Lithobreaking into Heaven

Oh, I’m a sucker for a scientist.

"A marriage ending isn't a failure at all. I spent eleven years with her. We were so in love that we couldn't image life apart from each other. We got our own place, adopted a dog, and supported each other through school. I thought if tow people loved each other enough the rest would fall into place, except... love isn't everything.

And I didn't want to believe that, but we were sitting in counseling one day, talking about our future and I realized we were describing two completely different lives. Where we'd live, what kind of life we wanted, what made us happy. And it hit me that- I love this woman and this woman loved me. And after eleven years of loss, grief, career changes, we were so deeply in love... but we weren't aligned. And I kept thinking 'We just need to try harder. We can find some compromise to make this work,' because that's what you're supposed to do when you love someone, right?

But the reality was, we had just become different people. Her trade school took her in one direction, my graduate degree in another and trying to force us back into who we were five years ago wasn't coming from a place of love. It was coming from a place of fear. Fear that, if this ended, it meant we wasted eleven years. But sitting there across from her, I realized: That's not how love works.

Those eleven years happened. They were real. The dog, our home, showing up for each other through grad school and trade school. I wouldn't change a single thing because loving someone doesn't mean you're meant to stay with them forever. And letting go doesn't erase what you had. We measure marriage by whether it lasts forever or not, but what if we measured it by whether it mattered?

What if we measured it by the love we gave, the life we built, and the people we became? Because love's job isn't to last forever, it's to help you become fully completely yourself, and sometimes the most loving thing you can do is give each other permission to be yourselves, separately. But the dog doesn't know were' divorced. He just gets two Christmases now."

No figures. No stories. No explanations. 🤌

Rothko didn’t paint people. He painted feelings so large they couldn’t fit into words.

In a world that constantly demands explanations, Rothko created rooms where emotion could exist without words. 🤏

But. Why talk about the chapel and then proceed to show zero pictures of it ? Do you not know what it looks like, because that's funny to make a hook for something you are showing and then never mention it.

Rothko didn't "paint emotion" or "blurry rectangles," the only two choices apparently, when you make a Rothko video. There's not some science to it. It can be interesting to point out these kinds of brain effects but it's so intensely overdone with Rothko that it's just more of the coercive language of the art market.

People do get something out of his paintings but I wish bloggers would stop trying to make a case for it like they are selling Matcha. People like art. Different kinds, but they come for the same feelings for Rothko that you get with music or literature. It's not that none of these adjectives apply, it's more that it turns people into this mush of buzzwords about eternity. Selling Rothko with this mantle of spiritualism happened maybe because of the real feelings people had about his paintings, but it's becoming this weird influencer speak to justify high priced euro trips.

Rothko paintings can suggest a feeling of eternity, but if that's what you get from it, I am sure you will find your own words without 100 videos such as this. Rothko wanted you to feel what you felt, the last thing he wanted was for you to be told what to feel.