<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: mary’zine random redux:  #4 May 2000</title>
	<atom:link href="http://editorite.com/2009/03/14/mary%e2%80%99zine-random-redux-4-may-2000/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://editorite.com/2009/03/14/mary%e2%80%99zine-random-redux-4-may-2000/</link>
	<description>It all started when I deluded myself into thinking my opinions mattered--Dilbert</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:44:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: editorite</title>
		<link>http://editorite.com/2009/03/14/mary%e2%80%99zine-random-redux-4-may-2000/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[editorite]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Mar 2009 20:42:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://editorite.wordpress.com/?p=5#comment-10</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve received a couple of e-mails about this issue of the mary&#039;zine (May 2000) that raise interesting questions. So here&#039;s a tricky way of keeping the commenters&#039; anonymity while still addressing their comments for the sake of a broader audience. 

Commenter #1 asks if my &quot;spiritual experience&quot; in the hospital could have been caused by the drugs I was being given.

Me: You may be right. The reason I suspect it went deeper than that is that I&#039;ve had many such drug experiences and felt nothing of the kind. I think part of it is that I was primed, in those days, for seeing everything as terribly significant in the &quot;spiritual&quot; sense. I&#039;m not sure about that anymore. Instead of labeling it &quot;spiritual,&quot; my epiphany about the parsley could just as easily be attributed to my awe at the vast confluence of human effort that created hospitals and people willing to work in them. A cynic could see this as just &quot;human nature&quot; doing its practical, necessary things. So what it all comes down to, I think, is one&#039;s perspective... i.e., everything objective in my story (parsley, birds, etc.) could be interpreted in lots of different ways, or not interpreted/noticed at all. 

Commenter #2 wonders &quot;how all that (nicely expressed) spirituality sits with the recent discussions we&#039;ve had about God and all his forms being dead?&quot;

Me: This is harder to answer. It&#039;s true that I feel a deep resistance to even hearing the word &quot;spiritual&quot; these days. I don&#039;t know what it means anymore--well, it means whatever the purveyor of the term wants it to mean--and I&#039;m afraid that what I was meaning by it, back then, was a kind of self-aggrandizing sentimentality, a compensation for being a tiny speck in this great big world of ours. I was always saying, &quot;The universe wants me to do this... or that...,&quot; and everything that happened (that I liked) was not coincidence but synchronicity, that is, proof of some greater force that was snapping my life together like a giant jigsaw puzzle. I guess what I think now is that I DON&#039;T KNOW, and I&#039;m fine with that. I love the Mystery of painting; why not treat my life the same way?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve received a couple of e-mails about this issue of the mary&#8217;zine (May 2000) that raise interesting questions. So here&#8217;s a tricky way of keeping the commenters&#8217; anonymity while still addressing their comments for the sake of a broader audience. </p>
<p>Commenter #1 asks if my &#8220;spiritual experience&#8221; in the hospital could have been caused by the drugs I was being given.</p>
<p>Me: You may be right. The reason I suspect it went deeper than that is that I&#8217;ve had many such drug experiences and felt nothing of the kind. I think part of it is that I was primed, in those days, for seeing everything as terribly significant in the &#8220;spiritual&#8221; sense. I&#8217;m not sure about that anymore. Instead of labeling it &#8220;spiritual,&#8221; my epiphany about the parsley could just as easily be attributed to my awe at the vast confluence of human effort that created hospitals and people willing to work in them. A cynic could see this as just &#8220;human nature&#8221; doing its practical, necessary things. So what it all comes down to, I think, is one&#8217;s perspective&#8230; i.e., everything objective in my story (parsley, birds, etc.) could be interpreted in lots of different ways, or not interpreted/noticed at all. </p>
<p>Commenter #2 wonders &#8220;how all that (nicely expressed) spirituality sits with the recent discussions we&#8217;ve had about God and all his forms being dead?&#8221;</p>
<p>Me: This is harder to answer. It&#8217;s true that I feel a deep resistance to even hearing the word &#8220;spiritual&#8221; these days. I don&#8217;t know what it means anymore&#8211;well, it means whatever the purveyor of the term wants it to mean&#8211;and I&#8217;m afraid that what I was meaning by it, back then, was a kind of self-aggrandizing sentimentality, a compensation for being a tiny speck in this great big world of ours. I was always saying, &#8220;The universe wants me to do this&#8230; or that&#8230;,&#8221; and everything that happened (that I liked) was not coincidence but synchronicity, that is, proof of some greater force that was snapping my life together like a giant jigsaw puzzle. I guess what I think now is that I DON&#8217;T KNOW, and I&#8217;m fine with that. I love the Mystery of painting; why not treat my life the same way?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

