I tend to miss the forest for the trees (coincidentally, I am myopic [ironically, this is a synoptic statement]).
For instance, most of my blog posts on this blog are really just 3-6 hour explorations of the tributaries of some first thoughts. Just little storms that drench and pass. Sure, they tend to carry a fair amt of synopsis, and I am by far the greatest commentator [read, interrelator] on this blog. But for the most part, tut tut, they are unorganized, have no purpose that can’t be gleaned from the first couple’a paragraphs, and are never revised.
I’m good at drilling down into things with a compass trained on the prize. But I don’t tend to seek out new prizes strategically. I just gather them, this one and then that one, in a desultory manner. (Like a squirrel that can’t recognize edible nuts?)
But that’s not true. I make prizes out of prising connections btwxt this’nthat’s distinction.
“Your mind is like an arrow.” “Practice tipped. And is an arrow better than a stormfront?”
But isn’t this all nonsense? Reading over my blog, do I not play light with heavy concepts? Do I not range out at the periphery? Sure, but like a hawk, I home in on tiny specks. So be it. I mean, that’s just me, right? Hopefully they aren’t too heavy for talons. (I mean, what does that even mean? Having given birth to the phrase, I can’t backspace it, but…)
What the hell’s my point? I had one, once. There’s a feeling tone that spawned all this jibber-jabberin’.
I seek anew. Isn’t that why, instead?