I still don’t understand why J is given the Noisy Cricket back in the first Men in Black film. Was it purely for K’s amusement? That he knew J would be blown clear by the recoil? Humour at the expense of a rookie agent? Or was it given as a matter of respect? Because K expected that J would be able to adapt without difficulty? It’s a powerful pistol in a small package, is it actually considered a strong firearm by more experienced agents? If that’s the case, then why would he switch up to other guns as the movie (and his skill as an agent) progressed? No idea. It’s not something that matters, but I think it’s recursive in my head. I come back to it every few years and dismiss it out of a lack of resolution. Simply googling it has heralded no great results, so I’m packing it back into my mind meats in order to fish it out later.
It feels so weird to be sitting here in the glow of a truly domestic Saturday morning. I was in bed before 1am, I had 8 hours sleep, got up and went to the gym, bought groceries, ate brunch, put on some washing and now I’m sitting here with a cup of tea in front of the keyboard. It’s the kind of lifestyle many would depict as “slowing down”. Except not. It’s not like “gone are the days” of ragers and long nights out for adventure. It was a night during which I didn’t feel up for socialising, being friendly and taking into accounts the needs/wants of others. It was “me” time because I felt depleted, run down and in need of a recharge. It’s the kind of behaviour many would term as introverted. Except not. I love being social, friendly and taking into accounts the needs/wants of others. Feeling like I’m bringing value into the lives of peers by my presence really does lift me up. I feel an immense sense of self-worth being a part of a lively social atmosphere and knowing that I’m contributing to the cultivation of that atmosphere. I’m far from introverted like the above would imply, it’s just that sometimes my physical wants and needs are those which I need to take into account.
I guess what I’m getting at is that people so often seek to carve out their identity and brandish it aloft these days. Introversion vs extroversion, sexual orientation, gender affiliation or fandom. So many ways in which people label themselves for easy categorisation. It’s a complicated notion and I’ve simplified it far too much in the last few sentences. I get it. I get that finding the unique nuggets of what makes you you can be an effective method of finding like-minded community and glomping together in kinship. If you feel left out and different, it can help others understand and empathise with why you sometimes feel alone in a crowd. I understand it as a method of connection. That’s great and I hope it works for you. I don’t know if I want it for me.
I’ve been thinking about it a lot lately with the idea of “identifying” as polyamorous and how I still don’t feel any different. Maybe it’s because I’m shifting perceptions, going through something Kafkaesque, but I still don’t feel like a different person. I don’t know that I want this as a label. It’s just something I do. There are nigh infinite components to my personality and the last thing I want is to be known for my relationship orientation. I don’t feel like a simple person, quick to categorise efficiently. Stereotyping exists as nothing more than a way to turn people into a set of components for easy identification, but it feels weird to boil my essence down to a few composite elements. I mean, look through this archive. Look at the diverse ideas and thoughts that surface from nothing more than sitting down in front of a keyboard and typing. I’m not claiming to be more complex than anyone else. Rather, we’re all more complex than we give each other credit for.
The more I’m typing this, the more I’m really starting to grok the end of my third paragraph. Unless I’m wrong (which I’m quite good at), the notion of creating labels and identifying in certain ways is to ease social interactions. If you tell someone “Hey, I’m a Pokémon fan”, it puts the burden on them to construct your identity from the array of cultural knowledge they have surrounding that topic. It means you don’t have to explain as much and conversation can hopefully flow beyond that point into real human interaction beyond these labels we stick to our identities. Of course, often people’s lack of understanding around that topic means we need to step back and deliver our own explanation to help bridge those gaps and it doesn’t often get beyond that point.
It’s like, sometimes you need to wield a Noisy Cricket before your audience is ready to see you with a Series Four De-Atomizer.