalls.  Obviously returning to the point of freedom, one continuity leads into another, and careful self deliberation.  

Switching the voice

And identity?  Again not certain of this so much in a clearer way.  Obviously, if one can speak with consistent voicing...it is why one learns through some manner of devised self testing that irony falls flat in some way if a flow between logical styles is disruptive to the degree of clarity.   How does one develop a sense over time in using any one particular device by natural extension without relying upon a given social test, for instance.  That is, testing an idea to the degree that someone scratches one's head, or a critic.  Whether this is given to an abundance of writing, an over exertion, overly thinking one's writing.

Straying from convention

I've written about this in so many words before.  In another way, the idea seems provokes something of disliking.  As if too often by way of convention, the writer appeals to the sensibility in producing a product while railing against being identified as a product.  A style of mind is unfortunately given to this convention, is it not?  Or more so to artistic hegemony.  People pay to see the reproductions of an artist that seem artistically the art of an artist, or style that deviates, in this way is somehow the reflection of something that were less than authentic to self reproduction.  Social cultivation leads one to a given experience, refinement, and set social expectation.  Invariably in the modern age, this could be to the laughable charge, 'hipsters' something, or at least hopefully a cute self righteous affectation.  So much the peril, to social deviations here...granted this is tolerable for film makers...you can after all direct, The Incredible Hulk, and still produce a fine art film.

 Please refrain from publication for a time on this one

Should this be more obvious.  This is merely something like an ice breaker, or relaxation of mind when all seems to serious about the world.