Just by the title alone I think one can pick up that Oskar is probably no longer the character who is telling the story for it is dated in 1963, way before Oskar was born. The chapter begins with four simple words, "To my unborn child." As soon as the eyes hit the words the mind begins to wonder. Unborn child? Is this Oskar's dad? Who is this? Are they a father, or a mother? Was the child ever born? How does this person relate to Oskar?
The man goes on to describe his silence; how he can no longer talk. He mentions a girl named Anna. Someone he used to love, but lost somehow, and now because of that loss he has lost all words. It got so bad that he got the words Yes and No tattooed to the palms of his hands to make it easier for him to communicate with others. He also gets a notebook to write down other answers to questions that may not result in yes or no answers.
Then he says something that struck me a little, "I've thought myself out of happiness one million times, but never once into it." I feel like this is something we all do. Our minds can be wonderful instruments, but sometimes they can be disastrous. We over think things and make them into things that they are not. Someone says something to us that is harmless but we make it into a threat. Someone compliments us, but somehow we make it into a bad thing. We convince ourselves that our lives are much worse than they actually are. Why is this? Why can't we just see life how it is? Why can't we talk ourselves into happiness? Things would be so much easier if we could. Some people believe that we can. Humanists, usually. Those who believe in the powers of the human, and how they can be whatever they want to be. I believe we can do it too. I believe that we can talk ourselves into happiness, but for some reason it becomes such a struggle to do so. Why? I guess there are two things I can get out of this. One, talk myself into happiness more often. Two, talk others into happiness more often. If it's so hard to talk ourselves into happiness that it just might take someone else to do it then why don't we be that someone for another person? As someone once said, "You don't need a reason to help people." But this could be a reason; to help others achieve what you wish you could achieve on your own, happiness.
Then the man discusses on how he met the unborn child's mother. He met her at a Bakery in New York. Then he mentions how they both came to New York. Which means they were originally from another place. Did they come together? Or did they just by chance find each other? Did they both come from the same place, or opposite places?
The man describes how the woman slid up next him while he was sitting in a booth. She told him that she could see he was suffering, and that she was suffering as well. She expressed how she knew that everyone could tell that they were suffering. She talked to him as if they knew each other. She continued to talk to him, but he could not respond. Finally, he wrote to her that he could not talk and he was sorry. She began to cry. She wrote a thing of her own onto the last blank piece of paper he had, something bold, "Please marry me." Then the two flipped back and forth between pages. Him pointing at pages that led to the answer no, and her flipping back to asking he would marry her.
Then the character goes on a flashback of his life within his head as he contemplated answering yes. Here you discover that his family was pretty wealthy, that he had a love of his life (most likely the Anna he mentioned earlier), and that he used to be a sculptor.
And then he says, "I'd experienced joy, but not nearly enough, could there be enough?"
Could there? Will we ever be happy enough? Is there a limit to happiness? Is there an unachievable bar of happiness? A bar that we want to reach, but can never be happy enough to reach. We often go on an on about happiness. What makes us happy. Why we aren't happy. How we should be happy, but for some reason we aren't. Is happiness what we evolve around emotionally? Is all that we want happiness? Or do we want sadness, and despair? Do we need sadness and despair? Could we ever be happy without sadness and despair? Think about it. We complain when we are sad, but how could we ever be truly happy without being sad every once and a while? I mean sadness is what drives us to appreciate happiness so much. Without sadness, happiness is just a norm, nothing to appreciate. But what happens when all there is, is sadness? Could there ever be enough?
Immediately after that quote the man states this, "The end of suffering does not justify the suffering."
This I believe to be true. We cannot free people and then say, "Well okay, we're good now right?" In the book, "Man's Search for Meaning", the author Viktor Frankl talks about the feelings and psychological mindset of the prisoners of Auschwitz after their freedom. He discusses how they couldn't really believe they were free, but more importantly he discusses how some began to act out on society with the mindset that they have the right to do harm because they have been harmed. They did not feel that just because their suffering had ended that their suffering was now over, and justified. We all do this. We do something terrible, apologize, and move on. We think that the ending of whatever terrible thing we have done makes up for the suffering, but it doesn't. Say you bully someone, and then one day you come to terms that it was a terrible thing to do. You find this person, and apologize. You give closure to the situation. You end it. Does this mean that all of the sudden all of that damage you caused them is gone? I believe in forgiveness. I believe in grace. But I also believe that as humans we are not like God in His way of forgiveness and grace, though we should strive to be. God forgives and forgets completely. Clean slate grace. But humans just don't work that way. Those years of bullying had an impact. Viktor Frankl says, and I'm paraphrasing this, that no one has the right to do harm, not even those who have been harmed. This is true. Two wrongs don't make a right. But just because this is true doesn't mean that it's reality. My point is the person you bullied most likely took that wrong doing, and did some wrong doing of their own. But now you've apologized, so everything's good right? Wrong. What about all of the things this kid did in reaction to your bullying? What about the relationships he/she has destroyed because of the social damage you have caused on them? What about all of the unseen after effects? Just because you ended the suffering does not justify the suffering.
Now the suffering that this character is describing is a more difficult kind of suffering, and internal suffering. When he reflects back on his life he finds that he had a pretty good life until a certain point, and then he became worthless. Ultimately he answered the woman by pointing to another page that simply read, "Help."
The man describes how the woman slid up next him while he was sitting in a booth. She told him that she could see he was suffering, and that she was suffering as well. She expressed how she knew that everyone could tell that they were suffering. She talked to him as if they knew each other. She continued to talk to him, but he could not respond. Finally, he wrote to her that he could not talk and he was sorry. She began to cry. She wrote a thing of her own onto the last blank piece of paper he had, something bold, "Please marry me." Then the two flipped back and forth between pages. Him pointing at pages that led to the answer no, and her flipping back to asking he would marry her.
Then the character goes on a flashback of his life within his head as he contemplated answering yes. Here you discover that his family was pretty wealthy, that he had a love of his life (most likely the Anna he mentioned earlier), and that he used to be a sculptor.
And then he says, "I'd experienced joy, but not nearly enough, could there be enough?"
Could there? Will we ever be happy enough? Is there a limit to happiness? Is there an unachievable bar of happiness? A bar that we want to reach, but can never be happy enough to reach. We often go on an on about happiness. What makes us happy. Why we aren't happy. How we should be happy, but for some reason we aren't. Is happiness what we evolve around emotionally? Is all that we want happiness? Or do we want sadness, and despair? Do we need sadness and despair? Could we ever be happy without sadness and despair? Think about it. We complain when we are sad, but how could we ever be truly happy without being sad every once and a while? I mean sadness is what drives us to appreciate happiness so much. Without sadness, happiness is just a norm, nothing to appreciate. But what happens when all there is, is sadness? Could there ever be enough?
Immediately after that quote the man states this, "The end of suffering does not justify the suffering."
This I believe to be true. We cannot free people and then say, "Well okay, we're good now right?" In the book, "Man's Search for Meaning", the author Viktor Frankl talks about the feelings and psychological mindset of the prisoners of Auschwitz after their freedom. He discusses how they couldn't really believe they were free, but more importantly he discusses how some began to act out on society with the mindset that they have the right to do harm because they have been harmed. They did not feel that just because their suffering had ended that their suffering was now over, and justified. We all do this. We do something terrible, apologize, and move on. We think that the ending of whatever terrible thing we have done makes up for the suffering, but it doesn't. Say you bully someone, and then one day you come to terms that it was a terrible thing to do. You find this person, and apologize. You give closure to the situation. You end it. Does this mean that all of the sudden all of that damage you caused them is gone? I believe in forgiveness. I believe in grace. But I also believe that as humans we are not like God in His way of forgiveness and grace, though we should strive to be. God forgives and forgets completely. Clean slate grace. But humans just don't work that way. Those years of bullying had an impact. Viktor Frankl says, and I'm paraphrasing this, that no one has the right to do harm, not even those who have been harmed. This is true. Two wrongs don't make a right. But just because this is true doesn't mean that it's reality. My point is the person you bullied most likely took that wrong doing, and did some wrong doing of their own. But now you've apologized, so everything's good right? Wrong. What about all of the things this kid did in reaction to your bullying? What about the relationships he/she has destroyed because of the social damage you have caused on them? What about all of the unseen after effects? Just because you ended the suffering does not justify the suffering.
Now the suffering that this character is describing is a more difficult kind of suffering, and internal suffering. When he reflects back on his life he finds that he had a pretty good life until a certain point, and then he became worthless. Ultimately he answered the woman by pointing to another page that simply read, "Help."
No comments:
Post a Comment