A couple of weeks I thought of a book project, but I had no idea what I would write about. I kept the idea alive with a WhatsApp friend or, at least, someone who bothers to reply to my nonsense on that channel from time to time. It is a friend with a beautiful mind. Not a corrupted one, like mine. Of course, you will immediately ask: how do you know his mind is not corrupted? There is no such thing as a pure mind. Everyone’s mind is corrupted, right?
Wrong. The answer is this: he has been with the same partner all of his life, and it still looks like they are in love. Every day. I am plain jealous of that. His mind must be very pure. Also, he knows enough about my emotional troubles and musings now to know I am a total disaster (not only on the love front but all fronts: I win a few battles, but I always lose the war), but he phrases that always rather carefully. In an encouraging way. Not in a way that makes me feel like shit when I tell him I screwed up again. He tells me something like: “Yes. You screwed again. But it was a rather nice fight that you put up there. And you are getting better.” Something like that. It may be just an emoticon but, because I know him, I know the emoticon means something like that. [Sometimes I think I should just install an advanced chatbot on my phone (they pass the Turing test since quite a while already so I would not know the difference – except for the fact that I installed them). But, no, I still prefer real people.]
I have another friend like that. One that does not condemn me in any way. But that is because his mind is as corrupted as mine, and his ironic or cynical WhatsApp responses (when he bothers to react at all) are, therefore, slightly less valuable. [He will read this and nod in agreement. I know. He may actually write me on WhatsApp (in response to me alerting him on this post that he will probably not read but acknowledge as yet another futile thing to waste my time on) that it makes him feel good every time he learns I am a worse loser in life than he is.]
There is another reason too why I say the mind of that pure-mind-friend of mine is not corrupted. He has been very successful in life. He does big projects. Like another pure-mind-friend of mine in Liège, who also does big things with real risk and huge investment of time, energy and money. My Liège-based pure-mind-friend says he does big things – work is all that matters for him – because he has no time for friends or lovers. [That makes me feel flattered, of course, because he does reserve time for me whenever I can make it to Liège, and he is then the most wonderful and witty host you can imagine: we do not meet often (two times a year, perhaps) but, when we do, it feels like we are just picking up from where left off – yes, like what happens in a fling but, unlike a fling, we have a relation for life with each other – no doubt about that. In short, his mind is pure and works much better and faster than mine. Always. That is what I like about him (he knows I do not care about his wealth and so, by default, our conversations are always focused on the immaterial intellectual and esthetic pleasures of life).]
So… Well… No. No big material or financial projects in my life. I was just a mercenary. I just went to Afghanistan and other dysfunctional places like that to sell whatever personal services I could sell. Frankly, I think the organizations I worked for there hired me because of my eternal smile. Because they needed to see somebody smile even in the worst of situations – ironically or cynically or even genuinely laughing about it all. Someone who smiles like that does not quit, right? Never. And so then you want that guy because, if no one can do it, that guy just might.
Besides earning reasonably good money, I also went there because of the adventure and travel that comes with it. I guess. Something like that. But I should not try to make myself look better than I am: I am a nobody, and I know that (knowing yourself is a big part of being happy). I never did anything that matters and I will, therefore, leave nothing behind. No real estate or money. No wealth. At my funeral, my friends and family will just shed a tear or two (I hope they will laugh a lot, actually), and so I am just like that other friend: totally corrupted after 25+ years working. 25+ years of living in some illusion that we might make a difference in the big world out there, while neglecting our kids, our partner(s), our friends and whomever else mattered to us. They made the right choice: stay at home. Do not waste time on some ideal. Do not try to be a hero or something we cannot understand.
We made the wrong choice: now we both wonder what we were trying to do there, and we look at the images of Afghanistan and we try to cry, but we do not have many tears left (we should have saved some for later, like now) and so the few tears we shed do not soothe our soul. We try to get some people out – people we know (it is not an anonymous war for us there) – and that is it. Nothing grand. Reminiscing on the twists and turns in our life. It is not miserable. It is just not grand. Our minds are corrupted. Totally.
In short, my two pure-mind-friends – one in Brussels and one in Liège – are totally different from my mercenary-time friends. They are grand. They are like my two grown-up children, who also have a beautiful mind. They listen to me, and they say something like this: “Dad, you are a total disaster. You always have been. We know that better than anyone else. But you are funny and entertaining. Therefore, and despite you being such disaster, we still love you. And we will love you forever. We have to anyway, because you happen to be our dad. We have no choice. We can choose our friends, but we cannot choose our dad. You happened to be here first and decide you wanted us to be here as well. We survived till now and we do not need you anymore but we like your stories and all the nonsense that comes with them.”
That feels good. I want to stay friends with my son and daughter for the rest of my life too. Now that they are young promising adults, I have to re-define my fathership anew anyway, and friends might work. I could call it a life coaching relation, perhaps, but that sounds preposterous and not very credible, because it is obvious to them that I have made a mess of my life and that they, therefore, should not look at me as a teacher about the good life. But the stories are funny – OK, let me more modest: with the benefit of hindsight, it is always possible to make them funny – and, at the very least, they can learn from my failures: it helps to do the right thing if you already know what you should surely not do, right?
[To be fair, my experience with them on the coaching front over the past few years has not brought too much success, however. The more I tell them they are beautiful and young and clever and everything that they do better than me and that they, therefore, are on the right track to become rich and famous by 40 (I will write a few things about age and ambition and achievement in a moment), the more they tell me: “Dad, there must be more life than that, right?” That is very worrying, and I tell them that: “No. That is an illusion. I do not know why that illusion is so strong and omnipresent with youth. I felt the same when I was your age, and I went for it. I looked and tried almost everything, and I did not find it. You should not waste time on looking for something else. Rich, famous, beautiful. That is all that matters. If you can have it, have it.” They then smile and tell me they love me, but they do not seem to take my advice very seriously, even if I tell them it is the only serious advice I can possibly give them. My son once replied: “What about beauty, dad? Or adventure? Risk? A real rush? Impossible love, perhaps?” I told him: you already have that. You are beautiful and adventurous (he climbs mountains too and all that) and everyone who gets to know you, loves you. What more love and beauty and adventure do you want? If you have money, you can go and see it, buy it or enjoy it in every way you want. Most things I like are for free but that is only because I cannot afford the expensive stuff. You can, or you could. But you must go for rich and/or famous then. You must.” He just laughed at it. No one takes me seriously. Not even my own kids. It is a rather sad state of affairs but I find it amusing.]
Let me try to get back to the point I wanted to make in this blog post (you must have switched off reading already). The writing idea. Because of what happened on my love front lately, and also because I had time on my hands, I feel some of the ideas for that future book of mine (which I will probably never write because I do not have the discipline that is required for a book – a blog post will do) are maturing. Let me jot down a few and let me write using numbered sections so as to make sure I stick to the point. To the storyboard for this post.
1. Its working title was The Stairs in Sidi Bou Said. Because of personal associations. A beautiful black-haired Tunisian woman. The longest-lasting on-off reasonably working relationship I ever had. Blue skies. Soft skin. The sea. White-chalked houses. Cobble-stone alleys. Small quiet corners. Those dark brown eyes again that peer straight into your soul. The taste of an excellent local red wine. Fire. The moon. Possible and impossible Love. Beautifully weathered faces. Excellent food. Memories of great books and writers who have been there and produced brilliant pieces. Subtle music. Equally subtle silence Etcetera. Stuff that triggers the imagination.
However, that is the title you would give to a roman de gare (in English, you would call it a dime-store novel or a pulp novel). You would buy it because you would want to read a thrilling story with a lot of sex. I will leave such works for other writers because I prefer to have sex rather than write about it. It is only because I cannot have sex now that I am writing. [I could use my Afghanistan diaries, though. They include short notes on wonderful sex or thoughts about sex that I could easily expand in red-hot lyrics that would blow your mind but, again, I would rather relive those experiences than write about them.]
2. My new working title, which I thought of last week only, is far more ambitious: The Art of Love. Yes. A title that reminds one of that other bestseller: Sun Tzu’s Art of War. Its structure is very useful because the Art of War and the Art of Love have a lot in common. The five heads of war are:
- The Moral Law: the guiding values and moral principles. You need to be on the right side of them.
- Heaven: night and day, cold and heat, times and seasons (I am just copying from Sun Tzu here – only some small adaptation would be needed to define Heaven in Love).
- Earth: distances, danger and security, open ground or narrow passes, the chances of life and death (again, I am copying Sun Tzu’s description on what Earth might be about)
- The Commander in us and his/her virtues: wisdom, sincerity and good faith, benevolence and humanity, courage, and strictness (self-respect, self-control or ‘proper feeling’). Those who have read Sun Tzu may wonder what translation I am using. The answer is: the classic Lionel Giles translation). You will also wonder what commanders have to do with love. War, yes, but love? I will let you think for yourself about roles and associations here. Some are obvious. Some are not-obvious. But it should be easy for you to start thinking about the rather obvious ones. If that does not work, just think about the mentioned virtues. Some good stories there too.
- Method and Discipline: that needs no further explanation. It is related to practice. Wisdom and knowledge are good (otherwise you do not know where you are or where you want to be next), but only practice gets you what you want. As for the discipline of writing, I have not much experience with that, but since I stopped drinking, I write a lot more, which is good practice. I also smoke a lot of hand rolled tobacco nowadays, so that looks like the practice of some other great writers too.
As for my practice of love, I had four long-term relations (two marriages and two non-marriages) and 30+ significant short-term relations inbetween. Many were just Platonic (no sex) or what is commonly referred to as short-lived passion. But they were significant: I am not counting prostitutes or the like. […] OK – perhaps I will include one lingerie model, Liz, with whom I have had a similar experience as with Sylvia (I mean some kind of crazy experience with a beautiful woman that lasts a week or so only – and then I need a month or so to digest what happened).
And then another one. An older wonderful Thai whore I would go to bed with in Bangkok. Literally. Go to bed with. Usually no sex. She did not charge me: we would just crash together in bed – at her place – after both of us had had an exhausting day. We hardly talked (her English was very poor) and we did not have sex in the sense that you would associate it with it: excitement and coming quickly. No. We would often just hug and then fall asleep. A few hours of rest before being swallowed up by our day job again (hers and mine had only one thing in common: we had to please people – all of the time – very exhausting). It was a very significant relationship. I think of it as one of the best I ever had now, although I did not think of it as a relationship at the time. But my thoughts are wondering away now – the Monkey Mind in me – and I forgot her name. Hence, I have to think about how significant it was and whether or not I should include it in the book as an example of a relationship that worked, somehow.
You may think that is not enough material for a book about love. One woman for every letter of the alphabet and then some more. That is not enough, right? Maybe you are right. But all these women talked to me about previous or parallel relations they had or were having. So that makes for a multiplication factor of four, at least. And I only started keeping track of relations when I went to Afghanistan. I was 38, then, and I did have a rather wonderful life before too. So we are talking hundreds of experiences here. Not a few dozen. I think that is enough material. Let me turn back to the discipline one needs for a book.
3. Structure. The book would need a structure. The structure of the book depends on what you want the readers to do with it. Beginners in love would probably want a do-it-yourself structure. They would expect me to start writing on the techniques of seduction so they can start practicing from the start. And then a chapter summarizing the Kama Sutra for heavenly sex. So that is when my dating tips work (they do – trust me) and you go to the next stage (go fast – endless dating is a waste of time and energy). And then a chapter on how to negotiate in love, and get the best deal of the deal (if you want a long-term relationship, you need to define the give-and-take in it, so that is negotiation). And then a chapter on loss and grief as well, of course. Because that is, inevitably, the next stage and if you do not manage that stage of love very well, you lose a lot of time and energy. Time and energy you should use to go for the next disappointment.
But I will not use that structure, although I realize beginners in love would probably be like 2/3 of my potential readership and so my book may not become a bestseller. In any case, there are plenty of books on that already (except on the loss and grief stage of love, but then there are dedicated books on that and I have nothing to add to those).
The latter remark – on the book and how to make it a marketing success – makes me think of the critical success factors for it to become a bestseller. Bestsellers usually have happy endings. Improbable happy endings but happy endings nevertheless. I cannot see a happy ending, so I will have to invent one, I guess. I will think about that later.
4. I cannot use a chronological structure either. Then I would have to pick and choose a limited number of experiences and write about them. Then it would become very interesting (especially the sex experiences – especially the pornography vignettes which would inevitably be there) and that would boost the potential audience for this book again (despite the lack of do-it-yourself instructions and coaching tips for dating). But I have difficulty picking and choosing and I can see myself ending up with hundreds of pages of writing that I would then have to pack again in a volume that is about the same size as The Art of War, or the essentials of it. [The Art of War is a book of 250-300 pages, but the essence of it can be packed in 60. You will not want to read more than 60 pages. Short novels are better than long ones.]
Hence, the five heads of War may dictate the logical structure of my Art of Love. An introduction explaining the basics and how these factors relate to each other, and then five chapters. One on each. It should be easy, right? In my Afghanistan diary, I have a few quotes that directly relate to love experiences I have had and I could use these to develop some short love stories around them and the 60 pages would be there in no time. Let me give you a few:
- Do not repeat the same tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances. […] There are no constant conditions. […] Military tactics are like water; water in its natural course runs away from high places and hastens downwards. So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak. Water shapes its course according to the nature of the ground over which it is flowing.
- Do not press a desperate foe too hard. Birds and beasts, when brought to bay, will use their claws and teeth. If your adversary has burned his boats and destroyed his cooking pots, he is ready to stake all on the issue of the battle, and he must not be pushed to extremities. […] You should then not try to crush him by making a direct attack. Your enemy may have few soldiers left, but they will defeat yours. [OK. I admit. I added the last sentence, but then I am sure Sun Tzu wrote that elsewhere.]
- If you know the enemy and yourself, your victory will not stand in doubt. If you know Heaven and Earth, you make your victory complete.
- By persistently hanging on the enemy’s flank, you will succeed, in the long run, in killing the commander-in-chief.
- He who exercises no forethought but makes light of his opponents is sure to be captured by them.
I have five already. Five quotes around which I could write at least ten pages, so that makes 50 pages already. I think I should ask for some input again from my WhatsApp friend. I asked him to think of the music if this book would become a movie. He is an artist: a musician and designer and many other things. I think that must make him think better than me. More Zen. Themes, notes, instruments, and all that. He agreed that any music to my future non-book should be minimalist. Focused. Just like the experiences I will be writing about. They must be more like images than short-movies. Less is more. Do you think this is workable, my friend?
[For those who read my blog and know me and my friends, I should say that my friend does not exist. That is better in terms of respecting our friendship and not writing about people you should not be writing about.]
Post scriptum: These rather random thoughts about a book project make me think about what I should do with my life. Now that I have survived cancer too and starting my 14th life, something inside of me says: You are 50+ and you are not rich. You are happy with your place in Brussels and a modest salary as a civil servant, so that means you will never get rich. You are just content. Lazy. Leading the easy life. Enjoying. Writing. Chatting up people. Trying to find love. That sounds like pre-retirement. Get out. It is too late for you to get rich and you are not interested in it anyway. But you can still go for Glory. Be like Tom Shelby in Peaky Blinders. The man Nick Cave describes in his Red Right Hand song (I actually think the series is built around that song: one song inspiring a whole series. Amazing, isn’t it?)
Yes. I can still go for Glory. But I am lazy. For the very first time of my life, I feel lazy and rather content in a place that I can call mine. And the few pure-mind-friends I have are telling me there is nothing wrong about that. They are probably lying through their teeth but my mind is so corrupted that I start liking to believe them. Perhaps they are seeing what is good for me. Perhaps they may be speaking the truth.
There is also a more mundane, physical reason why I should probably just be happy here in my place, and not search for Glory. I am 50+ and I have to admit I do feel somewhat older now. One of those short wisdoms that is attributed to Confucius is this:
“At fifteen I set my heart upon learning.
At thirty, I had planted my feet firm upon the ground.
At forty, I no longer suffered from perplexities.
At fifty, I knew what were the biddings of Heaven.
At sixty, I heard them with docile ear.
At seventy, I could follow the dictates of my own heart; for what I desired no longer overstepped the boundaries of right.”
I sure know what are the biddings of Heaven now, although I am not sure if I have planted my feet firm on the ground, and I sure still suffer from perplexities. My heart is still set on learning too. I do not listen with docile ear, but then I am not sixty yet. In short, I think I am doing rather well on the life agenda that the Great Confucius set for himself. Of course, I can never aspire to be like Him. He had a rather glorious ancestry, wealth, and a brilliant political career. I have none of that. Even when he spoke or wrote about philosophy, he himself said it was of little value. He said he was just a “transmitter who invented nothing.” Very Zen. However, I know I am a nobody and, hence, I feel I now know where to stand and that my aspirations should be commensurate. I want to go for that Zen part of Confucius. The glorious stuff is out of reach, and I am too old for that anyway now.
There is a Flemish wisdom which resembles the quote above. There are some variations on it but it goes like this: “If, at 20, you are not beautiful; if, at 30, you are not married; if, at 40, you are not rich or famous; if at 50, you are not wise; then you will never be.”
I got married twice (before 30 and after), so these two ladies must have thought I was beautiful (in some other way than the Tunisian woman with the black hair and the dark brown eyes, but then she is a woman and I am not). And I attracted other women too. So, yes, I must have been pretty, right? Or beautiful enough, at least. Hence, I can tick that off (please do not tell me I should uncheck those two boxes now because I am no longer married and, therefore, obviously, no longer beautiful).
So then we are left with the rich and/or famous box. What about that? Can we agree that one cannot have everything in life, especially not if you know that your mind is not pure and will never be? So that gives me a score of two out of three, then. What about the fourth box? Wise? If I would consider myself not to be wise (which is probably the harsh reality), then the score would be two on four only. Because I feel a bit battered after the love battle I lost last week, I prefer to lie to myself for a moment and think I might be wise. So as to give myself a score of three on four. Three on four is a pass. I am happy with that. I have to think positive and genuinely believe that, despite all my losses and failed gambles in life, I am not a loser. I will, therefore, just do that. I am telling myself: you are 50 now, and you are wise. Nothing else matters. You lost your way in life, several times, but you are where you wanted to be at your age, and you should feel good about that. Full stop.
That will also be good for the book. Love should include self-love. I think I have something to say about that. There may not be much of an audience for it, but then the book does not need to be a bestseller. I have enough wealth (just a house and no debt, but it is enough) and money (nothing much but it pays the bills – why I should want more?). No. I want the book to be good. That is all. I will not be catering to some real or imaginary audience. The music that my friend will write for it will probably be very special. Minimalistic. Some harsh sounds tearing up the melody or the theme of the sound track (if it will have a melody or theme – maybe not – that is up to him). It will not have a happy ending. Worse, the whole thing might not read and sound very happy. I could not care less. The only criterion is truth: it must reflect and capture what is life, what is worthwhile to live and die for. […] OK. You are right. I forgot the criterion of funny. It must make one smile or laugh. Otherwise it is no use to add anything to this world. But, with me, that criterion is always there, so I should not have to repeat that all of the time.
[…]
That will be all for the day, folks. If you have read this, I thank you for having read it. It boosts the WordPress stats, which is nice to see because it makes me feel a bit less like I am wasting my time writing nonsense like this. A comment or a like would be appreciated as well. Even if you have not read it, you may want to give a chatbot-like like-reaction because you know that makes the writer feel a little bit better about wasting his time on his writing. But do not feel obliged. When everything is said and done, I like to write because I like to write. Because it helps me. Me. Because I have to get things out. I will now go to the gym for my daily spinning hour. That helps to get things out too. In a very different way. More physically. That combination of writing and doing some sports over the past few weeks feels good. Happiness may be a word like God or Love – in other words, it does not really exist – but this might come close to it.
[…]
So, yes. I write because of me. Only because of me. On the other hand, I do like to think some other people might actually like to read me. If so, the book project might become more serious. Or non-serious. Whatever. So if you do like this post, let me know. If you really like it, share it. 🙂
Final note: I am sure that, if you are a woman, and you read about what I considered to be some kind of real relationship with an older prostitute, you will feel disgusted. If you are a man, you will want to know more about it. Let me, therefore, tell you the background of it. As a younger diplomat, one of my more enjoyable tasks was to guide visiting VIPs around in Patpong and Nana Street. That was something the Ambassador would not do, especially not because she was a woman. So, after their long daytime programmes and hopping around and doing important things, they all wanted to see that scene. To relax and watch. Some of them would take a woman home and then they needed guidance so as not to be ripped off. So I took care of that and, of course, I did develop relations with them after organizing such things a couple of times. So one of these relationships I considered to be real. Something more than just sexual, but that sounds so odd in this context.
She was a bit older. Less attractive. Read: she was getting less and less clients. But she was genuinely nice. I liked her more than the younger girls because of that. And so she offered me to stay at her place – for free – if I did not feel like staying at the hotel with the VIPs. And I took her up on that offer, because we would both be exhausted after trying to please everyone after these long grueling days with VIPs trying to pack a programme of a month into one week. Likewise, she would often be sick and tired of her clients of the day too. So, yes, it was a phone number I could always text to. To get something organized for my VIPs or, as I preferred to do, when the VIPs had had their meal of women. That was usually around 1 or 2 pm. Or even later. She would then text me tell me if she was at home or not. Her home was a miserably small space. Not a hotel room. But I was always welcome to fall asleep there. And I slept easily next to her. Without feeling that I should have sex her, and with her feeling the same.
She cried her heart out when we met for the last time. When we left Bangkok for New Delhi. I had not expected that. She had never really talked much to me about herself. We just had a tired-after-a-long-day-do-not-talk-let-me-fall-asleep-please relation. I did leave some money from time to time. She took that in the beginning, but soon refused and let the money just be there on her table. When I saw that, I did not add to it anymore. So then we had a truly non-paying sleeping-together relation. Nothing intelligent. Nothing what would be referred to as friendship or love or whatever label you would have in mind. Just two exhausted bodies sleeping together. That is all. Nothing more. Nothing less. I did not think too much about it. I had no time then. I was a young workaholic and this just fit in, somehow. In a weird and totally screwed-up way, but it fit in. And today I am sad I forgot her name. That I can hardly recall her face. That I only sort of feel her body when I think of her. So, yes, I do count that relationship as a significant relationship with a woman.
If you are disgusted by me writing this – thinking it proves just how fucked up I am – then you are right about the latter: I am fucked up. A man who has slept with prostitutes cannot be relationship material. Never. He is doomed. He has committed the Ultimate Sin, with the Devil in person – with the most evil of women. He chose, or accidentally, got onto the Highway to Hell and, once you are on that highway, you cannot leave it anymore. It will bring you straight to your final destiny: Hell. You are right. Fully, completely, perfectly right. I will not argue about that. I told you my mind is totally corrupted. Not pure. And, yes, that is it, then: I fucked up. I am not, and will never be, relationship material.
Good to know. There. The sticker. It is just like the ‘veteran’ sticker. That one also never fades away: “Oh… Well… He’s OK, but he’s been in Afghanistan and other crazy places for like half his life. Hard to adapt for him now. Poor social reflexes. You know. Bit of a beast. The trauma.” You’re right. Again. And you can add more prejudice when you would dig into my past. I come out of a bad neighborhood, for example, so I was not raised to be romantic and fit in. Yes. Correct. You should add drinking. Yes. I had an alcohol problem. It is gone now, but it will always stay with me, right? I am sure you can think of some more ready-made stickers that would fit me and explain why I am ruined as proper relationship material for a decent woman. Just pick and choose. I’ll take it.
So I would say: go for other reading if the theme of my posts – love – is of any interest to you. Go for the pure stuff. Romantic writings of your soul mates, preferably: other women. Not men. And surely not men who slept with prostitutes. Such men can only tell you something about the Art of Sex. They can teach you nothing about Love. Prostitutes are transactional. Men who have slept with prostitutes are transactional as one. Give and take in the crudest form possible. Not love, in other words.
Can you even call it a relationship? It depends on your definition: if you buy something – one shot – is that a contract? A contract implies some longer-term relation between the seller and the buyer, right? If longer-term is your criterion, then my relation with that prostitute was a relation. But then you will have to admit that a man who returns to the same prostitute, or hires the same escort girl time and again, also has some real relationship. You see your easy definitions are not so easy, right? Hence, I will let you decide on such definitional niceties. It is an interesting exercise when thinking about the complexities of social relations but you need not spend time on it.
Again, I do not want to argue. You are right. I fully agree that men who slept with prostitutes cannot be relationship material (although I must admit I suddenly find it a bit tough to think of me like that – but the logic is clear now to me – so it is good that I am writing about this so I can be more clear with myself). A man should not cross that border. No matter how easy it is to do that, and no matter how beautiful it looks over there. How beautiful it actually is over there. Indeed, I can assure you that it feels like Heaven rather than Hell. But that must be an illusion, right? And it is an illusion which leads to divorce or a breakup with your partner (if you happen to have one) in this life, and to hell in the next (if you believe in next lives, that is). So you should avoid it: it fucks you up, and you do not want to be fucked up.
[…]
Anyway, enough about that. Let me now say something about the former element in that phrase I started this digression about a relation with a prostitute with. About you feeling disgusted when you read this.
I cannot say much about that, except that I do not care. I do not know you. But, if I did and you would condemn this – morally or otherwise – I would probably say that you do not really know what life is about. Or that you have not tried to live it to the fullest extent possible. Worse, I would probably tell you this: now that I cannot have sex anymore because of my ED problem after prostate cancer surgery (maybe permanently – it looks like it – recovery has not been great on that front), I am thinking that – if I would want one of the women who knew me to come back into my life today – it would probably be her. She was warm, friendly, and sex was just like an accessory to deep, refreshing sleep. What more could a man wish for?
Shocked? Good. Maybe I do have an audience for my book project then. To make it on the Internet nowadays, one must shock. Not please. So do like the post if you are shocked, even if you do not like to be shocked. And share with like- or not-like-minded people. 🙂
PS to the note: After reading all of the above, you may think that I should have therapy or something. I did that. I went to see a psi. A psychiatrist: full medical doctor on top of being psychologist. He came highly recommended. To be precise, Fatima recommended him, and she is/was very important to me, so that is why I consider it be a high recommendation rather just a recommendation. She recommended him because, besides all the usual stuff you would associate with a good psi, he also does hypnosis. So I followed up and went to see him. We had a few highly enjoyable sessions. Enjoyable for me as well as for him (at least that is what he told me – maybe he just pretended).
After the first session, he said hypnosis could not work with me. He said I was too intelligent for that, and that it was close to impossible to get people like me into a state of hypnosis. Then we talked about addictions (I was drinking a bit then) but immediately stated I was more than smart enough to get that under control, which I did. Then we talked about psychoanalysis and philosophy. He liked the writings of Gilles Deleuze, but recognized that I had maybe understood more of those writings than himself. Why? Because I was clear about the personality of Gilles Deleuze himself: I think of Gilles Deleuze as a professor in philosophy who tried to justify his drinking problem by portraying it as something out of this world, and alcoholism is very much in this world. He also committed suicide (he jumped or fell out of the window of his apartment, in some kind of delirium apparently) without using the opportunity of killing yourself to make a grand statement. In short, I told my psi I think of Gilles Deleuze as a coward: someone who talks nicely about risk and life without taking any risk himself, without living the kind of adventurous edgy life he always talked about.
Think of it: Gilles Deleuze was an outspoken hardline left-winger, or so he said. If you want to kill yourself anyway, why not pick up a Kalashnikov and get killed by joining the Revolution in some far-flung war?
I have a similar problem with taking Karl Marx seriously: Karl Marx always wrote about the revolution, and preached and fueled it by his writings, but he never joined any real revolution, despite having had plenty of opportunities to do so. Instead, when things got hot in the city where he happened to be (he wrote the Communist Manifesto in Brussels), he always fled to some other city to escape violence or impending arrest and threats of incarceration to write some more elsewhere. That is not very consistent, right? How can you take a guy who keeps writing about a revolution but but never does anything real in his life – nothing matching his words – seriously?
On top of that, Karl Marx was married to a rich woman, Johanna Bertha Julie Jenny Edle von Westphalen, who was part of the bourgeois society which he hated, and she paid most of the rent wherever they were. This is not a joke: check it. How inconsistent can you be? If you want to make a statement, make a statement with your life, not with a book. There are enough books on socialism and communism already. Even Marx copied a lot of what socialist writers before him had written. For some reason (a bit of historical accident and style, I guess), he just became to be equated with all communist writing. Marx is just a label. Just like Mao and Maoism is a label. He is not an original thinker. Not for me. Mao, at least, actually fought the war he believed to be just. He killed for it. He himself. Marx never did. That is why so many people went on the Long March with Mao: because they saw a man who would lead from the front. Not from the back. No matter if the war is right or wrong: belief is what counts and what makes you fight and risk your life.
[…]
I have a few degrees, including one in philosophy. Evening courses. I like(d) philosophy. And I like exams. One of my professors was an excellent guy. Several exams with him. My last on John Locke. I like Locke’s writings, so he asked one very specific question to check if I had actually read all the material (I do not always read all the exam material but, on John Locke, and with this professor, yes). I gave the correct answer and he then said he was confident I knew all about John Locke and that he would, therefore, not ask any more questions. Except one question that had nothing much to do with him. He asked me to compare Jesus and Marx. He gave me 10 minutes to reflect about it, and I came back with a nicely structured monologue on differences and similarities. I ended by saying: “The biggest difference is that Jesus died because of his beliefs. Marx died in bed. That makes a hell of a difference.” He gave me a 19/20. An unusually high score. He was known for not giving high marks. I am thinking he may not have liked the answer (he was an armchair philosopher himself) but that he had to acknowledge its logic was sound.
Also – I am just noting it for the record – it is a rather well-known fact that Gilles Deleuze had announced he would write a grand new special book on Karl Marx, but so that was just before the Berlin Wall came crashing down and all Eastern European countries went for a right-wing revolution. I think these real-world events in 1989 and the years after contrasted starkly with his beliefs and may have led to the final depression that made him jump out of the window of his apartment. Like a war veteran who looks back at all the wars he fought, wonders what he had been fighting for all his life, and then shoots himself through the head. Except that veterans have actually risked their lives for what they believed in (or not – but they fought nevertheless). Gilles Deleuze never risked his life, and left some ambiguity as to his suicide: he may just have fallen out of the window in an alcoholic delirium, rather than consciously killing himself. [I admit this is just a personal theory about Deleuze’s suicide or accident. You may have another one.]
In any case, I told the psi: Che Guevara or some other real revolutionary, yes. Someone on the left or the right, or plain anarchist or terrorist. Whatever. But real warriors, not philosophers. I would gladly talk about that. But Gilles Deleuze, or Karl Marx, no. That is theory. Not practice. I also told the psi that I liked Che’s Motorcycle Diaries more than Che’s theoretical writings, and I asked him if he had read those. He had not. He then duly noted my point of view and agreed it was no use to continue talking about Gilles Deleuze, or even about philosphy in general, with me.
For the last session, he invited me over to his own place, rather than the formal setting of the cabinet. He told me I should not think of myself as a problem, because I was not. He said that I am probably bipolar – going very deep both into happiness as well as sadness – but that me making fun of the sad things seemed to be pretty genuine fun. He told me I should consider myself as a happy person, because I basically am. So that was it. I jokingly wrote above that no one takes me seriously. Not even my own kids. Not even myself. And even a paid psi does not seem to be able to take me seriously: when I start talking about any problem I might perceive with myself, I start making jokes about it, and then even a trained psychiatrist – someone whom I pay to talk seriously to me – starts laughing along with me in the end.
There is not much more I can do, can I? Hence, I would suggest you just smile along and not come with any serious recommendation aimed at cleaning up my messy thoughts and feelings. I have tried everything. The mess does not go away and feels good now. Hence, my strategy is now to convince other people of what that psychiatrist told me: I am not a problem. Please laugh along. It is genuine fun.
[…]
Thinking back on that exchange with that smart and nice psychiatrist, it is obvious that it could not work. I did not accept his authority. That is the basis for such things. You get a diagnosis – bipolarity is the popular one for adults (plus a PTSD label for guys like me, of course – an easy-to-add-sticker on your forehead), and problem kids are almost always diagnosed with ADHD – and that’s it then. The patient feels happy he got a diagnosis – a label for his disease – and accepts that the person who sits in front and whom he pays to entertain him knows more about it than him. And he trusts that will solve the problem. Of course, it does and it does not. Conversations with a psi go on and on and the treatment seldom stops. The patients get addicted to the psi, like they can get addicted to medicine. But they feel OK about it because, at the very least, they feel they understand the problem now – although not so well as the psi, of course (that is why they need him) – and that they are doing something about the problem. That’s already half of the solution, isn’t it?
It is not for me. I refuse to accept such easy diagnosis. Bipolarity? Everyone is bipolar to some extent: we feel good some day, and very bad another. And smart people will probably feel happier and more sad because they dig into their emotions much deeper than people who just enjoy and do not think too much about how they feel. So smarter people tend to be more bipolar, then. I can go along with that, but I think that, with that psychiatrist, I instinctively refused to let him qualify myself as a patient. Maybe it was some kind of rivalry: it is hard for me to accept someone is better at this or that, because I first want to see him prove that. I left no chance to that psychiatrist to prove that, and so we were off on a bad footing. Or on a good one.
I consider it good, because it led me to give up on the idea of trying to heal myself. Perhaps the psychiatrist is right: I have no problem, no disease, no mental problem or illness. I am complicated, but not a problem. Or, more likely, he just got rid of me because he felt I did not accept his authority. Or because he considered me to be a problem he could not solve, never. Perhaps he was just trying to be as genuine as he possibly could, in light of the fact that I was doing the same and clearly expecting him to be as true. Or perhaps he just felt I would not pay that much longer for what appeared to be mere chatter to me. It does not matter. Perhaps it was a mix of conclusions from his side. I like to think that his invitation to have the last session at his place was a sign of genuineness, but that is just personal flattering.
In any case, regardless of his conclusions or sentiments, my conclusion is that my problem (everyone acknowledging that I am a disaster, that my mind is totally corrupted, and what have you – but that it is the funniest mess they have ever seen) may actually not be “a rather sad state of affairs.” It is a state which I should also qualify as amusing (if everyone else does, why not me?) and then that’s it.
Perhaps I should think of myself not as bipolar but as tripolar: Thanatos and Eros, and then the Mind that controls all and preserves healthy balance between white and black, happiness and sadness, heaven and hell, good and bad, day and night, fear and courage, sky and earth, water and fire, cold and hot, mind and body, heart and soul, life and death instinct, etcetera. Whatever bipolar features my personality might have: my minds sees them, and understands them, and balances them in a weird but beautiful dance. The Dance of Life.
Perhaps I should not take of my mind as corrupted. No. I should think of it as being fully engaged in life. As working with my body and soul. Fighting and making peace again. Spiraling upward. Not downward. All of the time. A weird but beautiful Trinity. All engines burning. Not always in sync. But with formidable thrust.
That makes a lot of sense in terms of my personal philosophy and beliefs, which revolve around Buddhism and the no-soul doctrine: there is no me. All is motion. There is only an evolving state of being. I am fairly happy with my state of being, and it evolves in the right direction. It always does. I am a lucky man. For some reason that I do not quite understand, things always work out for me, even if it does not always feel that way. Bad things turn out to be good things later. And good things are just what they are: good things. In short, I am good. And I am getting better every day. I will prove that by writing a better piece next time, but then you have to tell me what you liked and what not. Because good and better are judgments that must be made by others than myself. 🙂
[15 August 2021: I shared this post with a few friends, so my blog is no longer anonymous. I got a very critical remark from a male (!) friend, saying my writing was inappropriate and hurt his feelings because – in his value system – writing things like that is not quite acceptable (he phrased it a bit differently but that is the gist of his reaction). One of two others were more positive, saying it was/is courageous to write things out if that makes me feel better (it does). Others do not react at all, which I interpret as not being interested and, hence, I wonder if they should continue to call them friends. In short, I think I lost a friend because of my writing (probably more than one), but I may find others. I know friendship can only function within a shared set of values and social norms. It looks like my set of values and social norms is moving. That should be OK, as long as I am aware of it, and I can find friends despite the unsettling fluctuations of my own set of values and norms. I am 50+ now. I want to be my own self. Not someone else’s ‘me’. The time has come to be me. If it hurts a friend or two, so be it.]
To conclude this post (did me really good to write), the usual song suggestion. This time I will suggest a very simple feel-happy song: So Done, by The Kid Laroi (from the Australia track of my Spotify likes It is a beautiful day again. Sunday. I think I will make a nice long tour on my road bike today. Enjoy your Sunday as well ! 🙂