|
[ Jim Hare classic posts Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |
I pulled off the road at Nipton for a little coffee and a look at the vista. The general store and outbuildings sit desolate beside the railroad tracks, some forty empty miles from anywhere else along the two lane Joshua Tree Highway. The store reminded me of the “Bagdad Café” from the now cult movie of the same name.
From the raised berm of the train tracks, I could see beyond the vanishing points of the rails, to the jagged peaks at either end of the vast, empty desert valley.
Railroad tracks are big, bold, man-made metaphors of time, I thought. Wherever I might stand on the ties is the exact point between arriving and leaving. Uh oh, airy fairy, toot-toot, mystical choo choo experience! This particular railroad crossing was my own private Harmonic Concordance!
A drive in the desert is a spiritual journey, a pilgrimage to nowhere in particular or wherever I choose to pull over and muse in a great outdoor cathedral.
“Stop, Look, and Listen!” I remembered from first grade. So I did.
Holding a styrofoam cup of bad coffee like a dangling participle, too long in the carafe, what I heard reminded me of the night noises when I sit up alone. The “white sound” of civilization cannot reach this place, so the THX crunching of my shoes in the sand, the rustle of my clothing, and my own breathing startled my attention. These sounds I usually do not notice.
The big sky of this place reflects one’s inner echoes for as far as the spirit senses can soar. Holy. Peace. Remote desert morning, my kind of place!
In Reply to: Outdoor Cathedral posted by Jim H. on November 11, 2003 at 10:43:32:
What a great piece! Reminds me of my upbringing in the more desolate parts of Montana and Wyoming. Spiritual indeed.
Martha
In Reply to: Outdoor Cathedral posted by Jim H. on November 11, 2003 at 10:43:32:
Jim H, Makes you feel a little small in this big world, eh! Silver Fox!
In Reply to: Outdoor Cathedral posted by Jim H. on November 11, 2003 at 10:43:32:
A word shaman, that's what you are. Your writing has genuine healing power, Conejo. "THX crunching of my shoes". I love that line in it's seeming simplicity. You convey the mystery of THX, the walk along the Path, the Whatever.
In Reply to: Outdoor Cathedral posted by Jim H. on November 11, 2003 at 10:43:32:
Martha, my family owned a store in Anaconda at the turn of the century. My wife's people were homesteaders from Seco. I've travelled both Montana and Wyoming. So true, both have the landscape and big sky that inspires, and as Steve mentions, can make you feel small in body. At the same time it can make you feel expansive in spirit.
And "Bart", oh disguised one...word shaman? I'm glad my words seem healing to you. I think I would be more like a "word chiropractor" though. If I could administer just a little adjustment to the reader, I would be pleased. But, for sure, the process of writing is healing for the writer. An uplifting topic and a little humor are good for the soul.
In Reply to: Outdoor Cathedral posted by Jim H. on November 11, 2003 at 10:43:32:
Thanks, Jim.
As usual,you have lightened my day!
Namaste`
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Outdoor Cathedral posted by Bart on November 11, 2003 at 16:08:18:
Bart, what is THX?
In Reply to: Outdoor Cathedral posted by Jim H. on November 11, 2003 at 10:43:32:
Gosh. Haven't seen such beautiful writing about nature for a long time! Yes, the outdoors, and being with nature...that's where my whole being--body/mind/spirit--feel so at home, where every single cell is smiling the happiest smile, where the Harmonic Concordance is felt ALL the time!
Um, could you please write more about the beauty/magic/magnifance/charm/etc of nature please? Please? :)
In Reply to: Re: Outdoor Cathedral posted by Sally on November 12, 2003 at 09:14:56:
Sally,
Simply, THX means really good sound. High quality movies these days have the THX ad run before the movie to brag on the great sound.
A quote:
"In essence, THX is an exclusive set of technical standards established by the engineers at the world-reknowned production company, Lucasfilm Ltd. THX grew from George Lucas' personal desire to make the playback of film soundtracks in both movie theaters and Home Theatre as faithful as technically possible to the original film itself. The Home THX Program singularly represents the first workable performance standard in the sixty-year history of the hi-fi industry. Before any Home Theatre component can be THX Certified it must first pass a rigorous series of quality and performance tests. Only then can these products feature the THX logo.
A Star War origin... Film soundtracks are designed to be played in large cinemas. To achieve the best playback of these soundtracks from your Home Theatre, THX has made all of the necessary improvements that includes:
Re-equalization
Takes the edginess or "brightness" out of your home cinema sound, compensating for the fact that sound mixed for theatres will sound too bright when played back through flat response speakers in your home.
Timbre Matching
Matches the tone of your front speakers to your surrounds to compensate for the fact that only two surround speakers are used in a typical Home Theatre system instead of a full array as in a movie theatre.
Adaptive Decorrelation
Gives a stereo "feel" when your surrounds are playing mono and automatically switches off when they are playing stereo.
Bass Management
Electronic Crossover allows you to use more compact, easier-to-place speakers, while sending bass to a subwoofer system, improving frequency response, lowering distortion and increasing dynamic range.
Bass Peak Level Manager
Protects your subwoofer from overloading due to the great amount of bass a 5.1 soundtrack delivers.
Loudspeaker Position Time Synchronization
Lets you easily set up your system for an optimum listening position, which is difficult to achieve within the space constraints of most homes."
In Reply to: natural sound track posted by Bart on November 12, 2003 at 12:43:25:
THANK YOU BART! I love my subwoofers but now I know there's much more to love. Thanks for the very thorough explanation, I can appreciate Jim's prose even more.
In Reply to: Re: natural sound track posted by Sally on November 12, 2003 at 14:39:10:
This is tiresome, Gregory. You can't get a rise out of me. You are only proving that you are disruptive and mentally ill by doing things such as posting under other peoples' monikers. I find it sad that you have a need to do this.
In Reply to: Re: natural sound track posted by Sally on November 12, 2003 at 14:39:10:
Sorry to bring you into this wearisome and ongoing board saga, Sally. My apologies. I originally posted as Bart and referenced THX. Gregory, the board's poster boy for the mentally different, jumped in and replied to your question as to the meaning of "THX" using my board name for this post, in this instance "Bart". His answer to you was excellent and clear, but that's not the point.
Gregory's consistent track record of disruptive board behavior is making it increasingly difficult for people to post without dealing with his angry intrusions into strings, as well as increasingly difficult to know if the abusive or angry reply you recieve to a post you make is coming from Gregory or from the the poster associated with the actual name connected to the angry or abusive reply.
In this instance, he thinks he knows who I am and is attemtinng to draw me out. Phat chance, Gregory. All you do is expose yourself more and more.
Again Sally, I apologize for drawing you into this patheti- cally bad B-movie even a little bit.
In Reply to: Re: Stop posting under other peoples' names. posted by Gregory, stop. You aren't Bart on November 12, 2003 at 16:21:25:
I don't post under other people's names. Now I ralize that you won't believe me because your mind is already made up,
but I thought I might defend myself, just this once.
In Reply to: Re: Gregory's little game posted by The original Bart poster on November 12, 2003 at 16:38:57:
I got an idea. Why don't you post to Bill (privately of course, no need to embarras youself further) and ask him to check IP addresses. If Bart's and mine are the same, you win, case closed. If the aren't you owe me a public apology -if you're man enough...
In Reply to: Re: Gregory's little game posted by The original Bart poster on November 12, 2003 at 16:38:57:
Why would Gregory post such helpful info under someone else's name; seems to me he would want to take credit. Although I know Gregory loves a good brawl, I think he catches a lot of crap for stuff he has nothing to do with. Just my 2 cents.
In Reply to: Re: Gregory's little game posted by The original Bart poster on November 12, 2003 at 16:38:57:
No apology needed, Bart. Thank you for verifying the content though. I've been here long enough to see all the antics but use my own strategies for avoidance. The worst part in my estimation is how it may impact Walt's credibility. But this is G.'s playing field I'm afraid.
In Reply to: Re: Gregory's little game posted by Sally on November 12, 2003 at 19:09:21:
Thanks, Sally. My chief concern as well is the potential and existing impact of G.'s behaviors on Walt's credibility.
I don't know how long you've been here nor is it my place to ask, so pardon me if what I'm saying is stuff you're already aware of or disagree with. I'm a board "old timer" who still drops in from time to time to see how things are going. I imagine, but have no way of knowing, that many "old timers" do the same.
Even back in the halcyon days of the Stoll board, there were, in my opinion, sanctioned board standard operating procedures which unwittingly led to the conditions that prevail here now. I believe that the gradual change in tenor of the board led to the disappearance of many cooperative, friendly "old timers".
There were some remarkable exchanges and conversations on this board. Fortunately many are archived. I think it very possible to return to some updated version of the good times. What it would take, though, includes establishing a fair playing field.
I agree with you that this board is now G.'s playing field, which is exactly how he wants it, regardless of the costs to his own wellbeing.
Since blocking G. has proven ineffective, I think conscious, loving, and open intervention directed at G. admonishing him to get help and take care of himself is the wisest and kindest option available to caring board members who want a viable, truly functional board.
In Reply to: Re: At Play in the Fields of Gregory posted by The original Bart poster on November 12, 2003 at 21:23:49:
Bart, I was surprised at the liberal view taken by Walt at times but they are trying to keep things simple, I guess. Walt has kept the site "pure" and therefore can dictate any rules of censorship he wishes. Personally I would take full advantage of that and delete any initial posting he recognizes as inflammatory. By the time Bill gets involved.... there were 120 posts to delete the other day.
Perhaps technology will catch up to this situation and the playing field will level out. I'm sorry, I don't think cajoling will work on G.
In Reply to: Re: At Play in the Fields of Gregory posted by Sally on November 12, 2003 at 22:23:12:
Sally, sad to say, I think you're right as to the inefficacy of appealing to G.'s better judgement. By the way, please don't take my putting it that way as a negative reflection on you. My observation is in response to the "unique" reactions to the intervention post I made a couple of hours ago. Apart from the usual G-mind collective stuff, all I see in reply is anger and within-string sniping. Same old stuff. I have serious doubts that many will want to try out online intervention. The status quo of "just ignore it" seems easier, even as it is quite literally aiding and abetting, in my opinion, the ultimate downfall of the board. And the downfall of the board, I opine, is precisely what G. wants, and he wants to have one heck of a good time watching it happen.
Blocking didn't work. Bill's only one person. The concept of censorship is anathema to me. But in this instance, for the sake of board preservation? Perhaps the removal of all nasty, angry, abusive, and/or judgemental posts, regardless of who has posted them? Tough call. There might not be a whole lot of posts left. I'd likely see some of my own removed, were I to return here on a regular basis with the board in its current condition.
Sally, I just don't know. I'd like to think that kindness and goodness and compassion will prevail. In myself as well as others. In some ways I see this board as a hell realm; the most opportune place to come to learn and practice true service. In other ways, it's too much to take. Even coming here for a little while feels like being reinfected by a virus that I need to heal myself from after I leave. I become involved again to a certain extent, and then I always end up having to go.
In some ways the board dynamics have never been healthy and have allowed for gross and subtle abuse of power at different levels, and for the inappropriate playing out of negative emotions at the expense of others. And now the playing field has become extremely gross.
In all of this, I'm expressing my own opinions only, colored by my own life perspectives. I mean no offense. I wish with all my heart that boundless courage and compassion come to this board as permanent residents, just as I wish that they come to reside in my own heart, as in Gregory's heart; as in everyone's hearts. May this become a place of clear light.
In Reply to: Re: Sad to say...a progression from worst to best posted by The original Bart poster on November 12, 2003 at 23:42:15:
Your compassion filled posts accusing me of posting as you will be the first to go.
All I ask is that you get Bill to verify this. I'm not asking for it publicly. Have him email you privately.
I don't want to embarrass you. I just want you know you are wrong. Not publicly.
Privately where you can eat crow in private, and think twice before you post your little bon mots.
Then Carl, Sally and the rest of you self-righteous fuffalo buckers can see that you are perpetrating the very thing you say you abbhor.
In Reply to: natural sound track posted by Bart on November 12, 2003 at 12:43:25:
I am not very technical person but I am trying to undrstand the difference between THX and Dolby. Could you explain it to me?
In Reply to: Re: natural sound track posted by Night Owl on November 13, 2003 at 02:29:17:
My Turn.
Dolby (TM): Patented noise/hiss reduction systems developed by Ray Dolby to improve audio recording quality. Dolby A is commonly used in television; Dolby B was developed for use in consumer electronics.
THX: Refers to a series of specifications for surround sound systems. Professional THX is used in commercial movie theaters. Home THX specifications are not published and manufacturers must sign non-disclosure waivers before submitting their products for THX certification. Manufacturers that receive certification for their products must pay a royalty on units sold.
In Reply to: Re: Sad to say...a progression from worst to best posted by The original Bart poster on November 12, 2003 at 23:42:15:
I do understand your comments, Bart. The reality of these situations is that people will assume their "positions" until the "fullness of time" and for the most part they progress in their general direction. Just read their reactions when someone tries to counsel them. Reformation rarely works. Acceptance may be the key and, avoidance, as I mentioned before. Look on the positive side; at least your impersonator did you justice. :)
I still see Walt as the real victim here so I can only respect his tenacity and acquiesce to his modality.
In Reply to: Re: natural sound track posted by Gregory on November 13, 2003 at 03:31:39:
Wasn't Dolby working on suround sound and din't they develop it? I thought that was their invention.
In Reply to: Re: natural sound track posted by Night Owl on November 13, 2003 at 12:55:41:
Dolby originally started out as a noise/hiss reduction system. The primary application was cassette tape, as it was the recording medium of choice among amateurs.
Reel-to-reel doesn't have that problem because it is thicker and wider with a resulting better signal-to-noise ratio.
There are of course many other factors, but the the cassette market was blooming, and there was a huge demand for high-quality cassette playback. Eventually the Dolby technology was built into receivers to reduce all noise-generating sources.
In Reply to: Re: natural sound track posted by Gregory on November 13, 2003 at 13:07:27:
But I thought that Dolby was primarily working on noise reduction for movie soundtracks and movie theaters, wasn't that the bulk of their work? I thought cassette tape applications were done by other companies on Dolby's principles and Dolby was making commissions on it.
In Reply to: Re: natural sound track posted by Gregory on November 13, 2003 at 13:07:27:
Read this: http://www.dolby.com/
In Reply to: Re: natural sound track posted by Night Owl on November 13, 2003 at 13:56:46:
Sorry.
I got my information from a company that was a direct licensee of the technology.
Dolby, THX/Lucas, MPEG and a number of different groups worked on noise reduction for motion pictures. There is a separate group working on noise reduction for consumer applications.
It will be interesting to see how digital technology changes all this.
In Reply to: Re: natural sound track posted by Gregory on November 13, 2003 at 14:24:14:
No problem, just thought you might like to know:-)
In Reply to: Re: Sad to say...a progression from worst to best posted by Sally on November 13, 2003 at 09:37:19:
Sally, I agree with what you've had the key to all along. Acceptance is the key. I didn't get that. Thanks for the reality lesson.
Attempted reformation? Kind of, but not exactly. Unless I'm fooling myself, part attempted reformaton/part superman saves the world/part just plain trying to demonstrate (a) behavioral option(s) based on values that serve me the best when I'm disciplined enough to say "stop!" to my baser and more compelling and leading urges. Whooboy. Time to pull the broomstick out of my behind.
As to Walt being the victim here? Everything is so much a matter of personal perspective, and I'm not going to disagree with you, especially when I've never had an explicitly clear viewpoint on the issue. I've had my disagreements with his managerial style, and I've alternately felt love and annoyance towards him, and sometimes both simultaneously, but I have only admiration and respect for his motivations and accomplishments. When it all comes out in the wash, I love the guy.
It has annoyed, worried, and flat-out angered me when I've observed what appears to me to be a chronic and unhealthy board pattern, repeated by more than a few posters (generally male for some reason) over the years. Thus:
A new poster appears on the scene, hell bent to impress Walt, imprinting on him like a devoted puppy. He wants to be noticed and loved by Walt, and posts constantly, and cleverly. The new poster's frequent posts take up a disproportionate amount of board space. Walt's a very bright as well as compassionate guy and see's what's going on for what it is, but is also genuinely interested in what the poster has to say, hecause Walt has one of those minds that's hungry for knowledge. Hence, he doesn't (as far as I know) set limits on the poster until things on the board start getting out of control. By then quite a few regular posters are mad at the poster who's vying for Walt's attention and has developed a cocky attitude to boot, and then the string wars start. At some point the poster who's imprinted on Walt as Daddy realizes he's not going to
win Daddy's undivided love, and besides that, for some reason he can't understand he just isn't very popular among other regular board members. After several or more "I'm leaving now and you'll never see me here again" dying swan-type speeches, said poster usually vanishes, to be shortly replaced by a new clone. Some of the replacement clones seem to have had revenge fantasies directed towards Walt based upon fantasies of having been "jilted by Daddy". It's a fascinating and weird phenomenon. I figure it's got to be common to all cyberspace environments that aren't tightly monitored. Again, this is my opinion only.
There's so much that could come pouring out of me about my time here. I spent a long time reading the Archives last night and found myself crying. There is a tremendous amount of beautiful, rich material in there, and a lot of love and respectful give and take, between people whose names I'd long forgotten. It made me think that the only way anyone should be able to get access to posting on the bulletin board would be to have to read the Archives first, in their entirety. Walt created this phenomenal site, and for that he deserves tremendous respect. Sally, even though I originally addressed this to you, I've got to turn to Walt now.
Walt, my friend, I accept, love, and deeply respect you. Namaste.
P.S. Last I heard, Caroline's gone or going to go solo. My heart is not breaking. Oooh, there goes one of those baser feelings...
In Reply to: Re: Musings (to Sally and Walt) posted by The original Bart poster on November 13, 2003 at 20:42:28:
Thanks, "The Original".
I appreciate the analyisis and agree with it.
Namaste`
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Musings (to Sally and Walt) posted by The original Bart poster on November 13, 2003 at 20:42:28:
Dear Bart, Well put! I have chuckled over watching those very displays for Walt's or someone else's attention. But as long as we share the planet, we have to come to terms with human nature. I keep myself detached to a degree. I know that Walt is still finding solace in what he is doing and still helping lots of sufferers and that is still what matters most.
In Reply to: Re: Musings (to Sally and Walt) posted by Sally on November 15, 2003 at 08:36:53:
Dear Sally, you keep hitting the nail square on the head. Ouch :) A big issue for me in my practice and life as practice is indeed maintaining that "detachment to a degree" that you bring up. My unresolved inner garbage is instantly triggered by provocative "self as external" circumstances, and then coming to terms with my human nature as illustrated his or her human nature is difficult indeed. It is becoming easier, but what a ride. My own path is Dzogchen, or I suppose, just pulling nails through observing the inner voidness.
In Reply to: to Sally posted by the original Bart poster on November 15, 2003 at 19:04:37:
Speak english.
In Reply to: Re: Musings (to Sally and Walt) posted by The original Bart poster on November 13, 2003 at 20:42:28:
Give it a rest.
You have not changed much in the intervening time Krya. I used to like to talk to you, even through I disagreed with you most of the time. Once upon a time, Walt thought us listening to each other might create a worthy synergy, but he was wrong. I don't wish to insult you or your philosophy, but you need to not take yourself or your philosophy so seriously.
And stop talking with peterb. He'll ruin whatever is left of your mind if you let him.
In Reply to: Re: Musings to Kyra/Bart posted by The Ancient on November 15, 2003 at 19:49:31:
By whatever name you choose to call yourself, and by whatever name you choose to call me, it really doesn't matter. Because, my beloved teacher Anger, you have given me the gift of looking myself in the face. I have seen myself in all my undistorted ugliness and rage. It must have been hard for you, wearing my face for so many years, superimposed on the personalities of so many different people, just so that I could ripen into the ability of looking myself directly in the face.
I am awed, and honored, at your compassion. Thank you, beloved one. Your suffering on my behalf has been tremendous. I'm weeping tears of joy, for you and for me. Will you rest in the Stillness with me now? Emaho!
|
[ Jim Hare classic posts Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |