Imagination? Or psychosis?

lets see...

Real in my head.
Not real IRL.

That is how it goes for me, for the most part ;D

 

Nope, and just like people can't fly on their own, without the help of mechanical devices, dolls can't have souls or personalities on their own.

 

Depends on your definition of flying, a soul is an insubstantial thing so to liken flying to something my physical body has to do is an apples and oranges argument.

Again we're back to your reality versus mine.

 

You're welcome! Campbell goes on to describe how we do the same sorts of thing with the communion ceremony and other ceremonies, both present and past. We know, but we choose to know otherwise, for a particular time and in agreement with others taking part in the same ceremonies. For some reason I found it very moving to realize that we've always, as a species, engaged in some variant of this meaningful "play". (Note that I use the word "play" for lack of a better word and because I can't remember exactly how he put it - and not to diminish the importance of anyone's beliefs).

 

Using the belief of animism to make our materialistic doll hobby seems more spiritual is downright silly. A $500 chunk of resin is not a 500 year-old Redwood tree. If people here truly are an animist in regards to dolls, I'd yet to see them boycott the sad, evil exploitation that's been happening in the Marketplace all this time.

Imagine, dolls (sentient soul-filled beings) are sold regularly like slaves, yanked away from their loved ones and friends. Dolls are torn apart, their body parts sold separately, in order to create Frankenstein-like monstrosities! Dolls who are heterosexuals being forced to couple in homosexual relationships with other dolls (and vice-versa), and male dolls having their bits dremeled off because their new owner wanted them to be a girl, and female dolls having their breasts chopped off because their owner thinks they'd make a cute guy.

So where's the outrage? And I bet quite a few of the "animists" here have conducted the same activities over the years.

And while there are many things in this world that are indefinite, there are also many things that are quite definite. Law of gravity among them. You were the one that stated that one's individual perception of reality creates that reality. I was merely pointing out that's not always the case. There was a guy in the news who believed he could fly and so he jumped off a ten-story balcony, and...well, I think you can guess what happened next. Does that mean his perception is off? I think so.

If you want to say that to you, your dolls are real, that's totally cool. But to excuse it with the notion that we make our own reality seems far-fetched.

 

Genesblues, forgive me for getting to your response a page late, but let me just say that I *completely* agree with what you're saying here! I'm a writer as well, coming from both fanfiction and professional writing backgrounds, and I fully agree that the strange alchemy that occurs between writer and character is at direct root of the brilliance that eventually arrives on the page.

I find it interesting and inspiring that in only two professions, writing and acting (see my below comments to Baakay on that one), do we wholly accept - and encourage - individuals to talk about the characters they've created or embodied with the equality that they might discuss another human being. Interviewers will explicitly ask writers or actors how well they and 'Sally' would get along on a shopping trip, willfully ignoring the fact that Sally has no credit card, much less many other aspects that would make her a human being rather than a character. Yet her personality and preferences are given as much weight, in a theoretical question such as that, as are the preferences and personality of the writer/actor answering the question!

I think it hints at a respect toward that sanity-maintaining fantasy that you mentioned. It makes me hopeful that the playful, ahm, "originating" (creating-things-where-things-did-not-previously-exist) spirit is still well-respected, though deeper in disguise, in our modern pop culture. (Please forgive my abuse of vocabulary in there...I couldn't find the right type of word, so I appropriated and tweaked the tense of another one. )

Toshirodragon, I think there's a particular slogan - though I can't find the original icon that I first discovered it on - which you'd appreciate. It runs thus:

"Don't justify my truths."

Bakaay, I think "play" is a fine word for the context, when understood in the many uses and contexts that it can claim. Just as a sampling of ones that I can call to mind offhand, remembering that I have had precisely zero formal anthropology training... A course I took last year on digital media and communication theory used the term a lot, referring to more than simple divertissements; rather, the reciprocal and investigative interaction between subject and inquisitor, investigation and experimentation. "Play" is still used casually by folks of many hats to indicate the process of trial and error, investigation and discovery, inherent in becoming more familiar with a process, piece of equipment, or concept. And, running straight across the spectrum to theatre, I think the seriousness and gravity with which roles have historically been, and still are currently, adopted and acted out in "plays" (both musical and not, Western and Eastern (and otherwise too!), with and without dance aspects (medicine & rain dances) as well) speaks to the importance that we've always seen, as a species, of temporarily becoming what we are not.

I have the suspicion that I'm restating much of what you already know, but I'm having fun finding the words for it anyway One of these days, instead of gathering my knowledge of Campbell from secondary sources, I need to sit down and directly read the man's work. One of my many many items on my long literary To Do list.

 

I think this is quite perceptive. I was sanding my roomie's new Cuprit last night and realized I was going to a lot of trouble to keep rearranging her in reasonable positions, rather than just getting a grip on her leg or arm and twisting it whatever way was the best working angle; it was more the way I would position someone I was giving a massage to. I even covered her with a dish towel when I took a break. Is this because I thought it was uncomfortable for her, or offensive to her modesty? No, it's because I personally felt uneasy giving such rough treatment to a nude female figure; that's just too close to home. I may have projected a little and thought "this must be really embarrassing for you", but I know the one who actually felt discomfort was me.

(and just BTW, let's remember that in Japan it's long been believed that anything that exists more than 100 years gains a spirit of its own. Maybe our dolls just have to wait. =)

 

I agree. When I first got my little March doll at a convention she wasn't well strung, and her ebows would dislocate and twist as I carried her. I can't tell you how many perfect strangers went "oh no!" and very tenderly corrected her. I was grateful because it -was- painful to see her like that.

I think as social creatures it's our nature to look after anything with a face, with eyes and hair and recognizable features. This extends to animals and inanimate objects alike. Let's not forget the major trends of having and caring for a pet rock, or giving hardboiled eggs to students and encouraging them to take care of them (sometimes leading to very real attachments that make some kids cringe or cry when their eggs are broken when the projects are over).

For me, if something comes into my possession that has character, I want to take care of it. And as irrational as it it I'm uncomfortable leaving my dolls in uncomfortable positions, or even in skimpy or light clothing when it's terribly cold out. Generally this is an anxiety for me that I acknowledge as being silly, nevertheless even putting a washcloth, scrap of fabric, or piece of clothing over them like a blanket can ease my discomfort. I don't know if that's me being "off" or just my nature to feel maternal to things closely resembling, moving, and being treated like people, and to whom I attribute character and feelings on a regular basis.

I find it interesting that, for me, headless bodies (an admittedly rare phenomenon) are not treated as carefully and lovingly as those with faces. And dolls I get without faceup or eyes are still inanimate to me and have almost no character. Maybe's it's true what they say, it's all in the eyes.

 

I have a good imagination. I feel offended.

But its ok. I dont mind.

 

this is a really interesting topic for me, and i think about it often - not just with dolls - but with all kinds of things in life! i think that a lot of what we feel/imagine to be real is not. but then again, i also think that maybe because we believe something - it becomes reality. because it does. at least for the believer. you know - this could turn into a pretty deep subject: what makes reality, reality?

i could go on for pages about this topic, but i won't. i'll just say, for me - i don't really believe that insanity is what we generally say it is. i think a lot of what is considered sane is not, and what is considered insane is not. maybe imagination is just as valid a reality as reality, just as dreams are in a way. if that makes sense. to answer your question, i think the line between imagination and psychosis is a pretty shifty thing. that there may be no definite line - and i think that's okay.

who knows though - maybe i'm crazy.

 

I definitely believe in the housing theory. Not everyone agrees with my views, but I also believe that everyone has different levels of consciousness in which they are aware of different things. As somewhat of an unofficial medium (I know I sound stupid here, but bear with me.) I have come into contact with guides and "fairies," or spiritual beings usually only known by mythology. Honestly, I have one such "fairy," a domovoy, living in my home, and I've been looking for the perfect doll to use as a vessel. To expand on that, a lot of people feel that dolls are "evil" based on this feeling of "there might be some kind of spirit in there." Mostly, the only "spirits" taking temporary residence in dolls are usually just silly fairies who are bored. (Wow, I sound so, so crazy...)

At the same time, the diagnosis of "psychosis" can sometimes be made purely based on opinion and the level of consciousness available to the person. Don't get me wrong, sometimes people are just loony, and I think you can tell the difference after a while.

 

As someone said earlier, I think that there is a huge difference between pretending and believing. I bond pretty deeply with my dolls, they have characters and personalities, but I'm perfectly aware that these are just things I have made up in my imagination and projected onto them.

While I don't think that it's healthy for someone to believe whole-heartedly that their doll is a real thinking, living being with a soul not derived from the imagination but instead a separate entity, as long as they are not harming themselves or others with this belief, there is no reason to worry.

However, I think that once taken to extremes-- when the doll is actually talking to you on its own, as in you can hear its voice in your head, and this obvious element of psychosis is what is bringing you to believe that it is real, I think it would be an excellent idea to seek help immediately.

 

I have a very strong imagination. I believe in multiple dimensions. I know it sounds crazy (which means I am not crazy, right? XD) but the way it works for me is that there is a thin veil between me and the soul of the doll, and the body is how we interact. On our side we see dolls and props. On their side, they see actual things. They are moving in their world and when we give them props they become real food and items they can use. It's like magic.

When the body gets hurt, they get hurt. We interact by letting them see through the doll body. They choose to stay in it or to stay in their world. It's like a mirror or gateway. So they can go shopping in our world, but I haven't found a way to escape my body to go to their world yet. XD It's complicated.

I'm a writer, can you tell? :3

 

I agree with those who said that there's a distinction between pretending that a doll is a separate being and actually believing that.

And... to add it in to the mix, I don't believe in any sort of soul (Not only that, but I can't even comprehend what a soul would even be). I suppose it would be hard for me to believe that my doll was real.

 

I hear my dead father speak to me, I'll make sure my doll is "comfortable", and I talk to my dog. But I never truly believe that it's my actual father speaking to me, or that my doll is going to get a bad back because I didn't position her correctly, or that my dog really understands me when I tell him WHY I'm using provolone cheese instead of feta.

That beng said, I think it's unhealthy when people are convinced their doll is "mad" at them, or has "feelings" for another doll etc. And if they ACTUALLY believe the doll is talking to them, I'm one step away from calling the men in white coats. Thats when I feel as though they are crossing the line from "delightfully eccentric" into mental illness.

 

I think it depends on the persons life. How social is this person? Does he/she can make contacts with other people and/or living beings. Imaging the doll is alive and can communicate with the owner isn't a bad thing, I think it even can be healthy at some points. Personally I also have a great imagination, but I won't share them with others. It helps me during busy and stressful times. It will be bad when the person is getting isolated socially. So I think imagination is a good thing unless the person is getting isolated and gets a depression or something like that caused by the imagination.

BTW, many people have some imagination with other objects, like cars, plush animals like teddybears, computers and cartoons.
I also think it's some kind of taking care of these objects because we own them and have to take care of them. Almost everyone talked at least once to a object. Think about a car which won't start and the driver is begging the car to drive. I know it's much different but it's still related to some kind of imagination.
Because we care a lot of our dolls and even love them in some way so it's easier to imagine them as a real person. As said by many others it will get bad when a person gets freaky ideas and thinks a doll gives them orders to hurt other people. Or something like that.

 

I,too, beleive that having something to take care of it , whether it is a plant, pet, or object is very therapeutic. i takes the person away from the situation that they are in for a few minutes and they can get relief from the world when they are concentration on the object of their affection. Gardeners love taking care of their plant and sometimes spend hours pruning, talking, or just relaxing in their presence.

I actually find it kind of sad that we are condition to put away the "childish" things. I think that children can teach us so much. children don't discriminate they just want to be happy and make many friends. I think that keeping some of your childes things is good for you. Pretending your doll is helping you stay up to finish a paper is a good one

 

You can't tell people we all have souls. We have life, electricity that flows through our bodies and makes us work, and a brain that creates chemicals and electric signals that make us thing move etc. Complicated systems that flow vital fluids to the organs which need them to function. Is that a soul? No, it's very scientific actually. To say "We all have souls" is like saying "We all have a god."

Not everyone thinks humans have souls, or any other creature for that matter. I personally do not believe that I have a a soul. I believe that I am a complex organism with greater intelligence, but I do not think that when I die I will become a ghost or go to heave or hell. There is not enough hard scientific evidence for me to believe any of those things. I've never seen a ghost, nor heaven nor hell, so why should I believe that? I have seen a brain, and I've seen the studies that tell us (for the most part) how our bodies work, but I don't think that when I die, an invisible me will float fourth from my body and ascend into the sky (or probably descend in the ground in my case >.<) or linger.

As far as dollies go, I think our imaginations create their "souls" They aren't really souls at all, and we know that if we talk to them, they wont talk back. I mean I never converse with my doll, but I do occasionally tell him "Hello" or "Reios you look so cute today" just little things like that. I mean dogs are of course different from dolls, but we talk to them fully not expecting to get a verbal answer from them. (maybe a sweet little bark or a kiss ) It's when we start hearing them speak back to us in our native tounge that we obviously have developed some sort of problem. I'm sorry but if you honestly and truly believe that anything which can not speak is talking to you in the language that you speak, regardless of what it says, you're insane. If it's telling you to give 100 dollars to charity or to kill a baby you are insane. Dolls can't speak human language, nor can dogs or trees or cars of anything other than humans. Sure animals can seem to understand our works, I wont deny that, but they never speak back to us in Human language.(unless its one of those freaky cats that makes strange noises that kinda sound like words.)

It is though, entirely healthy for us to pretend. Carrying on conversations is weird, but if you don't expect them to answer you or input their opinion, you're ok. It's when you hear them respond, you're a nut. lol.

Edit: Just so everyone know, the latter parts of this post are opinions only. Do not take them literally if they offend you, and don't start fighting with me over my opinion. It's my opinion and it's never going to change. Take it with a grain of salt please.