This is weird, but I'll tell you anyways- I like to listen to the "angsty music" from my teenage years to relax and unwind. Yes... yes, it's true. I'm one of those people who actually enjoys sad music. For me, the wistfulness and nostalgia are comforting factors, like a musical security blanket.
Check me out below.
Are we feeling it yet? Yes? Yes. From Feist's low croon instructing me to "Let It Die" to Tame Impala's assertion that "The Less I Know the Better", this particular playlist is what we young (ish) folks like to call a vibe.
Picture this:
It's another rainy ass day in Georgia (or wherever you live), and you do NOT want to get out of bed. I don't blame you, sleep in! Or better yet... tune in. I know right, exactly what you needed- just hit that little app with the music notes on it and enter the magical realm of angst.
First stop is MGMT. The eclectic and ELECTRIC feels (see what I did there? c'mon that was A1...) from their pyschdelic jams are the perfect way to relax your soul. If music could get you high, MGMT is definitely meth. Maybe something stronger. My point is, every time I listen, I feel those vibes tingle all the way down to my toes. Yes. Yes I am wiggling my toes while I type. And you can too- definitely hit that "Time to Pretend" one good time, and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.
Next, wade into a deeper level of your feels. As you drift along this playlist, you probably already feel like you're in a dream. And you are! A "Fever Dream", as brought to us by the soulful Iron & Wine is enough to pull you right out of your comforter and lay you in a field of daisies. You can literally feel your heart expanding in size as this soothing song gently caresses your mind and lowers your inhibitions. Touch your chest. I'm serious. Can you make out that little ball of emotion there? You're alive, and that's why you feel it. It may make you cry, and hey, I don’t blame you. I’ve cried it out, plenty of times. Tears are cathartic, don’t be ashamed to let it out while you zen it out, feel me?
Now we have arrived. Where, you may ask? Well, we’re so in tune with our emotions, allowing ourselves to feel every little way we need to feel, so that we never want to leave this protective musical sphere. Florence + The Machine gets it, she really does. That’s why “Never Let Me Go” is such a mood. Listen closely to the lyrics, we’re not giving up, we’re just giving in. Let that wave completely overtake you and transcend you to a place where nothing exists except for you and your soul. I’ve let myself just drift on that wave many a time; each trip I take, I come back more attuned to the peace I need to remain at ease even moments of doubt or turmoil. I’m not kidding, this particular song really will transport you, and you will LOVE it.
Finally, take some time to appreciate the present. Afterall, it is a gift (OH COME ON. That was GOLD). But seriously, “Be Here Now” like Ray LaMontagne says. Just be here. Feel alive and grateful to exist. As you explore my playlist, I hope you allow yourself to feel. I hope you honor what you feel as you listen; give yourself grace and space to be at peace. I hope that you can relax and find comfort here, even in music that can evoke sadness and memories of a different time in your life. Music is one vehicle to another dimension, where you can truly unwind and feel free. Take the trip. It's truly, amazen.
About the Creator
Kaye Thompson
just a girl with a pen.
Keep reading
More stories from Kaye Thompson and writers in Longevity and other communities.
Bryson Tiller Saved My Life
I honestly was not a dog person. Like... I was seriously terrified of dogs growing up. I could sit here and detail my experiences, but that's neither here nor there. The point is, I went to college and thanks to the ridiculously cute pups they kept bringing on campus I became a changed woman. I went from crossing the street if I saw a dog approaching, to literally not being able to pass a dog without wanting to pet it at the VERY least.
By Kaye Thompson5 years ago in Petlife
Day 4 of Quitting
If this is how sobriety feels, maybe it’s better to go through life a little buzzed… this, along with other hits like, I want to kill myself, I wish I was dead, and I’m going to throw myself off a bridge have been the only thoughts on rotation these past few days. I promise myself that if, in a month, I still feel like this (‘this’ meaning despondent, full of rage, and simultaneously numb) I can go back to smoking. Until mid-February though? Nicotine is off the table.
By sleepy drafts8 days ago in Longevity
The Return of the Aircraft Carrier Truman Is Being Seen as a Snub to the Navy in the War of the Future
The return of the U.S. aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman to active deployment has sparked debate far beyond naval circles. While some see it as a show of enduring American naval power, others interpret the move as a symbolic snub—particularly in the context of how modern warfare is rapidly evolving. In an era dominated by drones, cyber warfare, hypersonic missiles, and artificial intelligence, the decision to once again lean heavily on a traditional aircraft carrier has raised uncomfortable questions about whether the Navy is preparing for the wars of tomorrow or clinging to the strategies of yesterday. A Floating Symbol of 20th-Century Power For decades, aircraft carriers have been the ultimate symbol of U.S. military dominance. These massive floating airbases project power thousands of miles from American shores and allow the U.S. to strike almost anywhere in the world. The Truman, like other Nimitz-class carriers, represents this legacy—housing nearly 5,000 sailors, dozens of fighter jets, and unmatched logistical capability. However, critics argue that what once made carriers indispensable now makes them vulnerable. Their sheer size, cost, and visibility turn them into high-value targets in a battlefield increasingly defined by precision strikes and long-range weapons. The “War of the Future” Looks Very Different Modern conflict is no longer limited to sea, land, and air. Cyber attacks can cripple infrastructure without a single shot fired. Drones can swarm targets at a fraction of the cost of traditional aircraft. Hypersonic missiles can reach targets faster than current defenses can respond. In this context, sending a massive carrier strike group into contested waters can appear less like a strategic necessity and more like a risky gamble. Critics argue that the return of the Truman reflects an outdated mindset—one that prioritizes visible force projection over adaptability and technological evolution. A Snub to Naval Innovation? Many analysts and serving officers believe the Navy’s future lies in distributed lethality—smaller, more agile platforms networked together, harder to detect and cheaper to replace. Unmanned surface vessels, autonomous submarines, and land-based missile systems are increasingly viewed as the backbone of next-generation naval warfare. Against this backdrop, recommitting to a traditional carrier is seen by some as sidelining innovation. It sends a message that, despite years of discussion about transformation, the Navy still defaults to familiar tools when tensions rise. This perception has led to frustration among those advocating for faster modernization. They argue that resources devoted to maintaining and protecting carriers like the Truman could instead accelerate investment in emerging technologies that are more relevant to future conflicts. The Strategic Signal to Allies and Rivals Supporters of the decision counter that the Truman’s return is not about nostalgia—it’s about deterrence. Aircraft carriers remain powerful political tools. Their presence reassures allies, signals commitment, and demonstrates readiness in a way few other assets can. Yet even here, the message is mixed. To technologically advanced rivals, the deployment may signal predictability rather than strength. Adversaries have spent years developing strategies specifically designed to neutralize carriers, including anti-ship ballistic missiles and advanced surveillance systems. Cost Versus Capability The financial reality cannot be ignored. A single carrier strike group costs billions of dollars to build, maintain, and operate. In contrast, drone fleets and missile systems can be produced and deployed at a much lower cost, often with greater strategic flexibility. Critics argue that continuing to rely on carriers drains resources from areas where the Navy needs to grow most urgently. In a future conflict defined by speed, dispersion, and digital dominance, the cost-benefit equation of aircraft carriers looks increasingly questionable. Why the Carrier Still Matters—For Now Despite the criticism, aircraft carriers are not obsolete—yet. They remain unmatched in their ability to sustain prolonged air operations without relying on foreign bases. In regions where access is limited or politically sensitive, carriers still provide options no other platform can. The real issue, many experts say, is not the existence of carriers like the Truman, but over-reliance on them. Using them as one component of a broader, more flexible strategy may still make sense. Treating them as the centerpiece of future war planning may not. A Turning Point for Naval Strategy The return of the USS Harry S. Truman highlights a deeper tension within modern military thinking. It represents a crossroads between tradition and transformation, between proven power and emerging threats. Whether history views this moment as a wise assertion of strength or a missed opportunity for innovation will depend on what comes next. If the Navy pairs legacy platforms with bold technological change, the carrier’s return may be justified. If not, it risks becoming a powerful symbol—not of dominance, but of reluctance to adapt in a rapidly changing world.
By Fiazahmedbrohi 4 days ago in Longevity
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.