Financial sirens

Popular bloggers claim that in a world filled with increasing uncertainty, you shouldn’t chase your dreams. Among other things, they suggest being more practical and earning capital first. To do this, of course, you need to follow their channel. The advice is to live in the here and now, be highly productive, and set your dream aside for a while. It’s a very practical piece of advice, except for one “but”: our time and energy are not limitless. Mastering even one craft fully can take 5–6 years or even a lifetime. And what if the dream is blown away with the first gust of wind in the form of real action toward it, while the years have already passed?

Let me tell you the story of Tom Mueller, the son of a lumberjack. Against his parents’ wishes, he moved to Los Angeles to follow his inner calling—to become a rocket engineer. After gaining considerable experience at a boring corporation that supplied parts, Tom never gave up on pursuing something bigger. He built rocket miniatures and tested theories literally in his garage, along with other dreamers of great achievements.

At that time, Elon Musk was developing the idea of founding SpaceX, and by chance, he met Tom. He asked him just one question: “Can you build something bigger?” And so, in 2002, Tom became one of the founders of SpaceX. Would he have achieved this had he first created his own advertising business?

Whatever stage of life you are at, you need to remember that your true identity is more likely shaped through acts of self-assertion and self-discovery in the context of a continuous search for meaning and struggle. This phenomenological process of searching is not a simple path of the samurai, a process often perceived as going against the flow.

P.S. I don’t have all the answers, but I believe entrusting your fate and happiness to the hands of financial sirens is not the path that will help you find yourself or meet the people who are truly right for you.

The Killer movie review

 "To be or not to be, to be many or the few" - Fincher explores this question in his films. This time, using the charismatic figure of Fassbender, we delve into the thoughts and character of that one percent of lucky ones, free to decide their fate as they please. Yes, it's as if such killers stand above the entire world of ordinary and even ultra-rich people. As if the path to this percent lies precisely through murder. Such a decision, it turns out, defines a person's character. But what do we find? Most of the film we hear the inner monologue of a calculating killer, and there is not even a shadow of doubt in him: the question of "who lives and who dies" is resolved very simply. And even somewhat boringly, there is a mantra that the character repeats to himself over and over, as if convincing himself, killing everything human in himself. Calculation, cold calculation alone, guarantees you a place under the sun in this world. And if you need to knock off a couple of such scoundrels along the way, then it's just a question already resolved. The eternal dilemma for the average person turns out to be cowardice. How to get out into this very "few"? How to become a brave, daring person, and also deftly forge all these document manipulations? The film masterfully shows all these manipulations, so that the viewer gets true pleasure from the quality of the work done. No doubt about it: this is the only way not to become mediocrity. So what do we discover in the head of this person? Actually, nothing. No human qualities, not even an internal dilemma. Only once do we hear a voice, or rather, a timid little voice in the form of Tilda Swinton, suggesting that sometimes you can think about whether we are doing the right thing. And even such a figure the director twists mercilessly, dryly, without going into details. The film leaves the impression that the world is ruled only by the laws of force and nothing more. He who is stronger is right. Honestly, you expect a deeper analysis from the director of "Fight Club" and "Zodiac". What's the point of such a straightforward conclusion from a seasoned master of mysteries?"

📝 On the Benefits of Keeping a Journal 📝

The parents of the young Arthur Schopenhauer strongly encouraged him to keep a journal. It wasn’t that they wanted him to share his observations, but rather they saw it as a tool through which their son could improve his writing skills and develop good and clear handwriting.

I also came across an interesting quote from Parmenides. Socrates was advised to practice more in common reasoning before tackling anything substantial.

“[…] You prematurely, without properly exercising yourself, undertake to define what beauty, justice, goodness, and any other idea are. I noticed this the other day when I listened to your conversation here with Aristotle. Your zeal for reasoning, rest assured, is wonderful and divinely inspired, but while you’re still young, try to practice more in what the crowd considers and calls useless chatter: otherwise, the truth will slip away from you.”

No matter who you look at, all these people in one way or another kept journals, recorded observations and thoughts. Just for themselves. Even Dostoevsky:

So, here’s the kind of writing I’ve involved myself with. My situation is extremely uncertain. But I will also talk to myself and for my own pleasure in the form of this journal, and let whatever comes of it. What will I talk about? About everything that strikes me or makes me think. If I find a reader and, God forbid, an opponent, I understand that one must be able to converse and know with whom and how to speak. I will try to learn this, because in our literature, this is the most difficult thing.

Digital art

Digital art allows for the possibility of safe mistakes. You can always undo anything at any time with a simple Ctrl-Z. In life, as Stanley Donwood tells us, there is no room for such undos; nor should there be in digital art.

The digital world is atomic and clean; millions of cubes and donuts created in Blender are proof of that. In life, we organize primordial chaos, while in the digital realm, we introduce disorder and leave room for randomness.

I would tell my younger self: “Don’t pay attention. They (art institutions) are just parasites on the beautiful flesh of art, not its keepers. No one can shackle art.”

Alexander Rostov — art director of Disco Elysium.

Art is his too.

Canada life

 🚽 Off-topic about life in Canada 🚽

💼 For the past four months, I’ve been battling with the Canadian tax authorities. Here’s how it works: at first, they trust you and give you the tax refund you request. But a year later, you randomly get a notification to confirm all your income sources and other documents. But I’m the kind of person who doesn’t bother with keeping documents and paperwork – that’s all worldly stuff, not for artists. But here, it was a matter of life and death. I found out about my debt completely by accident, and every week it grew by a certain percentage just for non-payment. 🫶

Of course, I didn’t have the paperwork to prove anything, and I had already moved to a different city. The only way to communicate with all the authorities was through email.

Collecting everything took four months, and every time I sent documents, they asked for new ones. They even asked me to draw a plan of the room where I lived and calculate the area designated for work! 🍸 Throughout the process, all the tax office employees were extremely cold and soulless. Every call with them was a reason to feel disappointed in the world. 👋

The worst part was dealing with the internet company. It turns out they don’t keep information for more than a year. They archive it and, if needed, only send it by mail to the address where the service was provided, and each page costs $10. It felt like I’d gone back 30 years in time.

I had to track down who is renting my old apartment now and ask them to forward me those documents. Luckily, they were really nice people and sent them to me for free. Only now has Canada decided that I wasn’t lying and that my taxes were indeed calculated correctly. This process even frustrated my tax accountant 🚽.

History repeats itself in memes

 Next up a loose translation of Pascal’s thoughts:

Ordinary people judge things correctly because they remain in a natural state of ignorance, which is appropriate for a human being. Knowledge has two extremes, and these extremes converge: one is the complete natural ignorance with which a person is born; the other is the point at which great minds, having encompassed all knowledge accessible to humanity, discover that they know nothing, and return to the very ignorance from which they began their journey; but this is a conscious, enlightened ignorance. Those in between these two extremes, who have lost their natural ignorance but have not gained the other, amuse themselves with scraps of superficial knowledge and pretend to be wise. These are the ones who mislead others and make false judgments about everything.

Ordinary people and wise men sustain the flow of life; these others despise it, and are despised in return. They judge all things falsely, while the rest judge correctly.

Thoughts (1657) - Blaise Pascal

-30-

My life has constantly been on the move since childhood, and it seems difficult for me to settle in one place. I’ve changed schools several times and even more frequently moved from one place to another, making it hard to maintain a stable social circle. Then there was the move to Canada, and recently I switched provinces again, and I’m thinking of doing it once more.

For the same reason, I’m not particularly eager to form lasting connections. Recently, I’ve had painful breakups with several close people, and my best friend is moving to another country. Well, working in graphics has its perks—you can work anywhere in the world. But it also has its downsides—sometimes you have to work all over the world. In general, after such separations, something inside withers a little, and it becomes easier to let people go.

People who live in one place for 10 years, how do you do it?

It’s been six months since I turned 30, and I really like this age. Almost all of my twenties passed by strangely and unconsciously, spent trying to figure myself out and deal with my problems. It was practically an uncontrollable fall. In an effort to change things, I tried everything from seeing psychologists to experimenting with strong psychedelics and peptides. However, in the end, simple life experience and the support of people made the biggest difference.

For the first time, I feel like I can do anything I want, without being influenced by external forces. But you can’t just do everything at once. I’m constantly jumping from one area to another, although I’ve learned to control it better as I’ve gotten older.

I’m trying to help people learn CGI, and it’s been a pretty transformative experience—it feels like I’m doing something important, not just creating detached commercial products.

Ambitions

YouTubers always amaze me with the beauty and simplicity of their reasoning. They say that instead of being ambitious, one should be very mindful, live in the moment, and enjoy what they have. Success and ambition, they claim, lead to burnout and are inherently bad. They might even add that capitalism is to blame, as it’s the root of all these issues and pushes us towards such actions. (Here, I’ll reference a good medieval film featuring a very ambitious guy—capitalism wasn’t even around then.)

They point a finger at Hollywood, claiming it’s in decline, conveniently skipping over all the films that have been released lately addressing such themes in the Western world. For example, there’s a story about a London clerk who methodically does his job throughout the film and finds great meaning in it by the end.

After watching the video, one gets the impression that the answer lies in comparing American and Asian cultures. But why all this glorification of Asian culture? It’s not at all relatable, and if you dig deeper, you’ll see that mindfulness in Asian culture doesn’t really exist. Asian countries don’t even compare to the U.S. when it comes to work-life balance.

And what’s so bad about ambition anyway? Real actions change the world around us, and achieving goals adds confidence and joy to life. Humans are wired in such a way that it’s hard for them to be alone with their thoughts, and tasks provide a good way to avoid the aimless contemplation of the world’s beauty.

So, the only good for people is to be distracted from thoughts about their fate. This can be through some activity that redirects their thoughts, a new passion that fills them, or games, hunting, or an engaging spectacle—in short, anything we call entertainment. Pascal.

God Got Bored and Created Woman

The film Poor Things, based on the 1992 novel of the same name, touches on many themes. Each viewer will find something unique in it, and they'll probably be right.

"God," as Willem Dafoe's character is affectionately called, is the personal god and creator of the protagonist Bella Baxter (Emma Stone). Breathing life into her, He assigns her the role of a life companion and keeps her imprisoned in his Frankensteinian house under various pretexts.

This pattern of restricting the girl's freedom, both physical and intellectual, is evident in all the characters she encounters throughout the film: "Don't eat these cakes!", "Don't hit the children!", "Don't help the poor!" But Bella wouldn't be herself if she gave up so easily! Through new experiences, tasting life, and making many mistakes, we witness her journey toward conscious existence.

Bella counters society's insinuations with her motto: The world is as it is until we discover a new way it can be!

And the current state of things is merely an aporia on the path to a new worldview. After all, if one doesn't reassess their knowledge when faced with reality, it's easy to be seen as a mystic.

Old Bella, her "mother," couldn't muster the strength, she had "grown tired of life," as Dostoevsky might say. Even with a child already formed! "What kind of world will I bring her into?" - she may have thought, resigned to her fate. But Bella succeeded, she asked more questions than anyone else, was open to the new, and surpassed her parents and her creator.

Kinds of Kindness movie review

Interestingly, the director himself wasn't too fond of this title. He initially planned to name the film "End," but it was deemed unsuitable for mass distribution.

I believe the director may have had a completely different title in mind, but that's not so important. The title itself has little connection to the core of the film, or only a tangential one. It's like how "kind of" or "like" is used in English - filler words that don't add much meaning but set a certain tone. Similarly, the film's title serves as a way to set the viewer's rhythm for the story.

The key idea of the film, as I see it, is the cycle of abuse, which is incredibly hard to break. The characters in the film seem to find satisfaction in being abused, while the abusers take pleasure in controlling others. All three stories presented show us that breaking this vicious cycle is nearly impossible. The victims return to their aggressors, and the abusers are more than happy to take them back. In the end, despite the obvious violence, whether physical or emotional, everyone seems to be content with the relationships as they are.

These relationships are portrayed as a form of dominance, a sort of game with pain, where abuse manifests through extreme forms of control - from physical violence to psychological manipulation. The film raises the question of why people remain in such cycles, though unfortunately, I didn't have the chance to watch the film multiple times to analyze the plot and details more deeply.

Nevertheless, the artist's role is not to provide a final answer but rather to raise the topic and make the audience think.

Personally, it seems to me that the director is starting to sexually abuse Emma Stone a bit too much, but we enjoy that, don't we? 😉