not jesus

a narrative is a tweening

the way that eyes jump around in saccades, only moving smoothly if they're tracking something that itself is moving smoothly

to explore the intrasaccade requires indirection and translation, the way that calculus translates change, lets us get physically intuitive about places that are an abstraction away

whether your current narrative uses the now as a plot point or some imagined future configuration of now as a plot point, you're still understanding in terms of plot points, like eyes jumping from point to point

but you can move your plot's current focal point beyond your direct vision, intentionally blind yourself to it, and work with it by indirect translation instead

if you've got a translator that works for you

it seems like everyone's is different

interestingly the way that they all seem different (to me) looks isomorphic (to me) with the way everyone's path to god/enlightenment/whatever seems different (to me)

this puts me in a particular place for a particular kind of translation

I don't have the wherewithal to be a realtime translator myself, but I can express product-construction through the inverse of my translation ability, and the resulting products sort of sit at the intersection of all human worlds (or at some of those intersections, one intersection per product?), addressable from anywhere on those experiential spectra, and thus they kinda meet everybody where they're at

but they're not places to land - the design of them you can land on, but to use one is to enter saccade, and I don't know where you'll go but you'll definitely go somewhere - they don't have the same endpoint for everyone, but that's the functional trade-off for universal addressability. the function is observer-specific. (wait, do I make verbs? or .. do I make things that become verbs under observation? maybe I make vehicles? suddenly reminded of how Apple devices are generally designed as personal, single-observer, an adopted function of the self)

I sort of think the functional issue with Jesus-as-concept is that the character itself is an attractor? on the other hand, do you know of Isaac-Luria-as-concept? "come to me" vs tzimtzum-like-cosmic-kintsugi

can you imagine the feeling of living in prosaccade, indefinitely? landing in the unlanding? because I think that's what I'm doing

I think that's what I did - and these days I don't need to locate or effect myself anywhere in particular. it's okay if my location/existence is always not-here

reminds me of the late Dentarthurdent discovering flight

(theory: within the web two clicks deep from en.wiktionary.org/wiki/saccade one can build a self-evidently complete model of aliveness)

... I think the function of yours.fyi might actually be to land you in stable translated/companioned prosaccade, actually, where the point you experience yourself asymptotically approaching is you

---

god this feels relaxing, I feel like writing pieces like this is like... like each one is a line in the hatching, revealing shape and depth that makes the rest of the sketch legibly sane to me

I suppose each line is a saccade eh? one that I can look at

writing-as-personal-calculus

(mm, I made something for this too: please see impliedreality.com)