Feb. 18th, 2014

fengi: (Reach)
What I write my journal are small, incomplete fragments of my larger self and everything I find interesting.

It's not necessarily the most vital or significant topics, but what I can form into somewhat coherent sentences in the moments I choose to write. The patterns reflect things about me, but are limited in what they actually reveal.

For most readers, these words are all they know of me, and their impression is further influenced by how much they read and how closely. I see my writing in the context of a full self which my audience may never know.

These are obvious points, but worth refreshing in my mind periodically. Rarely does one get the entire contents of someone's head from an idiosyncratic glimpse.

There are defining moments in which limited communication creates a strong, justified impression. Generalizations and immediate conclusions can be rational responses. Mot people can be more complex than they seem, but this doesn't obligate you to accept bullshit.

It's not about giving a pass to extremes like raving bigotry. It's recognizing sometimes there's value in questioning assumptions, sometimes perceptions are determined by the absence of information.

This occurred to me because I've written more about a squabble between some SF authors than issues of greater importance to me. It's not that I have nothing to say about them, but not here, at least not yet.

Reading over my journal, I'm surprised how many items which were important to me get a fleeting mention or exist only as an unfinished draft in a text file. The self which exists in the gaps is not the same as what is there. But this consideration is something I rarely extend to anyone but myself, even though I know this can be myopic.