Understanding ruins experience? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message


gypsygrl -> Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 7:43:21 AM)

I didn't want to hijack the "the touch" thread, but a couple people made a comment in it that attempting to understand an experience ruins it.  Personally, I'm not sure whether or not I agree, and I always wonder if I should stop trying to figure things out and just let things flow.  My instincts, however, are pretty analytical, so I'm curious about other perspectives, especially in the context of a D/s or M/s interaction.
Does a sense of mystery enhance the interaction?  Or, can an interaction be enriched by understanding it?   Does it vary depending on which side of the slash one identifies with?






LeatherBentOne -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 7:54:22 AM)

I love the element of surprising my sub and the "deer in the headlights" look  when this happens.  I tend to also enjoy being very spontaneous.  Therefore, there are times when I answer certain questions with the response, "Now that would take away all of my fun. You wouldn't want that to happen, now would you?"[sm=evil.gif]




crouchingtigress -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 7:58:34 AM)

for me i guess i see it the way one poster on the other side does in the sense that what we do is very much like a magic trick....yet  i love to know how magic tricks work and it never precludes me from enjoying them after that, in fact i gain new and more mature levels of appreciation, in that now i start to look at the finesse and skill the magician brings to the trick...i look at the mastery of a trick preformed 100's of times till it is perfected enough for the publics viewing, and i see years of dedication and diligence to honing his craft.
 
and i see love, love for magic, love that inspired  the hours research, education, practice, focus, and mastery.
 
so if anything, understanding (for me at least) enhances the experience many times over....
 
there was a time for me to be a little girl, and to be doe eyed and entranced...and i loved that time of my life very much, but i would not trade what i know now, because it nourishes me more deeply to know that , say for example  "the touch" that those feelings are possible and that it has as much to do with me and is a barometer of my willingness to be electrified as much as it is his understanding and mastery of the the electrical currents we share.




onestandingstill -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 8:00:54 AM)

Hi There,
I'm kind of in the middle. LOl or playing both sides against the middle here.
I like those things that are consistent and give me great comfort and structure and those things that are a total shock and surprise too.
All one way or all the other would seem boring to me.
I like having no clue why I'm doing something sometimes other than because Sir said to as it shows him my loyalty and level of commitment as his sub.
Other times I still do what I'm told, but cuss and have a fit in my head about things I don't understand and internally am resistant to not knowing what's happening.
I also like in play, to have no idea what's coming next, but can relax if it's something I've played with or done before.
For me I sit squarely on top the fence on this issue and lean to each side depending on the circumstances.
I need both  over all I think,
suzanne




LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 8:14:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gypsygrl
I didn't want to hijack the "the touch" thread, but a couple people made a comment in it that attempting to understand an experience ruins it.  Personally, I'm not sure whether or not I agree, and I always wonder if I should stop trying to figure things out and just let things flow.  My instincts, however, are pretty analytical, so I'm curious about other perspectives, especially in the context of a D/s or M/s interaction.
Does a sense of mystery enhance the interaction?  Or, can an interaction be enriched by understanding it?   Does it vary depending on which side of the slash one identifies with?

IMO there's a time and place for everything.

There's a time to experience, and there's a time to try and parse through the experience.  A lot of people have trouble just letting go and letting be, and a lot of people have trouble slowing down and figuring it out.

They both enrich the other, both should be enjoyed to the extent they are enjoyable, but in their proper place and time.




gypsygrl -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 8:38:38 AM)

quote:

 I love the element of surprising my sub and the "deer in the headlights" look  when this happens.  I tend to also enjoy being very spontaneous.  Therefore, there are times when I answer certain questions with the response, "Now that would take away all of my fun. You wouldn't want that to happen, now would you?"


Yeah, I get this, and really do try not to think too much before or while something's actually happening.  Back when I first started, though, there were times when I've stopped everything just to ask questions: what is THAT?  what's it do?  where'd you get it?  does it come in other colors?  blah blah blah  How irritating must I have been? lol

quote:

 so if anything, understanding (for me at least) enhances the experience many times over.... 
 

Thinking about things after the fact does increase my appreciation for something and I find that by reflecting on something I come to understand the importance of it and it increases my respect for both the giver of the experience and the experience itself.  If anything, the wow factor goes up and I become even more enchanted.  Part of this is because I tend to dissociate during anything thats way intense, so in order to fully experience it, I have to 're-create' it in my mind later.

quote:

 I like those things that are consistent and give me great comfort and structure and those things that are a total shock and surprise too.


I have a love/hate relationship with surprises.  I don't like them at all, but am such a structure/predictability freak, I would get really stagnant on my own.  I can't help but acknowledge (however, grudgingly) that jazzing things up is a good thing.  For me, it feels like a control thing: being in a state of surprise is being out of control.  Love hate love hate. :)

I guess there's a time for letting things happen and a time for thinking about them.





gypsygrl -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 8:44:59 AM)

quote:

 IMO there's a time and place for everything. 


Yup, I think its the timing thats crucial.

quote:

  A lot of people have trouble just letting go and letting be, and a lot of people have trouble slowing down and figuring it out.


There's more than one way to skin a cat, and there's more than one way to have trouble, I guess.




Emperor1956 -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 9:06:34 AM)

"The unexamined life is not worth living." -- Socrates

There are people for whom "the unexamined life is not worth living" is a non-statement.  These people live their lives entirely upon impulse, and do not examine situations.  These people act, and react, entirely viscerally, and do not contemplate consequences.  They justify their conduct (often destructive to themselves and others) as "seizing the day" or "just keeping it real."

Conversely, there are people for whom "the unexamined life is not worth living" is a mantra; they examine everything, often obsessively.  They are unable to experience anything without obsessive, constant revisiting of the issue and examination of their emotions, physical state, and situation.  Often this need to constantly examine and rethink paralyzes them, and they cannot accomplish any task, whether it is as simple as attending a party or a munch, or as complex as creating a career.

We call both sets of these people crazy.  (If you need technical terms, ask a shrink.)   For the rest of us who are not crazy, there is a happy medium between experience and reflection.

E.




toservez -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 9:20:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Emperor1956

"The unexamined life is not worth living." -- Socrates

There are people for whom "the unexamined life is not worth living" is a non-statement.  These people live their lives entirely upon impulse, and do not examine situations.  These people act, and react, entirely viscerally, and do not contemplate consequences.  They justify their conduct (often destructive to themselves and others) as "seizing the day" or "just keeping it real."

Conversely, there are people for whom "the unexamined life is not worth living" is a mantra; they examine everything, often obsessively.  They are unable to experience anything without obsessive, constant revisiting of the issue and examination of their emotions, physical state, and situation.  Often this need to constantly examine and rethink paralyzes them, and they cannot accomplish any task, whether it is as simple as attending a party or a munch, or as complex as creating a career.

We call both sets of these people crazy.  (If you need technical terms, ask a shrink.)   For the rest of us who are not crazy, there is a happy medium between experience and reflection.

E.



That was way better then anything I could possibly write. How I tick I tend to try hard to always be one step ahead in knowing something so I do appreciate very much getting surprised by something and very much love it in my life. Depends on my mood which might give more pleasure but as far as that factoring into letting go or greater pleasure one way or the other, just different not one better then the other.

I am not a big fan of judging experiences by how much better in comparison one is to the other and this applies very much in this area. To me it is like eating chocolate, you may prefer one type to another but never really complain about the one you are eating then and there.





Missokyst -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 9:24:00 AM)

I don't know if I agree with that either. I know how special effects work but it doesn't stop me from enjoying a movie.  I know how to do some magic tricks but it is still very cool to see them happening before my eyes.  I know that a violet wand isn't going to turn me into Mrs Frankenstein, but it still makes me fall like a rock when someone comes at me with one in hand. 
Knowing how things happen is not a bad thing for me. Becoming jaded to an act is what kills the thrill.
30 yrs later.. I am still enjoying the things that happen.  <g> But I may just be weird wired.  I still like regular sex too.
Kyst




OedipusRexIt -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 9:39:04 AM)

I do believe in not examining the magic trick too closely, lest one spoil the effect.  Still, I can appreciate that deep desire to know, as expressed by some here.

Does analysis and understanding always spoil things?  I don't think so, but on the magical things like "touch", I don't feel I need to know, and I would rather not screw it up by digging too deeply.

Remember when you followed all the clues and it led you to figuring out Mom and Dad were Santa Claus?  Did it make you happy to know that?

Sometimes, a little ignorance is bliss.  For me, if it works, why tinker?




tearfulsurrender -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 10:25:11 AM)

quote:

Remember when you followed all the clues and it led you to figuring out Mom and Dad were Santa Claus?  Did it make you happy to know that?


This is a great example.  I have always been one to avoid disappointment by over anazlying something.  Life has too many disappointments without me creating them.  If it is magic, i flow with it.

tearful




Celeste43 -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 1:05:11 PM)

In the beginning I needed to understand a great deal more than now. Partly because I was a total newbie with damn little knowledge and partly because by hearing his explanations I learned that he did know what he was doing and that it was safe to trust him.

As far as anticipation and dropping tantalizing hints go, no thanks. I suffer from anxiety and too much anticipation and mystery causes anxiety attacks. But these days I trust him totally so I'm fine with anything he does. I may not like it but I probably won't get an anxiety attack and that's all that matters.




bandit25 -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 4:01:48 PM)

I used to be that way also...in life in general.  Now, I just go with it.  I don't need to know a LOT of things I thought I needed to know.  Make life simpler.




topcat -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 6:23:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: OedipusRexIt

I do believe in not examining the magic trick too closely, lest one spoil the effect.  Still, I can appreciate that deep desire to know, as expressed by some here.

Does analysis and understanding always spoil things?  I don't think so, but on the magical things like "touch", I don't feel I need to know, and I would rather not screw it up by digging too deeply.

Remember when you followed all the clues and it led you to figuring out Mom and Dad were Santa Claus?  Did it make you happy to know that?

Sometimes, a little ignorance is bliss.  For me, if it works, why tinker?


heh.

If I am half as good as they say I am, I should be able to explain it in detail before hand, and still blow her mind when I do it...
 
 




slavejali -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 6:41:10 PM)

I think understanding leads to consciousness and consciousness leads to a more powerful exchange.




Noah -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 6:54:18 PM)



quote:

ORIGINAL: Emperor1956

"The unexamined life is not worth living." -- Socrates



Thanks, E. I enjoyed your treatment.

and now somone ought to say it:

"The unlived life is not worth examining"

As for our our analytical little OP ... maybe if you bracketed that analysis for a while and moved instead toward a hermeneutic interpretation?

And I'm not even kidding?

Analysis can be of lots of sorts. Usually if we're thinking along psychoanalytic terms, for instance, we'll include the prefix. There is mathematical analysis and logical analysis and grammatical analysis and so on and so on. To me the bare-bones word analysis usually points first toward the sort of analysis that happens in the sciences. It is an attempt to get at something in a way that will lead to improved powers of prediction via a theory.

A great thing about that kind of analysis is that you can analyze pretty much anything in terms of lots of different things. A political scientist  can give you a theoretical account (an analysis) of what you did today in, say, the terms of Marx and his way of looking at the world. Or he could use another lense. Maybe the word power crops up a good deal and so this is not a useless way to analyse your day if you are interested in power exchange. I dunno.

A biologist could explain what you did today, maybe, by reducing you to the human animal. Some other biologist could analyse your day entirely in terms the goings on of your particular organs, or by reducing you to an amalgamtion of cells.

A chemist could analyse everything you did today by reducing you to a complex system of chemical events, I suppose.

A physicist can do the same (given several lifetimes, I suppose) in terms of energy events at the subatomic level.

And maybe every word every one of them says is true.

So which one will you turn to?  I think it depends on what sort of utility you want to gain by applying the theoretical result of the particular analysis you decide to pay for.

Similarly, we can anlayze ourselves in terms of , well, most anything. These boards are rife with dull little reductionist analyses of WIITWD. "Everyone always acts to maximize self-interest (often enough followed by some sophomoric claim like: ... and so there is no real submission" or "... and so there are no gifts" etc. etc)

We hear people boiled down to evolutionary units, people boiled down in terms of some laughable, one dimensional smidgin of an actual idea, like "Natural Law." These people don't seem to notice that once you boil people down, the topic is always: Cannibal Soup.

But hey, maybe there is some useful application of any analysis, however simplistic or silly it may be on its face. If nothing else, some of these quasi-rational analyses seem to make the "analyst" feel better, or more important, or something? I dunno.

But what if we don't want just to placate ourselves?  What if we want Truth? Or... are I say the words in these violent, fearful times ... Liberation?   Healing?

Well then I suggest leaving the tools of science behind. Science carefully conducted never claims to present The Truth, although some True Believers in  The Religion of Science (a small subset of the vast group of people who value science in various ways) will hold that Science succesively approximates Truth betterer and betterer. Of course they jump RIGHT out of the realm of science when they say such a mystical, untestable, unverifiable thing, but maybe that makes them feel better so it is mostly okay with me. I don't like to fuck with people in terms of their religion, whether or not they realize what temple they're bowing to all day.

When you, personally, ponder the groovy thing that happened yesterday, are you hoping to "get to the bottom of it" (if you'll pardon the expression)?

Having read your posts for a while, I don't imagine your "analyzing" is aimed at establishing once and for all the Right Theory of Magical Happenings. I expect that your musing about those events is kind of rewarding in itself; that it is something like fun. I imagine that you might be pleased if in these musings you notice a new way that This sheds light on That, affirms an understanding you have been carrying or challenges one in a way that smells fruitful.

I imagine that the results might end up as new shading of color applied to your world view, or pages inserted in your personal narrative, or as princes and principalities in the myth by which you may choose to organize your personal set of meanings and understandings of the world.

If I'm right and this is sort of more or less the kind of analysis you tend to do, rather than some reductionist boiling down of things, then I say: try to keep your perspective about what you're doing, and what urges seem to move the process along, and go ahead.

If what happened today was Twue Magic, I suppose it is safe from Science (analysis) in any event--although that doesn't mean that you and I are safe from Science, which--for all it's gorgeous and wonderful powers can sometimes just pull the labcoat over our eyes. But even while our vison is occluded, whatever is Out There is still out there, I guess. Drooling and snarling. Or loving us to death, maybe. God knows.

So yeah.  I say go ahead.

And please submit your results for peer review.




SusanofO -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 7:16:11 PM)

Well this will sound like a perhaps dry comment after that one, but I read a fascinating article a few weeks ago in TIME magazine, between atheist Richard Dawkins (a reknowned biologist who has written several books on various biology topics that explain complex concepts in relatively simple terms to the mass public), and Francis Collins, the director of the Human Genome Project (which a few years ago, successfully and for the  first time ever, mapped the human genome).

Collins is a Christian, but not a rabid, evangelical one. He used to be an atheist. Dawkins is still an athiest. At one point in the interview, Dawkins became upset because Collins couldn't "prove" the existence of God. Collins said there are some areas of science (like perhaps, the existence of genes to begin with, maybe) that are just "beyond the reach" of science's ability to provide an answer as to their origin. Science can study genes, he insinuated, but it's not going to probably come up with an answer (very soon) about why they developed at a deep, "why anything happens, philosophical level. Maybe someday soon, some scientist will be able to say "because the Neanderthals died out, humans developed an _ gene" or something - but that isn't the kind of "why" question I was referring to. I was referring to why humans exist - at all.  

Collins said science can be particularly bad at answering these types of fundamental "Why" questions - which are usually the ones that fascinate me anyway. It was a very interesting article - and it wasn't a very long, one, either.  

As far as people are concerned, and relationship-building, etc. - bdsm oriented, or not (although maybe it is easier in a bdsm context, I dunno)I guess I am all for creating a mood, taking people at face value while realizing there is a lot beneath the surface yet to be discovered (and that is just wonderful, I think - it is so interesting poeple can be so multi-faceted) and then letting human creativity do its work as far as "analyzing" something in a bdsm context. Enoy it. Make of it what you will. Enjoy it. Learn something about yourself from it.

I mean basic understanding of someone's personality can be a good thing, I think, as far as being able to communicate with them or help or try to understand their viewpoint -  what makes someone else "tick" or how they may react to this or that - But- even that, with many folks, has depths that I believe are almost unfathomable.

I think analyzing something, or some scene or event, or person "to death", so to speak, as if to come to some "final conclusion" about why something happenend the way it did, or how to handle this or that aspect of someone, just seems to somehow partially ignore and cut-off the fact humans are fundamentally creative and changeable beings. Problem solving is good as far as "correcting behavior", etc - but - putting someone's character and-or personality in some box and labelling it so it never changes and stays the same for the rest of eternity is probably wrong. And seems stultifying, and against the implicit goal of many bdsm relationships, somehow.

How can anyone grow or change or have fun if nobody else expects that because they've got them "all figured out?" and know they "always do" X, for example. Maybe this is a values issue with me. I don't operate that way, and don't appreciate it much. I think getting to know some people can be great. And I am not saying I dislike stable people (I think that's important). But -

People, I think, can and are writing the novel of their own lives - every day they live - they can make things have a happy beginning, or middle, or end, simply by the way they choose to veiw events and the context in which they put these things indie their own heads. Including their impressions of themselves.

They are the author's of their own books - their life stories. It's not a cut-and-dried thing we are looking at, here - when it comes to other people's lives (or our own), I don't think. I don't think it necessarily need to be analyzed in a way that will allow some sort of "final answer" or figure out exactly why X or Y happened.  Of course I am the sort who thinks even if I did figure one answer out, there are probably ten others out there that may be just as "valid". Maybe via analysis and understanding, several ways of looking at something will surface, though.  That would be my goal, anway.

Sometimes, I agree, hard-core analysis (that results in a definitive answer as far as what something is, or what someone is all about, or why an event occurred) seems to destroy the mystery and wonder that allowed it to maybe spring into being in the first place.

That might just be the pessimistic viewpoint, however (and also seems to imply that the thing or person or event being analyzed was a good thing, a beautiful thhing, and not some horrible event). I am sure analysis has its good and creative uses and healthy uses, in regard to bdsm many times too. I have not been around long enough to be a judge about that, really.

Hope that even made sense - it got a little long-winded.

- Susan




MasterGremlin -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/9/2007 7:41:18 PM)

I think some P/people think that trying to understand or explain an experience is equal to trying to rationalize or justify it which is consistant with a moral dilelma.  For myself, I have a very curious mind and have a strong scientific aptitude.  I like to know why, what, how things work they way they do.  Just me.  My Master, on the other hand is happy with, "it just is" and going with the feeling of the moment. 
Cordially,
minxy [:)]




gypsygrl -> RE: Understanding ruins experience? (1/10/2007 4:20:59 AM)

quote:

 For the rest of us who are not crazy, there is a happy medium between experience and reflection. 


Yes, of course.  The hard part is finding that happy medium and being able to rest in it.  Knowing its there is one thing.  Recognizing when you've found it, another. 

quote:

I am not a big fan of judging experiences by how much better in comparison one is to the other and this applies very much in this area. To me it is like eating chocolate, you may prefer one type to another but never really complain about the one you are eating then and there. 


I think comparisons can be fruitful in the course of reflection in so far as an awareness of similarities and differences between two happenings can enhance understanding/appreciation and draw out the uniqueness of a given happening.  But, I'm also pretty convinced that when it comes to the sorts of complex experiences implicitly being discussed here, judgements concerning better or worse are fragile.  Such judgements may be pragmatically justified in the moment as a way of organizing one's thinking and making decisions, but over the long haul they probably interfere with anything more than the most minimal understanding and could lead to a certain stagnation.  When it comes to chocolate, so long as its not toxic, its all pretty good and generally better than the alternatives. :)

quote:

  I know how special effects work but it doesn't stop me from enjoying a movie.  I know how to do some magic tricks but it is still very cool to see them happening before my eyes.  I know that a violet wand isn't going to turn me into Mrs Frankenstein, but it still makes me fall like a rock when someone comes at me with one in hand. 
Knowing how things happen is not a bad thing for me. Becoming jaded to an act is what kills the thrill.


These are really cool contrasts because they bring out different meanings of the word understanding/knowledge.  The difference between how something works (special effects) and how it all comes together to produce final culmulative effect (what the viewer sees at the movie) involve different approaches that can complement each other if one is able to suspend disbelief about what one knows in order to enter into the illusion.  My favorite example of this involves knowing, on the one hand, that the alphabet consists of only 26 letters, and that everything thats been written can be reduced to those 26 letters easily learned by most any reasonably competant 5 year old, and then thinking about, on the other hand, all the various and awesome things that have been written with those 26 letters.  The finite can produce the infinite. 





Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875