Skip to main content

on aging

Turning 51 tomorrow. You may now insert tried and true reflections on mortalityin the form of homilies about aging well, the beauty of autumn, a mature perspective on life, and how while one blossom from the tree falls, another blooms, and all that crap. I just read in Patrick O'Brian: "the caution of the elderly, proverbial" or something very like that. I'm not elderly yet, but getting more cautious. It's a desire not to screw up so much as in the past. One cliche I fully embrace, like a grandma kissing a hallmark card from her granddaughter, is "If only I knew then what I know now." This cliche is not however fraught with Hallmark-card-style sentim entality, but is instead redolent of regret, ruefulness, even remorse. If I get into that mood, reflections on my past become one long HOmer-Simpson-going-"DOH!" Man if only I'd known how to speak to editors, record producers (John Hammond Sr for Christ's sake! He wanted to make a record with me and I fucked it up!), if only I'd known to watch myself, to observe myself mindfully, so that I *think* before blurting, why then, two of my former best friends (one quite famous) would still be my friends.
What's that you say? Unattractive whining in a public forum?AN utter waste of time? I'm supposed to say I regret nothing, I did it MYYYYY way? Horseshit. Remorse is the first ingredient for self transformation. It's like an alchemical solvent that softens material otherwise too ossified to be re-shaped. I believe in regret--up to a point. NOt to the point of self destructive wallowing, no. But there's a kind of personal Lent or something at times in life.
(read more...)
-John Shirley

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Tony diTerlizzi and classic D&D monsters

The sixth entry of his series on drawings of classic D&D monsters is up. He's one of my favorite fantasy artists. His work tends toward the charming and cozy, rather than others' focus on machismo or melodrama.

sad fate

“Our legendary personalities are evergreen ‘brands’ with the benefit of worldwide recognition,” reads a message on the Richman agency’s website. Guardian UK Article *vomits* Where is the line drawn between “public figure” and “celebrity”? How can a dead person have an agent, particulary where there are no specific works concerned other than a sense of character? It’s one thing to insist that Duck Soup is a work that should be protected (which any more simply means controlled by whomever has the most buX0rs), but shouldn’t personalities and such pass into the public domain as well? ( boingboing : Bill Gates 0wns Einstein, Groucho , Freud, Asimov, Fuller, et al )