First of all, let me say I do not entirely agree with critiquing someone else’s process book. My initial argument to Elisa, my instructor, was that by giving input to someone who is attempting to demonstrate how they work automatically compromises the very essence of a process book. In any other situation, I recognize the validity of respecting the opinions of your peers, but in this case, adhering to another person’s idea in regards to something that reflects your own thought process simply sacrifices the intuitive aspects altogether. If a process book is characterized by mediocre concepts and substandard execution skills, then, for integrity’s sake, I would assume it is an accurate depiction of the designer. With this in mind, I do not necessarily think this should be a difficult assignment nor would there be an incorrect way to do it. I have to give props to Elisa, though, for pointing out that the only wrong way to do it would be not doing it. Okay, let’s move on…

Borderline personality disorder is what some might call it. And while a fancy title is better than clinging to the “victim of circumstance” excuse, I like to think I have a little more sense than that. We are all victims and we all experience circumstances, but some, like myself, just choose to dwell in the experience and let it compromise the best of them. Is this a problem? Of course it is, but does overcoming such a problem make the taste of accomplishment that much sweeter? I think so, but at this point the bottom line is vague. Is this just an oversimplification of something extremely complex or is this question an obvious implication of self-defeating, wishful thinking bringing means to whatever end I am attempting to establish? Do rhetorical questions beg a more empathetic response than clever, emphatic statements? This is the way my mind operates.

Stop obsessing and start living: something I have been trying to do for a very long time. Yes, the fact that I have become aware of what stifles me is progress in itself, but while this may be good enough for some, it seems like it will never be good enough for me. I am not going to compare my problems to anyone else, but I will say that I know I, like many others, suffer from a significant disadvantage that impairs my ability to overcome even the simplest of setbacks. This brings us to the title of this entry.

At any given moment, I can identify two distinctly different sets of characteristics within me that battle to present themselves. My ability to recognize this and no signs of memory loss proves I do not have multiple personality disorder, but still suggests my mental state is not entirely healthy nor beneficial to the productivity level I need to maintain for the lifestyle I have chosen. Am I just fishing for excuses to convince the world that my catalog of failures over the past several years are somehow legitimate? Maybe I have somehow induced my mental instability as a result of being exposed to the idea that most of the greatest creative thinkers in history also had cognitive abnormalities? Even if this is the case, though, it means that I would still have to get beyond my lulling around and actually produce something great so people know I exist. As of now, I am just someone doing nothing important.