ulysses. i am starting to think that there lies a great chasm between those who can see the big picture, and those who cannot. and i'm starting to suspect that i'm on the wrong side of that gap. i often think about how difficult it is to say, make a movie -- something that is done most routinely and clearly, by people of all (in)capacities. all of the details, the planning, the foresight, and the vision involved intimidates me. i marvel at how well sportscenter's graphics are displayed and executed. how do they sync up the images and the commentary so well? anything that seems complicated, that i can't immediately get my mind around in five minutes, amazes me.

i once found comfort in the idea that if you look at a finished product, it would be akin to gazing upon the human body as a piece of work -- miraculous, but certainly explainable. i talked myself into thinking that i could understand things if i had seen the work from the beginning. i mean, if i knew about atoms then molecules then cells, the human body could logically emerge from that knowledge. step by step, if i could see the individual parts being constructed, i would get to the whole with a full understanding of how things worked.

however, this is small consolation when looking upon most great works. sometimes i'll read a book, watch a movie, or think about a concept, and my mind is just blown. i can't wrap my little brain around how something got from point a to point b, with no perceivable logic save miracles in-between. to me, it seems as if the great work emerged, like athena from the head of zeus, fully formed and clad in a set of armor. i'm mind boggled.

so it helps to read things that explain how things got from the beginning to the end. and to realize that great works take a million steps from point a to b, even if all you see, and are transfixed by, is the final product. well, it helps until you realize that you don't even know where your personal point a is.