Habitual Behaviour

Followers may have noticed that skreeworld has been neglected of late. Primarily a pictorial, photographic journey, peppered with he odd thought, skreeworld is what I see, or what I tell the world I see. A person is only very skilled at something when it is habitual behaviour. At one time drawing was my creative vehicle of choice. Any bored moment would be taken up by habitual sketching. There was no distance between the idea and the pencils tip. Good musicians play everyday. Knitting becomes blind habit for old ladies. No one picking up a task at weekends is very good at it. Bank holidays regularly see middle aged bikers wipe out. Unless you do something everyday, to the point where there is no conscious thought or plan, only the doing, you are not skilled. Consciousness has become the primary focus for many working in the neurosciences. But as Daniel eagleman explained it; if you imagine all the industry, all the quiet details from hobbies to duty of human activity in Great Britain, in its entirety, then think of a newspaper for the day, the paper would be consciousness, and all the other subconscious activity is by far the greater part. I also argue that it is the unconscious things we do that are our finest moments.  It is only when we practice an activity to the point where it becomes habitual behaviour that we excell at it. Try any sport. From batting at baseball or cricket, to keeping goal in football, to boxing. Try any craft, or art.  If you are still doing it consciously you are a poor amateur. It is when you no longer need to think that you are skilled. And they are paid accordingly. By comparison the conscious jobs deserve less pay, after all, anyone can think there way through a problem. Our lives once depended on this. When a lion attacks you, thinking of what to do is of no help. You must react quickly. Emotion drives movement far faster than cognition. I would argue that emotion drives us too. We may articulate a political or moral stance later, but it is an aesthetic decision prior to reason. We take all important life decisions with our unconscious. We choose our partners unconsciously. I like the tale of sigmund Freud s attempt to master his subconscious with his conscious mind. He swore he would hold his face up to the glass side if a snake terrarium. When the snake made a fast move toward him, despite his consciousness, despite him knowing that glass shielded him, he lept backwards across the room. Consciousness is the tip of the iceberg. The implications of this, as I have explained throughout the last year are vast. It really is as significant of Darwin pitching us together with all other animals, or Galileo decentralising us in the universe. 'We', the conscious we, are not in control. I even concede that in all likely hood, my religious choices, my preference for the elegance of the theory of evolution and for the scientific method and reason over faith, god and souls, is, in all probability an aesthetic choice. Faith strikes me as dull before any rational kicks in. We now talk of emotional intelligence. Drug addicts, depressives, are often considered to have high intellect yet low emotional intelligence. This is somewhat insulting. If we are to accept the truth, that emotions have a biochemical origin taking place below our consciousness, then we are no more responsible for them than we are responsible for the colour of our skin. It truly is as ignorant as racism to blame an addict, or a depressive or even a paedophile for their nature. It may, of course be in societies interests to lock up a criminal or paedophile who is unable to control their urges, but only for our good. These implications of accepting that we are all of us not responsible for who we are will take time to sink in. Too many people have invested too much in the belief that their success is down to their hard work. We are not born equal. Politically it pans out one of two ways. Either we go for an extreme Thatcherite anarchy, survival of the fittest, no taxes, no NHS, no welfare state. Or we accept some are born unequal and take steps to stop all the money floating to the top. Through taxing the strongest and redistributing it among the weak. We are divided between those who think that there are too many weak, supported by the strong, and that they ought to be culled. This is the Osborne, Duncan smith philosophy. And the others who jink that the top 1% have taken all the money and sealed off social mobility. Both have a whiff of truth.
So herein lies skreeworld. Lost in 2013 Britain. Thinking about our state of being. Photographing what I pass by. And making things.
And this is why I have not been writing. Because I have neglected it, just as I did with drawing, and ice skating, and countless other skills I once had, I no longer do it to a satisfactory standard. And once you have been good at something it really hurts to be crap at it. I am focused on woodwork again, making everyday. Now that the three year job, the top floor furniture for a large house on Exmoor, is coming to a close I will be happy to change direction. The drawings for a large bookcase, amd for a desk and office have been approved and work starts soon. I'll be going to Exmoor to check it all off soon.
But I slip in to what I swore I would never do. Nothing bores more than diary blogs. Or those ones where some guy thinks his views on the news are of interest to oythers. I considered writing up all the gore and grizzle from my recent relapse, but I'll you the pain.