Last weekend I bought a new 120 GB hard drive for my system. I'm thinking of stripping it down and reloading the operating system on the new disk. I started getting the files in order to be backed off.
Right now, I'm listening to music and drinking a Diet Coke. I just finished watching the Shawshank Redemption. It's a great movie. I could watch it almost any given week and see it over and over, but it is a movie made for the company of a couple. This I know, despite never having seen the picture in company myself. I've written of this before.
We are puzzle pieces, not necessarily always all that complex, but distinctive enough in our shapes that there are only a certain number of ways we can fit into the big picture and only a certain number of compatible pieces with whom we fit. There are two kinds of people in the world: those who understand this, and those who don't. I suspect that the latter are more numerous than the former, even if the former are not all that uncommon. Does that work for them? Quite often, I doubt it, but then many of them seem to make that lack of understanding work for them, or at least it does not seem to hinder them too egregiously. Sometimes, I look at certain things and realize that few would see them as I do. It's not a claim of a superior perspective; it is the claim of an abstruse and singular perspective. The irony is that it isn't rare. We each have our resonating frequencies with which only certain other tones will harmonize.
Are some people born like Andy Dufresne, (in the Shawshank Redemption) or can anyone acquire that sense of life? In some ways, good and bad, I fit that character description myself, but I wasn't born that way. I know that. Most of the time though, I can come close. I suspect that Stephen King is the same. He and I are more like Red and we strive to meet the world and see it as Andy does most of the time, and often we succeed. People like Andy's character though, make it look natural and effortless -- it's engrained into them. Other aspects of Dufresne's character though, like his seeming inscrutability, seem to come easy to me. Rand claims that we are shaped by our premises, consciously chosen or picked up subconsciously. Sometimes, it seems as if one can entertain correct premises and yet still not be entirely convinced by them all the time. Do we lack the courage of our convictions, or is it the conviction itself that goes lacking, occasionally?