Coffee shop kids and the reality of space and time

In the decadent decors illuminating a fantastic illustration of aesthetic and hidden curriculum of pretentious names and capitalist symbolism, there are those who enter into a space of being different than when than enter and taking on a form of identify seeped within a distinct, yet different composition and conception of time.  These I have come to regard as the coffee shop kids.  The use of “kids” is somewhat misleading, but it is a playful usage of language that I will explain later.

My first thoughts came to me as I sat in the corner of a starbucks and felt a shift and uneasiness of the time and space in which I was situated.  Inside there was an attitude and an allure of the other world. The other world in this case is one of intellectualism and proposed elitism.  The names are foreign to the traditional convention of small medium, and large and in place we find tall grande and venti. The complication of ordering is only a brief complication of nervousness like the first intravenous experience of heroine, a trickling burn of cocaine in the nasal cavity, or the sting of a sucker punch.  Those that have become addicts, narrators, and navigators of this space and time know its intoxicating aroma and effectual bliss of hypersensitivity and loss of the world which they left to enter such a space.

The experience of the coffee shop kids is one that cannot be proposed or summarized in some tyope of universalism or generalization.  I feel that everyone experience a temporal loss of the self and floats in uncertainty to find one’s self that is a compatible self to such a  space.  There can be such rejections and utter forced excretion of the incompatible beings that try to retain a sense of self that has not been organically stimulated in this space.  The resistance to flowing into a space and allowing a sense of being and self, and such a possible identity, is thus the result of temporal disengagement and organic stimulus of the core desire.  Perhaps the desire is one of chameleon adaptation, but this would be a bad example.  The chameleon changes to not be seen.  The coffee shop kids partake in a voluntary involuntary paradigm of self negotiation negation and transformation.  Their consciousness turns from that of external concern to one of internal concern that stimulates and informs the outward.  As such, the transformation and space is one that can be describe as the of the old tv show “The twilight zone.”

Is it required that something strange should happen to analogously refer to the twilight zone, if so why?  Here it is assumed that the space and time must be different to a degree of horror and psychological asphyxiation, but this is not necessary.  Such vile interpretation of space and time different form that that we believe exist as normal is falsely assuming the deviance of another space.  Such is the fetish of many to assume the there can be a “normal” space and time.  Moreover, the ability for us to truly become of aware of such transformation of our self and the space in which we occupy is questionable.  How do we know it exist or occurs if we cannot place any type of absolute framing into its descriptions?  The answer is not one that can be simply provided in any degree of objectivity in observation.  Observation itself is subjective and thus we arrive at understanding of a personal experience.  The observation and mere pondering of transformation from one space to another could be considered experience, but is it really experiential?  If one does not cognitively recognize and gain the ability to articulate, or at least attempt to articulate, such experience can it be called experience?  How can we make distinction between experiences as something of an occurrence situated in the objective in contrast with transformation which is situated with in the subjective.  It is a matter of theoretical view and philosophical inquiry. 

By observing and proposing a theory of transformation I am proposing that the transformation is somehow standard or at least measurable.  This, however, is not what I mean to discuss here.  Rather, what becomes more consuming and contemplative is the subjective referential of self reflection upon the self in the self and of the self while consciously assuming no cognizance, perhaps acknowledgement, of such transformation.  In this sense the transformation can never be described nor attributed to anyone except the self and conscious undertaking of that self to attempt to understanding the transformation and subjugation of a new space and temporal allowance.  We can simply posit that people enter the coffee shop unaware and incredulous to any such change in their being, identity, or self.  But this matter does not concern nor does it matter if its generalizable to others.  The only one who can provide a settling understanding of what is is the one who is being at the time of such transformation.

We could call upon the pop culture reference to the movie The Matrix in which people participated in a world they believed to be true but in fact existed as a sub-world to the “real world.”  The issue of real and reality are also complicated and can only be explained as much as they are contemplatively experienced.  Dreams provide an example of such space in which we believe things to be real for an amount of time and only when we gain consciousness in our unconscious state(i.e. lucid dreaming) do we come to understand that real and reality are not objective claims but very subjective to the understanding and transformation, conceptually of the self in such a space and time.