I just had a new thought about the choice between (good) and (evil) guided by the (will) alone.

The two things that are underlined in the song are (care) and (war), THE two things that are ideally and historically attibuted to the two genders.
-------------------------------------------
(female/care)
Here we have a stone
Gather, place, [erase, so / a razor]
Shelter turned to home

(male/war)
Throw to stay the stranger
Swore to crush his bones

(female/care)
Spark becomes a flame
Flame becomes a fire
Light the way or warm this
Hope we occupy

(male/war)
Forge a blade to slay the stranger
Take whatever we desire
-------------------------------------------
Just something I wanted to share

Hmmm...

Stays along the Right in Two seam.

But however I think it is socially and consciously your ideals and stereotypes that lend you to this interpretation and "adjacent logic". Male and Female relationships and viewpoints are developed by your upbringing and personal plights. Your social "poison" that has shown you what to expect of this. But, you could point to animal instincts and creatures (not including humans) as an example of this hierarchy.

That being said I think this song and it's meanings are unisex; talking about the creation of life in general. The spark of conscious beings and our creations (war, animals, space, etc - depending on your beliefs - I am using mine for this example), then the next part of it (Right in Two) is the plight of observers to ask why we choose to use this gift and understanding to conquer and plunder our kin (which is everyone; unisex)? You make a circle and come back to the fire, the spark, the fuel; our nature has stifled and forced the majority that do not use our brains (or more of it) to focus on instinct (greed, etc). This seperates the ideals from the actions. And this is what I believe is the basis, the growing and *teaching* of our instincts and self rights and worth. Equality is a hard thing to find in less informed environments, instinct rules them. That is the fueled fire in which you look to assign a gender. In all obvious thoughts a human's "sex" is just the way we identify energy multiplying in our "eyesight" hindered view. A & B = C, and C = whatever A & B subject them to.

I guess to sum it up I'll ask this question (keeping with the subject); would you know what a spark, love, or even the color green was if you had not been shown or taught this as a subject of your environment? Imagine figuring it out for yourself and feeling the way energy hit you (almost like a fire) without a preconcieved or taught notion. Would it be greed that was first? Survival? Or did that come from understanding? Did curiousity really kill the cat? Now that is a subject of neverending trip thoughts, eh?

Now you see my question, and thought on this elongated post: Was the spark the creation? Or the examplified process of communication that only focused on greed - therefore passing on and teaching only greed - the fire? (hardly a male/female only subject). Has the ability to be communique and intelligent actually hindered our "happiness" or has it enabled us to understand (through this inherent knowledge) the reason of our selfish role of stupid monkeys? Maybe just a "weeding" out process. Without the knowledge we wouldn't beable to strive to another level or plane, but the journey is trite and full of hate and instinctual boarding.

So to say the least, Intension is a good "building" and start-off to the judgement that enlighten hold on the human race today (right in two). It effects some, but more or less it comes down to the question of ... is the pen mighter than the sword? Not in the actual black and white everyday world, or in the immediate NOW, but in the everlasting thought energy that ecompasses us all... it truely is.

Oh, but I do think the song is (unisex) and that it is about (choice).

But this thing kept me bugging for some a couple of weeks now.
AND it's not just my stereotype.
Women have always demonstrated a superior capacity of (attention) to the others, somehing that the men leaked many many times.
And that's the easy part.

I said that (war) is (male).
The history of human species is at least ten times longer that written history (I mean the **** Sapiens species). Before the history we know there were ten times more histories. And, before the supremacy of the (male), called (patriarchy), there were societies led by the (female), or better the (mothers), called (matriarchy), that were mostly pacific. They invented agriculture, language among others bases of civilization.
The coming of (patriarchy) often coincides with the invetion of (private property) which is the most important of the reason for (war); the concepts of 'stranger' and 'taking'. And this links to Right in two too.

hmm... while i'm writing i'm gradually less sure i am wrong... it does make sense...
:S

Damn site censured the H O M O word in **** Sapiens LOL

I understand about the history of the human species, however that doesn't change the fact that this history still influenced who and what people became. And that is what I believe the song is, the actions of the predecessors complete our focus and shape the world today.

I don't think that the words meet the two different 'archies', I think it is basic nature. However that does not meen that your theory is off base or wrong at all. This is just my opinion. HISTORY DOES naturally and presently associate these two types of behavior with the different genders of humans.. however the gender roles take different approaches in different species (lion, etc). So that is why I think the roles gender take in our now is predated by our past. The stereotypes we come up with are a view of sciences explanation of chromosomes and understanding of the two different genders which basically shaped the view and relation they will have in our societies eyes.

Your explanation for the private property aspect (male you call it) is spot on my friend. But I don't think it is gender specific. I think it is human specific and how our past influenced the need to have both of these. Humans (whether male or female) have both of these (care/war) aspects in our blood. How we view and act are a DIRECT influence from the past and our upbringing (freud's built in nature of humans). Intension is the building of our past to shape the views and world we are in today. Right in two is a more or less a reasoning behind it, and how it happened, a view point of the consequences of those in a past. Once we were able to communicate and given the oppertunities... most (this may be male based, but it is completely coincidental) took the role of aggresor, rather than compassionate. These aspects however could be male/female. You have to remeber though, some of the most ruthless leaders have been females.

I think it is just the guidance and past wrongs and "giving into" ruthlessness and "wrong" desires that shaped it (Intension). Once we were given choice, the ones who were ruthless embodies and controlled the more laid back and subdued "peace"tavists. This making our past and influences more and more focused on this type of action, and eventually this has shaped the human society, stupid monkeys (Right in Two).

I agree completely with your explanation for Intension, just not the male/female aspect. The care/war (choice) aspect is spot on IMHO though! I enjoy this thread, thanks for the spark in thought. :)

I enjoy it as well ;)

I think this thread has been grossly overlooked.

Curiosity may have killed the cat, but it taught us.

Just the simple fact that males produce millions of sperm on a whim and females have 1 egg a month will cause differences in the two halves of the species. I know we like to think of male and female as completely equal and similar, but it just isn't so. Ultimately male and female have different motivations... different instincts.

I guess I always thought that the spark becomes a flame, flame becomes a fire had to do with evolving, growing. The spark of consciousness becomes a flame. The flame of consciousness becomes a fire. It has many meanings. Technology began with a spark that became a flame. The flame became a fire.

You are right on though that the meaning of this song is the duality of things. We can use the stone as a tool for peace or war. We can use fire as a tool for peace or war.

So is this the fact of this song... we agree on duality.... but is it the war that we have chosen? Hence right in two...

I think that the majority has chosen this, but then again how do we change the path from majority to right? Or is war and peace not even an example of right and wrong...

Curiousity killed the cat but, satisfaction brought him back.

"testosterone has basically two and only two major drives: fuck it or kill it...oxytocin (the female equivalent) has been described as the "relationship drug"; it induces strong feelings of attatchment, nurturing, holding, touching." Ken Wilber A Breif History of Everything. [somewhat of an altered quote]
THis is how our earliest forms of civilization were determined. (Hunter/gatherer)
I think that this song is about our beginings, spark becomes a flame, a fire, shelter becomes a home... Our Evolution of Consciousness.
Pure as we begin(Eden) the tree of knowledge(good and evil) Divided it right in two, the awareness of our differences.
I don't know what the song means but maybe this has some validity, I'll keep thinking about it.

Personally, I see the song as a statement on complacence. We made steps forward, then we stopped. Much like Lateralus was all about moving forward, taking the next step, this song is talking about how we seem to be stalled and the conseqences of it. 10,000 Days as a whole can certainly be seen as a "stop and look where we are!", lyrics-wise.

"Spark becomes a flame." Innovation, a positive step forward.

"Flame becomes a fire." Potential for big moves forward or big trouble.

"Light the way or warm this home we occupy." We're on a path and this flame (potential) will give us the chance to move forward or become complacent.

The trouble with complacency is that suddenly what was once shelter is now a home. We're rooted. And when we became rooted, we became protective of our space. And we now use that stone to stave off strangers. We're protective of our home to the point where we now kill one another.

This could be our evolution. Pure as we begin.

****?

What I find most interesting is that nowhere in the entire section for this song has anyone discussed the obvious mispelling of Intention (spelled as Intension) on the album. The only reason that I was able to think of for this mispelling is that it is meant to be seen also as In + Tension as in being pulled by to conflicting forces. This fits nicely into the argument that this song was written about the duality of human nature the so-called masculine vs. feminine. I also just wanted to see what other people had to say on this topic.

? What does intension mean? I am not familiar with that spelling.

I think the dictonary will give the answer you are looking for..

sigh... I realize that

in·ten·sion (n-tnshn)
n.
1. The state or quality of being intense; intensity.
2. The act of becoming intense or more intense; intensification.
3. Logic The sum of the attributes contained in a term.

has anyone checked over this chapter by bob frissell?
(you are a spiritual being having a human experience)

Okay, so once I realized that Intension was also a word (which I sort of stumbled its meaning upon by breaking it down) the title of the song makes much more sense to me. Growing intensity (spark becomes a flame...etc.).

Now, is it's placement before "Right in Two" significant? It seems to be about a separate issue and stands alone really. However, I could see a possible argument about it's relevance to "Right in Two"

I think the entire album makes strong refrences the sexual duality of the universe. In the book of law, one of its most noted phrases is "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law". Aliester Crowley, as well as many more occult authors shared the belief that mans "will" will ultimately bring the most good, and evolution. "Move by will alone"

I think that idea also plays into the idea that will brings about evolution.

There are so many refrences in Tools music and artwork to mankind, as well as all of life, being One essence. There is also the belief that the universal consiousness has been split just for the chance of reunion... which makes Right in Two very revealing.

Also, in the Book of Law, it talks about there being two Dieties, instead of just one. Nuit and Hadit. Nuit is the Female counterpart, and Hadit is the male. Nuit is everything physical that comprises the universe, and Hadit is the unseen force that makes it move.

However, I never thought about this song being from two different sexual perspectives. Interesting Thread.