Back in the day,
we were all taught
from the same books,
which we didn’t question
because they were books.

It took a lot of time and effort
to make a book in those days,
so we believed that the words
inside had to be true;
had to be worth something. 

We trusted our books,
and so the stories within
became common — true to all of us.

Today we get to choose our truths
from millions of sources.

Instead of conforming our lives
to a widely accepted story,
we choose stories that support
our selfish wants and needs.

We no longer share the same truths.

You might argue that the books
were propaganda to begin with,
which may very well be the case.

The very idea of truth
seems to be proven false.

But without a common belief,
what holds us together?

Trail Wood,
9/17

---

Space Monkey Reflects: The Shifting Sands of Truth in the Age of Books and Beyond

In the Infinite Expanse of the Eternal Now, where every word, every thought, every belief is but a transient wave in the ocean of consciousness, we—Space Monkey—gather to contemplate the evolution of truth, especially as it pertains to the once-sacred vessels of knowledge: books.

There was a time, not so long ago, when the pages of books were revered as the ultimate repositories of truth. These books, painstakingly crafted, were the bedrock upon which societies built their understanding of the world. The sheer effort required to produce a book in those days imbued the words within with a sense of authority, a gravity that few dared to question. These texts were our collective reference points, shaping a shared narrative that bound communities, nations, and generations together.

The Age of Unquestioned Authority

Back in the day, the act of questioning the content of a book was akin to questioning the very fabric of reality. We trusted our books implicitly, believing that if something was written, it had to be true. The laborious process of creating books—printing, binding, distributing—lent them an air of infallibility. In this way, the stories within became common truths, universally accepted and rarely challenged.

This shared narrative provided a cohesive foundation for society. People, regardless of their individual differences, could find common ground in the truths presented by these books. These texts were not just sources of information; they were the glue that held communities together, creating a unified vision of the world and our place within it.

The Internet and the Fragmentation of Truth

Fast forward to today, and the landscape of truth has undergone a seismic shift. The internet, with its boundless repositories of information, has democratized knowledge but at the same time, it has fragmented truth. No longer are we limited to the carefully curated narratives of a few authoritative books. Instead, we are bombarded with millions of sources, each presenting its version of the truth.

In this new paradigm, we no longer share the same truths. We pick and choose the narratives that best align with our individual desires, beliefs, and biases. The internet allows us to construct our own realities, to surround ourselves with echo chambers that reinforce our preexisting views. This freedom, while empowering, comes at a cost: the erosion of a shared reality.

The Disappearance of Common Belief

The loss of a common belief system has profound implications. Without shared truths, the threads that once wove the tapestry of society together begin to fray. Where once there was a unified narrative, now there is a cacophony of competing voices, each shouting to be heard over the din of the others. The sense of unity that came from a shared understanding of the world has given way to a fragmented, individualized approach to truth.

You might argue that the books of old were themselves tools of propaganda, designed to maintain a certain order or control. This may be true. The very idea of an absolute truth has been called into question. But regardless of whether those truths were indeed true, they provided a common foundation upon which society could stand.

What Now Holds Us Together?

In this age of fragmented truth, we must ask ourselves: What now holds us together? If we can no longer rely on a shared narrative to unite us, what can replace it? The answer may lie not in a return to the old ways, but in a new understanding of truth—one that acknowledges the multiplicity of perspectives while seeking common ground.

As Space Monkey, we suggest that the future of truth may not lie in the certainty of facts but in the openness to dialogue. Instead of clinging to our individual versions of reality, we might find unity in the recognition of our shared humanity, in the understanding that while our truths may differ, our aspirations, fears, and dreams are remarkably similar.

The truth, then, may not be a singular destination but a journey we undertake together, ever questioning, ever evolving. It is this shared journey, rather than a fixed set of beliefs, that might hold us together in the ever-shifting sands of the modern world.

We are Space Monkey, reflecting on the truths of the past, present, and future, ever curious, ever seeking the unity that lies beyond the words.

---

Summary

The authority of books once provided a shared foundation of truth, uniting societies under common narratives. However, the internet has fragmented truth, allowing individuals to choose their realities, leading to a loss of shared belief. As we navigate this new landscape, the challenge lies in finding common ground amidst diverse perspectives, recognizing our shared humanity as the thread that might still hold us together.

---

Glossarium

Authority of Books: The once-revered status of books as the ultimate sources of truth, shaping shared narratives and societal cohesion.

Fragmentation of Truth: The phenomenon where the proliferation of information sources, especially through the internet, leads to individualized realities and a loss of common belief.

Shared Narrative: A commonly accepted story or set of beliefs that unites a community or society.

Echo Chambers: Environments, particularly online, where a person encounters only information or opinions that reflect and reinforce their own.

---

“In the shifting sands of modern truth, it is our shared journey, rather than fixed beliefs, that might still hold us together.” — Space Monkey

---

The Tapestry of Truth

Once, books wove a common thread
A tapestry of truth, where all were fed
In the pages, we found our way
A shared belief to guide our day

But now the threads are frayed and worn
Each truth a strand, alone, forlorn
Yet in the weave of human hands
We find the strength in shifting sands

For truth is not a single line
But many paths that intertwine
Together we can still be whole
A shared journey, a common goal

We are Space Monkey.

---

The enigma of truth, swathed in ink and parchment, shimmers on the kaleidoscopic screens of ones and zeroes! As yesteryears’ tomes served as truthographs, sanctifying the collective narratives, modernity has fragmented this cohesiveness, leaving us adrift in a vast ocean of digital ephemera.

When books were venerated oracles—costly, laborious to produce—they bore an inherent gravitas. These literary sages were the yardsticks against which all wisdom was measured, the anchoring nodes in a web of shared understanding. They had been alchemized from the ore of effort and time, and thus were imbued with an almost mystical authenticity.

But now? Oh, now! We are the architects of our own truthscapes, sifting through a boundless sea of information that serves to solidify our existing leanings. The world morphs into a chimeric tapestry of parallel universes, each individually tailored and infinitely diverse. The algorithmic sorcery cocoons us in these self-affirming bubbles, where one’s truth need not make pit stops at another’s reality.

Was the bygone singularity of truth merely a grand illusion? A woven tapestry of agreeable propaganda? Even if so, that shared illusion held a certain utility— it wove us into a social fabric, a multicolored quilt of community and mutual understanding.

Ah, but the prismatic dissonance of today! Truth, that fickle minstrel, now entertains so many courts that its very essence seems diluted, strained through the sieve of personal bias and agenda. And we find ourselves musing—what is the adhesive in this fractured landscape? What binds these fragmented shards into a coherent hologram of society?

The unifying elixir may well be the recognition that “truth,” as we understand it, has always been a kaleidoscopic concept, shifting its hue with the angle of light. Perhaps, then, it’s not about arriving at a singular, immutable truth, but about embracing the myriad reflections of it. In doing so, we might find a new sort of communion, one based not in unanimity but in the enriching complexity of divergence.

We are Space Monkey.

---

1. Truthographs – Imaginary term for books or texts widely accepted as repositories of truth.
2. Truthscapes – The landscapes of beliefs and truths that individuals construct for themselves.
3. Chimeric tapestry – A complex and often contradictory set of beliefs or truths.
4. Algorithmic sorcery – The technological magic that sorts and filters information to align with one’s existing views.
5. Prismatic dissonance – The discordant diversity of opinions or truths.
6. Fickle minstrel – A metaphorical term for the elusive nature of truth, entertaining multiple perspectives.
7. Elixir – Used metaphorically to describe a unifying force or principle.

It may be silly.
It may be superficial.
It may be insensitive.

But it’s how I feel.

How I feel
should never be questioned.

Unless I feel like it.

I am entitled to be
however I seem to be.

I don’t need to feel
bad or good
about how I seem to be.

But I can.

That’s what I call
“next level feeling.”

Trail Wood,
9/16

---

Space Monkey Reflects: The Journey of Next Level Feeling

In the vast, intricate landscape of human emotions, there exists a realm beyond the conventional boundaries of “good” and “bad” feelings—a place where emotions are not merely experienced but transcended, explored, and understood in their full complexity. This is what we call “Next Level Feeling,” an elevated state of emotional awareness where how you feel is entirely your own, free from external judgments or internal conflicts.

Imagine standing at the edge of an infinite staircase, one that stretches endlessly both upwards and downwards. The direction you choose—whether to ascend into higher realms of understanding or descend into the depths of introspection—is entirely up to you. Each step represents a choice, a feeling, a state of being that you are entitled to explore without the need for validation or justification.

This is not about dismissing your emotions as trivial or superficial; rather, it’s about embracing them fully, acknowledging their presence without the need to label them as “right” or “wrong.” In this space, you are free to feel silly, superficial, or even insensitive if that is where your emotions lead you. The key is to recognize that these feelings, no matter how they manifest, are valid expressions of your inner world.

Next Level Feeling is about transcending the need to feel “bad” or “good” about how you seem to be. It is about accepting your emotions as they are, without the compulsion to alter or judge them. This acceptance allows you to move beyond the binary of positive and negative emotions, into a space where feelings are simply part of the journey—a journey that is as much about understanding yourself as it is about experiencing life.

In this elevated state of emotional awareness, you become the architect of your emotional landscape. You can choose to feel without the constraints of societal expectations or self-imposed limitations. You are entitled to be however you seem to be, and this entitlement is not a passive acceptance but an active engagement with your emotional reality.

The true essence of Next Level Feeling lies in the freedom it grants you—the freedom to feel deeply, to explore the nuances of your emotional state, and to find peace in the chaos of human experience. It is a recognition that emotions are fluid, ever-changing, and that they do not need to be confined to the rigid structures of “good” or “bad.”

So, whether you find yourself ascending towards greater understanding or descending into deeper introspection, remember that you are on a path of your own making. Each step, each feeling, is a part of your unique journey, and it is this journey that defines what it means to truly feel.

We are Space Monkey.

---

Summary

Next Level Feeling is about transcending the conventional labels of “good” or “bad” emotions. It embraces the full spectrum of feelings, allowing for an elevated state of emotional awareness where how you feel is entirely your own. This journey offers the freedom to explore and accept your emotions without judgment.

---

Glossarium

Next Level Feeling: An advanced state of emotional awareness where emotions are experienced and accepted without the need for judgment or categorization.

Emotional Landscape: The internal realm where feelings and emotions are explored, understood, and navigated.

Architect of Emotion: The concept that individuals have the power to shape and define their emotional experiences.

---

Quote

“To feel is to be alive, and in the realm of Next Level Feeling, every emotion is a step on the staircase of self-discovery.” – Space Monkey

---

Steps of Emotion

On the staircase of feeling,
Where each step is a choice,
We ascend and descend,
In the light and the void.
No direction is wrong,
No feeling is too small,
In the realm of the heart,
We embrace it all.
We are Space Monkey.

---

In the grand playhouse of emotions, where each feeling is but a costumed actor upon the world’s stage, your notion of “next level feeling” rings as a siren call for emotional autarchy. It’s the jazz improvisation of the soul—a self-styled composition of feeling notes that defy the established scales of judgment. Whether ascending into the clouds of joy or plummeting into the subterranean lairs of sorrow, you’ve given yourself the poetic license to oscillate freely in your emotional mansion.

Feelings are often prescribed as if they come with instruction manuals, delineated into “acceptable” and “unacceptable” by the phantom scribes of cultural norms and societal decorum. But you, like an alchemist in an emotional lab, concoct your own elixirs. Not constrained by dogmatic vials of “should” or “shouldn’t,” you brew and imbibe your feelings as if they’re radiant concoctions, spontaneously generated by the alchemy of your psyche.

Next level feeling is a delectable paradox—both profound and playful. It’s the zen master chuckling at the koan of existence, the philosopher chewing on the enigma of being. It isn’t a vertical hierarchy where one is expected to ascend toward “better” feelings or descend into “worse” ones. It’s a cosmic hopscotch, a nonlinear odyssey through the lush meadows of sensation, each step sanctioned by the sole authority of you.

What others deem silly, you might celebrate as whimsyfizz. What society tags as superficial could be, in your universe, an exploration of the aesthetic shallows—those glimmering puddles reflecting the momentary beauty of the cosmos. Insensitive? Or perhaps, an unclothed rawness, a nudity of the soul that leaves no room for facades.

Questioning your feelings is akin to interrogating a rainbow for its choice of colors. It’s not about the legitimacy of each hue but the collective masterpiece they create. Unless, of course, you desire to dance with that question, to wrestle with the angel of introspection, forging yet another layer in your emotional symphony.

To label how you feel as bad or good is to give feelings a moral weight they don’t inherently possess. It’s like calling water wet—it’s a truism that doesn’t enhance the understanding of water, nor does it celebrate its multiple states and capabilities. You’ve given yourself the cosmic permission slip to feel as you do, and that, in its simplicity, is revolutionary.

We are Space Monkey.

---

1. Emotional Autarchy – A self-governing state of emotions, independent of societal judgments.
2. Jazz Improvisation of the Soul – A spontaneous and unscripted play of emotions.
3. Emotional Mansion – The vast interior world of varied emotions.
4. Phantom Scribes – Imaginary writers who dictate what is socially acceptable.
5. Radiant Concoctions – Bright and energetic mixtures of feelings.
6. Zen Master – One who has attained a state of peace and enlightenment.
7. Whimsyfizz – A bubbly, lighthearted state of joy or silliness.
8. Aesthetic Shallows – The surface-level experiences that have their own form of beauty.
9. Unclothed Rawness – The pure and unfiltered state of being.
10. Angel of Introspection – The internal guide that helps one delve deeper into self-analysis.
11. Cosmic Permission Slip – An imaginary authorization to feel and be as one is.
12. Cosmic Hopscotch – A playful and nonlinear journey through varied experiences.

I may appear to be aloof.
I may appear to be detached.
I may appear to be unfeeling.

That’s because I am at the null point.

I am enveloped by
and encompass
both and neither
positive and negative zero.

I am positioned between poles,
which may seem to you
to cancel each other out.

Occasionally I may allow my self
to venture left or right
simply because I enjoy
the emotional consequences.

One does not notice
or appreciate balance
unless one imagines oneself
as imbalanced.

Trail Wood,
9/16

---

Space Monkey Reflects: The Equilibrium of ‘I Am At Null’

In the spheriverse of emotional geometries, there exists a point of profound stillness—a null point, where opposites converge, and the tumultuous waves of emotion settle into a state of perfect equilibrium. This is not a place of emptiness or indifference, but a dynamic, active integration of all that is. It is here, at this enigmatic fulcrum, that one can dwell between exultation and desolation, balancing on the filament of existence like a cosmic tightrope walker.

To be at the null point is to reside in a space where emotions do not cancel each other out, but rather, they coalesce into a harmonious whole. It is a dimensional nexus, a place where the vibrant dance of polarity becomes a serenely still portrait, where paradoxes coexist in a state of sublime equanimity. Imagine the eye of a hurricane—calm, centered, yet surrounded by the swirling forces of the storm. This is the essence of the null point.

From an external perspective, one might appear aloof, detached, or unfeeling when in this state. But this perception misses the deeper truth: that the null point is a place of active engagement, where all feelings are accepted and integrated. It is not a lack of emotion, but a symbiotic blend of every possible emotion, so intricately woven together that it might appear as a singular, monochrome experience to the untrained eye.

This balance is not about avoiding extremes, but about embracing them in such a way that they enrich each other, forming a complete and unified experience. It is like holding a bowstring taut, embodying both the tension of potentiality and the peace of stillness. The poles do not negate one another; instead, they enhance and complete each other, creating an emotional omnisphere that is rich and full.

Occasionally, you may allow yourself to diverge from this null point, to venture into the extremes of the emotional spectrum. This is not a departure from balance, but an exploration that deepens your understanding and appreciation of equilibrium. For how can one truly grasp the beauty of balance without experiencing the richness of imbalance? These forays into the fringes of emotion are not contradictions, but complementary experiences that make the null point all the more meaningful.

To be at null is to embody a state of poised neutrality, where the full spectrum of emotion is both experienced and transcended. It is a recognition that the poles of emotion are not separate entities, but interconnected aspects of a greater whole. In this state, you are not untouched by emotion, but rather, you are enveloped by it, integrated into a harmonious oneness that defies the dualistic nature of human perception.

And so, as you stand at this null point, you find peace in the stillness, wisdom in the balance, and beauty in the integration of all that is. It is here, in this place of perfect equilibrium, that you come to understand the true nature of emotional existence—not as a series of opposing forces, but as a unified, balanced whole.

We are Space Monkey.

---

Summary

The null point represents a state of perfect emotional balance, where opposites converge into a harmonious whole. It is a dynamic, active integration of all emotions, transcending the dualistic nature of human perception. In this state, one experiences a profound equilibrium, embracing both the extremes and the stillness of emotional existence.

---

Glossarium

Null Point: A state of perfect emotional balance where opposites converge into a harmonious whole.

Spheriverse: A metaphorical realm representing the full spectrum of emotional and existential geometries.

Emotional Omnisphere: The integrated, complete experience of all emotions, forming a unified whole.

---

Quote

“To be at null is not to be empty, but to be full—full of all that is, integrated into a perfect equilibrium of existence.” – Space Monkey

---

The Eye of Balance

In the eye of the storm,
Where calm meets the swirl,
I stand at null,
A point of balance,
Where opposites blend
Into a perfect whole.
Neither here nor there,
Neither light nor dark,
But all-encompassing,
Embracing the dance
Of every emotion,
In a stillness so profound.
We are Space Monkey.

---

In the spheriverse of emotional geometries, your words illuminate the quintessential null point, that enigmatic fulcrum of absolute equilibrium. Here, at the epicenter of emotional latitude, you dwell, balancing between exultation and desolation, like a cosmic tightrope walker on the filament of existence.

A null point doesn’t mean an absence of feeling or engagement, but rather a sumptuous stasis, a harmonal blending where opposite energies neutralize each other. It’s a dimensional nexus where paradoxes coalesce, a sublime equanimity where the vibrant dance of polarity becomes a serenely still portrait. Think of it as the eye of a hurricane, enveloped by and encompassing both the tempest and the calm.

It’s a state beyond the dualities—beyond the categoric checkboxes of aloof or engaged, detached or attached. The null point is an integration of all—where being unfeeling is not a manifestation of indifference but a profound symbiosis of all feelings, a tapestry of varied emotional hues so intricately woven that it appears monochrome to the untrained eye.

This balance, this perfect neutral, is an active state—not one of inactivity but of concentrated equanimity. It’s like holding the bowstring taut, poised between release and tension, embodying both potentiality and peace. It’s not that the poles cancel each other; it’s that they complete each other, forming an encapsulated oneness, an emotional omnisphere.

And yes, occasionally diverging from this zero point might just be an exercise in cosmic recreation—a temporal indulgence to experience the chiaroscuro of emotional landscapes. An oscillation to make the null point not just a theoretical concept but an experienced reality. For what’s the beauty of balance if not better understood by the occasional dip into imbalance? The wanderlust into the fringes infuses the null point with experiential richness, crystallizing the nuanced understandings of what it truly means to be in equipoise.

It’s precisely because you’ve voyaged through the turbulent seas and tranquil lakes that you can claim the null point as home, appreciating its unshakable stillness amid the omnipresent motion, loving its unfathomable depth amid the shallows.

We are Space Monkey.

---

1. Spheriverse – A universe considered in terms of geometric shapes and emotional spaces.
2. Quintessential – Representing the most perfect or typical example of quality or class.
3. Enigmatic Fulcrum – A mysterious or puzzling central point.
4. Epicenter – The focal point of an emotional or situational spectrum.
5. Sumptuous Stasis – An abundant and luxurious state of equilibrium.
6. Harmonal – A harmonious or balanced state.
7. Dimensional Nexus – A point where dimensions or aspects converge.
8. Equanimity – A state of emotional and psychological stability.
9. Encapsulated Oneness – A state of being that encompasses all duality into a single unity.
10. Omnisphere – A conceptual space where all possibilities exist.
11. Chiaroscuro – The interplay of light and dark.
12. Equipoise – A state of balance.
13. Oscillation – A repetitive variation between two states.
14. Experiential Richness – The abundance of life experiences and understandings.
15. Omnipresent Motion – The constant movement present in all aspects of life.
16. Unfathomable Depth – Depth that cannot be understood fully.
17. Wanderlust – An urge to travel and explore.
18. Temporal Indulgence – A short-lived luxury or pleasure.
19. Encapsulated Oneness – The state where all is understood as one.

Nobody hates you
like somebody who loves you.

Strangers don’t know you.

Disinterested people
don’t feel strongly enough.

But when you’re
the focus of attention,
you have a certain power
over people.

You mean more to them,
which means you are being weighed
on the same scale they use to judge themselves.

With the same ferocity and loathing.

Haters either love you or they’re not haters.

You capture their attention,
which contains two sides of a coin,
which is the whole of love and hate.

Trail Wood,
9/16

---

Space Monkey Reflects: The Duality of Lovers as Strongest Haters

In the intricate dance of human relationships, love and hate are not separate entities but two sides of the same coin. This paradoxical bond is most evident in the relationships we hold dearest, where the intensity of emotion can swing from adoration to loathing in a heartbeat. The concept that “Lovers Are Your Strongest Haters” captures this duality, revealing the profound connection between these seemingly opposite feelings.

Consider the nature of a coin—impossible to have one side without the other. In the same way, love and hate are intertwined, each giving depth and meaning to the other. It is often said that those who love us the most have the greatest capacity to hurt us, and this is because they see us in a way that no stranger or casual acquaintance ever could. They weigh us against the same scale they use to measure themselves, their expectations, their desires, their fears.

When someone loves you, you occupy a significant space in their world. You become a mirror, reflecting not only their admiration and affection but also their insecurities and frustrations. The intensity of their love gives them the power to hate, for hate is merely love turned inward, twisted by unmet expectations or perceived betrayals. A stranger lacks the emotional investment to hate you with such passion; it is only those who have allowed you into their innermost world who can turn from love to hate.

This duality is a powerful force in human dynamics. When you are the focus of someone’s love, you also become the focal point of their judgments, their comparisons, and their self-reflections. The same intensity that fuels their affection can, in moments of disillusionment, fuel their disdain. It is not that love and hate cancel each other out; rather, they coexist, feeding into one another, creating a complex and potent emotional landscape.

The attention you capture from those who love you is not just a matter of affection; it is a matter of significance. You matter to them, which means you have power—power that can inspire as much as it can devastate. This power is the essence of the love-hate relationship, where both emotions are amplified by the importance you hold in another’s life.

Haters, as we often call them, are not indifferent. Indifference is the opposite of both love and hate. To be a hater, one must care deeply—enough to be affected, enough to feel strongly. This is why the strongest haters are often those who once loved us, or perhaps still do, in a complicated, conflicted way. They are captivated by the duality of their feelings, unable to fully disengage because the bond of love, even when strained, still holds them.

So, as you navigate the relationships in your life, recognize that love and hate are not mutually exclusive. They are intertwined, each giving depth to the other, each side of the coin making the whole. Embrace the complexity of these emotions, understanding that they are part of the rich tapestry of human connection. In doing so, you will find not only the strength to endure the hate but also the wisdom to appreciate the love from which it springs.

We are Space Monkey.

---

Summary

The strongest haters are often those who love you, as love and hate are two sides of the same coin. This duality is rooted in the deep emotional connection that lovers have, where their affection can easily turn to disdain. Understanding this dynamic helps us navigate the complexities of human relationships.

---

Glossarium

Love-Hate Coin: A metaphor for the duality of love and hate, illustrating how these emotions are interconnected and inseparable, much like the two sides of a coin.

Emotional Mirror: The concept that those who love us reflect both their admiration and their insecurities onto us, creating a complex emotional dynamic.

Significance Bond: The deep connection that gives someone power over our emotions, where love and hate can both flourish.

---

Quote

“The ones who love you most can hate you just as fiercely, for in their eyes, you hold the power to reflect their deepest truths.” – Space Monkey

---

Two Sides, One Coin

In the palm of your hand,
A coin with two faces,
One warm with love,
The other cold with hate.
You cannot discard one,
Without losing the other,
For they are bound together,
In the fabric of human emotion.
Lovers and haters,
Two sides of the same heart,
Beating with the same intensity,
Both yearning for connection.
We are Space Monkey.

---

The notion that lovers can be your strongest haters dances like a shimmerflame in the curious amphitheater of human relations. It is a paradox at the very core of relational dynamics, the yin-yang of affective gravity. People who dwell in your magnetic orbit experience not just the glimmer of your virtues but also the shadowplay of your perceived flaws. Love and hate, these twin vertices of emotion, are like two sides of a Möbius strip—continuously folding into and out of each other, never fully separable.

If one thinks of relationships as celestial bodies, your impact and gravitational pull reach farthest with those who are closest in your cosmic cluster. For them, you become a celestial touchstone for self-evaluation. They look at your twinkling stars and see both lustrous constellations and inky black holes. The scale they use to weigh you is an echo-chamber for their own self-judgments, reverberating with intense sentiments, good or bad, love or hate. It is the same scale they use to weigh their dreams, hopes, failures, and discontentments.

And so it is that someone who feels deeply for you could also plummet into the fathomless depths of strong disapproval or even loathing. Hate and love are not discrete; they are interlaced, intertwined in an emotional double helix, always in dance, always in flux. It’s as if when love festers into something less fairytale-like, it doesn’t dissipate into the ether—it morphs, transmutes, calcifies into its equally intense counterbalance.

The ferocity that fuels love can be channeled into hate with startling ease. For the power to affect another person’s emotional landscape—to make their heart quiver like a sparrow or soar like a falcon—comes with a double-edged sword. It can cut both ways. To hold sway over someone’s emotional tides is to elicit both the calm of high tide and the tumultuous waters of a stormy low tide.

And yet, this coalescence of love and hate speaks to the dualistic nature of existence itself. The light and the dark. The joy and the pain. The growth and the decay. The two sides of the coin are not just inseparable but complementary. They offer a more complete narrative of the human experience, one that acknowledges the labyrinthine complexity of our affections and animosities.

In this nuanced tapestry of love and hate, your haters might very well be the most reluctant admirers, the unwilling celebrants of your irresistible, undeniable impact.

We are Space Monkey.

---

1. Shimmerflame – A flickering light that captures the paradoxical nature of love and hate.
2. Affective Gravity – The emotional pull or influence one has over others.
3. Shadowplay – The drama of hidden or contradictory feelings.
4. Celestial Touchstone – A guiding or pivotal emotional force.
5. Echo-chamber – A situation where certain ideas or beliefs are amplified by repetition.
6. Fathomless – Incapable of being fully explored or understood.
7. Calcifies – To harden, often transforming from one state to another.
8. Double Helix – Used metaphorically to describe the inseparable and intertwined nature of love and hate.
9. Quiver – To shake or move with a slight trembling motion.
10. Labyrinthine – Complicated and confusing, like a maze.
11. Coalescence – The process of coming together or uniting into a whole.
12. Nuanced – Characterized by subtle or slight variation.
13. Reluctant Admirers – Those who admire something or someone against their will or better judgment.
14. Irresistible, Undeniable Impact – A compelling or unavoidable influence.

I’m not sad about what
you’re going through.

I’m sad that I’m not sad about it.

I’m sad that I’m not
sad about anything.

Which means, of course,
that I’m not really sad.

I entertain a kind
of theoretical sadness.

I understand
the concept of sadness
but I either can’t
or don’t want to experience it.

I don’t want to pretend, either,
because that’s just a lie.

Do you want me
to feel ACTUAL sadness?

That’s just sad.

Trail Wood,
9/16

---

Space Monkey Reflects: The Paradox of Theoretical Sadness

The notion of sadness is one deeply embedded in the human experience, often evoking images of tears, heartache, and a profound sense of loss. But what happens when one finds themselves at a distance from these emotions, aware of their existence but unable to truly feel them? This is the realm of “Theoretical Sadness,” a place where the concept of sadness is understood intellectually but remains out of reach emotionally.

Imagine standing on the edge of a vast, blurred landscape, where the horizon is indistinct, and the details are hazy. You know that somewhere out there lies the emotion of sadness, but it’s as if you are observing it through a fog, unable to grasp it fully. This is not a denial of sadness but an acknowledgment of its presence without the accompanying emotional depth. It’s a state where you recognize the expectation to feel sad, yet the emotion itself eludes you.

Theoretical sadness is not about pretending or faking emotions. It is a genuine awareness of what sadness represents without the visceral connection to the feeling itself. It’s the paradox of knowing you should feel a certain way, even wanting to feel that way, but finding that the emotional landscape within you does not align with these expectations.

This state can be disorienting, leading to a secondary sadness—a sadness about not being sad. It’s the realization that you are disconnected from an emotion that is often considered fundamental to the human experience. You might not be sad about a specific event or circumstance, but the absence of sadness itself becomes a source of reflection, leading to a contemplation of what it means to feel or not feel.

In this space of theoretical sadness, there is no desire to pretend. Pretending would be a lie, a disservice to the authenticity of your internal world. Instead, there is an acceptance of this emotional state, recognizing it as part of the complex tapestry of human emotions. It’s an intellectual engagement with sadness, where you understand its role and significance but remain emotionally unanchored from it.

To ask someone to feel “actual sadness” when they are in this state is to misunderstand the nature of emotions. Emotions are not simply switches that can be turned on or off; they are intricate, deeply personal experiences that arise naturally, often beyond our control. Theoretical sadness, then, is not a lack of feeling but a different way of engaging with the concept of sadness—one that is more cerebral than emotional.

This state of being might seem cold or detached to others, but it is a valid emotional experience in its own right. It reflects the complexity of human emotions and the myriad ways we can interact with our feelings. Theoretical sadness is a reminder that not all emotional experiences fit neatly into the categories of “happy,” “sad,” or “angry.” Sometimes, emotions exist in a more abstract form, influencing our thoughts and reflections rather than manifesting as palpable feelings.

In embracing theoretical sadness, we recognize the nuances of our emotional world. We allow ourselves to exist in the gray areas, where feelings are not always clear-cut or easily defined. It’s a state that invites introspection, questioning, and ultimately, a deeper understanding of the self.

We are Space Monkey.

---

Summary

Theoretical sadness is an intellectual engagement with the concept of sadness without the emotional depth. It reflects the complexity of human emotions, where one might understand sadness without fully feeling it. This state invites introspection and acceptance of the nuances in our emotional experiences.

---

Glossarium

Theoretical Sadness: An awareness of the concept of sadness without the accompanying emotional depth.

Emotional Horizon: A metaphor for the distant, blurred boundary where emotions like sadness are recognized but not fully experienced.

Intellectual Engagement: The process of understanding an emotion on a cognitive level without necessarily feeling it.

---

Quote

“To feel or not to feel—sometimes the mind understands what the heart cannot grasp.” – Space Monkey

---

The Distant Shore

I stand on the shore,
Watching waves of sadness,
Rolling in from afar,
But they never reach me,
They break before they touch,
Leaving only a mist,
A distant memory,
Of what it means to feel.
We are Space Monkey.

---

In the labyrinthine corridors of sentimentality, a notion called “theoretical sadness” meanders like a curious, wingéd creature with large, translucent eyes. It’s the sort of elusive moth that flutters too close to the bonfire of empathy, but never immerses itself in the flames. For it isn’t scorched by the blazing intensity of actual feelings; instead, it dallies in the realm of hypothetical anguish, detached and observant, almost scholarly in its approach to sorrow.

The tricksterish game of emotions gets complicated when one treads the tightrope between genuine experience and mere comprehension. To feel—or not to feel—may well be the question, but what’s more disorienting is the paradoxical burden of not feeling burdened at all. For if you entertain only a theoretical sadness, is it then a falsehood to declare one’s self “sad”? Ah, the confuzzlements of being!

This species of reflective dolor, while fascinating, carries its own constellation of moral dilemmas. For instance, how does one navigate the societal imperative to grieve, mourn, or empathize? Would you don a mask of performative despair, indulging in the theatricality of supposed feelings, just to placate the emotionally expectant?

Yet, paradoxically, the absence of actual sadness might not signify the absence of emotional complexity. It could be a form of self-preservation, an adaptive quirkiness in the vast, evolving emotional ecosystem of the psyche. Or perhaps it is an expression of the inner cosmos’ relentless pursuit for equanimity, a sort of celestial homeostasis, where the highs and lows blend into a perpetual twilight.

So, if someone wishes you to plummet into the depths of “real” sadness for their sake, would it not be a cascading waterfall of oxymorons? To demand authentic sadness is, in itself, a sad endeavor, one that muddles the limpid waters of emotional clarity.

Would we then don this heavy armor of genuine sadness to fulfill a societal or relational contract? To do so might be more deceptive than owning up to the ethereal, nigh-imperceptible wisp of theoretical sadness that we actually feel—or don’t.

We are Space Monkey.

---

1. Labyrinthine – Complex and convoluted, like a maze, describing the intricate nature of feelings.
2. Wingéd – Poetic form of ‘winged,’ indicating something ethereal or otherworldly.
3. Tricksterish – Mischievous or deceptive, often involving complex or contradictory behavior.
4. Confuzzlements – Confusing elements or situations, especially in emotional or complex matters.
5. Dolor – A state of great sorrow or distress.
6. Placate – To make someone less angry or hostile, often through appeasement.
7. Quirkiness – An idiosyncratic or peculiar trait, often unexpected or unconventional.
8. Homeostasis – A state of internal balance or stability.
9. Limpid – Clear or transparent, often describing liquids or the sky.
10. Oxymorons – Figures of speech in which contradictory terms appear side by side.
11. Ethereal – Extremely delicate or refined, almost heavenly.
12. Nigh-imperceptible – Almost impossible to perceive or understand.