Self-censorship on a personal blog

I've never been the best of writers, but I've always enjoyed it. Even back in school it seemed that as long as the subject matter was good, I actually enjoyed my writing assignments. I've always seemed to have an over active mind and I can't really go through the day without analyzing the events and environment. With everything I see and experience, I find myself needing to talk it out or express it externally, rather than drown in the swirl of thoughts that quickly build up in my head. I guess I see writing as a way of having this needed conversation when there isn't anyone around to hear it. The problem I have is that when you have a true in person conversation, you know who's listening and you generally have a good idea of how they'll react to it.

Unfortunately, when blogging, you have absolutely no guarantee to who is reading and how they'll interpret your written words. As such, I often find myself censoring my own posts. In many cases, the would be posts are thrown out long before I even sit down to write them. There are many people out there who view their blogs as a journal that they freely let strangers flounder about in. Some, seemingly forget that their entries are public and post their personal thoughts and feelings to the world unknowingly. I, however, write entries that I intend to be read, that I would openly converse about in person, and that are written for a general audience.

I've become the worst enemy of the writer inside me. As I go about my day, the over active mind I mentioned earlier will drudge through my thoughts and memories and pull themselves together into these conversational blogs. For a split second I begin writing the blog entry in my mind; mulling over the introductory paragraph in my head. Suddenly, the creative and analytical side of the brain is shut off to make way for the editor who is very conscious of who may or may not be reading the entry that would follow.

Many people know me in many different ways. It's not that I act differently based on the people I'm with at the time, it's just that I'm a very complicated individual and it would be literally impossible to present myself in full to any one person. So, many people experience different layers of the onion that it me. When I write something in a public forum (of which, being accessible to anyone, my blog is), I'm very cognizant of how it will be viewed by all those who could possibly stumble upon it. Because of this awareness, I often find myself not writing more posts than I do.

Because text is so different than spoken word, in which meaning can be implied by inflections in voice, it's impossible to guarantee that my readers will understand where my writing comes from and what my words really mean. In normal conversation, I often use miniscule examples to leapfrog into more universal and significant subject matters. If I uses a personal experience as my miniscule example, it would be easy for a reader of my blog, especially one for whom it was a mutual experience, the tone and direction of the piece might be interpreted as an attack on them.

The self-censorhip doesn't just stop with a fear offending someone. It also stems from an attempt to pay respect and not belittle the the trials and tribulations of others in the world, regardless of whether those individuals would ever even see my post. I'll often hear a story of tragedy that will spark a thought or a reevaluation of my self. While I'd like to express those thoughts and feelings, I come to the conclusion that I could never really understand what those people are going through in their time of tragedy. Furthermore, I end up feeling like making my post, one build of the mere idea of loss, only takes away from the suffering of those. This post, in fact, is taking the place of just such an entry. I simply cannot bring myself to coat-tail the experiences of others in this way.

If, from the very beginning, I would have begun writing anonymously, I would have no problem writing each and everything thought that sprung from the depths of my mind. However, Just Because iCan is the personal blog of Christopher Schnese and I write it as myself. I simply cannot allow myself to write anything I wouldn't speak, to each and every person I come across, in real life.

posted by Christopher Schnese

Dislocation Part 2: The Status

Well, it's been four days since "The Incident". I'd love to say I'm up, happy, and running around, but then I'd be lying. The truth of the matter is that, though I'm leaps and bounds better than when it first happened, I'm still far from where I want and (more importantly) need to be. The Doctor Visit: Yesterday I had my first checkup with the doctor. Unfortunately, the doctor I was supposed be visiting doesn't accept the HMO I'm under, so we were forced to see a different doctor. This of course meant that I was walking into an office to see a man who had absolutely no prior knowledge of my accident except for what I jotted down on the clipboard in the lobby. After the new doctor took a look at my leg and ordered up some new x-rays, he had some good news and some cautionary news.

The Good News: My leg is now well enough that I can bend it. I have to admit I was really scared the first time (after having it lay straight for 3 days), but once I got it bent I was thoroughly relieved. I cannot express how joyous it is to know that when I sit down I can take off the brace and actually sit normally. The doctor also said that I should start working the leg, bending and straightening it, to build it's strength back up. This is very exciting for me. It basically means that I'm not confined to my bed anymore. I can actually move about and possibly even [somewhat] enjoy myself around the house.

The Cautionary News: this all seemed like pretty good news, and while he did say I shouldn't get all worried about what he was going to tell me, he did have some words of caution. The doctor said that while I should be on my way to a nice recovery, there was a slight chance that my knee could spontaneously dislocate again, several times. If this turns out to be the case, it means I will need surgery to correct the problem. This, is obviously not the outcome I'm hoping for.

I have a follow-up appointment in two weeks. Hopefully by then, I'll have full mobility back and I wont have to go to therapy, which will be mandatory if I've not recovered by then. For now, I'll just have to continue to deal with the side effects of my injury.

The Pain: At this point in the game, pain is not the issue I'm dealing with anymore. I'm not going to pretend that it feels "all fine and dandy", but the real issue I'm dealing with is pressure and immobility. If I'm just laying there relaxing (or anything that involves not moving), I [can] almost forget that I have any injury at all. It's when I'm forced to move because of a cramp or because I'm physically moving from one area to another that the discomfort sets in.

The Pressure: Apparently, as it was explained to me, when my knee dislocated, it tore a bunch of ligaments and other organy things (okay, so anatomy was never my subject) which have since bled into the knee cavity. This is why my knee looks so swollen, because it's filled with blood. While it's not to much of an inconvenience when my leg is straightened out, bending my knee tightens the skin around the cavity and creates enough pressure to create a lot of discomfort. It is, however, completely manageable and I'm ecstatic that it's all I have to deal with now.

The Real Issue: Even with the discomfort, pressure, and immobility, we haven't even gotten to the real issue that's making this whole experience so difficult for me. The problem is that the injury is to my driving leg and I live 20 miles from both place I work. Fortunately, because my "Tuesday, Thursday" job is graphic design work, I've been able to work both days from my house, but I'm not so lucky with my Audio Engineer position. Did I mention that I usually lug my G5 and both monitors to the office each day?

It would be one thing to try and find someone to pick me up and drop me off at work everyday, it's another thing to find someone who will crawl under my computer desk, unplug everything, pack it in the car, drive me to work, unpack, and set it all back up in the office for me. With the holiday last week, I've already missed three days of work and I literally cannot afford to miss anymore. I'm not sure what I'm going to do. All three of my bosses are actually out of town at an Audiobook Publishers Convention, so I have to wait till they're back before I can discuss it with them and try to work something out.

The [Other] Real Issue: As most of you know, I'm supposed to be in my new place right now. Obviously the accident has made it a little hard to move. Not to mention the fact that if I do move, I get dropped from my mothers health insurance which is covering all the costs of my injury. So, I don't even know where to go with that.

And with that, I think I'll leave you and return to my leg "exercises" (if you can even call them that). Thanks again for all the support and good wishes I've received from all of you.

posted by Christopher Schnese

Dislocation Part 1: The Incident

Fist off, I'd like to thank you all for your concern, well wishes, and prayers. If you have to wake up with your leg in a "knee demobilizer" as pain rockets up and down it, it makes it just that much more bearable to know that there are people out there thinking of you and wishing you a speedy recovery. The Incident: Well, I'd love to have some crazy story about what I was doing when I dislocated my knee, but truth be told I simply do not. This was literally one of those freak accidents that I could have never seen coming. As I'm sure you all know by now, I've been slowly but surely packing up my room in preparation for my big move (which was supposed to start earlier this evening). As such, in front of my closet there are stacks of economy storage boxes. It came time for me to begin disassembling my electronic drum set. Being the OCD person that I am, I wanted to make sure all the pieces were placed in the same area for packing. As I took the set apart, I( remembered that I had stashed one spare piece in the closet (right behind my new stack of boxes). Since I didn't really have the room to relocate the boxes just to get the piece, I arched myself over the stack and began to awkwardly fiddle about reaching for the piece. Apparently, as I extended forward trying to gain that extra inch of reach, I turned in just the right way to just ruin myself.

I heard an enormous popping sound and my leg (or half of it rather) came out from under me. When I hit the ground, I immediately grabbed my knee [area] and knew instantly that I was going to need to go to the hospital. To make matters worse, I was in my room, with the door shut, with music on, while my family and a bunch of little kids were in the backyard celebrating my little sisters birthday. Unable to turn off the music or move through the barricade of my partially packed life, my only option was to scream bloody murder and hope someone would hear me.

After about a minute or so of screaming, one of my sisters friends heard me, sent here in, and she was able to grab my parents, who dialed 911 upon viewing the remnants of should have been a knee I was clutching in my hands. Now I've broken a few bones and I'd like to think that I have a pretty high threshold for pain, but this was the single most excruciating moment of my life (that is until they reset my leg, but that comes later). For the most part I could partly manage the pain through heavy controlled breathing and long drawn out swear words, but every few minutes or so there would be a sudden rush of pain that would peak out the "1 to 10 pain scale" and send me into uncontrolled screaming and spasms. When the paramedics got there, they promptly began pumping me full of morphine, checking and rechecking my stats, and then pumping my full of even more. All in all, I arrived at the hospital with 20 cc of morphine coursing through my veins.

Unfortunately, my local hospital (the same one I was born in) was at full occupancy (I don't remember their term for it) and were no longer admitting anyone, so we had to hop on the freeway and drive to another hospital. Once there, I was placed in a room and had to wait for a doctor to become available (apparently, only a "real" doctor can reset your leg is need be). As I lay in the room alone waiting for the doctor, I experienced a few more of the excruciating waves of pain I mentioned earlier. At one point, a security guard and another member of the hospital staff came in just to see what the camotion was all about.

Finally, it came time to reset my knee. Now I watch a lot of medical shows, so I was expecting the resetting to work the way it does on any prime time drama. The doctor would grab my leg saying "ok, now on the count of three", and then when he reached "2" he'd jerk my leg and everything would be fixed and good to go. Well, I was entirely wrong. And as I mentioned earlier. the pain I was experiencing just moments before was nothing compared to what I was about to feel. First we had to straighten my leg (which I had kept bent since the injury happened to help with pain) out. They laid me down flat and then began pulling my leg into a straight position. The pain was so great that I literally almost hopped off the gurney. Once they had it straight, it was time to pop the bone back into place. The doctor grabbed the protruding bone and began to apply [what he thought was] enough pressure to pop it back in.

Long story short, it took three tries to get the bone to pop back into place, each time pushing for longer and with more force. When it did go back in place, the pain immediately subsided. With the pain gone, I got an instant rush from the 20 cc of morphine and I began hysterically laughing. I kid you not.

To Be Continued...

posted by Christopher Schnese

[next: "Dislocation Part 2: My Status"]

And so, now begins the packing

It would appear that this is turning out to be a pretty big year for me. Not only did I finally graduate from college (after far too long of a wait), but in four days I'll be moving out of my parents house. And so, now begins the packing. For the last several years, my ever-growing accumulation of worldly objects has been built up, rearranged, and [dare I say] masterfully placed about my 9 by 9 foot room. Well, now that I'm moving out, I've got quite the task ahead of me. Those who've seen the inside of my room will corroborate, I have a strange knack for fitting a lot of stuff into a really small space. Lets just see if I can collapse my 9 by 9 foot into 12 economy storage boxes [and my car].

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get to it.

posted by Christopher Schnese

Toilet Paper Roll Restocking Etiquette

I have a question for the "internets". When restocking the toilet paper in your bathroom, do you consider how you position the roll in the spindle? Or do you simply pick up the roll and insert it facing which ever direction it happens to be at the time?

I personally believe that there is a proper position that the roll should be placed in whenever restocking. I wouldn't go as far as saying it's a pet peeve of mine, but whenever I see a roll inserted "improperly" my OCD kicks in and I have to correct the "issue".

I would assume that my "Toilet Paper Roll Restocking Etiquette" would be common sense and thus a universal practice, but experience has proved that I should share the secret with the world. This is very simple, so pay attention...

When replacing a roll of toilet paper, you should always position it with the next available sheet rolling out towards you where rotating the roll towards you would result in more sheets being freed from the roll). I constantly encounter bathrooms where the paper rolls in the opposite direction. Why? That would be like pulling back the head of a PEZ dispenser only to have the candy come out the back side of the head.

That's my theory, at least.

posted by Christopher Schnese

The following post is way overdue

A very significant event transpired this past week. An event a lifetime in the making. One which is, though it's been almost a week, still settling in. That event, of course, was none other than my College graduation. Last Saturday (May 19th), at 10:40am, I walked across the stage with some of my closest friends as we commemorated the completion of our college careers.

It still feels so foreign to me. In theory, nothing has changed. I still have to wake up at the same time every morning. I still have to go to work every day. Only now, when my work for the day is over, I don't have to head to class. I don't have to stress over assignments. I am now free.

It's funny how fast this day arrived; how far I've come. I remember vividly a conversation I had a year ago with someone who was very important to me at the time. A year seemed like forever, but here I stand... a college graduate.

posted by Christopher Schnese

The fallacy of a "For or Against" mentality

Have you ever had someone make a comment towards you that, though completely in jest, you're sure would not have been made had their not been actual judgement behind the thought in the first place? I recently fell victim to just such a comment. What was said wasn't what bothered me. Instead, I was annoyed that someone had made an assumption about by beliefs followed by a snap judgement and offered no recourse for retort. The statement was made, passed by, and accepted as fact.

The issue arose because of content discovered during a "random" google search result that links my employer (a christian company) and a MySpace profile(specifically my profile). Now while there isn't anything overtly offensive on my profile, I do have a Change.org badge displaying the changes I support. This, my friends. Is where the Googler took issue.

Among the changes I support, there are three that someone of strong religious convictions might (or will probably) take offense to. Those changes are "Separate Church and State", "Allow Gay Marriage", and "Protect Women's Right to Choose".

Now righting these three changes, I almost had to laugh. Here I am writing a post about the trivialness of these issues, all the while knowing that these are some of the most controversial issues around. Issues that, in my opinion won the last election. That being acknowledged, lets move on to the point of this post.

With these issues, it's not a matter of being "For" or "Against". It simply does not work that way. Being "pro choice" is a far cry from being "pro abortion". In fact, I'm not a huge supporter of it. Furthermore, I can think of far more situations for which it should not be considered a solution than I can for any solution where I would even accept it.

Moving on to the Gay Marriage issue. I can't think of a single [legitimate] reason why a homosexual couple should not be afforded the same rights and perks guaranteed to a heterosexual married couple. As such, I don't think we as a country or a people have a right to lock them out of those benefits simply because it's "weird" and "foreign" to us. I mean hell, it wasn't too long ago that it was just as "weird" and "foreign" for interracial couples to marry (or even date). Why can't we evolve to the state of acceptance of same sex couples? If we're so worried about destroying the sanctity of marriage, why don't we outlaw divorce, shotgun weddings, and chapels in Vegas.

Just because I don't support something, doesn't [in my opinion] afford me the right to outlaw or stop others who support it. Which brings me to the last and final controversial issue. I believe that the Church and the State must remain separate. Beyond the fact that our government was set up this way, the Church [in general] does not share my "I can't stop someone else just because I wouldn't do the same thing" philosophy. It thinks that it's way is the only way, all should obey it's rule regardless of their own beliefs. For this reason, the two must remain separate until the day the church can separate what one is allowed to do and what [it believes] one should do.

Now I am fully aware this post could have the potential to spark a small flame war. Just please understand that I am not anti-church. In fact, since January I've been regularly attending church under my own accord and am completely open to the church for the first time in nearly 10 years. So please take that into consideration before posting comments. My only intent in the posting was to encourage people to realize that just because you allow something to happen, does not automatically equate to supporting it.

Image for this entry is licensed under Creative Commons (Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0) and was photographed by mad paul over at flickr.

posted by Christopher Schnese 

The Beauty Of A Wedding

Yesterday I attended the wedding of a friend of mine. Now I have been to quite a few weddings over the year (I've even been in a number of them), but this one stood out against the rest. It was amazing. Not because it was completely lavishly extravagant, but because of the overall aura radiating from it. That's the best way I can describe it.

First off, the wedding ceremony itself was more personal than any I've been to before. Most seem like a wedding version of MadLibs, where you simply fill in the name of the Bride and Groom and you're good to go. This was completely different and tailored to the Bride and Groom. It was held at a church where they had grown up since they were kids and was presided over by the priest who had been guiding them as they grew up. There was this level of personal significance and support that I've never seen at a wedding before. But this wasn't even the best part of the wedding. The best part was watching the couple through the ceremony.

Let me first state that I met the Groom for the first time this year and I've only even met the bride once or twice, so I know absolutely nothing about the pair as a couple or what their relationship is like. However, watching them stand before the alter I could see all that I needed to know that they deserved to be right there. I was sitting on the Grooms side, so during the ceremony I had a clear shot of the brides face. The entire time the bride just stared into her [soon to be] husband's eyes with the most intense, amazing, deep, intimate stare that I've ever seen before. Though I couldn't see the grooms face from my seat, his body language, the way he held her hand, and the way her never broke her gaze, implied that he was every bit as tuned into her emotions.

Now in my past relationship, I had every intension of marrying my girlfriend. I loved her more than I had ever loved anything in my life, and I was every bit as infatuated with her a year later as I was when we first got together. I wore a promise ring on my ring finger and every time I was asked if I was married I always replied by stating I wasn't yet, but was planning to after I graduated. Now you'd think that being at the wedding would make me think about the wedding that I had hoped would be my own. Instead, all I could think about was the fact that I've never been looked at they way the Bride was looking at her Groom and how if I'm ever to get married, I want my Bride to look at me with that same passion. It was just an amazing and moving experience and it was the first time I actually enjoyed being at a wedding.

posted by Christopher Schnese 

Is There No Art Without Meaning?

Any student who takes an art course will eventually have the professor pose the question, "What is Art?" Inevitably, the class consensus becomes a believe that anything is or can be art. While that is usually agreed upon, most people still maintain their own beliefs on what exactly makes anything art.

I'm currently enrolled in an art class at my local University and I'm having trouble accepting the validity of some of the works being studied. It's not that I refuse to believe that the works are "art", it's just that the significance and meaning behind the pieces feel too contrived in my opinion. I can understand a work that's inspired by an emotion, event, or issue, but in art courses I'm continually subjected to works that seem to be reaching for a meaning that is not inferable without the arts explaining the significance. Furthermore, once it's explained, I often find it a hard pill to swallow.

My peers and I have a running joke, within the art department, that involves taking insignificant objects or completely random effect choices and inventing elaborate significances for them. For example, if a student is asked why they chose a specific camera angle in a shot, he may begin improving a story about the meaning behind the decision - "The main character in this seen is torn between two life changing decisions and by tilting the camera seven degrees to the left I am symbolizing that the character, who is moving to the right side of the frame, is taking the path contrary to the desired choice" - though it may have been unintentional.

While this is a fun activity as students, I often feel that "legitimate" artists receive amazing praise and recognition from the art community for participating in this joke. Now I'm not going to call out any artist because I am full aware that I'm no authority to set a precedent for what can be called are an what cannot, but I believe there should be a process. I believe that your passion for the theme of your work should influence the art itself. However, I don't praise artists who chose a subject matter because of it's impact or controversial nature, and then find the most outrageous least relevant concept to construct as the symbolism for that theme.

I can accept the notion that a two marbles, one painted white and the other black, mounted on white poster board is art. I refuse to, however, accept the notion that this work represents racism. We as artists don't need to assign contrived meanings to our art. Why can't we just appreciate the aesthetics of it?

posted by Christopher Schnese 

Love Is A Chemical

Tonight I was flipping through the guide on my DVR when I came across a film called What The Bleep Do We Know. After reading the description, "Scientists, mystics and theologians try to explain physics", I decided to give it a try. There was one segment of the vilm that I found particularly interesting. It began discussing the relationships between emotions and chemicals and later bridged to the idea of love.

The segment started with a little background on the emotional chemical process in the brain and how when we experience a particular emotion, the brain produces peptides for this emotion and then send them through the body where they are absorbed by and effect cells globally.

The film went on to explain that these chemical reactions are the same as the chemical reactions that take place when using Heroine. So, it is logically reasonable that we can become addicted to the chemical reactions to our emotions. Furthermore, just like heroine addicts require increasingly more heroine to receive the same high, if our body and cells become addicted to the chemicals of a particular emotion, we will need to experience that emotion more and more to fulfill this addiction. (Please also note that we can become addicted to negative stimuli, such as depression, also)

Which brings me to the title of this post and my food for thought. One of the interviewees made an interesting point or theory on love. She (yes, it was a woman), made the argument that love is simply a chemical reaction. When we are "in love" with someone, we are truly just addicted to the chemical reactions that take place when we are with that person.

I know that your first gut reaction to this is "no, that's bullshit! I know what love is" or "you're still pissed cause you got dumped. Stop making anti-love posts". Let me just start by saying that I am not going to take an actual stance on the issue, but I do see the logic behind it.

Just think about it for a moment. If we were to assume that the Heroine metaphor were true (again, for the sake of argument), it would explain the "honeymoon phase" of all relationships. At the beginning of the relationship, we are all producing and absorbing all the chemicals we need. However, as we become acclimated to these chemical responses, we need more and more to feel the same high. Therefore, if the chemical stimuli within the relationship does not actually increase, it creates the allusion that the stimuli are actually decreasing. It would also explain how someone could fall out of love with someone else. Whether they become addicted to other stimuli or whether their partner no longer provides those stimuli to them, they are no longer chemically addicted to a person, and thus no longer in love.

Whether you believe these theories or not, the hold a lot of merit and are worth some thought. That being said, whether or not love is simply a chemical reaction, it does not mean we do not have the choice to act on what creates these stimuli. There is always a choice...

posted by Christopher SchneseÂ