'To muse' comes from an Galo-Roman word muza or snout. It literally means "to stand with one nose in the air" or to "sniff about". It has a feeling of being lost in thought and also being idle.
'A Muse' on the other hand comes from Greek 'mousa' which means 'song, music'. Does that mean that the most important of the arts was once music? Its interesting that oral art was once so much stronger than visual. I think the invention of the book had a lot to do with that, then the camera and video camera. Now we sit for hours in front of screens, reading, looking, interpreting. Wouldn't it be nice to rest our eyes and let our ears do all the work, filling with exotic and new sounds, deep and complex sounds. When you hear a piece of music does it take you on a journey or are we loosing the ability to interpret and imagine with our ears?
'To muse' according to the root of the word doesn't require the use of your eyes either. It uses your nose to feed your thought. It is taking in the air around you and letting it fuel your imagination.
I'm going to make an effort to spend more time with my eyes closed, my nose in the air and my ears pricked.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Yahoo news
Yahoo news seems to gather the most imaginative stories from around the world. Here's a great example of a story so rich in images, so fanstasical that I feel it should have some deeper significance. But I don't think it does, and I like it all the more for it.
'Toddler Weds Dog To Avoid Indian Tiger Doom'
The ceremony, at a Hindu temple in Orissa state's Jajpur district,was conducted with all the rituals observed at traditional weddings.
It included a dowry for the bride - the village bitch.
The dog sported two silver rings and a silver chain, the UNI news agency reported.
Parents of the groom, 18-month-old Sangula, were advised to arrange the marriage when they noticed a tooth growing from their infant son's upper gum.
The growth was considered to be a bad omen in the boy's tribal community.
Village elders believed it would lead to him being killed in a tiger attack - a fate preventable, according to tribal tradition, by marrying a dog.
Sanrumula Munda, Sangula's father, said the ceremony would not stop him from marrying properly when he comes of age.
Superstition is still a potent force in tribal and remote communities of India.
'Toddler Weds Dog To Avoid Indian Tiger Doom'
The ceremony, at a Hindu temple in Orissa state's Jajpur district,was conducted with all the rituals observed at traditional weddings.
It included a dowry for the bride - the village bitch.
The dog sported two silver rings and a silver chain, the UNI news agency reported.
Parents of the groom, 18-month-old Sangula, were advised to arrange the marriage when they noticed a tooth growing from their infant son's upper gum.
The growth was considered to be a bad omen in the boy's tribal community.
Village elders believed it would lead to him being killed in a tiger attack - a fate preventable, according to tribal tradition, by marrying a dog.
Sanrumula Munda, Sangula's father, said the ceremony would not stop him from marrying properly when he comes of age.
Superstition is still a potent force in tribal and remote communities of India.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Brain training
Try this site for a good way to procrastinate, Ali! You can not only feel like you're being productive by working on essential skills but you are also 'exercising' of sorts. Perfect. Don't do it for too long though as I can feel my wrinkles getting deeper as I'm squinting at the screen trying to beat me own scores. You'll have the brain of a 20 year old but the face of a 50 year old.
www.lumosity.com
www.lumosity.com
What came first, the human or the brand?
I read this quote from Tom Peter's article 'Brand called you':
“No matter what you're doing today, there are four things you've got to measure yourself against. First, you've got to be a great teammate and a supportive colleague. Second, you've got to be an exceptional expert at something that has real value. Third, you've got to be a broad-gauged visionary—a leader, a teacher, a farsighted "imagineer." Fourth, you've got to be a businessperson—you've got to be obsessed with pragmatic outcomes. It's this simple: you are a brand. You are in charge of your brand. There is no single path to success. And there is no one right way to create the brand called You. Except this: Start today. Or else.”
It seems to me to be a very narrow vision of a brand. I agree that we are all building our own brands which is the same as building a public person, creating the right impression on others which ultimately helps you to reach your goals. You could say that building brands takes lessons from human instinct as people came first and we intuitively create personas for ourselves in many different ways. I'm not sure if I like the threatening tone of this quote. I mean since when did brands dehumanise us, shouldn't we be humanising brands? Fair enough it was written in 1997, I like to think we've moved on since then.
“No matter what you're doing today, there are four things you've got to measure yourself against. First, you've got to be a great teammate and a supportive colleague. Second, you've got to be an exceptional expert at something that has real value. Third, you've got to be a broad-gauged visionary—a leader, a teacher, a farsighted "imagineer." Fourth, you've got to be a businessperson—you've got to be obsessed with pragmatic outcomes. It's this simple: you are a brand. You are in charge of your brand. There is no single path to success. And there is no one right way to create the brand called You. Except this: Start today. Or else.”
It seems to me to be a very narrow vision of a brand. I agree that we are all building our own brands which is the same as building a public person, creating the right impression on others which ultimately helps you to reach your goals. You could say that building brands takes lessons from human instinct as people came first and we intuitively create personas for ourselves in many different ways. I'm not sure if I like the threatening tone of this quote. I mean since when did brands dehumanise us, shouldn't we be humanising brands? Fair enough it was written in 1997, I like to think we've moved on since then.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)