Justifying My Actions

I said to myself jokingly; somebody hates me therefore I exist. I use to ignore these words on many occasions already because it just came out me right at the spur of the moment. It popped out of my big mouth. Then it is already there.

It is given that somebody is angered by my presence and by that space I occupy and the things I do within that space clashes with him. I choose to merit his existence, that presence of another being who is not happy with my being there in that certain space. Given that there is a space and so is there also a place for interaction that breeds contempt.

In the event of an interaction, this individual approaches me and tells me that I am a “rotten bastard.” So he limits me as a rotten bastard. The defining aspect of the ‘am’ declares it all. In his mindset, I am a bastard and I could never go beyond that role or assumption. By simply enforcing his own reality on me, he just gave me a reason to live within that means. Thus I limit myself to being a so-called rotten bastard. As rotten bastards have a bad connotation then all things that come with the word which is mostly bad now becomes my nature. Due to this, I am encouraged to do everything to convince him that I really am one.

From this point of view, I am not being evil. It is justified that I am just trying to understand his perspective. For if I go beyond that definition he gave me then it wouldn’t make any sense for me to transcend this trait into something else, perhaps something better or something worse? It is pointless to go beyond that limitation. When an individual gives somebody an affixed meaning then he gives me an essence and in this essence there is already that purpose he imposes on me. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, this is a free country. Freedom of speech comes in here and with that exercise he has just enabled himself greater harm or wasn’t able to save himself with the burdensome re-occurrence of that attitude of mine he seems to dislike. His words gave me two things, a limit and a purpose. It wouldn’t be any difficult for me to decide on how I am to deal with him. He already defined it for me and as much as I don’t want to be lazy and just take things as it is, I have to because I am expected to act around him in that certain aspect of my being. Going back to the limit and purpose, which could be collectively explained in the postmodernist sense wherein meanings aren’t attached to a word as a single meaning is truly limiting. In his position he has self-limited me and gave me that limit. The limit that comes with being a rotten bastard and the purpose that could come along with one is someone who is of a nuisance or causes great annoyance towards him. He gave me the right to own the word and the nature of one is now mine. As the right is passed on to me, I now serve the purpose of a rotten bastard which to him is annoying. It then becomes his fault why I would continue to behave in that certain context or attitude that he dislikes of me.

Change is a violation. If I try to change then, I will disrespect him because in his credited attempt to impose his own reality on me, I couldn’t just turn the tables as if changing clothes. This means that if I try to prove him that I am a nice person then that means that I am not meriting his claims on me. I do not let him practice his own subjectivity and as individuals are bound to it, I create a grave offense against the individual. If I go beyond that rotten bastard stereotype or trait that he associated with me, it will be of no use because what will I try to prove now. There is no room for further change, meaning, or discourse as all is complete. He has perfected the notion of my being an existing individual as that. What seems to be very crucial here is one’s words. No matter how angry you are to a person, you should watch every single word coming out of your mouth. As it was his choice to be careless with his language then it is now his inescapable fate that I remain a rotten bastard towards him. It was never my fault. If he acted out of impulse and that approach served as an outpour of emotions, then it was his choice. You could opt to settle it in different ways. That is why there is such a thing we call as creativity. Still, what remains an important matter is the choice of words. In talking, you may sound subjective but that subjectivity of yours could also act as a tool to either pursue your uniqueness or as something for others to see some fault in you.

(NOTE: Images by photographer Melvin Sokolsky. The guy is a famous fashion photographer and since I am talking about limitation due to the use of definitions, these photos capture essence of what I am talking about. To be confined is to be defined, there are no left and right turns.)

And Vogue Says So

I would just like to plug something here, there is this book I would want you guys to look out for and it looks intriguing as well as interesting enough for me. I’m so friggin’ curious that I would also want to share this all hyped up curiosity I’m experiencing.



In the October 2005 issue of Vogue, Megan O’Grady writes in “Amours fous” about a book entitled Tete-a-Tete by Hazel Rowley. It chronicles what many consider as the greatest literary love story of the twentieth century. The story behind Sartre and Beauvoir’s unconventional affair must be really interesting. The beginning, the outcomes, the in-betweens, the exploits and so many others condensed in one of the season’s best books.

Speaking of existentialism, I suddenly remembered what Ms. Leslie (my Intphil prof) talking about the relationship of Jean Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir. She mentioned that after de Beauvoir died, her letters to Sartre were published and boy-oh-boy! I saw the book at Fully Booked-Promenade, Greenhills. It is really thick and I was close to buying it but the only thing that hindered me from getting that book is that I happen to be lusting at the same time for a pair of Marc Jacobs lace-ups (here I go again…another pair of shoes on my priority list). Setting aside the Marc Jacobs, the book was kind of pricey 950 bucks but anyways its relatively cheaper than me buying a quarter of an inch thick Rilke at 700 bucks. Well, if I am fortunate…I would really by that book.



I am thinking that if I get that book, I would satisfy the chismoso, gossip-seeker in me and enjoy it for weeks. Anyways, I think the Tete-a-tete would be a better buy so I will just have to wait for it to hit Philippine shores.

Lastly, I go talking about something that happens to be coincidental…the Frenchmen whom I happen to adore and idolize seem to have the same names- Jean Paul.

1. Jean Paul Sartre
> this man made me rethink the way I am living my life (seriously)

2. Jean Paul Leaud
> of Antoine Doinel fame and Truffaut’s Les Quatre Cents Coups…I’ve always like his discreet acting style since The 400 Blows and even now he continues to wow film fanatics. Well I ought to check his other films like Irma Vep with Maggie Cheung!

3. Jean Paul Gaultier
> of couture fame and reinvented Hérmes…this guy brightens up the City of Lights.
J’adore Gaultier…c’est magnifique!

P.S.

I’m thinking if there is a possibility of what you call “intellectual gossip” because of these things I’ve been encountering of the late.

The Sartre and Beaver affair = intellectual gossip. (laughs~)

Anyways, I’m kidding

(NOTE: Images are taken from http://www.rohwolt.de)

BOOK OF THE MOMENT: The Kite Runner

Written by Khaled Hosseini

The Existential Father- It is a wonderful journey through the exotic terrains of Afghanistan. It accounts pre-war Afghanistan to the present age. It is both a cultural and historical journey and the thing with this book is that it offers a mix of emotions after reading it. It is not a typical read as I remember reading this book months ago; I didn’t study for my Economics finals just because of this book but it was well worth it.
Basically the story is set in Afghanistan but I wouldn’t tell you too much detail for the sake of those who haven’t read the book yet. It’s a good read so I’m not spoiling you (although I’m used to being hated for being a spoiler). The main character is Amir who happens to be the novel’s narrator as well. So to start it, he has a relationship with this father whom he calls Baba who is a bit indifferent to him. He has always felt bad about this and only in the latter part of the novel he finds out why.

Well putting into discussion what I have always thought about Baba. He was one character I truly adored in this story. All along, Amir always felt that his father always gave him the cold shoulder and that he wasn’t really there to guide him in every step. As many of us would associate parents or in this regard as a guardian. The typical perception of a good father is that he is always there for you but now that we are in the postmodern age, I don’t think so. We have attached to words several meanings that most of us have chosen not to limit something with a sole definition so as parenthood. From how I see Baba, I think this is the kind of parenting that actually nurtures your kids. I lift an excerpt from the story said by Amir’s uncle, Rahim Khan who once told Baba that: “children are not coloring books, you could not put the colors you desire on them.” It then occurred to me, that existential phrase, existence precedes essence. A father should never impose his own reality on his own child like this is how you should act and this is what you should do. There is that distance he must maintain because you do not want them to be weak; you want them to be strong and in doing so you have to keep distance. This approach does not tell a parent to ignore his child but simply let them find certain meanings in life by themselves. Children are born into the world and therefore they exist. As they go on living and growing up, they learn about life through a parent’s guidance. You do not give them predefined meanings of things so that in the latter they would think of it that way. Take for example, I am a father and I tell my children about love like in fairy tales wherein there is that one person who is right for you like a soul mate; your destined one. Looking at this, it is thus very idealistic. The problem with this is that your children might think of love as something like that in the future and say for example you have a daughter and in fairy tales princesses wait for their prince charming. So your daughter waits. After being taught that, your children might be harmed later on upon facing the real world as things do not always go with an ideal ending as in these stories. The thing with being a parent is that you should also know the consequences of your choices regarding what you tell your kids and how you raise them because in the end; everything is going to interfere with how they experience life. As for Baba, he was a good father for he let Amir experience things and find his own meaning of life which is more sensible and correct as it gives more room for an individual to grow, choose his own fate, make his own decisions, and pursue his own individuality rather than live in the confines of a pre-ordained or dictated reality.

As for me…a bookworm it’s just too bad that I wasn’t able to do a paper on this one. It is one of my best-reads for 2005 and until now, the story continues to move me and après The Kite Runner, I have adapted this saying in Farsi “zendagi mizgara”; life goes on. I bid you salut for now and buy the book!!!

(NOTE: Photo taken from http://www.nsnews.com)

Poet for a Day

Paradise

Man sought you
Little did he know
That he defied his existence

Of happiness
Wanting it
Is of one great rhetoric

To be happy is a demand
Humans do this all the time
Yet satisfaction is never rendered
In such preciseness we would want

You are of the noumenal
I, a mortal
The greatest achievement I could have
Live my life and die
As I die I want to be remembered
Though I must die at my peak
At glory shall I then press stop
All ends
But something remains
I am not forgotten
And that is the most of it

Transcendental is phenomenal
Belief in metaphysics
Bears a steer from the real scenario

I look at my neighbor’s dog
Everyday he walks it
On a leash and after that
They play Frisbee
But does the dog ever tire of it?
The answer is no
Otherwise it would have gone tired of it
The frenzy and excitement of it
Says it all

Looking back at Genesis
Adam and Eve
The apple, the serpent, the tree of knowledge
Knowledge holds on such great receptacles
Expelled from paradise
The world takes on a new shape
Hardships and a focus on something else
Knowledge entitled us into this new being
That of existence and reason
Knowledge precedes idylls
While the search for truth
Belies of our reason and senses

Would it be right to compare oneself to that dog?
There was no account of dogs
Vanished from paradise
While I was told that I was
So I know that the human condition
Does not come to a close with animals
They are paradise and we out of it


Never do something
If you would not wish it repeated endlessly
Things are of a repetitive course
So these wants for knowledge
Made us who we are now
The human condition is to see and ignite
To satisfy one is not a justification
But a mere act done

(I am not a poet but this is an attempt...it's inspired by the quest for knowledge
and how individuals try to justify it.)

When Some Words Need a Little Redefining

Language is really deceiving and due to universal meanings we are often forced to take things for granted. Due to the fact that there are many different perspectives on things, there is no stable meaning for anything.

Philippine culture has prescribed certain rules on socializing. Take for example, you hate your uncle and since he is your relative but you have to remain civil. Among Filipinos, it doesn’t look good to show dislike of the elderly. It is either disrespectful or very ‘un-Christian.’ It is against traditional moral values but on the other hand being is an elevated form of hypocrisy; it is more of a euphemism but nevertheless bears the marks of a hypocrite. So in that sense no matter how much I abhor him, I have to say bonjour and salut every time. Complet de merde! It’s ridiculous because relationships are determined by choice and an act motivated by such means it is driven by the individual’s perspective. Again why am I talking about this? It is because I had the most annoying situation at hand. So here it goes. My bestfriend has a new guy but not really that new because they are about 6 freaking months now. And I am disgusted by the fact that her boyfriend is a bland and boring companion (not the type of person, I would like to hang out with). Now, I don’t need to get sedated (each time I can’t fall asleep) because he exceeds the effect of 1000mg of Diazepams which is way beyond the needed amount to get me to sleep. Okay, I’m exaggerating but he is beyond boring, I am just being honest. But that’s not it. The thing is that I am his girlfriend’s best friend and he thinks that it is a good idea that we get along somehow. The thing is that I choose not to be affiliated with him in any way so that’s it. It is given that I am not willing to be his friend. If you barge in into a relationship, you do not expect or assume that your boyfriend or girlfriend’s peers will also be your crowd. Be realistic!

My bestfriend Lex actually confronted me about this and made mention that her boyfriend wants to bond with me. So he is asking when I am free so that all three of us can bond together. This is due to my previous actions of not talking to him when I hang out with my bestfriend and him and ignoring him at the most and he feels that I do not enjoy his presence. With regards the bonding crap, my answer is NO. What part of no can he not understand? I’m assuming that he understands no but he proves to me that he is just plain stupid. Well, the moral lesson is that do not try to assume or do something that is too IDEALISTIC. We are individuals here and subjectivity is the game. If he believes in the generalized or universalized rules of conduct, well I don’t….I’m a non conformist to society, remember? Your idealism is your sickness and if my presence bothers you then you just prove me that I do exist.

Now, I just have to live with it. Oh! Sorry but that was a wrong choice of words. I can choose to ignore him. Now, that’s better. We all have our individual preferences and this is mine.

P.S.
You know who you are! Don’t act stupid in front of me and expect me to give in to your whims. I choose to consider you a null entity. Suppose I say hi or raise an eyebrow that’s it (I just do that for the sake of doing my best friend a favor)…but under any circumstances I would avoid not to do so. My advice for you is just go on with your life and don’t bother the way I treat you. I don’t like your company and I don’t and never will need it. Stick yourself to my best friend and don’t mind me. WE WILL NEVER BE FRIENDS!!!!!!!!!! SALAUD!

By the way…ever heard of Ferdinand de Saussure’s theory on language? Well try to figure out how Jacques Derrida ‘deconstructed’ his insights. That is what I am doing with words right now…So I tell you go to Fully Booked or Power Books and then you can talk to me in a discourse and not in a casual conversation.

NOTE:
1.Forgive me for the language but I can’t help it…I have to release my anger in little ways…Please bear with me!
2. The photo shown is an image shot by uber cool photographer Terry Richardson.
Well that image portrays what I intend to do to my bestfriend's guy...just to further the fact that I would never make any compromise with him. haha
BTW image taken from www.models.com!