![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I am just not having a good weekend. The material in the Underworld workshop has been good, but aside from the annoyance of getting up in the morning, I sat there the whole afternoon feeling very out of place because with only a couple exceptions, I am easily 15-25 years the junior of everyone else in the room, and feeling like I shouldn't even be there because I was not having deep, interesting experiences and in fact was often failing to have the basic part, that of feeling I was actually within the Underworld. It's making me seriously question whether I want to spend another $180 to most likely repeat the experience in July. I thought going to actual workshops would be helpful, but when it's clear I'm far behind everyone else, it hardly makes it worth it, because I feel so bad. In fact I'm rather questioning my right to be in any such place, including gathers. I remember in one of the workshops at Pantheacon that Orion Foxwood was talking about having Sight, and how this is something one is either born with or is not, and it's either awake all one's life, or shows up in puberty. As I'm now 25 it seems highly unlikely I'm suddenly going to "bloom" someday, so lacking even the basic aptitude that would be necessary to work in magical tradition, it makes me wonder what the fuck I think I am doing? Similar with gathers.. obviously that is also something one is, or is not, and it seems like jazz ("if you have to ask, you'll never know")... something where "if you have to question whether you are, then you're not".
no subject
Date: May. 29th, 2004 11:35 pm (UTC)From:I personally believe that every person has "sight" and that it simply varies in degrees.
Well, there may be a slight terminology difference here; "Sight" in the cunning/faery context of the workshop (and of traditional seership in general) is a bit more specific than how it's commonly used to just mean "psychic perceptions" (which I still disagree that everyone has, but here nor there). More and more I'm coming to realize that there are just inherent differences in "greatness" of about every attribute one could think of, and there's no way everyone's ever going to be anything like equal, even given infinite time.
You're one of the more innately magical people I know
Uh, you've met me what, four times tops? What on earth are you basing this on?
no subject
Date: May. 30th, 2004 12:25 am (UTC)From:Uh, you've met me what, four times tops? What on earth are you basing this on?
a) Seeing you every year at Thresholds since 1999. Admittedly, you're usually buzzing from proximity to Cel so my estimate of your magicalness may be different from what it would be if I saw you by yourself, but there are other things too.
b) I've seen you making Cel buzz in return, and have felt the energy you two can give off when paired. Most people I know don't do this, not even when paired with a deeply connected partner.
c) I've participated in ritual with you at Thresholds. Once, it was even a ritual you helped co-run with Cel.
d) I'm a fairly frequent visitor to your website and journal. You place a good bit of magic in both places, much more than many who claim to be magical beings.
e) The same is true of many of the posts I've seen you make to lists over the years. You put your soul into things you make, even posts in some cases, and the end result is magical in my opinion.
But hey, it was just meant as a compliment and encouragement, nothing more. If you don't think I know you well enough for you to feel comfortable with me making such a statement, I'm willing to withdraw it. I meant no offense, nor did I mean to assume an inappropriate familiarity.
no subject
Date: May. 31st, 2004 01:10 am (UTC)From:Those were the "four times tops" I was referring to. I don't think that's a big enough sample. Really, stick them together. Pretend we were all there for four days straight. Do you really think that's enough time to get a sense of someone?
Admittedly, you're usually buzzing from proximity to Cel
Continuing to consider that your samples are WtT only, I haven't been doing so since 2001, so while I guess that's 3 out of 4 WtTs you've seen me at, I still don't think of it as "usually".
c) I've participated in ritual with you at Thresholds. Once, it was even a ritual you helped co-run with Cel.
I can't make any speculations about rituals in other years, but the 2002 one (the one you mention) was, in a word, wrong. If nothing else, let us say that was "the bad year".
d) I'm a fairly frequent visitor to your website and journal. You place a good bit of magic in both places
Keep in mind that a lot of my website dates several years back. As for my journal, you're in on a couple filters, so this is not something that's generally present.
e) The same is true of many of the posts I've seen you make to lists over the years.
I really have no idea what you are talking about here, honestly, because my own memory* of most of my posts is short, negatively-centred things, much like my journal posts are. You know, the kind of things that often start with "actually...".
* - For the last several years, at least, and I think this would be borne out by archive searches, since I've done them for other things and run across my own posts in the process.
If you don't think I know you well enough for you to feel comfortable with me making such a statement, I'm willing to withdraw it
It's not "comfort"; I simply think you can't possibly have a large enough sample to base any kind of reasonable conclusion on. It's like looking at an angel food cake and going "this tastes good so it must be easy to make". It's just nonsense.
(well, easy maybe if you already have cooking skills. I know when I tried to make one for the first time when I was a child, I had no idea what "stiff peaks" meant on the egg whites, and wound up with a baked omelet thing in the pan rather than a cake...)
no subject
Date: May. 31st, 2004 01:35 am (UTC)From:I'm not going to argue with you over this, though. I've stated my perception... you clearly choose not to accept it as accurate, and that's your choice. Trying to convince you to accept it would be a waste of time far better spent trying to convince Dusk he really is beautiful.... ;-)
no subject
Date: May. 30th, 2004 12:38 am (UTC)From:This is specifically in reference to precognitive ability, then?
It's the only thing--including ability to perceive a peron's nature, see through glamer, etc--that I think is primarily determined by innate ability. even then, there can be exceptions.
I could, of course, be wrong.
As for "sight" in general, I have a friend who is in his mid-20s who spent some time a while back telling me he didn't have it. I got him talking about his few experiences, and when we were done, I pointed out to him every time I'd seen of when he had used some kind of sight.
He'd simply been looking for something spectacular, awe-inspiring, and undeniable. We can physically see, hear, and touch something and still have doubts about whether or not it's real. Why should this be any different?
no subject
Date: May. 31st, 2004 12:51 am (UTC)From:Well, that's more of a side effect, as far as I can tell; it has more specifically to do with perceiving and interacting with the Faery/Ancestral realms, I think. The main example focused on was receiving communications from "ghosts" or other spirit beings (raps, direct appearances..), but other things seemed to fall into it as well.