networks of knowing

I like things that are interdisciplinary, and I like finding links between subjects. That's what I love about the academic enterprise. It involves building a network of knowledge, and over time it becomes richer and richer. 

Everything is related in your brain. If you learn about art and you learn about science, those two subjects are connected in your brain because everything is connected in your brain...maybe not directly, but if both things are in there, they will be connected in some way. 

At uni, I did a course about the history of political ideas. Among the texts we read were Hobbes's Leviathan and Locke's Second Treatise of Government. So, I thought of them as thinkers and writers about political ideas. But then, years later, when I was studying education, I came across the same names, and learned that they had had a huge influence in that area. Then, later still, when I was learning about English literature and the relationship between science and poetry, there they were again. And I started to seek them out and reread their work. I came to see them as representative of the age in which they lived. 

And that's one of the joys of learning and study. You learn about something or someone in one context, and then, when you encounter them/ it in a different context, you already know something about them/ it, and now you know more about both the context and the person or issue. There's something really exciting to me about that. It's about real learning and real intellectual engagement. It's about building something. I can learn about John Locke for example, so, when I read the poetry of William Blake and I read a book like Northrop Frye's Fearful Symmetry, which is about how to understand Blake's poetry, and in that book he writes about how Blake had a fundamental disagreement with Locke and his philosophical approach, there's a whole extra dimension for me because I know about Locke for myself, so I can weigh up Blake's view and Northrop Frye's view, and it enriches my understanding of a whole range of things - Blake, Locke, literary criticism, philosophy, science, the 17th century (when Locke lived), the 18th and 19th centuries (when Blake lived). Learning is not a linear thing. It's like you have all of these masterpieces in your head that you've been working on, and when you learn new things, you work on multiple masterpieces at the same time. 

it's entertaining because it's not a performance

I was listening to Bird Set Free by Sia. A couple of the lines go: "I don't care if I sing off-key, I find myself in my melody..."

What an amazing lyric from someone who I can't imagine ever sings off-key. Even when her voice breaks, it's done with intent and it's beautiful. And I suppose, if she ever does sing off-key, it would be beautiful. She probably does, but you wouldn't know it. 

You can tell it's heart-felt. The lyrics are powerful and personal and inspirational. So, how interesting that Sia expresses that. It could just be a persona she's voicing, but I think there's something to it. I like to think that what makes Sia such an outstanding singer and songwriter is that attitude. 

When you do something distinctive, it takes courage because you don't really know if it's any good. It's different from everything else, so how do you know it's good when it can't be measured by the standards of other things that are good?

It would be easy, if you are a good singer, to be content with doing what other good singers are doing. 

Nothing appeals like authenticity though. I've been watching a lot of Emma Chamberlain's youtube videos lately. She's someone who is now rich, famous and successful because she's just herself. She's totally engaging and entertaining but you feel like it's not a performance. She's the Dickens of the 21st century. Dickens could write about a rainy Sunday afternoon at home, and make it enchanting. Likewise, Emma Chamberlain can make a video about going shopping or cooking soup, and it's entertaining. 

One thing I learn from observing successful creators is that success doesn't come from seeking success, it comes from wanting to do good work and doing it, and then growing in that field that you are working in. 

derivative originals

How is it that, when we find music or literature that we like, there's such a strong sense of recognising something that we're already familiar with? There's both in the things we really like - old and new. We recognise patterns and themes we've seen before, but the artist or writer brings something new. The best music and writing resonates with other great music and writing. 

I've been reading Steal like an Artist by Austin Kleon. The title alludes to something T S Eliot wrote: 'Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal...' and to the general idea that there is nothing truly new. Along the same lines, Harold Bloom maintains that everything that has ever been written is a wilful misinterpretation of other texts. 

It's an interesting idea. I like what Austin Kleon writes about influence in this book. He says that the problem with our concept of influence is that it implies passivity on the part of the one being influenced, when actually artists and writers choose to be influenced and choose how they are influenced. Influence is not something you passively receive, it's something you take - it's an active process. I stole that idea from his book and put it in my own words. I can't remember his exact words, just the idea. Bloom takes a similar line as well. He talks about writers turning the tables on their precursors, so that when you read the precursor it seems like somehow they've been influenced by the later writer. 

It's not stealing in any bad sense, it's just the way creativity works. Good artists and writers draw on the work of other artists and writers and create their own unique thing, and doing that well is what it means to be a good artist or writer. It makes sense when you think about it. Like, say if you want to play the guitar. You have to start by learning how to play the same way everyone else does. You're not a brilliant guitarist if you start by doing something that's never been done with the guitar before. It would have no value because you can't play the thing. Later on you can do something novel - like Jimmy Page using a bow to play his guitar. Actually, even that wasn't completely original (other guitarists had been doing it), which illustrates the point. 

a different creature

My first year of English uni program was really excellent. I can't imagine a better introduction. We got a taste of everything and it was really accessible. It was a great foundation for further study. One of the novels we read was Frankenstein by Mary Shelley. Before I read it I wondered why what I thought was a kind of tawdry horror story had been chosen for study at this level. But it turned out to be a very fine piece of literature. It's still one of my favorite novels. 

So, I was really excited that there was actually a movie version of the story coming out not long after I read the book. In my naivety, I thought that the film would be faithful to the book, but when I saw it I was disappointed. It was yet another iteration of the popular story that we know so well, in which the 'monster' is an inarticulate oaf who destroys people and property because he doesn't know any better or he's just evil. That's a different story from the novel. 

I had a similar experience with Wuthering Heights. I've never seen a film version that does the novel justice - not even close. I think it's only because I like these novels so much, that it bothers me. The films are pretty good - they have good actors and they're well made. The problem from my point of view is that they tell a different story to the novels. If I didn't know the novels and have my own ideas about them, I'd probably enjoy the films. 

Maybe that's why it's so hard - seemingly impossible - for a film to be faithful to great works of literature. Great literature inscribes images into your mind, draws you into its world so that your mind completes the text. It's as if the text gives you a dream. How can films ever compete with that? They can in their own right. There are some great films and TV shows, but I think it's extremely difficult to translate a novel to the screen. It's a different thing. To do it well you have to change it.

There's nothing wrong with that, and sometimes it's really well done. I really like Peter Carey's novel, Oscar and Lucinda, and I enjoyed the film version of it as well, but each - the film and the book - is a unique work of art, with its own theme and plot. Just like with Frankenstein and Wuthering Heights, I read the book before seeing the film. I think with Oscar and Lucinda though, I was able to enjoy the film on its own terms. With Frankenstein and Wuthering Heights, when I watched the films, I was excited to see the amazing novels I had read translated into film. I wanted what I saw in the novels to be in the films, and I was really invested in that, so I was probably bound to be disappointed. I feel like I should give these films another go though. I might watch them sometime. 

One screen version that I thought did a very good job was the BBC mini-series of Daniel Deronda. I had actually stopped reading the novel because I felt like I had to slog through hundreds of pages to get to the interesting part and in the end I gave up altogether. You can't read a book that way - just bearing with it until it gets good. But then I watched the BBC series and really loved it and went back to the book and this time I finished it. I think what inspired me to go back to the book was the realisation of something the series made very clear - that the main character in the story was Daniel Deronda, not Gwendolen Harleth. When I first read the book, I thought she was the main character, and, after a brief introduction to her right at the beginning, her story doesn't really start to unfold until, I think around half way into this very long book. So, that first half seemed to be a lot of padding, and it focused on a very unpleasant character. I just got sick of reading it. Then I watched the BBC series and I was captivated by the character of Daniel Deronda, which made me want to read the book. I can't remember how that inspiration that I got from the series changed my reading of the first half of the book, but it did and I really enjoyed the book. 

the frame changes the colour

You think you know stuff but that's just an impression you have. You realise how little you know when you try to use your knowledge. I'm learning C++ again for the first time in a while, and instead of just following the tutorials, I know enough to see where the instructor is going and then do it myself. It's then that I appreciate how much and how little I know - both how much and how little I know. 

I know enough to have a go at doing the thing, but not enough to get it right. But then I know enough to understand the error message and make the changes I think are required, but not enough to get the program to work. So then I watch more of the tutorial and learn. I also try to do things that aren't covered in the tutorial I'm watching. I'm working up to the point where I'll be able to start working on projects - making a game or a website or an app. 

When I first started learning about C++ I followed the tutorials and did what they said, but I didn't understand a lot of it. Then, in successive rounds of different tutorial series', I understood more and more. When I first started learning HTML and CSS, my big problem was that I didn't know where to write the code. I read a book about HTML and CSS and it told me a lot about what happens when you enter different code...but where? How do you bring up that screen or whatever it is where you enter the code? And what is the screen that shows the results. I didn't know the basic mechanics of it. To solve this, I turned to youtube. I honestly feel like watching youtube tutorials and doing what they show you, is the best way of learning these things. 

So, as I said, you think you know something or know about something, or you might think you don't know about something, but the reality is different to your impression. The line between knowing and not knowing is not so fine. Sometimes, when you think you don't know something, it's better to say you do, and sometimes, when you think you do know something, it's better to say you don't. 

to what end?

The future isn't what it seems and it's generally better than what I envisage. I tend to project my current conditions onto the future as if nothing changes, but things do change. I think something along the lines of this: How on earth am I going to run when I can't even walk? I feel defeated because I'm already struggling to walk and I'm rehearsing all of these situations in my mind that require me to run.

But the reality is that, if I keep trying each day, by the time I'm in those situations that require me to run, it won't be a problem. There's something about life that will not allow you to get near a challenge until you're ready for it. We don't lie in bed on Sunday night stressing and wondering how we are going to get up and go to work the next day when we're lying in bed, because we take things a step at a time. At the right time, we get up, we get ready, we have breakfast, we travel to work, etc. 

Another way to think about this issue is the analogy of two beasts living inside you that want to fight each other. One of them will win and will become your defining beast. Which one will win? The one you feed the most. The fight is not as intense as we might expect, because there is a double-edged sword involved. As soon as one of the beasts begins to hit its stride, the result is almost a foregone conclusion, because, if beast A is winning and that's the one you're feeding, that means beast B is getting weaker and easier to beat. 

Recovery, change, adaptation, are hard at first because it's all about loss and endings - the loss of what you've known, the end of life as you know it - but as you make progress, not only do you build momentum in the right direction but you actually start getting pulled through the process by what is at the other side. 

protagonism

I want to develop my skill at writing creative non-fiction. That's my project for my writing on Medium. It will probably change the way I write my blog. The two formats will feed each other. Writing for Medium has already changed the way I read and think about my blog. I've realised that, in my blog, I make leaps from one topic to another without explanation. With my writing for Medium, I have to think more about structure and sign-posting and helping the reader. I have to plan what I'm going to write because a good piece of writing will always have a thesis or central idea, or at least convey a logical progression. So thinking about all of these things leads me to see my blog in a different light. 

I'm trying to work on a novel as well. I've already made an attempt. I got quite far a couple of years ago. I wrote 9.5 K words. That's not huge but it's further than I've ever gotten before in previous attempts at writing extended prose fiction. To be honest, I truly feel like I have no aptitude for writng fiction. There's something about it that I just can't do. But then I felt like that about the kind of writing I'm doing for Medium. I'm figuring it out as I go, and enjoying the process. 

It's not that I'm not good at creative writing, it's just that the kind of creative writing I do is very experimental. I have this urge to bring art into writing and writing into art. But anyway, I'm not good at art either, but that doesn't stop me. Maybe to write my novel I should do what I did with art and just forget about what is expected and how other people do it, and do what I want. Then, the more I made art, the more skills I developed and the better I got at making something worthwhile, at least that I think is worthwhile. 

What other people see and appreciate and think about your art or writing does come into it though. Just as you only receive when you give, you will only be able to create written or visual art that people like if you forget what people like and work in a way that you like - do your own creative process. 

behind the scenes

Jung's ideas about 'the shadow' are really interesting. We repress what we deem unacceptable, so it becomes sublimated into our unconscious mind, and from there it influences our conscious thoughts and behaviour. Freud saw this sublimation as being very healthy. It was the conversion of depraved and socially unacceptable impulses into acceptable and productive behaviour. So, repression of those impulses is healthy and good. Jung disagreed. He thought that one of the keys to positive change and growth lay in understanding our 'shadow' - becoming conscious of that which we have repressed, and thereby defusing its influence over us. 

Harold Bloom wrote about the role of repression in literature. In The Anxiety of Influence he wrote that ‘Every forgotten precursor becomes a giant of the imagination.' (page 107) In Bloom's world, nothing is original - all texts are wilful misinterpretations of other texts. But writers repress that knowledge because they can't handle it. Then, because that knowledge is repressed, it has even more of an influence over them. That's not a bad thing though. Bloom writes in A Map of Misreading (1975) that, 'The glory of repression, poetically speaking, is that memory and desire, driven down, have no place to go in language except up onto the heights of sublimity, the ego’s exultation in its own operations.' (page 100) 

So much goes on in our minds that we have no conscious awareness of and the subconscious mind works very differently from the conscious mind. We're kind of separated from the subconscious but it is intimately involved with our lives. But what actually is the subconscious and what can we know about it? Modern psychologists and other experts don't seem to say much about the subconscious. Actually I did a search and I found some books about the subconscious mind. There's a whole list on Goodreads just about the subconscious mind: here. There are some interesting books on the list, but I think they cast the net a bit wide...like, there are a lot of self-help books on the list. I'm glad the list is broad though because I found some books that I like. 

I'm not going to buy any books right now though. I have enough books already, and I have a lot of good ones. I even have some of the best books about the subject of the subconscious mind, including, The Essentials of Psycho-Analysis by Freud (paperback), and Psychology and Alchemy by Jung (pdf).

immanence

I like to attempt the impossible when I do art. I don't always do it, but one of the things I do is to find images I like and use them as references. I always fail but in interesting ways. 

There's something mysterious about what artists do. There's a kind of alchemy. They just apply paint and you can see that that's what they're doing, but then, when you look at it afterwards, it's not just paint - it's an image of something. The mechanics of it are easier than we expect. For example, facial features are represented by a couple of short lines. 

My favorite kind of art is impressionsism because you can see both the paintedness of the work and what it represents. There's something very beautiful about that - more beautiful, I think, than art work that is more realistic. With impressionism, the artist makes it very clear that the work is a painting, but there's also a faithfulness to the subject, which creates a tension between abstraction and reality. 

I've always liked the idea of 'the flawed masterpiece', but I mean that in a different way to how the expression is often used. I think it's often used to describe something that is really good but has a flaw that stops it from being a true masterpiece. I like the idea of the flaw being what makes the work a masterpiece. 

The concept we have of perfection is anaemic and lifeless. We imagine perfection as being far away from everyday life and ordinary people. But there's a kind of perfection that is already here. You're alive. It's a miracle. 

virtuosity

When ideas get brought into the real world, there's always a distortion that happens, as if the reality in which we live can't accommodate the ideal. Everything very pure and good becomes somehow malevolent. Everything excellent in theory becomes vicious in practice. 

It also works the other way. Circumstances and events that seem really unfortunate and difficult can give us an opportunity of personal transformation. The way that seems comfortable and easy and pleasant is actually treacherous and dangerous. In this world, everything that seems like an escape is a trap. 

Often, the best thing you can do to get what you want is to stop trying to get it. It's almost like a law...the moment you stop striving for a goal it happens. That act of stopping - of not trying - somehow releases the thing. 

the process of creation

We think of what we see with our eyes as being unmediated - we're just looking at stuff. But our brains, not our eyes, actually do a lot of the work of seeing. Sometimes, if we look at an image upside down, we can't quite figure out what it's an image of. So, although our eyes can perceive the image, we can't see it. 

That could be why two different people can be eyewitnesses but have a very different understanding about what happened. One of them may not have understood what happened. Preconceptions can also play a part. If you think something is likely to happen, you're more likely to interpret what you see as being that event happening. Our minds are very good at filling in the gaps and making sense out of disorder, even when what we see actually is disordered. 

I watched an interview of Siri Hustvedt - Siri Hustvedt Interview: Art is a Memory - in which she talks about how to look at or see art and the difference between visual art and writing. She says that writing is different in that, when you look at an image, you see everything all at once, but when you write about something, you have to provide the details in a serial format - this, then this, then this. And she talks about how, if she writes an essay about a work of art, she's not translating the image itself into written form, she's translating her experience of looking at the image into written form. Earlier in the interview she talked about that experience and about how it involves taking time to engage with the work of art. I think this relates to what I was thinking about recently and wrote about here - that art and other forms of creativity are more about the process than about the final result. 

What I was thinking before was that the artist's experience of the art work is very different from the viewer's experience. For the artist, it's a process. The viewer sees the finished work. I think this way of thinking about art is why I don't get very excited about going to art galleries. Siri Hustvedt is talking about making processes out of the art. Her way of looking at the art is a process. Her translation of that experience into writing is a process. 

I can relate to this as well. Just looking at art is kind of boring, but if I start analysing an art work I'm looking at, with the intention of writing something about it, and then go away and write something, that's really satisfying and interesting. Same with poetry. I usually don't get poetry the first time I read it. Often I'm completely mystified by it. So, it's hard to like it. But when I start going through it line by line, analysing it, trying to figure out what the poet is trying to achieve, and then writing about it - then it becomes fascinating and very satisfying, because I'm getting it - I'm actually understanding it. 

process and practice

My view is that creative expression is not about starting with a great idea - a fully formed idea about how the finished product will look - and then executing that idea, it's about the process. 

I think that's why children are such enthusiastic creators. They understand that it's not about the final product, it's about the process. As we get older, we become more focused on the final product and, if the final product we produce doesn't seem very impressive, we don't see the point in engaging with the process. 

links and structure

I really like learning C++ and for some reason something happened with my computer so that, whenever I downloaded and tried to use an IDE for C++, I got an error message - something about how the compiler couldn't be found. I know that the compiler is in my computer and I don't know why the IDE can't find it. I had no idea how to fix it, so after my last couple of attempts, I just gave up and thought that, until I get a new computer, I won't be able to learn and use C++. 

But the other day I tried again and sure enough I got the error message. This time though, I thought, I'm going to have a go at fixing this. Something I've learnt in recent years is that, with a bit of technical knowledge, it's possible to do things by googling and following online tutorials and suggestions. You don't even need to understand what the problem is. Just google - "how to fix '[paste error message here]' ". So, I did that and found a YouTube video about how to deal with this problem, and I fixed it. Now I can learn C++ again. 

Why do I like C++? I think I like it because it's difficult (which makes it interesting) but not too difficult. I've never liked Python that much because of how user-friendly it is. As many people say, it's kind of like you're writing instructions in English, and I don't like that. I already know English. I want to learn a computer language. I warmed up to it a bit when I learnt about some of the things you can do with it, but for enjoyment of learning, I prefer C++. 

My learning of coding and IT is kind of like the early stages in the education system. Each year, you don't cover all new content. Instead, you spend most of the year going over what you learnt the year before and then you go just a bit further. I go through the same tutorial series over and over and each time I get a bit further and understand a bit better, and then I might move on to a new tutorial series that I haven't gone through before. 

I'm gradually phasing into working on my own projects. I've done that to some extent by using HTML and CSS to create a static website for free using Git Hub Pages. I want to do something more creative with that - like create a website that is strange and interesting and tells some kind of story - a kind of multimedia experience. I like the idea of that but I don't know if it would be that interesting or enjoyable for people. One of the things that people like about books is their linearity. You start at the beginning and work your way through the story. There's a sense that you're being taken on a journey. I sometimes wish that websites had that kind of linearity, especially when I find one that's very interesting or entertaining or useful. I want to approach it systematically and cover everything but there's no guide for doing that. That makes it kind of shallow in a way. A story builds in richness - each new segment contributing to a fuller picture. But a website is just separate pieces of information linked to each other. 

Actually, when you look at code, it has that linearity. The computer starts at line one and works its way down. You can't refer to a variable that is only mentioned further down the code. You have to let the computer know about the variable before you do anything with it. 

Hyperlinks are obviously very important. They're the basis of the internet itself. But maybe we shouldn't see them as being central to the presentation of information. Yes, they facilitate the presentation of information but maybe storytelling is still the best way of actually presenting the information. Typewriting, word processing or paper and pen facilitate the writing of stories, but we know not to make the story hinge on those tools. So, maybe with websites and multimedia texts, we should be providing the reader with more structure and sign-posting - telling them how to work through the material presented. Ideally there should be both. You should be able to just move around and explore by clicking on the links, but also there should be a way of working through the content systematically if you want to. 

figuring it out

I've learnt a lot this year. This year has made sense of so many other years in my life. I've had conversations with so many different people and I've drawn on key conversations to construct the story of a new life. 

It's like Frankenstein's monster. I used the different parts - the words that various people spoke to me - and I put them together myself in a way that enabled me to survive - to live. 

No one person explained things to me, but different people shared words and ideas that really spoke to me and gave me pieces to put in the puzzle I was building. The puzzle didn't exist though. It wasn't like a jigsaw puzzle which is meant to be put together and all the pieces have their place. It was something new and that I had to figure out as I went. 

creating

Among the things I've been doing pretty much every day are writing my blog and doing art. When I haven't been writing for a while, it's really hard to get back into it. Same with art. But when I'm doing it every day, it comes naturally. 

There's been an interesting issue that has arisen around the question of being productive. I don't make any money from my blog or from my art, but I want to, so I've taken steps to make that happen. I've been doing that at the same time as I've been getting back into writing my blog and making art regularly, and I've found that, over time, the creative aspect has dominated the productive aspect.

ART

I set up a Redbubble shop so that I can sell products with my art on it. I also use Canva for some designs and use some classic art that is in the public domain, so it's not subject to copyright. At first, I was making art with Redbubble in mind, and I was adjusting the settings on the digital art programs I use to suit Redbubble, and creating art with that specific purpose. But I quickly got really tired of that. It was so uninspiring, and I longed to just be creative. So I stopped adjusting the settings and creating for Redbubble and just created art. I still use some of my art for Redbubble and I also plan to do more artwork with Redbubble in mind, but I also like creating art for its own sake, and that's the more dominant thing at the moment. 

BLOG

I set up a blog/ website that has my own domain name and that I pay to have hosted, because that way I can use it to make money. I'm still trying to figure the whole thing out. After a while, it sort of came back to the question of, what am I going to write? What content am I going to create? And I really didn't know. So, I'm struggling with the technical aspect and learning about that, but then there's the probably more important question of writing and making content. To work on that I decided to start writing for Medium because that will give me the chance to produce this other kind of content that is quite different from my own personal blog. It's more for an audience and seeks to provide some kind of value. So, I'm learning about Medium and its rules and how to create articles in it. I've mastered the technical aspects, read a lot of articles on Medium written by other people, and watched some YouTube videos about how to do well on Medium. I'm ready to write my first article, but the same thing that I wrote above applies. I'm not used to writing this kind of content. I have to learn, which will happen as I do it. But that process is not completely separate from the process of writing for this blog. They're both about writing, and as I develop my writing in this blog, my writing of this other kind of content - for Medium and for my website - will be informed by that development. 

Whether it's writing or art, it's the creative act that is at the heart of it, and it's working on that that gives the art or the content its value. 

detach from results

The mind is like the eye in the sense that it can only focus on one thing at a time. One of the ways that being more active helps with rumination is that it gives your mind other things to engage with. 

You can't stop ruminating by trying to stop ruminating. It's like anxiety. Anxiety gets its power from the way you react to it. You have an emotional reaction - you resist it - and that feeds it. Likewise, with rumination - the more you recoil from it or try to fight it, the more power you give it. 

One of the best ways of dealing with anxiety is exposure. You deliberately go into situations where you know you will experience anxiety. Then, when you're in that situation and you're anxious, you stay and you do things in that situation, then, after a while, you leave. The key thing is that you're not running away. You're leaving when you're ready. You're teaching yourself that there is no threat. 

This whole approach, of dealing with challenging mental states by not fighting, and even embracing them, is a bit counter-intuitive. I remember learning about the strategies of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy in 'The Happiness Trap' by Russ Harris, and he writes in the book that you need to forget the idea that practicing these techniques is going to make you feel better. They will help you to feel better but you can't do them with that in mind, because they don't work like that. You have to do them because they are good things to do. You have to have a higher goal than just feeling pleasure and avoiding pain. 

In a way, it's kind of discouraging that you can't use these strategies to get what you want - to fix yourself - but when you understand that principle of doing things because they're worthwhile, it opens up a new world. The way forward lies in doing the things in quadrant 2 of Stephen Covey's time management matrix - the things that are important but not urgent...things like learning, planning, reflecting, creating, engaging with people and activities, pursuing spiritual growth. 

never going back

"Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see." Hebrews 11: 1

Jesus is very practical in his teaching. Like, with worry, for example, he doesn't admonish us not to do it because it's wrong, faithless or unspiritual. The main thing he says about it is that it's pointless. It's unhelpful, and we have better things to think about. 

Faith can be very practical as well. It can be a belief in what works and helps. Sometimes we get the idea that faith is something ethereal and not of this world, that it's about what creed you subscribe to, what doctrines you believe to be true. 

I was thinking about this issue because there's something in my life at the moment that relates to faith but it's not really spiritual as such, although spirituality is part of it. 

I'm referring to my faith in the power of my daily goals. My top goal - my first priority every day - is to spend time with God by reading the Bible, writing my insights and praying, so there is a spiritual element to it, but pretty much all my other goals are not directly related to spirituality. They're goals that I would recommend to anyone who wants to have a good life - things like, exercise, eating healthily, working, doing creative things, etc. 

Just lately, as I've been learning and changing to be more active and engaged and ruminating/ withdrawing less, I've seen the power of my goals, when I actually do them, to change my life and to bring about healing and recovery. I'm working through a particular issue and it's very challenging. It's painful and difficult and I have a lot of fear. Changing to be more active is essential for me in working through this issue.

It's been life changing and it gives me hope. But when I have a bad day, it's easy for me to lose that hope - to lose that faith. Rumination is the opposite of my daily goals. It's what stops me from being active and engaged. For a long time it has done that. I've added a few goals lately but most of my daily goals have been there for years, even decades, and it's rumination that has always gotten in the way of achieving them. But lately I've really been learning, firstly about my need to change, and then the reality that I have to change. So, I've been doing a lot more lately and ruminating less. 

But then I have a hard day and it's easy for me to fall back into thinking I can't do it. I can't do my goals. It's too hard. The good thing is though, that that way of living is losing it's grip on me. Even while I'm feeling incapacitated, I'm thinking, OK, yes, it's hard, but just try. I ask myself, what's the next goal on my list? Then I say to myself, take your time, and when you're ready, do it. What else is there on my list that I can get myself to do? What little steps can I take in the right direction? How can I scale my goals down if necessary to make them achievable? So, it's a start and then tomorrow and in the days to come, I can build on it and do more. 

looking back

The Bible says that "No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it." (Hebrews 12:11) Earlier in the same passage, it says, "Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as his children." (Hebrews 12:7)

It's really hard to see this and think this way. It seems like something is wrong when things are hard or we suffer. We don't see the value in those circumstances. It helps to reflect on the strength and the wisdom and the greatness of God. Things haven't gone wrong. God is building something beautiful. There is a meaning to these trials. We always see that later on. We look back on times of suffering and we see something good. We don't see pain. 

burning down the house

This change I'm going through, of moving to being more active and engaged instead of ruminating and withdrawing, is difficult. It's like I've built the house I live in out of rumination. It's what I know. It's my comfort zone. We ruminate and worry because we do get something from them. They are attempts at dealing with things, albeit maladjusted ones. 

Some of the things I'm learning on this journey are:

• I'm learning to recognise when I ruminate and to see those thoughts as untrue. It's real progress being able to recognise when I'm thinking that way - being aware of it as a thought or a story, rather than accepting it as reality. I think the reason that I notice it now is because I'm not doing it all the time, like I used to. I still do it a lot but now I'm able to recognise it for what it is: a distortion and a lie. 

• I don't have to wait for the storm to pass, I don't have to wait for my brain to be rewired...I can proactively engage in recovery and my new life. My new life and recovery are represented by my daily goals. 

• I'm learning to start small and be consistent. I might need to do a scaled-down version of some goals. I might not do some of them very well. It might be more of an attempt than an achievement in some cases. It might not be as meaningful or enjoyable as I would hope. But I can try every day. I can do these things on good days and bad days.

The effects of doing my daily goals instead of ruminating:

• The positive effect of choosing action and occupation instead of rumination - changing my life/ living my new life
• The positive effect of the actual activity e.g. exercise improves my physical and mental health
• The building of good, healthy, life-enhancing habits
• Unhealthy and harmful habits and ways of coping will diminish with time and have less of a grip on me

It seems to me that there are obstacles in the way of me achieving my daily goals, but I'm learning that that's not true. It's as if I have a compelling inner narrative that demands my attention and stops me from doing things. It's really like that. That narrative is my rumination. I've been learning to break that down and to just do all the things, and it's changing me. 

creation

Our lives are like a work of art that we create or a story we write. 

Acceptance is really important. The more we try to control our feelings, the harder they will be to control. It's a weird phenomenon, and it's quite challenging when it comes to things like anxiety and insomnia, which are unpleasant mental states. We want to do something to get out of the state we're in, so we try all these strategies to fix the problem. But the strategies don't work because we're fighting with our own feelings. 

When you can't sleep and it's an ongoing problem, doing everything you can to try to sleep doesn't work. What does work is accepting that you're not going to sleep, while taking positive steps in the right direction. Similarly with anxiety and worry. Trying to fight the problem - like, for example, trying to reason your way out of your worries - just makes it worse. What helps is accepting the problem and, at the same time, taking action that is going to make a positive difference. 

We have to make friends with our monsters.