Between Infinities

Welcome back to The Logo Edit, an extension of LOGO URL.

This publication is exclusively supported by its readers. Become a member to receive full access to the archive and upcoming posts.

In a nutshell: Asking what rests at the corner of lasting and fleeting.

An (unrelated) anecdote: If you didn’t care about the competition, why would you mind if people watched you as you worked? Just Wednesday, I met two people, one more concerned than the other about whether or not they were being studied. They paid mind to “if” photos were being taken of what they had at their table. None of these things were of their own making, but yes, we could say it was slightly their “curation”, a putting together. When I asked why so, about the photo thing, as they tried to monitor who put their phones up and down to document what was being seen, they said “they just might send it to a competitor.” I understood, but thought, did it really matter? Couldn’t inquiring first be a better initial ‘urgency’, before imposing rules that no one was going to follow anyway? If you also held this same concern, consciously keeping your guard up as a means of protecting your work, what have you learned about how you react to wandering eyes?

Some updates: We’re back on this Sunday for book club. We’ve been reading The Power of Now, chapter by chapter. If you want to join us for a while to discuss chapter 2: consciousness: the way out of pain, send me an email back & I’ll send you the book and meeting details. Also, I opened my consultations back up for those who’ve been wanting to chat about what they’ve been working on in more detail. Take a peek at my calendar and reserve a time for yourself.

Song of the week: Mary J. Blige, Be Without You (Live), 2006

The word infinite comes from Latin infinitus, from in- ‘not’ + finitus ‘finished, finite’.

“In”, to the world, has meant “entrance” for forever. If you were “in”, you were it.

Alternatively, its opposite, “out”, pointed to words like beyond, elsewhere, at bay.

In this case, we didn’t roam too far from what was already made of ‘finite’. We held it as a synonym and symbol of a door that reached an ultimate closing.

When added together, ‘in-finite’ illustrated ‘the way to the immeasurable’.

If we asked what role lied in deconstructing the between: the above and below, the indefinite but eternal, we intrinsically hinted at our relationship to anyone but ourselves.

Our affinity for belonging to, came from our sense for company. As we accumulated footprints, we were persuaded to puzzle over responding evenly in solitude as in communion.

When we dwell on who should surround our horizons, we reserve our eyes for and grow receptive to those who show an aptitude for devotion, leveled understanding, and willful tenderness.

Bridges, the point at which parts of a structure are joined, exist for those who have someone to see once made across. Before this decision no longer became a question, (meeting to not pass by), how could we make sense of what the crossroads was comprised of?

Resemblance: Here, proceeding didn’t allude to wandering. When we make room to remember, we see how to compare the common and two-of-a-kind. Ree - zzem - bull… who looked like what we had yet to be?, we ask. Where did similitude rest? Combing for parallels and their meaning was ingrained in the human condition, pursuing the same duplicates before rummaging through the non-uniform and supposed tangled up. The unchanged doesn’t ask of us, it mentioned the parts we didn’t yet groan to recall. We credit more, those whose steps agree to our melodies. When we check for differences, we stick to ditto’s, the indivisible. Too much of what is not our mirror led to snowballing more of the indistinguishable. 

Harmony: In the same fashion… This is where favor changes places with the ‘calculated’. All that estimating goes away. Harmony or ‘joining, concord’, is disloyal to any figure people put it to. Harmony only shows you its (((senses))) through action; it is not seen. We can decipher what is implied by its impression through impulse. Only one in a couple million have held this subject matter for more than a modulation. Harmony was born under desired chance, having contrast enliven wherever it fascinated, circulated, and hummed. This in-tune-ness narrated the completeness’ entities, the reliance on one and the other. When you were surrounded by song, you heard sound cover the whole; it couldn’t break or spill over what had already been arranged to be in place.

Progress: The stones that you picked up and let drop off, fall off your finger, once released. These are the ones that you don’t decide to add to their descendance, you let them rest however they fall. ‘I’m here’ is where you leave this element. If you said I’m here ‘now’, you begin to fidget and pick at time. Progress alone doesn’t reside in a c-locked realm. It plays with what is above the heart, comprehending over the dial of push and retract. When we want to ‘check’ if what we’ve consumed has made us more alive or brittle, we process gain in relation to missing; how much further did the flow of this develop or conclude. We section up speed, weighing choice, and ‘prosper’, a parallel synonym to glue the on-my-way to the seldomly explained. 

Correspondence: I do, you do. So we think. Comparable association wasn’t just related to the apparently coincidental. It had its rhymes that assimilated and didn’t rival. When we reorganize ourselves for what complemented the unsaid, we partook in approaching what could almost overlap, recording the recited and just mentioned. This gesture scheduled itself in the more you rocked with it. Patterns ran into each other, just as our feet, depicting where to remain from. In this setting, you were a walking analogy, a chord to the compared, related, and evident. 

Congruity: I didn’t call you because it rained this morning, look… When we can’t come to a conclusion it’s not because this something happened, it’s because another else did. We make broad statements for broad arrangements because they fit just so. Aligning their midpoints to converge and agree to harmonize was another pledge, mixing until no one noticed what came from where. When you oriented yourself for amending, reconciliation was how you tallied the remake, squaring off edges, to looking for loose screws.  

Oneness: When you adopt “take it from me” to your vocabulary, you refer to the 1000 and 1 lives before you. ‘Take it from us and us too’ is a more truthful fit. What is answered in oneness is not that of the identical but from the articulate; that which is proportionate to the stable and regimented, synchronized and accounted for. Unions were their own orchestra, spelling out body, spirit, and faint suggestion. 

Consideration: While this is true, let’s keep this on this side. That reminds me, that belonged over there. Standards, when not in place, got restless. There was little totality without sensitivity. Extending ourselves to be primed for ‘accounting for’ meant we could express what was vulnerable from what had already swelled. Receptivity was what told how you received the tactile and the intuitive, the accumulation of involved mercies. 

Recognition: I would still feel the same about you if, if, if. This is what we say we like to hear without asking, when it comes to giving homage without our hands positioned outward and upward. The outline of what you give meaning to was the acknowledgement of designation and defense; you protect what you certify to claim, without apprehension or denial. Testimony sustained discovery, as did naming out loud.

Now, I ask you, where did pleasure lean while it was in between infinities: the suitable, enduring, or momentary?

…

See you soon,

x

Madison

@logourl