Half-way into Red Belt

Seems like a drum roll or something “introducing something major” should be here.

Got some folks who are working, according to my interpretation of Dojo philosophy, in the upper reaches of red belt and dipping into green belt. Did a little bit of talking with them the other day and figured, “Hey, what the hell? Why not write something out so that one, it’s out there and two, to give people a taste of what I think it’s about?”

Couldn’t think of a reason not to, so…here we go.

Normally, in the land of Muggles, this is how it goes.

Input comes in. 

It is referenced against the data banks to determine what it is.

It’s a bit complicated at which particular order things occur but they all occur: 

what is it 

what does it mean

what does it mean in this context

what are the historical references in interacting with it

what is the likely outcome of interacting with it in 

what emotions/feelings are associated with it.

There are all kinds of nuances and you get the idea.

Taking what is out there in the now, matching it up against the historical databases, hearing what the historical databases have to say about it, and chooses what to do about it, based on those historical databases. 

It’s all “I” or “Primal Character” orientated. 

In Dojo terms, it’s all about reinforcing the Primal Character.

In Dojo terms, it’s all about denying or reinforcing black holes. 

That’s up till you get into Red Belt.

White Belt is, “What is”.

Yellow Belt is, “Given what is, what might be?”

Red Belt is multiculturalism. 

Getting into Red Belt isn’t that big a thing, conceptually.

“Different cultures associate different vehicles with different experiences and different expertises with different vehicles. I get that. Monocultures tend towards hard-linking specific vehicles with specific experiences and vice versa. And, more importantly, monocultures are very clear about there being an ‘I’, a central character. As you become more multicultural (being able to enliven different types of characters), the solidness of the ‘I’ will get less. I get that.”

That’s the getting into Red Belt.

There comes a point where there has been enough loosening of the self-identification with the Primal Character and enough practice has been done with other types of characters that the solidness associated with the “I is making decisions” get shaky. 

There might even come a time where the mooring ropes fall away.

There is a sense of “adriftness”. 

There is no more solid “I”, defined by values or likes/dislikes. 

There’s no “real” reason to make decisions to support one character or the other. 

If all values are made up, if they’re all learned, then why choose one over another?
How to choose one over the other if you’re not tied to a single character?

After all, preferences are linked to a character.

Laughing at the memory of that abyss. 

See the clip from Spy Kids about falling into the endless volcano.

So.

That’s the POV from the “I” side of the fence. 

Now, we’re going to walk through the gate and I’m going to try and paint a picture of what my meaning-making is about the other side.

There is still an experience of “I”. 

It’s just not identified with any specific character. 

It is expressed through a character. 

Most def.

And there is still a sense of there being a reality “out there” what “I” see, interpret, make meaning about, and interact with. 

The difference is that there isn’t some some critter sitting in front of a bunch of computer screens (see the movie “Inside Out”), making a bunch of decisions based on historical stuff.

Imagine being a harp and all that stuff out there that you are aware of is like the wind moving your strings. 

Your strings are made up, for the very most part, of your history.

The things that happened.

The meaning you made.

The language(s) that you use.

The preferences you have.

On and on and on.

The POV to hold on to, the POV to work with, the POV to believe in, is that, as a human being, you CANNOT be aware of anything (inside or out) without engaging that harp. 

Music is going to be made.

Period.

Now, the old way of doing things was for you to stand between the harp and the stimuli and interpret the stimuli and react to the stimuli through the intention of reinforcing a specific character. 

You tried to keep certain stimuli front and center.

You tried to keep certain stimuli hidden.

You tried to keep certain strings.

You tried to make certain strings loud. 

All in service to the reinforcing the predictability stimulus/response cycles of the character. 

“I” was the locus of meaning-makings.

“I” was the locus of choice makings.

In this new place, there is a new locus for choice makings. 

Not so much a new locus for meaning-makings. 

Meaning-makings are still pretty much a things of characters. 

From the POV that as soon as you are aware of something, as soon as something has stood out from the general reality out there, that your harp is playing/responding. 

From that place, the nuance is, “How is fullness moved towards.” 

Fuck, just noticed that this is straight from “grok”, from “Stranger in a Strange Land”.

Damn, what strange circling backs life seems to hold.

The big flavor difference, if I remember correctly, is that his is about, “waiting for fullness” and Dojo’s is about, “dancing towards fullness”. 

There are sooooo many things about “How is fullness moved towards” that will drive white, yellow and beginner red belts crazy. 

“How do you know something is full?”

“What is full?”

“Is full only one flavor?”

“Is full doing a good thing?”
“Can something be full of value-negative?”

Fullness is a totally personal thing.
It’s like “ripe”.

Or “pornography”.

I can’t define it but I know it when I experience it.

Regarding the harp.

When you first start bringing your attention to it, you’ll notice that your characters have put all kinds of stuff, all kinds of values on the strings. 

That’s not a good thing or a bad thing.

It’s just a way to effect the string, to color it’s “sound”. 

Theoretically, there are “cleaner” and “more added to” possibilities for strings. 

For some reason that I don’t have a good handle on, the more you work with this, the more there seems to be a non-interest for the coatings. 

The nuances that you can get with naked strings tends towards being more interesting than the nuances you can get with coated strings.

The particular things about how your Primal Character flavored the strings just sorta lose their intensity.  

For instance, lust directed at certain types becomes less interesting than lust in its naked form. 

Same with hunger.

Same with anger.

Same with sadness.

Etc.

So, that about covers it for the first paddle around the middle ground of Red Belt.

Wonder if I’ll ever write this way about Green or Brown Belts.

Don’t have that wondering about writing about Black Belts.
Someone else is going to have that “pleasure”.

Or so it seems at this point.