Wednesday, November 28, 2007

i
am
annoyed
at
my
lackadaisical
professor,
and
now,
what
amounts
to
an
enormous
loss
of
distraction.


cancelling
a
project
due
to
a
general
lack
of
interest

is
just
________.


i needed this busywork because my near future will reveal two new physicians:

1) the world famous one takes on anorexia; and, 2) the new resident at ucla will evaluate and attend to any medication i might take.


the 'endless threat of anorexia' and 'conflicts we have with medication' block resident doctor #4 and i from connecting on a greater level. AND, if other professionals handle these two issues, it is thought to afford anorexia the attention it needs, plus allows resident doctor #4 and i to explore a very different relationship.

in two weeks, i will have known resident doctor #4 for three years. i still refuse to sit down in his office and we can go without eye contact for months at a time. the truth is, i am pretty sure i wouldn't recognize him outside of a concentrated area of westwood village. we have recently transitioned to private practice at the body dysmorphic disorders clinic, and i even refuse to enter that facility on my own. i sign myself into the building but then wait for him to come out into the concourse to get me.

am i embarrassed to write this out? yes, of course, but the fact of the matter is that i would never act like this anywhere else. in resident doctor #4's office, illness should be, and is allowed to be itself.

1) he thinks that in my refusal to develop my connection with him, ocd is protecting our relationship. i have never outwardly thought this, or have found myself promoting it, but the idea is probably as accurate as possible.

an example: if i were to connect more and put my emotions out there for him to potentially damage, this goes against ocd, and due to that ocd, i probably harbor a deep belief that he will die.

well, that is the thought ocd usually creates to keep my obsessions and compulsions in place. many times i have found myself thinking that a relative would die if i threw away an unwanted gift that he or she had given me, but have never thought, "i am protecting our relationship." it was just an unwanted ocd thought-- and not to be questioned.

i mentioned this once, that i could not depart with an old, broken gift. he laughed and asked me what else i could do with that "great power." oh god, no kidding. needless to say, that day the behaviours began to lose their authority over me. the experience of following the rituals of ocd had felt protective, but soon after, it became easier to distinguish that ocd was only protecting its own repetition.

my history would reveal that this 'death phenomenon' has occurred whenever i have decided to let a person into my life on an intimate level. mental illness and the behaviours i have were designed after traumatic events. i did not just catch these problems out of thin air-- i worked hard to make and then keep them. either way, by not sitting down in his office and refusing eye contact, this keeps him at a distance, and the disengagement protects us in that we remain as we are to each other.

i often refer to this topic as our lack of connection. this is incorrectly stated. to clarify, my connection to him is profound. since it is this strong, the bond is available to be broken, and it is holding steady were it is. one day it will happen, and i already know i will hurt enough. why get out there with him and then one day deal with an even higher level of pain? i should refer to this as our "lack of increasing connection" or "our standstill."

2) another idea resident doctor #4 had about our connection: perhaps, in thinking how anorexia drives me, my self hatred is such that "i think if he knows anything about me, he will become disgusted or frightened and break off ties." false. this myth sounds recited from an outdated textbook that was written by someone without firsthand experience with anorexia nervosa.

what would it mean to go to his office for reasons other than anorexia? without its shield, i cannot define myself. what is it he would see if we relate anorexia as a side effect? nothing, or more reasonably, nothing i can talk about and therefore i always deflect to futility.

right now, the negative voice of anorexia tells me it is impossible to ever attain anything which will match or surpass its existence. it's true. i will never find a match to the all encompassing passion it can provide.

it is incomprehensible to 'not uphold the constant, unwavering picture of anorexia' for anyone. i don't know how to "not be on guard" all of the time in front of another person. i cannot think of too many cases where i want to be, either. why would i want to be relaxed-- weak -- in front of another person?

by eliminating the conflicts in trust brought on through issues of medication, resident doctor #4 and i can become a team. though he suggests otherwise, it's no secret that each prescription written by resident doctor #4 is a desperate attempt to either make me gain weight or ignite my endocrine system. soon, these battles will be gone and i will lack genuine reasons to restrict our connection.



or, the way mental illness thinks:

when these other doctors take command, i will then have an internist, a psychiatrist strictly for medication, and strober, the noted eating disorder specialist. strober will additionally refer me to a dietitian and specialized therapist. this level of all-around care will give resident doctor #4 a non-agonizing way to drop me as a patient. not only will i be under comprehensive care, but he could then terminate me without guilt or a fear that i would fall.

life had been structured so that the next two weeks of exams and research would overlap-- leaving no time empty enough to get fat on emotion. since my professor cancelled the points relevant to our project, an intensity is removed which avails additional time to think. i cannot help but try to protect myself in advance by abusing these thoughts of being thrown away. the idea is to disconnect from resident doctor #4 even more.


perhaps i could strive for blatant errors in english on every post next month? c'mon, everyone knows six negative sentiments in a sentence inflects good cheer. AND why care about multiple tenses, on a blog promoting the 'practice of AND' or notorious neologisms? december, and the chore of useless language immersion, will not come soon enough.


the end of the semester approaches. as you can imagine, substantial papers and intricate theories are due, but in the case of one particularly involved project, i need to wait until the last bell or risk another gluttonous out performance.

it's better than that-- my eyes have yet to set on the expectation. i am desperate to know the requirements. what are The Rules? what is it i am to research? i care but refuse obsession, and so far, have only hedged a guess at the due date. this thursday makes the most sense, therefore it's apt to be next, but if not knowing what, why, and how, then when rightly needs exclusion, too.

ho hum, why invest when an electronic reminder should impend soon?

consider the catholic school nun. silent since imaginary, the wooden ruler keeps tapping to palm, suggesting no one has done wrong, but if she retires, most will. consider how in her desire to be that skinny ruler, we each become the fat greedy hand.


[skip ahead]

AND, no surprise, when i imagine thick the sickness must stick. my professor has just cancelled our project, that is, she has recalled this semester long endeavor due to a general lack of interest.

consider: how this professor is too damn fat to even pick up the ruler.


consider: cracking these dusty blinds spotlights the doubt.

AND that's fine
or it was fine
but no, it's not fine now.

consider: the purpose of this blog.

for five years i would have argued in favor of this point.


Tuesday, November 27, 2007

i went to the dentist yesterday.
god hates me.

[blog entry should end here, but you'd be wrong.]


consider:

- the assessment detailed $30,000 worth of dental work?
- two or more years of attendance, pain, and investment?
- an incredible incentive to fix perspective, if not digestion?

or,

- my teeth remain perfect?
- insurance covered this visit in full?
- eating disorder's commitment to strength and obsession is secure?


Monday, November 26, 2007

korean paper lanterns
paper lanterns in the rain-- seoul, south korea


Thursday, November 22, 2007

two necessary phrases


rain, and therefore, pink smog


Wednesday, November 21, 2007

laptop and menu card
in flight entertainment--
scribbling on a menu / duty free card


Tuesday, November 20, 2007

as the three of us were confirming security and about to depart for the airport, the excited calls from a stray cat caused us all to look up. yep, as sure as everything, the sitcom continues. there, peering down from the roof of my house, sat a black cat. no incompetent ladder here-- in fact -- only high pointing enthusiasm or ropes to approach. thirty feet up? thirty scratches down? AND, had branches survived the summer, i'd neither have blister nor incident.


Monday, November 19, 2007

rather than spending thanksgiving at their grandparent's house, i suggested my nephew and niece return home with me, and then also travel along to seoul this week. the grandparents didn't seem to mourn the loss.

this is perfect. i neither have agenda nor engagement, and only need to figure out what area of the city would be favorable to rent an apartment. no application is intended until my return in january.

we have already been invited to attend a traditional birthday party at an elementary school, and i think we will reciprocate with our presentation of an american thanksgiving, but otherwise the three of us are free to investigate the city without a schedule.


the cardiologist who asked me out in the midst of a funeral two years ago attended the wedding. why would NO have adapted to YES? the conflict is how this scientist plots an assumed angle of position, without gathering data, yet acts confused at the resultant error. AND this: if he hasn't been laid in two years, do i really want to bleed that badly?

AND i wasn't expecting to see the hunched cellist from the chicago orchestra, either. i'd have bitten the flame of my fractured ankle and ran, but was resigned to wimpily duck and cover. never the body-- blame the handmade shoes.


wedding excess.
cake success.
gargoyle approved
- good, saves me from marrying him myself.


gargoyle = term of endearment


Thursday, November 15, 2007

AND my sister is marrying a gargoyle this weekend.

here is the worst thing i have ever stated in print: she is the most gorgeous person in the world, but goddamn how he functions to push it over the edge. AND i apologize for mentioning beauty without first qualifying her insurmountable talent and skill but she has none.

in my opinion, someone who has been planning her wedding since she was four years old and is spending such a stunningly wide-eyed amount of money on it should have requested someone other than ME to design the wedding cake.

the typically shy "oh-god not-me why-me" returned to the violet cache when she insisted my results will undoubtedly look and taste better than the $1500+ cake models she had toured. AND, since i couldn't discern whether or not these were "the magic words" or a challenge... why not?

later, she said, "you know how *this* must be the second showpiece and not... you know..." AND wow, or, perhaps a symphony of "wow", "ouch", and "let's stab the gargoyle with his own trident in advance to alleviate any future problems."

it's already the thursday of the big week. there has been too much to do. i also have an agonizing thesis committee meeting this afternoon, possibly an engineering paper on colloidal phenomena due, and need to shuffle Invalid Friend Chuck between multiple jobs today.

oh, but no. in the event that my catastrophic fantasy actually develops, i am having fun creating extra lengths of lace ribbon out of sugar and "painting" edible beads to make them sparkle.


life gets in the way of adhering to the chore of this blog: winning aforementioned bids and therefore instantly purchasing two homes... insisting chuck take a third job, getting him to those job interviews, and now keeping everything maintained until the end of his first pay period... deciding to renovate my rental property in london... accepting another grant to continue my green car eco project... AND suddenly deciding to spent a three day thanksgiving holiday looking for an apartment in seoul.


Sunday, November 11, 2007

russian serpentine beads and a luxurious red leather case

i took a trip to russia for a class, and instead of returning home with everyone else to write my paper, continued on to japan to attend a supposed-to-be-stuffy meeting.

it was unexpectedly crazy in a high yen hilarious way, but this was an important corporate situation where i dared not to laugh. not only was it confusing to find out there was a live band, but i left slightly seasick, with more boxes of smashed flowers than could be carried out by one person. none of the lawyers or executives were high, which would explain part of the odd spectacle-- they just lived at an inconceivable level of affluence.

in addition to being bashed with roses, i came away with a pair of personalized onitsuka tigers (green shoes, my name embroidered on the sides), leather opera gloves, several bottles of premium nihonshu, and folders filled with foreign text detailing this second sale of my soul.

had i signed on to develop another product or had i been an unprepared contestant in a chaotic game show? it's anyone's guess, but the bewilderment is approved. japan is so bizarre that the japanese mentor i call upon for lessons in etiquette is often left in a speechless half-choke of nose bending concern, too. in regard to this party and its strange style of amusement, he calculated all color and number to reveal an adoration and longevity.

when the weirdness wore off, in those very green shoes, i flew to south korea for an audition, felt my lips plump up as i nailed the cartoon vixen voice, spent a pre-celebratory night out with friends, and then slept the distance back to los angeles.

ocd met me before i even stepped out of the car. i cared not to engage, but 'he' was born under the sign of gemini, and never developed the capacity to take a hint. his pokes were irritating but i was nursing anorexia's lower back scabs and could barely move, let alone return the taps.

beaded velvet souveniranother flight took me back to seoul to accept the expected and sign on to additional distress? excess? life? of note, in south korea they shake hands instead of breaking flowers over your shoulders and no one even thought to hit me on the head with a gym shoe. i left with makgeolli, a cake, approximately thirty days of employment, and a salary that, if living light, could cover my next decade. the only excessive part was a threesome with depression and disappointment on that last flight home.

my connections were excited, but this only revealed their reduced variety of goal. good is never allowed to be good enough for me, and though this contract is great, i came away feeling crushed in a way i cannot adequately articulate. perhaps, i embraced the love at the tokyo circus but then felt potentially disposable among the antiseptic executives in jung gu.

ten years ahead in life, but an honest week behind in coursework, i was somewhat reluctant to log into my class. come to find out, absolutely no objectives had been posted to fulfill. "i wanted to give you guys enough time to recover from our big trip," our professor had written. what big trip? AND who could admit to needing to recover from merely two days of architecture and russian bluster?

when life insists on being a sitcom, one must expect that predictable punchline.
AND the rerun, "we do not all play on the same level of life."

i no longer have a problem with that.


Saturday, November 10, 2007

two years ago, my invalid friend chuck got fired from the highest paying job he ever held. new management had been brought in to help restructure the company, and the entire staff at the location where chuck had worked was fired over the course of a week.

the new manager either fired the employees on small technicalities, or suspended them for a week prior to letting them go. when they suspended chuck, they made him think he had done something illegal, and upon his firing, the new manager also left the impression chuck was lucky they would not be pressing charges.

a few weeks later, chuck's unemployment compensation claim was denied. the company had disputed the filing, and ultimately, the 'employment development department' declared chuck ineligible for benefits. "you were discharged from your last job because you destroyed employer records and property without permission. the department finds that you do not meet the legal requirements for payment of unemployment benefits."

chuck insisted he had done nothing wrong. this job loss continued to follow him and was responsible for a small series of rapid fire 'hire and fire' situations. upon investigation, it only appeared to a new employers that chuck was shady, a liar, and a thief.

it was eventually revealed to me that another employee had once tried to screw chuck out of a huge commission. chuck retaliated by cancelling the sale attached to the commission and this action seemed to fit the definition of "how one could destroy employer records and property." files had been deleted. paperwork was shredded. neither of them received a commission, but the company did lose a sale. after a few uncomfortable conversations about impulsivity, retaining gainful employment, and dropping the workerbee dream of being self-employed, we let the situation die.

time went by. chuck's subsequent employment endeavors were lame, his employers flaky, and his salary... erm, never as good as promised. over time, i came to understand that chuck definitely did not do anything wrong at that old job, and eventually got angry enough to spend a few seething afternoons in the los angeles county law library. on one particularly bad day, which proved to be my best day, i filed the papers to proceed in multiple directions.

this company has just settled in an amount of [several] times chuck's annual income of that year. today, the final itemized bill for legal fees arrived, and though the amount totals over $100,000, it still leaves a considerable award.

i'm really happy, but definitely romanticize it too much. i keep returning to look at the crisp laser printed letters, and think this enormous bill is much more interesting than the final settlement. it's one of the greatest pieces of mail we will ever receive. i think it is essential to file inside my boxes of unbelievable history.

AND of course, chuck refuses to marvel in the same atmosphere. he sees a bill-- in an amount which could cover the cost of terribly excessive material goods. consider how the bill offers no concept of barometer, let alone an illustration of assertiveness to him. AND how *chuck didn't think he was originally entitled to pursue the situation* but now thinks these fees reduce his entitlement. AND consider how i persist-- how i will always reveal the fat.

either way, the moral of the story is: don't mess with my family.


in my opinion, this year was almost a complete bust. i supposedly have accomplishments but didn't do as much as humanly possible, and that, i feel, is terribly lazy. continuing to tighten up anxiety has been quite boring for me.

there is much less to obsess about now, and this avenue of ease, or, that reduced workload in thought, has convinced myself that effort is cut. then, why write? what to write? why even mention what feels like the banal level of life in which another person could relate? exactly. i am not looking for a backwards connection-- the intention was to find someone who runs faster. who does that? obviously not someone who reads this blog by 10:00am on a monday morning. that person isn't going to excite my eleventh mile each day.

the maze i placed myself in over this last year has been fairly intense. i don't know what to say about it other than i am desperate for fun. its distraction was eventually sick enough to mask the dead end, and i am impressed at how it disgraced the alternate purpose of blog title and 'cism.' when i finally pressed the eject button, i don't know-- i was somewhat surprised that it worked. it's fine, i guess, to dissolve isolated daydreams and reintegrate, just as long as the flip side is of similar and old familiar incomprehensibility.

considerable time this fall was spent avoiding resident doctor #4, and in doing so, some of his stitches have been ripped out. it's been good to touch the restriction in that it makes my capacity for excess feel more remarkable than usual.

consider: how to detail the success this intensity brings without pissing off the uncomplicated people who think opportunity should be dropped into their laps? i will never admit to working hard to anyone because i know i can always do more. if i never agonize about the intricacies of production, it can appear that Phenomenal is possible without involvement, dedication, or grit.


Thursday, November 01, 2007

too many good things,
skip ahead...