Is it horribly misleading to make out like I am one way when I can't 100% corroborate that?

I'm going to try to word this as simply as I can: ruminations can go in my personal journal, but I want this to be as straightforward as possible.

I use different names to identify different mindsets. They're obviously all coming from me. The best way to describe this would be to say that each one is a different configuration of my core personality, stylized and utilized for different purposes. Each one is still me, but adapted for what I need it to do. It's a useful way to re-conceptualize who I am so I can step outside of myself and take a different approach to dealing with real life.

"Replacing your entire self concept" falls in with this, if that's helpful to think about, but it goes a step beyond that. These configurations can be based on someone else's self-concept, but are often adapted to take on a life of their own, so to speak, usually coming to be while I live it or apply it to my own life.

All this is well and good. My current self-concept is an amazingly fun state of mind to be in, but is so drastically different to every other configuration that I can't help but feel like a fake, a fraud. This isn't unusual; a lot of the other names/identities feel false while I'm trying them out, like I'm trying to live up to an imagined role that I am not, or like because this identity is created by me (whether consciously or unconsciously), it doesn't count as a genuine state of being.

Obviously that's bullshit; this is how I've always worked, and I've only recently become comfortable with the idea that this is a useful way to function (now that I've assigned a name to it, at least).

With this in mind I ask the question: How genuine can any of me be if I can change my identity so freely?

This is an initial attempt at writing this out, I just wanted to get it all down, I'll edit for clarity later.

Edit: This was originally a second entry made the following day, but it feels redundant to have it that way given the subject matter.

While I'm on the subject of pointless matters of identity, I'd like for two more things to be known:
1) Names are annoying and only partially factor into my identity. How can I be expected to see my name as being so uniquely specific, that to take it away from me would deprive me of all sense of self, while at the same time comfortably knowing that it isn't something unique to me? A name is a label, and I haven't found one that isn't inadequate. 
My legal name isn't unfortunate as far as navigating through the bureaucratic world goes, and I don't mind using it for that, but to think of myself having any strong attachment to it other than because I'm using it is alien. I like my name. It's part of the reason why I so rarely use it: I don't want to wear it out. As soon as I find myself truly identifying with a name, I feel the compulsive urge to discard it in favor of another one. 
It's easier to think of the names I use as being the names of my configurations, or part of the package: items that I can take up and discard as I want with no personal all-encompassing identity attached to any of them. Even when I use a name, I don't see myself as having it: I see myself as wearing it. I'd be happy to go nameless.
2) I'm warming up to the idea of appropriating words for my own use. I'm not the first to do this, and to an extent I've been doing it for a while. Lately it's gotten ridiculous. I want to be as succinct and readable as possible, but there are a lot of things in my life that don't have a name. I'd rather label them something based around an extended metaphor than try to shoehorn them into an extension of another concept that's being used for something adjacent, but not exact. I'd rather use terms that are parallel to what I'm talking about.


Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags