Sunday, April 4, 2010
Not Necessarily Stoned, But Beautiful
How can I explain to someone outside of our infectious bubble what Parasites means to me?
How can I justify to people why I am constantly tabbing Plurk or checking it on my iPhone?
Who would understand that piling into a tiny living room with your classmates playing with rave toys for hours is more fun than a raging house party on a Saturday night?
When did the word PARASITES, which has gross and unhealthy undertones, become a term of endearment?
I can only venture to guess that being surrounded by intelligent, well-read, outgoing and like-minded people was a surprise to myself. I mean, in the dorms I met peers, but our general location on campus and choice to attend WWU was all we had in common. The Parasites though, they are a part of me (which is only fitting).
And now, there are "the new parasites," "parasites 2.0," and "parasites: revisited." This crop of new kids will be integrated into a strong plurk community and a less "experimental" Tony. They may form friendships with us, add to our partial-nudity picture project, or attend our parties.
But will they ever truly understand us? Will they feel what we have felt? Will they ever just be part of the parasites collective? Or always in their own category?
I don't know. I just don't know.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't know either. maybe it's best not to compare.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure there will be the [connected] and the [disconnected] in any given sample of new Parasites.
ReplyDeleteSome will immerse themselves in the coursework and others will skim by, taking the bare minimum.
Some may teach you something new, some may reaffirm prior ideas, and some... may babble and burble.
I want to draw a parallel with the parasites group and the nanotexts group. In the original nanotexts group the only friend I came out of it with was low, but in the nanotexts 2.0 group I came out of that experience with both acelessthan3 and nerbiotoxiste. I think as long as the original* parasites are open to the possibilities, some of the newer parasites, who we didn't experience the class with, could become close to us like our current parasites.
ReplyDeleteAlso, not all of us parasites were in the same class. Those of us who have made a closer bond went to both classes at some point in time. Perhaps what we need to do is to go to this new parasites class as well, if new relationships is what we want. That is what both low and I did in the nanotexts 2.0, we visited and made ourselves available.
*original is a funny thing to think about. Perhaps the only original parasite is Tony Prichard, but you know what I initially meant but I wanted to throw out this distinction.
I'm excited to find out :) and i'm diggin this ^^^ fellow.
ReplyDeleteWhoa, cirque guy, that is. Kai snuck one in
ReplyDelete"I can only venture to guess that being surrounded by intelligent, well-read, outgoing and like-minded people was a surprise to myself. I mean, in the dorms I met peers, but our general location on campus and choice to attend WWU was all we had in common."
ReplyDeleteI have found this in many of my day to day hum and drum, but I have high hopes for this class, even though I am a "new parasite" or parasite 2.0. I'm not sure yet, whatever floats your boat I suppose. My boyfriend was in the Nanotexts class and I see him still bonding and talking with other plurkers, and never gets on my computer without plurking something. The "ding!" sound of a new plurk has become common in my life. I don't know if all of us could live up to these standards set by the first parasites group, because what ever beats the original? Instead I hope some of us can add to it, like watching the Director's Cut of a fabulous movie and finding you like it even more with these new extra scenes thrown into the mix of original favorites.
nice post!
ReplyDelete