- (When I say “parts”, I’m vaguely thinking of internal family systems. The idea that there are parts of us that we can “blend” with, fully merge with, and forget that they’re just one facet of experience)
- This is something that I didn’t “get” when I was doing my “making songs and videos and posting on youtube era”:
It’s totally ok, in fact it’s good, to write from the POV of certain parts of yourself, even if you don’t fully endorse them
-
I want to write a thing about Infinite Jest, but it’s clear that there, David is making characters from parts of himself (maybe that’s what all fiction writers do, but I have more insight into his life).
-
Hal is the hyper-educated, hyper-intellectual, young drug user. So David can take that character, that worldview, that ontology, and then take it to its logical conclusion.
-
Gately is the reformed drug addict, with no intellectual powers, but a big heart. Now, explore that way of being. Etc.
- Also Orin as a stand-in for a certain part, the hideous men, etc
-
Similarly, Alannis Morrisette talks about how “You Oughta Know” is written from a very particular place, and that she doesn’t still have anger toward the person it’s about. The song makes people think she’s permanently bitter and whatever, but actually it’s just written from one particularly bitter part.
-
This is blindingly obvious, of course. But I found that, if I were to make a song, I’d feel a strong urge to explain it, or to not take a stance that I don’t fully endorse, which leaves you with this kind of draining/tiresome voice which is always relativistic, always trying to indicate that it’s aware of the nuance and etc, vs just wholeheartedly blending with a part