Lesson 2: I am a Whole Human Being
I am a many-splendoured thing? What does many-splendoured even mean, really?
I am an intellectual being. I enjoy thinking, and will continue to try and develop my mind, through education, discussion, and discipline. If it were possible to think too much, I would already be there. Also, I will try and keep my mind healthy even when essays, work, or bad thoughts try and turn it to mush.
I am a physical being. I sometimes crave physical contact; other times I avoid it. I am trying to not let fear rule my life; fear of what people think, fear of being uncomfortable, fear of making others feel uncomfortable. I will try to give physical contact a chance. Sometimes a hug or an arm around the shoulders is nice :)
I am a sexual being. I acknowledge and accept that in all my relationships, I relate as a male. This affects the way I relate. I also choose to not feel guilty about, or deny, finding friends attractive. Perhaps the distinction between liking and “liking� is somewhat artificial? In any case, my friends are all wonderful people, and some of them are also hot. This is okay, and I am not sleazy for thinking so. It is nice hanging out with people you are attracted to, especially if they are also good friends. This is also okay. Yay!
I am an emotional being. I am not some steel-robot-man. I have feelings. I will try to give my feelings a little more room, and actually explore them instead of avoiding them. I will acknowledge both my positive and negative feelings, attempt to learn what makes me feel the way I do, and learn to change my behaviour where my feelings suggest it may be necessary.
I am a spiritual being. However, I am also a *unique* spiritual being. Quiet Times™ do not work for me, therefore I will not attempt to make my spirituality fit that box. I will explore ways of expressing and nurturing my spirituality that fit with my personal identity. However, I will try and exercise discipline, and not make excuses when I am just being lazy. I am not very good at this.
Lastly, I am a being loved by the Creator. I will attempt to treat myself with the same respect my creator does. This may mean telling myself off sometimes—but probably not as much as I already do. My creator likes me (designed me too!), I probably should like me also. It’s kind of rude to not.
Comment by Matt’s Evil Twin • Mon 8 Nov 04, 2:29 pm #
Quiet Timesâ„¢ : Best quote, ever.
Comment by Horse Whisperer • Wed 17 Nov 04, 3:41 pm #
Sounds like little more than a neo-christian, chicken-soup toting run for the moral high ground. It seems you’ve forgotten any bona fide depth you might have had, and substituted this cloying sentimentality for the masses. “I am a many splendoured thing”, indeed.
What has happened Matt? “I am a sexual being”. This is worst of the lot. Where is your shame? It seems you’ve taken the burden of your own responsibility and placed it on the shoulders of cliche. If you could for one minute forget all the soppy-eyed looks your christian friends give you, no matter how ‘heart felt’ they be, stop looking at your own face at the bottom of the can, you would reel at the things you’ve written here. How could it not make you cringe? It’s absurd what’s happening in this world; first the feigned sincerity and ‘ooh and aahhs’ of ecstatic informercial hosts, and now this blogging phenomenon - a public medium for expressing supposedly private thoughts… however, all the thoughts on these blogs are the same - it’s not inner depth that’s being revealed here, it’s something genuinely frightening - ‘depth for the masses’. A socially acceptable way to “be deep too”. These blogs are creating a vocabulary for depth, and soon it will become an unwritten rule to use such standard, public imagery whenever it comes to ‘talking about oneself’. If you turn yourself inside out like this, translating the richness of your ‘private face’ into the crude symbols of your ‘public face’, and actually BELIEVING it (as i think you do), you will dissipate.
Remember the kafka shortstory about the hostess, a woman who having spread herself so thinly, dissappeared completely. She held her cocktail parties only to peer into the eyes of the guests and look for pieces of herself, to try to catch her own forgotten rhythm; which she surrendered to the masses.
Consider the following quote written by a strong christian from the 1800s, Søren Kierkegaard:
“I have just now come from a party where I was its life and soul; witticisms streamed from my lips, everyone laughed and admired me, but I went away—yes, the dash should be as long as the radius of the earth’s orbit——————and wanted to shoot myself.”
Comment by Matt • Thu 18 Nov 04, 11:47 am #
Why can’t we all just learn to get along?
Comment by Matt • Thu 18 Nov 04, 11:51 am #
Ok, seriously, Horse Whisperer:
Firstly, it would have been nice of you to leave your real name (even a first name). You obviously know me, so I am left at a disadvantage (although I do have an idea of who you might be). This makes me inclined to consider your words less seriously. You could at least have the guts to own your words.
Now, to attempt to answer some of your observations. It seems to me that perhaps you are mistaking this blog for something it’s not. I am more than this site; the words I use are imperfect communication at best. As a result, perhaps it does sound like “cloying sentimentality” to those looking for it. On the other hand (and this is my hope) perhaps people can look past the shallowness of the medium and actually try to hear what I am saying; to try and hear what underlies my words.
You call this post “a run for the moral high ground.” While it was not intended as such, I can understand how it might seem that way. I am perhaps a little defensive on some points; particularly those where I feel the conclusions I am coming to are significantly different to those I have been taught throughout my life by the church. I write these points here in part to remind myself of what I am learning. However, I would like to point out that in this case it is you trying for the moral high ground, and doing so incredibly ungraciously.
I’m interested by what you say about “depth for the masses.” It may be that you are right. I need to think that one through some more. I never wanted this to be solely a talking-about-my-feelings, teenage-angst-venting arena. I did, however, want to share parts of my journey with others. If I have strayed from the one to the other, I apologise. I will make an effort not to clog up the internet with any more of it. However, I think there is a place for being deep-but-not-too-deep. That is, I want to share things here, but I also want to be careful about what and how much I share, given that it is completely public and open to misinterpretation. As a result, perhaps it can only ever partially deep. However, surely that’s better than nothing?
You seem to have a vendetta against the blogging movement in general, but it also seems you do not fully understand it.
Perhaps in future you can find the restraint to critique without needing to engage in anonymous, vitriolic, character assassination.
Comment by andrew • Mon 6 Dec 04, 12:50 am #
i love you matt, i mean we love you matt from amy and andrew