| Thursday, April 29, 2004 |
|
Emotions
e·mo·tion [n.]
1. A mental state that arises spontaneously rather than through conscious effort and is often accompanied by physiological changes; a feeling: the emotions of joy, sorrow, reverence, hate, and love.
2. A state of mental agitation or disturbance: spoke unsteadily in a voice that betrayed his emotion. See Synonyms at feeling.
3. The part of the consciousness that involves feeling; sensibility: “The very essence of literature is the war between emotion and intellect” (Isaac Bashevis Singer).
"It's just emotions taken me over
Caught up in sorrow, lost in my soul"
This song plays in my head nowadays when I think about emotions, feelings. I think it's called Emotions by Destiny's Child. I hardly ever listen to secular music anymore; somehow the appeal is just lost. Somehow this remnant of my radio-listening days floated up into my consciousness recently. Of course I only think of emotions when I'm in one of my funky moods and tell myself, It's just emotions. They're not reliable! Only God is.
Emotions. Interesting stuff. One of the things that defines humanity. Of course there is also the ability to think and reason logically, but technology can do a lot of that now. Technology, however, cannot feel, and neither can animals (though some swear animals do feel; I have no idea myself). Even the state of feeling emotionless is an emotion in itself.
And yet, are not emotions, afterall, base and in a sense, primitive? We cannot choose what we feel, and even to feel; we can only feel. We are sometimes taken by emotions and act impulsively. Emotions are fickle. One minute we can be feeling on top of the world and the next like our world has shattered upon our heads. We can't control them. We can, however decide how to deal with them. Perhaps that's what really separates us from other...organisms. Hmmm. (Gee, this is like a GP essay! :P)
Ah well. Just thought about this when I was setting my new mood on imood.com. It seems that the majority of people (or imood users to be specific) are tired all the time. As in, the mood that most people feel each day is 'tired'. That's rather vague actually. You can be tired in a lot of ways: physically, emotionally, mentally, spiritually.
Well...so much for that. Bedtime for me! =)
Speaking of emotions, if you need a lil' pick-me-up, go to emotioneric.com =)
|
posted by esther @ 2:01 AM  |
|
|
|
| Tuesday, April 27, 2004 |
|
Random Thoughts
Searched for people feeling 'content' on imood.com, and I find that they are mostly female. Is it an innate ability of the female gender to feel content easier? And yet I have realised that we, too, often think and analyse more than is good for us, and get irked by tiny things. Irony?
One of the people mentioned above caught my eye, mainly because he looked darn good in the photo. Visited his blog and was impressed and fascinated (yet also a little intimidated) by the highly intellectual and artistic mind behind the pretty face. Shocker: this guy was born in '87! Pity: he's gay. =P Question: I wonder if there're any guys in this little city who is like that? Someone who can impress me with his linguistic ability. Ok, I sound all hoity toity when I say that, but of all the guys I've known and know, perhaps only one has impressed me with his standard of English...and yet his grades for GP fluctuated constantly because he often used big words in the wrong context. =P I dunno. I've always had a thing for the arty (farty) type: who writes poems and verse (NOT cheesy drippy ones), reads a ton of chim books (by this I do not mean Harry Potter, thick as they come), preferably good at art and maybe even photography... Eeeks! GEEK! You scream. But I like! Haha. Oh, and he must also have a heart of gold and a heart for God. Geez. High expectations, eh? But, like I always say, love overcomes all things! And I sincerely believe that a good heart is better than a brilliant mind and/or a pretty exterior. =)
Ok, I digressed (as I often do). Anyhow, this guy's just really unique. He's talented, brilliant, arty farty, throughly nice, quite fit, and is not angry at the world as I would think people in his position might be (maybe I'm simply ignorant...afterall I don't have any gay friends!), and he's only 17. Wow. A little complacent, maybe. Haha.
Oh, did I mention that he's a Brit? I have a thing for Brits. I dunno. It's the accent, maybe. I love Brit authors, who often beat around the bush a lot getting to the point, but the way there is fun and interesting. Europeans too, and Australians, New Zealanders (oooh xP)...just not Americans. I don't mean to be racist or anything. I can't quite explain it. Maybe I've bought into the picture of America being the greedy, big-bad-wolf superpower. Well, in my mind, American has sort of become mainstream (largely) and I have this streak in me that goes against the mainstream, even though in person I'm hardly the avant garde.
Ah well. |
| posted by esther @ 8:16 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
The Survey Junkie Strikes! *grin*
"It is the chiefest point of happiness that a man is willing to be what he is."
| You are Desiderius Erasmus!
You have great love for others and will do just about anything to show it to them. You are tolerant
and avoid confrontations, so people generally are drawn to you. You are more quiet and reserved in
front of strangers, but around some people you open up. When things get tough, you like to meditate
alone. Unfortunately you often get things like "what a pansy," or "you're such a liberal."
|
What theologian are you?
A creation of Henderson
Which Historical Lunatic Are You?
From the fecund loins of Rum and Monkey.
"Born in England sometime in the second decade of the nineteenth century, you carved a notable business career, in South Africa and later San Francisco, until an entry into the rice market wiped out your fortune in 1854. After this, you became quite different. The first sign of this came on September 17, 1859, when you expressed your dissatisfaction with the political situation in America by declaring yourself Norton I, Emperor of the USA. You remained as such, unchallenged, for twenty-one years.
Within a month you had decreed the dissolution of Congress. When this was largely ignored, you summoned all interested parties to discuss the matter in a music hall, and then summoned the army to quell the rebellious leaders in Washington. This did not work. Magnanimously, you decreed (eventually) that Congress could remain for the time being. However, you disbanded both major political parties in 1869, as well as instituting a fine of $25 for using the abominable nickname "Frisco" for your home city.
Your days consisted of parading around your domain - the San Francisco streets - in a uniform of royal blue with gold epaulettes. This was set off by a beaver hat and umbrella. You dispensed philosophy and inspected the state of sidewalks and the police with equal aplomb. You were a great ally of the maligned Chinese of the city, and once dispersed a riot by standing between the Chinese and their would-be assailants and reciting the Lord's Prayer quietly, head bowed.
Once arrested, you were swiftly pardoned by the Police Chief with all apologies, after which all policemen were ordered to salute you on the street. Your renown grew. Proprietors of respectable establishments fixed brass plaques to their walls proclaiming your patronage; musical and theatrical performances invariably reserved seats for you and your two dogs. (As an aside, you were a good friend of Mark Twain, who wrote an epitaph for one of your faithful hounds, Bummer.) The Census of 1870 listed your occupation as "Emperor".
The Board of Supervisors of San Francisco, upon noticing the slightly delapidated state of your attire, replaced it at their own expense. You responded graciously by granting a patent of nobility to each member. Your death, collapsing on the street on January 8, 1880, made front page news under the headline "Le Roi est Mort". Aside from what you had on your person, your possessions amounted to a single sovereign, a collection of walking sticks, an old sabre, your correspondence with Queen Victoria and 1,098,235 shares of stock in a worthless gold mine. Your funeral cortege was of 30,000 people and over two miles long.
The burial was marked by a total eclipse of the sun."
Woohoo! Rather cool, I'd say. =D For more on this nut, click here.
The Dante's Inferno Test has sent you to Purgatory!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Take the Dante's Inferno Test
Ok, disclaimer here: I don't believe in whatever Dante's hell, and as far as I'm concerned it's just a piece of literature. Brilliant or not I don't know, cos' I've never read it. Maybe I will. I do believe in hell (as well as heaven), but only in the hell of the Bible, the lake of burning sulphur.
I have this to say -- :P Yes, I can be dependent. But I'm learning to be wholly dependent on God. =) After all, He's the only one who is completely and always dependent...
And, lastly....
My crappy little elf name is Quimmy Merryweather.
What's yours?
Powered by Rum and Monkey. |
| posted by esther @ 5:05 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Qing Ying, you find love in a Secret Crush
Or so says Tickle.com:
"You love the crush. It's that simple. Butterflies in the stomach, blushing when they walk in the room, coming up with plausible excuses to talk to them — it's the whole fantasy that appeals to you. Maybe you like having a secret and admiring someone from afar, or perhaps you're just shy when it comes to matters of the heart. But underneath all the cloak and dagger stuff, we wouldn't be surprised if there's a passion for all things mushy and gushy. Maybe that's part of your secret too.
In or out of a relationship, you like the idea of the ideal. That's what can make it so hard to take the first step to make a crush something more — you don't want to burst that bubble. But how do you know what will happen if you don't try? Maybe some secrets aren't supposed to stay that way."
Well...partly true...ok, I admit I do think that there is something hopelessly romantic and noble and selfless about loving someone from afar...after all, if you love someone, shouldn't that person come before all your desires to be with him/her? But mostly it is that before, I was scared that the other party would run to the other end of the world if he knew, and our friendship would be ruined. Yes, it's a problem with my self-esteem. Now, I don't think there is any point in telling him anyway, because nothing can happen now. It doesn't make any difference if he likes me too; in fact it would make it even harder because we will not be together. I like the idea of the ideal? Yes, I am an idealistic person, maybe even naive. But I know when I fall in love, it will be the way I've always imagined love should be, because that's a promise from my God.
I am an idealistic, hopelessly hopeful romantic! =D |
| posted by esther @ 2:32 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
Joan of Arc
Yep, I watched it. The one with Leelee Sobieski, when she was only 17. It was good! Excellent script writing and acting. Thought-provoking, moving. Though I cannot say I believe her 'voices' were real and truly from God, I believe she ardently, sincerely believed in her mission, and that she was doing it for God. And she had the courage and determination to carry it through right to the end, because she believed.
Because she believed. The weight of those words! Belief, faith. Sometimes I find myself so short on it, when times are hard and the future seems a blank. Yet always, I am drawn back to my God. My true prince! Speaking of prince...
There was this character, a Jean DeMetz (or De Metz..whatever), who was at first a cad -- asking Joan if she'd like to be a 'plaything' of soldiers when she first stumbled out of an animal cart in her first step to accomplish her mission, but whose character gradually developed and became mature.
No, he wasn't a prince, only a lowly soldier, but his character, at the end, does reflect that of a prince, or what I would think reflect that of one, anyway. =P This Jean (say 'John') had a sort of ambiguous friendship with Joan. He was the one who first spoke to her, who seemed the closest out of the other soldiers. He stuck with her. To the end, he was loyal and faithful. He was also strong yet gentle. Dependable. He could strike down an enemy on the field, but cry tears for fallen comrades, and return bravely to battle. Vulnerable and sensitive.
It was only when the producers put these words on the screen at the end, "Jean DeMetz never married," that I realised they had wanted this friendship to take a romantic slant. He believed Joan, in Joan, and did his all to support and protect her, while respecting her vision. At the stake, she asked that a crucifix be placed at her eye level, and no one responded. He wrenched one from a guard and carried it for her while she was being burnt to death. He knew that she was dying willingly for God and he respected it, while his heart broke. He never asked for any sort of commitment from her. Their friendship was so innocent and pure, the furthest he went was to touch her face while she was in prison because she did not respond to his words.
And he never married! Of course there would be nothing wrong if he had married. But he loved her so much his heart could not hold another to that extent. That's like, wow. It made me think, in our fast-food world, where one-night stands are not so rare and where the value of a kiss has almost evaporated, are there still guys who would be so respectful, honourable and faithful? Guys who are consecrating themselves for God and their future wives?
Funny, I've never really doubted that there will be godly men who are like that before. Why now? Hmm. Am I becoming jaded? =P No, I have no reason to doubt. There will be! There are guys in my church who are already doing that now, just that I'm not interested, and anyway, I'm not even ready! But who knows what will happen in the future? Only God. There are infinite possibilities! :D
Of course, nobody can ever hope to compare to Jesus, who even looking pathetic, dirty and half-dead on the cross is more beautiful than any human or angel. Who loves me more than anybody can every imagine. And, hey! He's mine! Just as I am His. Wow...
I'm content. =] |
| posted by esther @ 1:23 AM |
|
|
|
| Wednesday, April 21, 2004 |
|
Oh yeah I just thought of something...
Quite recently, I rediscovered the webpage of an old ICQ friend I used to talk to when I was 13 and he was 16. Somewhere along the way, we somehow stopped talking. I forgot why, and I don't have any record of our conversations as they're all stored in the old PC at my mom's shop.
You must be thinking, hmm, so what? He must be special.
Yes, he was, and still is, special, to me. You know some people just leave their imprints on you even if they're no longer dominant or even present in your life. You just can't forget them.
He was incredibly strong, or so it seemed to me. And beautiful too, though as I've re-read some of his journal entries from those days (he puts them up on his webpage), he said that people tell him he is strong, and beautiful, and attractive physically, and he did not think so. He wrote that he thinks they think so because they see their own beauty reflected off him, and think it is him who is giving it off.
Yeah, you're thinking, Hurh...
I don't really understand either, but well. He managed to recover from anorexia! I still think it's very admirable, and I looked up to him a lot. He always listened and seemed so understanding. Yeah, I guess I had a little kiddie crush on him. I did think he was cute, physically.
I don't know why I never thought of checking his ICQ info until that day; it was just there the whole time. He never comes on ICQ anymore, of course, but he's still on my list. Anyhow, I wrote him this email, telling him about all that I said above, and he hasn't replied. Hmm. It doesn't matter I guess. I'm grateful enough to have known someone so special in the course of my life. =) |
| posted by esther @ 7:11 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
HUH!
Ok, I've not posted for I-can't-remember-how-long. Imagine my shock when I come back to post something and I see a while different format -- the title of this blog was my reaction exactly as it was...
Well well well. Lately, I just don't really feel like blogging much anymore...and so much has happened that I am in no position to divulge on the World Wide Web. So...hmmm. *shrugs*
I suddenly thought of posting about Good Friday, when I sang for my church's production, but ah..that was 2 weeks ago!
Ah well. Till whenever, then. :P
"Our hearts are kind of like dumb puppies that need leashes and training and smacks on the nose to keep them in line. Will I ever learn?" -- a fellow female blogger |
| posted by esther @ 7:04 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
