(no subject)

[hexpiritus.livejournal.com]

Some questions, if I may:

1) I am confused as to the level of strong responses to my previous post containing the Hofstadter quote. Though I was expecting a lively discussion, there seemed to be a level of hostility or annoyance that I was not prepared for-- I may be mistaken, of course. In any case, was it the quote itself that aggravated people? Is quotes discouraged on this forum, or is only quotes directly pertaining to multiplicity alone allowed, and not quotes that may be indirectly related? Should I have stated my intentions concerning posting the quote in this community so as to have cleared up confusion before it began? Cata keeps claiming that we were being attacked somehow, but I find no firm, logical evidence of her assumption, and so would really like to get to the heart of the matter.

2) Though I have posted previously, albeit a while go, on the innerworkings of our system, it seems recent events and abilities within may have changed the appropriate identification of our processes-- at least for the purposes of such communities that require correct identification. We have always thought of ourselves as multiple/plural for two years, but the ability that's arisen where we integrate at will, and usually safely, to combine consciousness and skills, and then separate, may put us in the "median" category. I'd really like some feedback on the particular division with multiple and median.

3) My significant other, also a multiple, is stressed and alarmed that two of the entities within their system has walked out on them (let's call them the Elf-Star). A shaman-type woman claims that one of the entities that was once in the Elf-Star, which they just referred to as Phoenix, is now in her. Is that possible, that entities can walk out of one body and right into another?

Thanks for your patience.
-Stel of Hexpiritus

Comments

[appadil.livejournal.com]

I'm coming at this from a slightly different perspective thanks to recent discussions I had about literary criticism... authorial intent vs. reader response... You know the Robert Frost poem, The Road Not Taken? According to the author, it actually isn't about anything more than what it seems on the surface, choosing between two roads in the woods. There's no intended statement about life, no deep philosophical insights, and yet people still keep finding them.

And they aren't wrong. Just because they weren't intended doesn't mean they aren't there. Reading and listening aren't about passively receiving a message, they're about the meeting between reader and author, listener and musician. Each performance, each reading is unique to the recipient. It's not about what they put into it, but about what you take away from it...

I've got a list of quotes from various places which are somehow spiritually important for me, little bits of insight that just struck a chord somehow. Some of them were probably intended that way, some of them weren't, but it doesn't matter because they have significance to me. My attitude towards Hexpiritus and that quote is similar-the quote to you is about what you know deep down it's about, even if someone else knows it differently. It may not have been written to be about the experience of multiplicity or anything, but if it works for someone, great. Meaning is where you find it.

Or something like that.