And this was the sole picture in my Dragons sketchbook from this year's Fur-Eh, this one from
YueNoctis of this proud figure coiling through the waters.
I should have asked if this was deliberate, but I'm from B.C., and while Fur-Eh isn't in B.C. it's in the province right next to it... and while Nessie is the most famous lake monster, southern B.C. has its own lake monster in the form of Ogopogo in the Okanagan Lake...
YueNoctis of this proud figure coiling through the waters.I should have asked if this was deliberate, but I'm from B.C., and while Fur-Eh isn't in B.C. it's in the province right next to it... and while Nessie is the most famous lake monster, southern B.C. has its own lake monster in the form of Ogopogo in the Okanagan Lake...
Category Artwork (Traditional) / General Furry Art
Species Eastern Dragon
Size 428 x 600px
File Size 98 kB
Listed in Folders
I recall mentioning you and Ogopogo in a response to a Twitter-post from Aimee Major (I don't believe she's now or still active on FA but I could be entirely incorrect) and my own connection to Igopogo, Ogopogo's local goodbean cousin who reputedly lairs in Lake Simcoe.
As I suspect you didn't see that Tweet unless I or another friend you know shared it with you, I'm more than happy that we can agree on the cryptids we love- and the one particularly novel and mysterious Being of Feline Clever I adore. <3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igopogo
-2Paw.
As I suspect you didn't see that Tweet unless I or another friend you know shared it with you, I'm more than happy that we can agree on the cryptids we love- and the one particularly novel and mysterious Being of Feline Clever I adore. <3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igopogo
-2Paw.
Nothing like RL mythology to get one's creative novelty-juices firing on all reactive-professive cylinders, aye, senpai Jen?
And you're right- even if the organized bibliocracy of the modern informational intelligencia rarely takes vintage 'unproven' oral history or verbal profession seriously, it's just as much a human record as any other. We've been storytellers as long as we've been social animals, though it's not of course unusual to want the answer to every question you have.
But ignoring any of those questions, or the answers professing them that someone is unsatisfied with because they need an answer they must face the gage of provision to themselves, not numbers or words but context that cannot be defined outside of any uniquely novel human's experience, is not unusual but that's never how it works. What you find is infrequently far more important than what you believe you're owed in knowing, and it's important to understand the nature of a need, and how important the hand's-turn of understanding something in and of one's own biases and reckon of being and knowing is.
What you see is what you get, and what you get must very often come of your own provision. Overspecialization is fine, but if all you do is reduce the importance of everything- and everyone- else and ignore the lacking you prefer by compromise, you're not getting it wrong by excluding what you can't get right or don't know, you're guaranteeing personal blindness and ignorance of knowledge, getting it wrong by choice but forgetting you've chosen that path.
Know thyself ultimately means knowing all of what you are, in lacking and strength, inherent talents and inborn limits. There is nothing wrong with any element therein, and that personal gestalt is human beauty and honesty, fused into the person you are. If you can know that, you don't fear your limits, or misunderstand your strengths.
-2Paw.
And you're right- even if the organized bibliocracy of the modern informational intelligencia rarely takes vintage 'unproven' oral history or verbal profession seriously, it's just as much a human record as any other. We've been storytellers as long as we've been social animals, though it's not of course unusual to want the answer to every question you have.
But ignoring any of those questions, or the answers professing them that someone is unsatisfied with because they need an answer they must face the gage of provision to themselves, not numbers or words but context that cannot be defined outside of any uniquely novel human's experience, is not unusual but that's never how it works. What you find is infrequently far more important than what you believe you're owed in knowing, and it's important to understand the nature of a need, and how important the hand's-turn of understanding something in and of one's own biases and reckon of being and knowing is.
What you see is what you get, and what you get must very often come of your own provision. Overspecialization is fine, but if all you do is reduce the importance of everything- and everyone- else and ignore the lacking you prefer by compromise, you're not getting it wrong by excluding what you can't get right or don't know, you're guaranteeing personal blindness and ignorance of knowledge, getting it wrong by choice but forgetting you've chosen that path.
Know thyself ultimately means knowing all of what you are, in lacking and strength, inherent talents and inborn limits. There is nothing wrong with any element therein, and that personal gestalt is human beauty and honesty, fused into the person you are. If you can know that, you don't fear your limits, or misunderstand your strengths.
-2Paw.
FA+

Comments