kanaljee
4 years ago
Thursday, September 27, 2007
...
Yes, it's despicable how I'm making something so trivial be so overly significant. But, dammit, why can't I just for once fall in love and be happy about it? Maybe I shouldn't even think about it, maybe, all things considered, it just isn't for me. I mean, it isn't, I don't want any of the things it's supposed to lead to. The reproductive stuff. It wouldn't be fair for anyone else to develop feelings for me only to confront all the obvious issues coming from there. And I'd be a true emotional masochist if I wanted to develop feelings for someone and not have them be mutual. I've... really had enough of that. I crave the feeling though. It might sound crazy, but it's such a high. The obsession, the awareness of every tiny detail about the other person, the emotions - the positive ones. Something so beautiful and overwhelming. Only it leaves you so very vulnerable till you know how the other person feels... and if there's nothing there on the other side, it's far from a pleasant experience. (So yeah, what else is new.) *sighs* So confusing. But... uh... I had a crush on an anime character in May. There must be something wrong somewhere.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Just as a remark, I recall Athos saying that when he was fifteen, he had a crush on a Greek statue.
Don't know why I said that.
I don't think falling in love is trivial. Undoubtedly you can obsess over it and approach it in a wrong way or from a wrong angle, but you can hardly make it 'overly significant'.
So is there 'something wrong somewhere' if you fall in love with an anime character? Well, it is certainly unusual. If it is wrong, it is probably more of a symptom than a disease. The question is, what is the disease, and who has it?
You really are a good psychologist...also to yourself. You again provided the answer. 'I don't want any of the things it's supposed to lead to. The reproductive stuff.'
So it is clear where the disease is located: in the unnamed people who 'suppose' -- in contemporary culture in general, who 'suppose' that falling in love leads to reproductive stuff. In the traditional view, which is quite sane, marriage leads to reproductive stuff, and falling in love may lead to marriage, but leads more frequently to a lot of feelings, either good or bad -- and possibly to romance.
Which reminds me...some time ago I was listening to a audio lecture by William Fahey about Hilaire Belloc (a close friend of G.K. Chesterton). Belloc also fell in love with an unattainable person: an American girl, whose mother fiercely opposed her wish to marry Belloc. (They only married after Belloc had crossed a great distance in America on foot, he had been turned back by the mother, and she had had a nervous breakdown. Fahey tells the story really well; shall I send you a link?) Anyway, here is what Fahey remarked about an event in the initial stage of their relationship:
'The whole romance comes to this climatic moment, when Elodie Hogan, the young woman, in a hansom cab, grabs Hilaire Belloc’s hand and kisses it. And the two of them throughout their lives write about this moment, the intensity of this moment. It’s quite beautiful, especially when you think about what passes for intensity now.'
In other words, I know falling in love is not an entirely rational process, but try to find someone who shares your thoughts about intensity (and Hilaire's, and Elodie's, and Fahey's, and oh, so many more people). There should be persons in Tartu who still believe that marriage and reproduction stuff are inseparable. In a large historical context, it is very much the normal view. It is also normal psychologically.
You could check out the first chapter of Girls Gone Mild by Wendy Shalit:
http://catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0149.htm
I realize the name of the site might conjure up images of moralistic priests and the like, but I couldn't find the full chapter on any other site. ;)
Post a Comment