be. here. now.

Which I agree with, I too have regurgitated the same wisdom in and around essays in this book. The core of it is what a Buddha said:

if the past and the future exists, where are they?

The past doesn't exists, it only exists as a collection of events called memory.  The future will never exist, only because, we haven't live it, and when we do, the 'future' becomes the now.

I agree with that.

But,

Not entirely.

I can only object to it by propositioning you with a scenario:

Imagine you just got hit by a bus.

At that moment, you get up and realise your predicament, that moment dictates your future and that moment was brought about by a sequence of past events.  It would be foolish not to look back and assess the events, any good analytical mind has to do that, in order to learn, and learning prepares us not to repeat the same mistakes.

So,

at that moment you realise you got hit by the bus, the now doesn't exists, the past is relived to understand how this now is going to be and most importantly what the future nows will be.

I rest my case.

But, this is all relative, truth.

It is a new year and with that newness, there is a compelling sense of being that makes anymore, well most of us, feel like a dawn of a new beginning, a new adventure, a new journey.

Each beginning of a year fascinates me for that reason,

… a collective sense of newness.

Which is strange because from a time perspective there is no difference between any given time — it is our interpretation of that change, of the movement of a second that gives us seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years, decades, centuries — don't believe me?

Chinese new year

Alas, I cannot pretend I don't sense this moment — this moment of feeling that, this is the year were all your dreams are realised and all your fears disappear.

I suspect it is, as the architect from The Matrix put it:

hope.

Aluta, Continua.

… something has to be said if a government, elected by the people, continiously makes the wrong decisions, which are not of the interest of the people but the state itself.

By this I mean, why is it that we (the people) have to campaign, rally, protest, just to get the state, which we elected, to do our bidding and most importantly, to stop them from doing what we don't find to be right and just?

The current things on the table are:

1. protection of information bill
2. occupy movement
3. sopa

These three things are all about trying to get the state to do what is of interest to the people, but these states, the governments, are trying to push ahead with them, it makes no sense to me. I am willing to go as far as to say:

… this democracy, we have, doesn't work — it asks us to elect those who are going to represent us, but in the end, they don't represent us, and we have to keep reminding them, what is it we want from them to do.

That has to change.

What really upsets me, is the passing of the POIB and SOPA lacks the basis of logic, reason and it is unjustifiable, but these people who represent us, seem to lack the basic capability to see the flaws in these bills.  It is disturbing, it is annoying, it is dissapointing, and yet we have such a phrase as:

… political science.

Aluta, Continua.

Yes, that is a rare thing to do these days.

But, I have been thinking. I have been thinking of renaming this book, or, rather, expand this book. Instead of it saying:

a collection of essays by nkoane, lebogang.

I am thinking of making it read:

… a collection of ideas, thoughts and sometimes rants.

By that, I mean, I want to change the direction of this book into more of a collective space. Asking a few people I know that would like to contribute their thoughts on, anything, less ranting though, but more 'bout ideas of the world we live in.

In a way, seeking to share and exchange the big ideas.

Why? You might ask, well here is the thing, one of the things that pisses me off — wait let me list them all first:

1. The single narrative — through the time I spend on social-media sites, such as facebook and twitter; there is this single-narrative that comes up. They do really piss me off, because I don't belong in that 'school of thought', but that thought is peddled like weed at a ragga night. It overwhelms, it dominates, but it is not a narrative of us all, but of a few empty drums.
2. Secondly, if the stats still stand: less than 10% of all academic knowledge in South Africa does comes black intelligentsia. Which is odd, considering most my friends hold at the least 2 degrees. Why so few?
3. There is more ranting than there is exploration — to rant, is good at times, but ranting rarely creates new ideas or new thought patterns to entertain over a glass of wine;
4. and second last, we just don't document the possible meanings of experiences — especially creative critique. To put this into perspective here is a simple question: what is the definition of kwaito from a purist-musical perspective?
5. and lastly, our experiences are not only in visual format or auditory sensations but thoughts; I am of the school of thought that our thoughts are silent, only making noise in our own heads; so the new direction will involve mostly the written word— in long-form, which might be counter-established considering tweets and status-updates are popular — wait, isn't twitter and facebook becoming the mindlessness that TV shows were designed to put as at?
6. oh, addendum, it won't be re-actionary; that is to say if someone calls someone by their skin-colour, we won't flood the book with our immediate reaction, we will do what they thaught us in school: think, rethink it, then speak, well, write it.  Some of the things that happen become clearer a bit later, e.g: the 'celebrity' reaction to Amy Winehouse: most cursed 'drug abuse', but,  only a few weeks later it was clear it wans't illegal drunks that contributed to her death.

In the greater scheme of things, what is driving me more towards this direction is from a quote I can't remember who said it, but I have booked-and-marked it somewhere I can't reach:

… the biggest problem in the world is that, not enough people are working on the biggest problems facing the world.

As, aloof as that might sound, here is a question I have been asking myself since I learnt to be non-violent:

Why can't we just get along? Why are we striving for peace, if indeed we are inherently all good? Shouldn't it be harder to be in conflict than it is to be at peace?

I think it is a simple enough idea — just to so you know, what YG&B won't be about:

1. it is not thought-leadership; I believe that concept got derailed as soon as Mail&Gurdian started pushing it — I am yet to read an entire Thought-Leader blog post; nothing new but mostly baseless opinions; behind-the-phone-screen made philosophers with no authority on the subject matter;
2. Secondly, which will be good — it won't be so 'self-serving'; a broad perspective on this world, will be good, in allowing at the very least, an opportunity for me to gain new perspectives;
3. The topics will be varied, but they will be centred in and around obscure not-so-popular topics such as life, science, philosophy, art, music and maybe design: what does it all mean for the 7 billion minds on this rock?
4. I will be looking for people with a keen sense of cerebration — that is to say, those of us who read between the lines and continuously doubt our own conclusions of the truth that lies within those, sniffed, lines.

I will also have to rethink the Black in YG&B, I think — although, I would quite like to keep the irony of it, yé? That should raise some eyebrows.

Alas, what do you think? Is it an idea worth doing?

Silence, means consent.

I can't seem to prove if there is a self or if there isn't, but I am more certain that there isn't a 'self' but I don't have enough reasoning to prove it to be so, but I have analogy.

Imagine if a person having died and somebody asks whilst pointing at the [dead] body:

who or what killed him?

My question is:

What is the 'him', that is referred to or rather inferred by pointing at the non-living organism?

Theologians would argue that the self we refer to is the 'soul' and the human body is just a vessel that the soul 'lives' through.  If this is true, then it also implies these bodies we are 'living' through are just that, bodies, they are not us, but

Why are we so attached to them? We define ourselves through them: I am black. I am a man. I am tall. I love my hair — in fact sometimes, would die in defence of the vessel.

I suppose this is what, António Damásio meant:

… the self cannot be meaningfully imagined without being embedded in a body."

I can agree with that, but I do think the use of the word, "imagined", is the operative word.

It is all a dream.

I haven't burnt a pixel into this screen in a long time huh?  I have had a lot to think, digest, re-think, regurgitate, but I thought I'd spare you the ramblings of a man about to lose his mind.

Wait,

… I could say I have lost my mind, but

You know what they say,

… if you lose your mind, you are not capable of acknowledging that indeed you have lost your mind.

Speaking of losing my mind, an old friend used to say,

I think I have lost my mind, which is a good thing, 'coz I saw it coming.”

I will miss her — she should be somewhere in the land of the free, by now.

Ah, well —

this is just a hello from this side of the monitor to your side.

:-)

ma mère.

I have this nagging feeling or thought that keeps interjecting every-time I tweet to rebuff someone for saying something stupid or unfounded.  I could never put a finger on what exactly it is. I think at this moment I have a break through. It could be unfounded but I think it will be best to ink it into pixels, so I can later come back to it.

The feeling or thought has to do with, age, not getting old, but being past a certain age, in this case thirty.  I think, when you reach this age — yes, I am 34 — there less bullshit you are will to entertain, but, beyond that, you are not willing to subject others to your own bullshit.

By that I don't mean, being a bore but, everything matters:

what coffee you drink; what music you subject your mind to; what drawings of light you allow you mind to envision; what words you string together into an idea, a thought or an exploration of an emotion.

Yes, sure some things might not all come out in the best way you could project them, but there is this, almost obsessive, attention to your own details.

This is merely a thought, but I have come to realise it in a lot of things I say, do and enjoy, almost as if, this nagging feeling is in-fact:

about mortality — the end is nigh — every moment must be felt and lived to its fullest.

And, because at this age, you have a lot of memory and knowledge to draw from — bullshit, actually, you can smell from a mile.

… do you ever feel the answer to a problem but can't express it in any way, shape or form?

What does is it actually mean to forgive and forget? I suppose, either way you cut it, it generally has to do with forgiving somebody/thing who/that did you wrong, and to also forget what they/it did to you.

See, you can sense what is wrong in that already, right?

If you are to forget, then how do you know what is it you had forgiven? If you are to forgive, what are you forgiving?

I suppose my argument is, it is not possible to forgive and forget. Forgiveness is routed in memory, to forget is to fail to recall what, already, is in memory.

Yeah, I know what you thinking, it's a figure of speech. That is true, but it does not make sense to use a figure of speech that does not make sense, anymore.

There was a day, I was trying to get my brother to hurry up and shouted:

Yo! Hurry up, you dress like a girl.

My mother heard that — we never went anywhere — I got a 4 hour long speech 'bout feminism, women, empowerment, equality, stereotyping and freedom.

It is a false figure of speech.

Two years, waiting.  This is the moment, I went to school for, this is the moment I enjoy the most. Not the clichéd idea of completing something —hell, this project needs more work to be done on it that the work I had to do, to get it ready.

This moment, which I call,

… the moment of creation — the moment of having created, realised an idea; bringing something into existence.

Where it will go? Will it be understood? Well, you have to speak before you can respond.

But, herein lies the irony:

… I am broke as hell. I have no idea of where and when I will be able to sustain this these projects come end of July. We shall see in front.

I threw caution to the wind end of June — I was teaching, that kept me afloat, but I no longer want to teach (one day, I'll explain why). I want to be here again:

… where I realise ideas.

It is a beautiful place to be, regardless of how windy it is outside.

As, I was saying, I read somewhere:

The greatest danger in times of turbulence is not the turbulence; it is to act with yesterday’s logic."—  Peter Drucker

If I was to read every single essay I have written here, I will realise the following;

I go through the same angst, anger, depression, fear over and over and over again.

Something has to be said about that, which is:

… I react the same way, over and over and over again — I blame all the years of living the same life.

Scientifically, if you apply the same conditions to a system, you are mostly likely, to get the same results, over and over and over again.

What I have to come to terms with, it is not so much changing my ways —I always think changing your ways is way easier than changing what it takes to change your ways— I need to find a new pattern, a rhythm, a flow, to create a chain reaction, to change.

I am of course speaking on the inherent nature of humans to fall into a pattern, a rhythm of sort, lets call it:

… rhythm of existence.

Some might call it habits; some might say, "the way things are", some might even call it, "morality", or worse: divine theory.

Setting goals and things to do and make is easy — it is the daily minor routines you have to change. What is the first thing you do in the morning?

… check mail, check facebook, check twitter? make coffee? or do you go sit outside in the sun and enjoy 5 minutes of it?

What I am saying is change requires you to change the simple smaller things — which if we apply scientific knowledge it should make sense:

we are composed of minute elements, atoms, electrons; which become molecules, which consume or generate energy, to create dna, cells, fibres, muscles, hair, nails, finger, hand, body and finally a human, being.

To change your life, your world, your existence — every single atom in your body has to be inline, slowly, gradually, then suddenly you will be.

Well, that is the theory.

… life is rough."

I am writing this, essay, in a moment of angst, discontent, anger, fear, hate and all those things one spends a great deal of time not wanting to be in those moments.

I am tired.

Extremely tired.

… tired of dreaming."

Waking up.

What if as human beings we are, actually, connected. Not to say that in a hippie-kinda-way, but to say, our role in this life, it is not so much for the individual to pursue their own dreams and goals, but to inspire others to learn how to survive this planet.

What if self determination it not so much a bad thing, but a thing to drive an individual to move the collective, species, forward.

Just a passing thought in darkness.

I, have a problem with that word — I. It is also a a difficult thing to write about. How do I, have a problem with using the word, I. I, again, will have to use the word, I, to say, I, have a problem with using the word itself.

To even say, I do not know what the I stands for, what it is, what it means, what it implies. I, still have to use it, and by doing so it makes it difficult to shed the idea of what the word, I, encompasses. It almost sounds like shifting from one definition to another but never really having no definition of what I, is.

I, think that is what I wanted to say.

There is nothing else to say about, I.  There is nothing to enjoy about speaking and talking about myself.  This might have come across to those that follow on twitter — going for two weeks without tweeting.  I, again there it is, will tweet, I just do not know when.

It appears, everytime I get off the micro-blogging site (as in: twitter), I find myself with a lot more to say and much longer narratives I conjured up in my mind.  When I am on it, I think and contemplate shorter narratives, almost as if, I am trying to fit my thoughts into 140 characters (as in, a box).

It is limiting, as I find myself, re-thinking the same things over and over again, almost to say, I never conclude a chain a thoughts.

Yes, I think that is what I do not enjoy about twitter —

Never closing an argument — always never enough space to exchange the thought and thus one tends to end a debate/discourse just to end it, without a conclusion.

A case in point is this, essay, I had initially wanted to write about the 'I', but that lead to narratives and twitter.  If I was to only tweet that, where would I have gone? How many would have understood the underlying reasoning.

… I —damn it — suppose then it makes sense to, ahem, tweet about what your are doing, where you are, who you with, e.t.c —which is exactly the things that inflate the ego, the I, that I am trying to avoid.

That aside, how do I get rid of using the word I?

Anybody know?

However, I do love the word authority but, lets not digress.

Suits. In the metaphorical sense means not being a hippie, being about business, a capitalist and those other things that we "free spirits" avoid.  I have been that person for quite sometime.  There is a difference in understanding that money is needed to survive this world — depending which side of the bed you were born — and making money just for enrichment.

However, being that I am, still, learning Buddhism, I have had the tendency to shift my mind from the obsession of wanting, this or that, aiming rather not to own or have anything.  Which is good in the context of letting go, but, what if:

… what I am meant to let go is the idea of being a hippie? of being free spirited? What if, I can do more good in this world if I am a suit?

I have been this 'free spirit' for 8 years or so and today I am exactly where I was 8 years ago:

… I haven't done any good — nothing has changed; family is still the same; my business is still the same; my state of mind is still the same; the same dreams are still being chased; the hustle is the same;

Yes, some of you that know me, might say I have done a lot — I am aware of the good I have done outside of the things I want and need to happen for family, most importantly, it is about family.

I do, then believe, I need to be a suit — because inasmuch as I find peace in my current state of being a hippie, the entire world, my family, does not see the world in the way I see it. I have the time, the knowledge and the expertise to do more for family as a suit than I do as a hippie, for this current time-frame anyway.

By suit, I do not mean employment, but I do mean going out-there to raise the capital to realise these ideas (or dreams) I have held on to for this long.  I do think, this is the time to shed the old persona.

Besides,

what could be more fun than being someone else for a short period of time?

Aluta, still, continua.

Well, here is to love, again.  I woke up with a strange thought about love, from my perspective or I should say from this thing I call existence.  The thought is,

… in the number of times I have been in love with any woman, it appears those women were in a state of transition."

By transition I mean they were shifting from caterpillars to butterflies.  I am not referring to jobs, money, status — I am referring to their soul (or the essence of being). That is to say, they are moving from being part of a narrative that is not theirs to creating a new narrative of being, that was theirs.

I can't explain that further than that.  Assuming that is what it is, I am then left with the question:

… what am I in their lives at that stage?

In the context of my ego — why? why aren't I allowed to join them on their journey? I do not have answers for these questions nor do I know if it is in-fact true, but I can count at least four or five women in the past that are now somewhere else, without me.

Ah, well I suppose saying bon voyage is in order?

With that said, here are the lyrics to José Padilla — Adiós Ayer:

Thinking of tomorrow
With the sunset in your eyes
I feel everything and sorrow
So I have to say goodbye.

The lines, that rip open my heart are:

Este es mi momento. Ahora, aquí.
Adiós ayer.

Which mean, according to google translator:

This is my moment. Now, here.
Goodbye yesterday.

And in that moment I am happy.

Adiós, ayer.

… you are being naive.

But, I do think in the many years of civilisations that we have had, we have failed at achieving one simple thing that is the cornerstone of human existence:

… to be at peace.

So, I think, just maybe a naive, fresh, unheard approach might just be what we need and this what I am about to propose or rather put forward.

Being that we South Africans are about to vote (local elections) and as evident from my entire second year class that I teach, none of them (students) are going to vote. Most people who do not want to vote come back to this:

… there is no (political) party worth voting for.

We are torn between the ANC and the DA — which in my opinion is not a good thing to have a two-party system (cue America). I came to a thought that maybe the question should be:

… it is not so much who to vote for but what to vote for.

According to our current form of democracy we vote and we hope whom ever we voted for will deliver what we want (or need).  In essence we are hoping  one political party is capable of solving and handling all of the socio-economic problems we have.  I think that is flawed and because of that I think we should instead:

1. We could vote for the ANC to run nationally,
2. then the DA to run locally. Assuming the ANC is good at national level and the DA can deliver on a local scale.
3. Furthermore we could even chose different councillors from different political parties at the ward level that are good at delivering at that level.

I have no knowledge if this is even possible according to how our democracy works and how elections work but I do think each political party is good at one or more things but not everything, especially considering that we are a very, very diverse nation with diverse needs and requirements as the Coat of Arms suggests:

… diverse people unite.

Yep, that's my thinking — is it possible? is it insane? is it naive?

One aspect of human behaviour that fascinates me the most is that of boy and girl, especially in the beginning when

boy meets girl.

I met a girl a few weeks ago. In the clichéd phrased: our relationship is growing and no we are not jolaring (going out). This relationship fascinates me. I am interested in the language we use, the tone and register of the messages we exchange. The detail to which we elaborate our lives, our mindsets, our family, friends, work, etc.

That is the part I am trying to understand — what are the stages involved in building a relationship;

1. how much information does one share?
2. how detailed do you get?
3. honesty now or later?
4. merely engaging in conversation or steering it to a specific agenda?
5. at what point do you start to "feel" something?
6. and what is the initial "feeling"?
7. and what is the final "feeling"?
8. and are there any other "feelings" in between?
9. how much of your actions (daily, weekly schedule) are restructured to accommodate this new "relation" (as in to be in their company)?
10. do you let friends know of the relation, truthfully?
11. what are the requirements for that first kiss, sensual touches and sex?

Well, I have only met the girl — I am getting to know the girl. Wait, I don't think that's even possible to "know" someone. All one knows are references of this or that but not what the person is.

Inasmuch as I can agree with what I just said there is something I can't really pen down or put down in words. I am not sure if its a "feeling" or a thought or something beyond or not.

You know when you meet someone there is something that happens to you — be it lust and/or love (these are not mutually exclusive). You just find yourself in a beautiful state; to be in the same space and time with that person.

I am there — but what exactly is "there"?

Let me rephrase that: I tried to sleep early — I was tossing and turning all the way till sunrise. Fever. Inasmuch as it fascinates me, it annoys me.  Just before you start asking yourself, why the hell am I telling you about my life. Let me get to it.

I couldn't sleep. My mind kept wandering in and out of ideas, concepts, thoughts. Which is normal for somebody who can't sleep but:

Every single thought that entered my mind was dismissed with a conscious "whatever" the minute it started building a chain of thoughts.

Huh, I can hear you murmur. Let me elaborate this in a dialogue format type thing:

1. (mind): I don't understand why the girl was willing to chill with us, I mean she only knew us for 5 minutes but decided to spend an entire night at that moment. Maybe it's —
2. (me): whatever.

This process would repeat the whole night.  I swear I probably went through almost everything I have ever thought about but none of it was given the chance to evolve and become a thing that would affect my 'state'.

Alas, the reason I was able to do it was: I wanted to sleep — if I had let my mind run away with its own thoughts, I'd be awake.

But, I never slept that night.  Oh, if you are wondering I have recovered, yesterday actually. I am old — it takes longer to fight a flu-fever-tonsillitis illness.

Sigh.

… when the world pisses me off to the point where I am a few words from cussing everybody out.

So, I retract myself from the world to refrain from entertaining the anger within, and calming myself down.  As I do that I get a chance to see the things that lead me to that state — the over riding concept is the idea of 'having principles', which is defined as:

a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behaviour or for a chain of reasoning

These definitions are hard to shake off — what we define as "our principles" seems to be deep rooted in the idea of what we define ourselves to be.  You know when you argue with someone and their response includes:

I will not compromise on my principles

You know, you can no longer question them.  Alas, I am not writing this essay to challenge what we define as principles, that will come in future essays. What I am asking myself is:

… if principles are 'fundamental' truths or propositions that we base what we are then one can assume these principles are few, probably not more than 10 (reference to the divine commandments is coincidental, honestly).

Principles cannot be too many, otherwise, they are just 'prepositions' of what you think ought to be right but you are just testing out the waters if something works — the building blocks of life are few: carbon, water and something else I forgot — all living life is based on that, sans the few weird creatures who live deep in the oceans.

So, if the principles are few then the odds are we have similar principles. Which would explain why we can group ourselves based of race, ethnicity, religion, etc.

Without trying to even entertain what that previous paragraph might imply, let me drive this narrative to my conclusion, which is open to debate:

… if the principles are few and in doing so we tend to share the same principles, then I can conclude that it is possible to have the same principles and yet behave as you wouldn't behave.

Does that, even, make sense? Let me try to unpack it in a pseudo-philosophical way, by proposing a question:

… our principles tend to get us to react in a certain way based on the situations we face — in most cases the older you get, you react the same way all of the time.  Is it then possible then to keep the same principles but react differently?

I think it is possible and that is what I am learning, right now.

1. Missing Plane

I was on some roof of some building when I looked up the sky and I saw a plane on flames about to crash (digression):

… I have had repeated dreams of plane crashes throughout my entire life.

It was reddish (or orange, but mostly red), lets say 1time.  As I was looking at this plane descending, it disappeared from view because of the city skyline. I got out and ran down the road and saw it slowly sinking into a lake (or was it a river?).  At the scene there were NTSB agents just watching the plane sink. I then ran back to the building.

In this building there was a 'master' or 'teacher' or some person of importance that I had to narrate what I saw.  As I was finishing telling the story we heard at knock at the door. It was one of the NTSB Agents who asked to speak to us. We sat down and all he said was:

there was no plan crash today.

We told him we saw the plane crash and sink into the lake. He responded with,

Well the thing is, it is more cost effective for us to let the plane sink than try to save it, besides, we were the only witnesses.

Then he left — I then told my 'master' I will find evidence — from that point on we had to exchange ideas through loud music and paper notes because the house was bugged.  We were unable to find concrete evidence but the only thing were determined to find was:

evidence of a flight that left (or scheduled to leave) at 13h00 (on whatever date that was) through ticket reservations.

I woke up after that and saw this (posted on half).

2. A gentle zombie

This second dream happened yesterday — I was home and I heard somebody come up the stairs to my room, just after I had locked the door. Then all of a sudden the guy started banging on the door — for some strange reason I could see him (through the door and the walls) with a grey shirt, tie, pants and a metallic pipe. What was disturbing was

I could see he was Zombie — grunts and slouched body posture.

I picked up the phone and through it I could see him in full colour — he was wearing a red tie (or the blood on it made it look red).  After banging the door for a few he stopped, started walking downstairs. He then adjusted his tie and said:

I  apologise for disturbing you.

I started thinking about what would be my exit strategy should I be attacked by Zombies. I realised I had no exits — I panicked and forced myself to wake up.

Yeah, strange dreams, I don't know what they mean nor do I need to know.

The definitions are,

Want:

have a desire to possess or want something;

Need:

require something because it is essential or important;

and that is what I am torn between.

I am not sure if that or what I am talking about makes any sense. So let me explain a few things running through this mind, lately.

I know I am living in the wrong town or city and just maybe the wrong country.  At the same time I know I need to be in this town (Johannesburg).  I am in a continuous state of sadness, not the depressing kind, but saddened every morning that I am still here and not there where I want to be. I want to be in another town not because I need to be there, but because I believe I do not want to be here. Does that even make sense?

I know I need to be here — for family and for business — I am starting to hate this idea of business, a business I created out of my own doing, now becoming a burden to my existence. Family is never a burden but it does drive one to do more with the available resources, but family is not something you need to be in everyday.

Wait — I think I have realised what the problem is, the problem is business.  Strange that, this could mean, I should delete this essay, the problem is no longer need versus want, but what this business is.

I suppose this  could be extended to being a 'productive member of society', what exactly does that mean? Wait, before I digress, let me get something else off, the proverbial, chest:

I started my own business seven ago because I believed there was something else I should be doing with the knowledge I have. Moreso, I was not happy with how I spent the time allocated when I was employed.

Then the question is,

why is this business becoming a burden when it should be what I want and need to do (or become)?

I think part of the problem is ego — the other part(s), my mind is still to discover.  I think starting your own business has a lot to do with ego, in a good way, but keeping that business growing and running has a lot to do with ego and at times, in a bad way. That is to say:

the refusal to fail — regardless of what happens — being attached to the idea, the dream one created.

Wow, did I just say that — well, this is good, a realisation has been realised.  I'll chew on that for a few more days, maybe weeks, maybe months even.

I know I have said it many times before that I was going to change the design of this 'book' — well this morning is that day. I am in love with this design, although a few minor tweaks here and there are required.

You want to know how long it took me to redesign and update this site?

two days.

That, my friend, is being inspired — I am already working on another project, which I expect to be done by end of the week. Then we have this very big project to tackle, which I am also sure I should be done with it in a week or two.

'tis exciting times — very, exciting.

So, here we go.

1. Africans.

Firstly there was a silly debate on twitter about what and who is African? I mean really? Black men and women debating what defines what is being African? Behind all that pseudo-intellectual dribble is racism. Yeah sure we don't want to admit as black folks that we can be racist, but yep, that debate was all that.

What is it about black Africans and the obsession of trying to define what is it that you already are? For as long as you were born in Africa (or your parents have roots in Africa) you are African — if you choose to live a life style that is not common in most African cultures that is what you choose to do — that is what freedom is — it does not take or add to what makes you African, because the only thing that makes you African is the word African, like that popular phrase:

… the word is not the thing."

2. Identity

The core part of the African debate shows that as Africans (specifically South Africans) we are in constant need/want to define our identity — I find that silly, why are we in desperate need to be able to say to foreigners:

… blah-blah-blah and that is what being South African is about!"

Let me explain why that is a waste of our time:

… some very cruel, racist people before 1994 defined South Africa to be whatever they wanted — as time moved, they got replaced by other people who define what being South African is — by this I mean the identity is transient.

If you don't agree find any photograph of yourself that is at least 6 years old and tell me if you still agree you are that same person you are looking at — q.e.d

3. Celebrated Leadership

What is it about South Africans and this need to want to elevate 'celebrities' into the status of leadership — yeah, I know Americans do it too, but in the words of the late Dr. Mageu: "ha se mo states, mo!"

How is it possible to take a radio disc-jockey; tv presenter; an actor; sports player and ask 'em to uphold what is right and just? That makes no sense to me at all:

… they are entertainers — and that is their primary role and that is what they will do to survive — in most cases they will only entertain us, like metrorail, noma ka njani!

What really irks me is this phrase called twitterati — what the fuck is that?

… we have made celebrities out of people who have more followers than the next — what is even worse we have bestowed them with 'leadership' requirements based on the total number of 'friends' and 'drones' that follow them?

Do you think Americans (being that we are copy-cats) are asking @shitmydadsays for guidance on economic policy; morality; social development?

4. Education

Every time the matric results come out — there is always that peanut gallery response to them. Hey, it is called education, some will pass, some will fail — be it the state's fault; the school; the teachers or the family — if everybody passed how would we be able to measure what works and what doesn't?

We are learning country — we need to remember that.

But, what pisses me off — is the 'entertainment industry (as defined in point 3 above)' response. I could never understand an industry that spends less time trying to build a better nation throughout the entire year and all of a Sunday they are up in arms about education?

Okay — I know DJFresh did some wonderful work with Boston Media house back then — kudos to him — the rest of the other radio dj's are just riding the trend. A change in this media (especially radio broadcast) is needed, herewith are suggestions:

1. Instead of asking what 'Jezabel' means (btw: that phrase is nothing new, it's been around since the first days of groupies) — you could ask what meaning and value did @lebomashile wrap in her "Ribbon" poem;
2. Instead of always punting this gig-or-that you could punt science (education) festivals that do happen throughout the year in the country and abroad;
3. Instead of talking about "getting paid" get somebody to explain how anybody can get involved in buying shares; using other unconventional means of utilising the banking system to generate wealth;
4. Instead of punting the entertainment and creative industry to the kids listening: expand their minds to other fields especially mathematics and science and show them the inherent value these fields have in developing South/Africa;
5. We all know Malema is not an academically educated man — to belittle him is to mock every single person in the country that has not finished primary — and that includes my Grandmother. Think beyond the punch lines.
6. Expand the sphere of knowledge and people you promote on your shows: television, sports and radio have a greater audience than your 10 thousand followers/friends on twitter/facebook. There is a pool of talented and gifted individuals in this country that could use a bit of shine to glow beyond their immediate surroundings.
7. Instead of making a mockery of Jacob Zuma et al — you could try change young minds about sexuality (no, not love life); homosexuality; sexism; ageism; and all the other ism's that are taken to be "normal".

Okay — those are way too many to list, but you get the gist of what I am trying to say:

… there is nothing more disappointing that a black person in a position of authority that has a wide audience but chooses to be ignorant (e.g. yfm dj's)

5. Leadership

I want to get back to this — South Africa is in desperate need of leadership — I am not only talking political, I am talking from personal leadership, again, the clichéd phrase:

… be the change you want the world to be."

If you are over the age of 26 there is no "they should do something", that "they" is you, me and everybody over that age. There is no longer room to complain about anything — I have a new motto:

… whence I would complain, I now see a business opportunity."

I might end up knocking on doors till the cows come home — but there is an empowering difference between not doing something and actually failing at doing something.

We need to show leadership in our character not for somebody else but for ourselves, to be able to live everyday knowing that you are leading yourself to where you need to be — and no, I am not talking about:

… they sleep, we grind."

I am talking about taking the risk to achieve something; using your contacts to achieve what is good for you and at the same time doing good to your immediate surroundings (family, friends, colleagues) — a strong nation is built from the individual through to the collective.

Some have argued that: the people get the government they deserve, if that is true then:

… we have to be the government that we want — we cannot look up to people/entities that will fail us in being a nation or continent that we envision."

6. Being black

Lastly, what is it about being black that demands that we spend a considerate amount of time trying to define exactly what that is? We come up with phrases like:

black power; black unity; black consciousness

I thought 'bout that for a few days — if we accept the notion of all things being equal, then it begs the question if we black people would be happy with the following phrases:

white power; white unity; white consciousness

Not so kosher now, is it? But if we are truly going to go around with banners and chants screaming black power — then we should be willing to accept any other race to do the same, it is, a democracy; it is freedom.

… that should do it, for now, your thoughts?

This entry however was not planned for — which is unsual, it takes me about 2 weeks to convince myself I actually have something worthy of being read.

I suppose this is one of those — I am still alive — just not visible. I was going to say, I am planning to revive (read: re-design) this book, but I have said that before and nothing happened.

I was going to argue I don't have enough time, but in all honesty I have had a lot of time on my hands, but none of it inspired me enough to do anything.

My main obsession now is to figure out how am I going to get this one grand idea 'rich' to those who have deep pockets to get it off the ground before somebody else does it.

I am still baffled by it — but,

I have realised the minute I start talking about it, I get to unpack it and see its greater potential every time — but as soon as I am alone, the plot thins.

I suppose I should get a personal assistant.

We shall see — I'll return on Monday with an essay that has been running around my mind every time I wait for the kettle to boil.

'till then

this journey, never ends.

There is no end — just the beginning.

Through this, I am made to remember old, things, very old things, which beg the question on the phrase:

… let go."

I get it in the metaphysical sense what it means, but, being that I am kind of an odd-kid-in-the-park, I don't let go as easily, but here is what I was reminded of:

1. iceblok,
2. coffeeroom,
3. orange factory,
4. spoonfed,
5. ttby,
6. gusto (with projects)
7. half
8. seeds (un-planted, still)
9. and Apara, Skippa.

Yeah, sure 75 is burning and what-not — these ideas are ideas that preceded 75 and Studio83 (sans ttby):

… in fact the concept of 'Celebrate Life Picnics' can be traced back to iceblok — although CL Picnics, do now represent another metaphor.

I need to go back to Johannesburg — I need that energy, that energy I shared with my peoples, that energy I borrowed from them, that energy (and I suppose that affirmation too) that inspired.

Cape Town has creatives, very talented and skilled at that — but, they don't have add-on ability. By that I mean, well let me explain it in a narrative:

I would normally come up with an idea and I'll tell somebody else (that I trust) about it. Normally the response — when I am Johannesburg — is that person adds more to it, takes it beyond where I wouldn't have imagined.

In Cape Town — I am yet to meet somebody that can do that — sans one other person: Neo.  When she gets back to Gauteng, I am dam sure we will collaborate even more.

Anyway — this essay, was about:

eggs in a basket.

They say, never keep your eggs (ideas) in one basket.  I understand that, but the question I have is:

do you keep the same number of eggs in different baskets or do you get more eggs and more baskets?

I am thinking, some eggs, even though old, might give birth to more resilient chicks, than the newer fresher-shinier eggs.

I am going back to the old ideas — there ones, that are still hatching in my mind, even though, newer eggs have hatched and are nearing flight.

Chewing on this.

… the time on your phone is ahead, it is 15 minutes ahead."

My response was:

… that's because I am ahead of my time."

Yeah, we laughed — it felt good, well, in the essence that my ego was stroked (self-inflicted stroking might I add).

Anyway, there is a point to this selfish-rant.  I find myself arguing things that I have argued before and concluded on them way, way, back — okay, maybe 2 years ago at the least.

I also find things I have said way back being only understood now. Take for example this essay (Do It) that I wrote in March, 2007 — that's 3 years ago:

… it got re-published on Studio83 8 days ago — it solicited responses, from even people that know me longer that.  That is strange. Albeit, I no longer agree with the essay, sans the last paragraph.

I suppose, this can be summarised as self-ego-stroking, but lets put ego aside, we can conclude the one of the following, or both

1. I am actually ahead of my time
2. or I have lost my mind

I'd go with the latter, what is really a mind?

if it is not a sequence of 'framed' moments in time (memory) interpreted differently depending on the current context?

That sounds like lying to yourself every moment, but then again it could also mean:

formulating a relative truth every given moment of the reality you are in.

That still doesn't sound like the truth — ah well, it is relative anyway.

So is this, "ahead of my time" rant.

I have had many definitions, the last definition was:

love is.

Inasmuch as that definition, sort of gave me some sense of understanding what it is when the 'emotion' arises, it was never enough, something else was missing.

whatever it was, I could never put my finger on it.

There is an inherent need to define love by what we think, feel and do: I am pretty sure you know all the clichés that are used to define love, alas, they were never enough, even though I found myself seeking for something that I ought to be doing with this emotion.

But, yesterday — after a small bout of mental and emotion madness over a girl, I would define as a girl I loved — I read an essay written by J. Krishnamurti (if you have watched any of the Zeitgest documentaries you'll remember him) titled On Love.  The very first opening line, put me at absolute easy and peace with what I was going through:

that misery and sorrow of loving someone and yet not being able to be with them, even though, you do suspect (or feel) that she felt the same way.

The opening line goes:

The demand to be safe in relationship inevitably breeds sorrow and fear. This seeking for security is inviting insecurity.

For as long as I have loved, before, I've never thought of it that way, ever — he then concludes:

But you don't know how to come to this extraordinary fount - so what do you do? If you don't know what to do, you do nothing, don't you? Absolutely nothing. Then inwardly you are completely silent. Do you understand what that means? It means that you are not seeking, not wanting, not pursuing; there is no centre at all. Then there is love.

This then got me thinking:

have I ever been in love?

I don't think I have, but I can say there was a time I could say I was, by all counts of mediation, I'd say I loved my muse.

But that is besides the point I am trying to bring across.  I do think now, I absolutely know nothing what is love: be it an emotion, a thought, a state of existence, I know no more.

To some extent, I do believe, I have reached a rare state of enlightenment:

love no longer binds me, it no longer affects my thoughts, my emotion, my state of being.

I see it for what it is: just love and nothing more and nothing less, regardless what it is defined to be or not.

Furthermore, I think this is what I am now, with respect to love:

… I will love without want, need or agenda.

It is no longer something I will pursue, it is something I will only be aware of — it will no longer drive or guide me:

it is not different from seeing a full moon and realising how beautiful the moon is, then without attachment to the sight, you leisurely walk back into your house with a smile and carry on with ever else you are to do.

So, I suppose, now I can say:

love was.

and for that, I thank her.

Merci, Mademoiselle.

I have realised that the duality of heaven and hell is not balanced, we know more about heaven, than we do hell.  I suppose it has to do with our inherent want to end up in heaven.

I was thinking, what is it about hell that we all fear? How do we fear it if we know so little about? Isn't that the basis of all human evil:

fearing what we do not know?

Before, I get struck by lighting for what that above statement implies, let me stick to my story. What are we told about hell:

… generally it is defined as: being tortured for eternity.

I was thinking about that, what exactly is being tortured? Firstly, let me build my argument by asking:

if you are in hell are you aware that you have died?

So, if you are aware you have died:

what exactly is being tortured? Your dead body? Your dead mind?

and if you are aware:

that implies you have a human mind: and that by definition means, you can sustain eternal pain: living is painful, and we are survived by this very mind.

But, some would argue:

… your soul is tortured.

A soul, begs the question of definition: what is the soul? It is not a universally agreed on concept. We all define it after we are mentally capable of thinking (as in being able to construct ideas) it, and so:

… what is a soul in a place where you are dead? Why would you keep to the same ideology of it when you are non longer in the same living space?

Anyway — I am still drunk, your thoughts?

I am afraid to write anything — I have been afraid, for a month now.  I no longer trust what this mind is contemplating.

Seriously,

I fear how far it is willing to go — deeper and deeper into the darkness, the proverbial abyss.

So, instead of compiling words with extreme angst and disillusions, I'd rather wait, until I am able to tame this mind into not affecting my state of being through it's rampant thoughts.

I know, it sounds pseudo-quasi-emo, but, that's what it is, at the least in these parts of the mind.

Breathe.

didn't we celebrate your birthday like last month or two months ago?

Yes, we did.  See, I was running a social experiment. I told (via twitter, facebook and word of mouth) everybody that it was my birthday on two other days:

• 15th of May
• and 15th of June (I do consider myself a Gemini)

Why would I do such a thing? Well two reasons:

1. How social are these social networks? When the same people, still, wish you happy birthday on two wrong dates (separated by a month)?
2. Secondly, I never celebrate my birthday.

The second is probably more important:

I am not a being to be celebrated. I am not  important.

I am of the hope that, I will lurk in the background of existence, causing ripples, but never be the tsunami.

Alas, in the past 20 years or so, I am always with my mother, grandma and/or sister.  These are truly, the only women (most likely the only people) that understand what it was for me to be born, I'd rather celebrate them on my birthday.

Alas, I am 33 years old.

40, be knocking.