Yank's Free Range Turkey Trot Warming House and Bondage Barn

[dawn_of_night]

If you have a problem with the word, just avoid it....

*giggles*

Happy Thursday

 

[midwestyankee]

My reading - especially on Ye Olde Internette - is peripatetic. Thus, today, I came across an article asking to answer the question, "What is the best book every written?" One of many answers, and one with which I have some sympathy, was The Little Prince, by Antoine de St. Exupéry. As the article cited my favorite passage, I thought I'd drop it here. In some ways, I think this passage has a great deal to say about how we form friendships and relationships, and what they mean in a larger context.

"Who are you?" asked the little prince, and added, "You are very pretty to look at."

"I am a fox," the fox said.

"Come and play with me," proposed the little prince. "I am so unhappy."

"I cannot play with you," the fox said, "I am not tamed."

"Ah! Please excuse me," said the little prince. But after some thought, he added, "What does that mean -- 'tame'?"....

"It is an act too often neglected," said the fox. "It means to establish ties."

"To establish ties?"

"Just that," said the fox. "To me you are just a little boy who is just like a hundred thousand other little boys. And I have no need of you. And you, for your part, have no need of me. To you, I am nothing more than a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes. But if you tame me, then we shall need each other. To me, you will be unique in all the world. To you, I shall be unique in all the world.....

"If you tame me, it will be as if the sun came to shine on my life. I shall know the sound of a step that will be different from all others. Other steps send me hurrying back underneath the ground. Yours will call me, like music, out of my burrow. And then look: you see the grain fields down yonder? I do not eat bread. Wheat is of no use to me. The wheat fields have nothing to say to me. And that is sad. But you have hair that is the color of gold. Think how wonderful that will be when you have tamed me! The grain, which is also golden, will bring me back the thought of you. And I shall love to listen to the wind in the wheat...."​

Thoughts?

 

[Curious_in_Cali]

That is such a beautiful read, and it's just so romantical. Thank you for sharing it.

That said, it also made me ramble thoughts about how it plays into the idealistic notion that we can find our happiness in other people. That life purpose satisfactions are only found in the bonds and dependencies that these romances and attachments create. I have been thinking more and more about the not so subtle ways that society teaches us that we need these life mate realtionships to be whole and happy. As if we are not whole without them because we are born as incomplete beings and then fumble until we find our missing parts. That there is a fault in someone who finds a nourishing life in solitude or doesn't measure life success in family gatherings and barbecues. I wonder if more happy contentment would be made possible if we could find marriage and sanctuary for all the parts within ourselves.

"Make me happy" just feels kind of tense and hostile(?) to me. It creates the dynamic that the other person has a job to do more than a life to share. I think we are each individually responsible for our own life contentment and happiness. I find that I seek connections that sound much more like "Hey, I like you. Let's play." So much can happen in play, pain and pleasure, joy and sorrow, but that is what life the verb experience is supposed to be, isn't it?

Then again, having a job to do brings a common focus to my senses and can admittedly be rather arousing. I tend to chase the moments that make me feel grateful instead of just happy. I feel the power and shape of my sense of self and choices there, so it nourishes "me". It allows the range of human experices beyond just holding toothy grins and nodding at how comfortable the crowd is. I am grateful for the sadnesses and joyful things more equally now. Life cycles through these experiences like seasons, and I find my life momentum free up to a fluid state in realtionships that continually make me say "thank you.".

We are not more successful because we smile more than we strain. I wish there was more space held and shared for what hurts and stuggles, because I know I would feel incomplete without the freedom of experiencing my sadnesses and sorrows more than I would ever feel incomplete without a mate. But that's just me.

 

[Endless_Night]

It is a very beautiful passage. For some reason it also strikes me as rather...poignant.

I've never read The Little Prince. Oddly enough, this is the second reference to come my way in less than a week. Perhaps I should take a hint.

 

[wistfulwench]

It is beautiful and also tragically sad. The fox doesn't want to be tamed, cannot really be tamed... because then he will eat the boy, right?

There are relationships like that...

 

[midwestyankee]

That is such a beautiful read, and it's just so romantical. Thank you for sharing it.

That said, it also made me ramble thoughts about how it plays into the idealistic notion that we can find our happiness in other people. That life purpose satisfactions are only found in the bonds and dependencies that these romances and attachments create.

<snip>

We are not more successful because we smile more than we strain. I wish there was more space held and shared for what hurts and stuggles, because I know I would feel incomplete without the freedom of experiencing my sadnesses and sorrows more than I would ever feel incomplete without a mate. But that's just me.

I'm especially touched by your last point, which is quite real and useful. As for this particular passage, what strikes me is the choice of it all. Not that we don't often look for happiness in others, but that it's important to see that we choose to tame and allow ourselves to be tamed. It's a choice.

 

[midwestyankee]

It is a very beautiful passage. For some reason it also strikes me as rather...poignant.

I've never read The Little Prince. Oddly enough, this is the second reference to come my way in less than a week. Perhaps I should take a hint.

It's a delightful and challenging book. Also quite short, as French novels go. Reading it ought to be required for modern adulthood.

 

[midwestyankee]

It is beautiful and also tragically sad. The fox doesn't want to be tamed, cannot really be tamed... because then he will eat the boy, right?

There are relationships like that...

I recall such a conversation with the snake. But yes, there are, indeed relationships like that.

 

[Curious_in_Cali]

I'm especially touched by your last point, which is quite real and useful. As for this particular passage, what strikes me is the choice of it all. Not that we don't often look for happiness in others, but that it's important to see that we choose to tame and allow ourselves to be tamed. It's a choice.

A choice. Yes, we can choose to say yes or no to the offers.

And then there is this thing about the heart wanting what it wants regardless of what is offered and primal desire not feeling like a choice at all.

 

[desertslave]

A choice. Yes, we can choose to say yes or no to the offers.

And then there is this thing about the heart wanting what it wants regardless of what is offered and primal desire not feeling like a choice at all.

Please, could you elaborate on what this phrase is supposed to mean? I've heard it a few times and honestly it bewilders me a little. Maybe because I grew up with 'wanting ain't getting?'

 

[Curious_in_Cali]

Please, could you elaborate on what this phrase is supposed to mean? I've heard it a few times and honestly it bewilders me a little. Maybe because I grew up with 'wanting ain't getting?'

That's mostly my point. Wanting and not getting because reasons is reality. But that said, certain attractions exist beyond reason. Attraction does not always result in possession, but you can be completely possessed by wanting. Certain attractions seem to have no choice to them, even if there is choice in pursuing them. Does that make sense?

 

[desertslave]

That's mostly my point. Wanting and not getting because reasons is reality. But that said, certain attractions exist beyond reason. Attraction does not always result in possession, but you can be completely possessed by wanting. Certain attractions seem to have no choice to them, even if there is choice in pursuing them. Does that make sense?

Immensely.

 

[Misshotndeep]

That's mostly my point. Wanting and not getting because reasons is reality. But that said, certain attractions exist beyond reason. Attraction does not always result in possession, but you can be completely possessed by wanting. Certain attractions seem to have no choice to them, even if there is choice in pursuing them. Does that make sense?

I sadly concur.

 

[midwestyankee]

That's mostly my point. Wanting and not getting because reasons is reality. But that said, certain attractions exist beyond reason. Attraction does not always result in possession, but you can be completely possessed by wanting. Certain attractions seem to have no choice to them, even if there is choice in pursuing them. Does that make sense?

Dammit. This makes much too much sense. Per usual.

 

[desertslave]

That's mostly my point. Wanting and not getting because reasons is reality. But that said, certain attractions exist beyond reason. Attraction does not always result in possession, but you can be completely possessed by wanting. Certain attractions seem to have no choice to them, even if there is choice in pursuing them. Does that make sense?

I've been chewing on this, and just talked with my brother (who made me cry in a sweet way), so I'm blurting.

Yes, wanting can be an overwhelming, compelling experience. Attraction is gobsmacking when it happens. But here's the thing...it doesn't happen in a vacuum, in happens within that pesky reality. That should mean that it's uncool to lie, manipulate, seduce, etc. in order to gratify one's own heart if there are innocent bystanders involved.

"Because I felt like it" is how it ends up sounding to me. That might fly for a five-year-old. Tack on a few decades and it just becomes exactly what it is...a childish excuse for having one's own way without accepting any of the responsibility for the consequences.

I'm getting old, I guess. I've become increasingly disgusted by the flagrant lack of personal responsibility more and more people seem to feel or even respect. It's the reason Bart Simpson's "wasn't me, didn't do it" character horrified me. People being assholes to each other is not cute.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[butterfly_flip]

My reading - especially on Ye Olde Internette - is peripatetic. Thus, today, I came across an article asking to answer the question, "What is the best book every written?" One of many answers, and one with which I have some sympathy, was The Little Prince, by Antoine de St. Exupéry. As the article cited my favorite passage, I thought I'd drop it here. In some ways, I think this passage has a great deal to say about how we form friendships and relationships, and what they mean in a larger context.

"Who are you?" asked the little prince, and added, "You are very pretty to look at."

"I am a fox," the fox said.

"Come and play with me," proposed the little prince. "I am so unhappy."

"I cannot play with you," the fox said, "I am not tamed."

"Ah! Please excuse me," said the little prince. But after some thought, he added, "What does that mean -- 'tame'?"....

"It is an act too often neglected," said the fox. "It means to establish ties."

"To establish ties?"

"Just that," said the fox. "To me you are just a little boy who is just like a hundred thousand other little boys. And I have no need of you. And you, for your part, have no need of me. To you, I am nothing more than a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes. But if you tame me, then we shall need each other. To me, you will be unique in all the world. To you, I shall be unique in all the world.....

"If you tame me, it will be as if the sun came to shine on my life. I shall know the sound of a step that will be different from all others. Other steps send me hurrying back underneath the ground. Yours will call me, like music, out of my burrow. And then look: you see the grain fields down yonder? I do not eat bread. Wheat is of no use to me. The wheat fields have nothing to say to me. And that is sad. But you have hair that is the color of gold. Think how wonderful that will be when you have tamed me! The grain, which is also golden, will bring me back the thought of you. And I shall love to listen to the wind in the wheat...."​

Thoughts?

To me, the word 'tame' has always had negative connotations, as if being tamed meant you lost part of yourself, the very essence of what makes you, you. To be tamed was to be caged, to be caged was to be denied freedom.

Had you asked me before reading this if I wished to be tamed, than answer would have been a very defiant and definite No! Now, on reading this through the eyes of an altered perspective, I sit here and wonder if I already have been.........

 

[LallyH]

To me, the word 'tame' has always had negative connotations, as if being tamed meant you lost part of yourself, the very essence of what makes you, you. To be tamed was to be caged, to be caged was to be denied freedom.

Had you asked me before reading this if I wished to be tamed, than answer would have been a very defiant and definite No! Now, on reading this through the eyes of an altered perspective, I sit here and wonder if I already have been.........

I agree about the word 'tamed' - to me, it means having part of my character ground out of me and being less as a result, lacking spark and fire. I would be meek and amenable, passive almost, but it wouldn't make me feel a better person and secretly I would resent it

But I see the passage as a whole as a more positive thing - instead of tamed, I read 'connected'. In a world of people, I believe that we still need a strong connection to at least one other person, to feel wanted and needed.

The risk, of course, is that we cannot choose who we feel these connections to.

 

[butterfly_flip]

I agree about the word 'tamed' - to me, it means having part of my character ground out of me and being less as a result, lacking spark and fire. I would be meek and amenable, passive almost, but it wouldn't make me feel a better person and secretly I would resent it

But I see the passage as a whole as a more positive thing - instead of tamed, I read 'connected'. In a world of people, I believe that we still need a strong connection to at least one other person, to feel wanted and needed.

The risk, of course, is that we cannot choose who we feel these connections to.

Sorry, I didn't make myself very clear, did I? *slaps self*

I see it as positive too, although yes, I do relate that to my connection with 1 person in particular, and as someone who very rarely makes very deep connections with people, I treasure it greatly. Maybe he has 'tamed' me(in the context of connection as you described it) maybe the taming wasn't the traumatic event I supposed it to be given I never considered that's what had happened.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Cumference]

Turn that around.

Humans are a succes, because we are horny, curious, aggressive, creative and most importantly: we're social animals.

We are best, when we're part of a group. We can be smart on our own, but when we team up, we kick some serious ass!



Is being part of a social interaction opposite to freedom?

 

[Collar_N_Cuffs]

Turn that around.

Humans are a succes, because we are horny, curious, aggressive, creative and most importantly: we're social animals.

We are best, when we're part of a group. We can be smart on our own, but when we team up, we kick some serious ass!



Is being part of a social interaction opposite to freedom?

In some ways yes, in some ways no...
We give up some freedoms in exchange for being accepted into certain social groups. But in other ways, cooperation with others can provide a lot of freedoms that we could not accomplish on our own.
So... yes and no

 

[Endless_Night]

In some ways yes, in some ways no...
We give up some freedoms in exchange for being accepted into certain social groups. But in other ways, cooperation with others can provide a lot of freedoms that we could not accomplish on our own.
So... yes and no

I totally agree with this. Engaging in social grouping almost necessitates a loss of personal freedom. However, social groups are capable of creating changes that lead to a distribution of more widespread freedom overall.

 

[midwestyankee]

I know I started this, and all that. But doesn't anyone want to talk about kinky sexy fun times?

 

[desertslave]

When Master gets out of the hospital, I'll be happy to regale you.