Ramblng on Greeks, Celts, etc.

I don't enjoy- who does, though come to think of it plenty do, unless they're all pretending, though why should they all pretend?- mutual vanity?- but on such a scale! no, that's ridiculous- Greek myths. I don't much enjoy Greek myths. They don't really appeal to my nature. Why? Is it because I'm a Celt- a different sense of being altogether, perhaps. Whether I'm a Celt in a biological-cultural sense, by nature, or on an individual level, nature again, my sense of self just happening to accord with Celtic sensibilities, I'm not really sure. And to be honest, despite probable appearances, I'm not even really interested. Which probably makes me even more of a Celt. Not that I'm much interested in the idea of being a Celt, have read precious little on them, this indifference itself probably a manifestation of being a Celt...and so on.

We, or at least I, don't understand, or don't want to understand, the atrophied need of other peoples for rational maps to and of existence, within which self-formulated structures they, the world, and all within it, have their solidly defined places. Slaves. Though they probably imagine all this map-making goings on in their heads is the path to freedom, which reinforces the concise point. If you believe yourself to be not free, trying to gain freedom, then of course you're a slave. What else could you be? And think of a line like "I am trying to find myself"; the first word particularly- "I". If you are engaged in the trying to find yourself then you've already achieved your purpose, since it's yourself that's doing it. Maybe if we switched the words around it would become clearer: "Myself is trying to find I."

I've an idea, by the way, which is that people are their nationality before they're born, conceived even. They are already Irish, English, German, etc spiritually , and so they incarnate where such a nature naturally is. That's why people are so English, French, American, etc- all within reason of course- not just for simply earthly reasons. This is their nature to begin with. "But how do you know? Prove it..." But see, that's the thing; I've no interest in proving it. I'm not even all that interested in it in the first place. I mean I'm interested while I'm thinking of it, but I've no interest in artificially sustaining, as it were, this interest; creating an ideology, nailing my colours to its mast. It's an idea which feels true to me, but I'd get on perfectly well without it.

All incidentally reminds me of some of Dostoevsky's musings about the Russian abroad, and perhaps more or else specifically himself: that there was an ingrained sense of cultural inferiority, of uncouthness compared to the civilised Europeans, but it would begin to dawn on him that he was actually the superior one, broader, less able to exist within 'form', and this at being at ease within form was much of what this being civilised or cultivated comprised; the capacity to exist without doubt within a definition, and this capacity for inhabiting narrowed dimensions endowed them with boundless certainty and self-righteousness; in subservience to the idea of the nation-state, for example, and beneath which certainty those not capable of dwelling comfortably within 'form' mistakenly quailed.