Open with a confession. For whatever remnant of my childhood was remaining when Mr. Rogers was inviting us into his neighborhood I resisted. I was not fond of Mr. Rogers. It was not an active dislike, it was a meh sort of thing. I'd watch if there was nothing better. I would have just turned 16 when Mr. Rogers Nieghborhood debuted in 1962. That's no time to settle on any opinion of the world. Neurologically though that's sort of what's happening in the brain: world sculpting.
One of the best films made last year was A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood. Like so many critics my gut reaction was to avoid or risk tooth decay of the soul (or worse: diabetes). Early brave critics, like lifeguards on the shore of Cinema, proclaimed the water safe to enter.
Let me reveal further (don't want to bury the lead) that my interest in this ramble is not Fred Rogers but is intended as an exploration of what I mean when I write "meta." I found this film to be very meta and not really about Fred Rogers at all. Rogers is a McGuffin, the lure to engage you, distract you, while deeper magic is being done.
[Frustration! I had written much more this than what you above. I took a break to do some household tasks; when I returned to it all I had written was gone. This will test my mettle. When will I reconstruct?]
The vision is for Ongoingness; Life continuing on . . . .
I am I and my circumstance; and, if I do not save it, I do not save myself.
—JOSÉ ORTEGA Y GASSET
Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly. For some strange reason I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. And you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be––this is the interrelated structure of reality.
—MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
At Play in the Field
Richard Valasek 1501 Kuloko St Pearl City HI 96782
+1 (808) 256-1646