![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 5 of 5. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Racer on March 12, 2004, at 23:08:27
OK, you know how sometimes people here say I'm a little hard on myself? Well, they're wrong -- I'm lazy, undisciplined, generally do really shoddy work, etc. So, for example, when my pdoc said something about me being a perfectionist, my first reaction was to think, "How wrong can one man be? I'm not a perfectionist -- nothing I do is perfect!" Getting the picture, right?
Keep in mind that I'm not leaving the house, not doing anything at all, just waiting for relief or release. Since I'm not leaving the house, I'm not getting a lot of social contact, right? And so I have plenty of mental time to mull over what anyone I do see says to me. That's also pretty important to this revelatory experience.Got that picture clearly in your mind? Good, then it's time to go on to the next piece of my puzzle for the day.
Anyway, at my last appointment with the pdoc, we were talking about kids books, and how we find ourselves going back to them for comfort as adults. His face lit up, and he said, "The Little Prince!" Now, I've read that book, in three languages, and it's never spoken to me in any of them. When he said that, I cringed. "What's wrong with me, that I can't find the magic in this universally admired and revered book? Everyone seems to think it's magic, and it didn't do a thing for me. Must be my fault, something wrong with me."
Today I reread it. In English, since I'm basically monolingual these days, and it still sat quietly in my hands, showing me its charms, but never trying to share them with me. The book just doesn't move me.
That's all lead in, by the way. Just so that you can understand the incredible power of my epiphany.
You know what? That a book so admired by so many, a book which has deep meaning for other people, a book which provides comfort and meaning to many, does not speak to me means exactly one thing: it means that it doesn't touch me. Nothing more. There's nothing wrong with the fact that this one book amongst many leaves me with no music in my soul. It just means that its magic is not my magic, it is not in harmony with my song. Simply put: I don't *have* to be moved by it! (Why am I getting Jonathan Livingston Seagull vibes? Another book I never quite saw as others seemed to.) Hell, most of my favorite poets leave most of the world cold, when you come right down to it, and while I think it's only because readers don't see the deeper beauty to them, I never think there's anything wrong with those other readers. (In fact, I tend to question why they resonate so well for me, but that's another problem for another day.)
So, my epiphany is that it's OK not to be moved by something just because it moves others. It's OK to like something for no more reason than because I like it, or to be indifferent to something just because it leaves me indifferent. I don't have to like something just because others like it. It doesn't mean they're right or I'm wrong. It just means that my taste is not the same as theirs.
So, anyone here wanna tell me why it took me so damn long to figure this out?
Posted by shar on March 12, 2004, at 23:20:34
In reply to Epiphany!, posted by Racer on March 12, 2004, at 23:08:27
Yes, Racer. Fortunately, through all of our various adversities, we remain ourselves. Have you tried "Charlotte's Web" ?
Nevermind if you haven't. You are totally correct in thinking that some things do not speak to us. Some things do. Luckily (or not-so-luckily) we remain the judge(s).
Take REAL good care!
Shar
> OK, you know how sometimes people here say I'm a little hard on myself? Well, they're wrong -- I'm lazy, undisciplined, generally do really shoddy work, etc. So, for example, when my pdoc said something about me being a perfectionist, my first reaction was to think, "How wrong can one man be? I'm not a perfectionist -- nothing I do is perfect!" Getting the picture, right?
>
> Keep in mind that I'm not leaving the house, not doing anything at all, just waiting for relief or release. Since I'm not leaving the house, I'm not getting a lot of social contact, right? And so I have plenty of mental time to mull over what anyone I do see says to me. That's also pretty important to this revelatory experience.Got that picture clearly in your mind? Good, then it's time to go on to the next piece of my puzzle for the day.
>
> Anyway, at my last appointment with the pdoc, we were talking about kids books, and how we find ourselves going back to them for comfort as adults. His face lit up, and he said, "The Little Prince!" Now, I've read that book, in three languages, and it's never spoken to me in any of them. When he said that, I cringed. "What's wrong with me, that I can't find the magic in this universally admired and revered book? Everyone seems to think it's magic, and it didn't do a thing for me. Must be my fault, something wrong with me."
>
> Today I reread it. In English, since I'm basically monolingual these days, and it still sat quietly in my hands, showing me its charms, but never trying to share them with me. The book just doesn't move me.
>
> That's all lead in, by the way. Just so that you can understand the incredible power of my epiphany.
>
> You know what? That a book so admired by so many, a book which has deep meaning for other people, a book which provides comfort and meaning to many, does not speak to me means exactly one thing: it means that it doesn't touch me. Nothing more. There's nothing wrong with the fact that this one book amongst many leaves me with no music in my soul. It just means that its magic is not my magic, it is not in harmony with my song. Simply put: I don't *have* to be moved by it! (Why am I getting Jonathan Livingston Seagull vibes? Another book I never quite saw as others seemed to.) Hell, most of my favorite poets leave most of the world cold, when you come right down to it, and while I think it's only because readers don't see the deeper beauty to them, I never think there's anything wrong with those other readers. (In fact, I tend to question why they resonate so well for me, but that's another problem for another day.)
>
> So, my epiphany is that it's OK not to be moved by something just because it moves others. It's OK to like something for no more reason than because I like it, or to be indifferent to something just because it leaves me indifferent. I don't have to like something just because others like it. It doesn't mean they're right or I'm wrong. It just means that my taste is not the same as theirs.
>
> So, anyone here wanna tell me why it took me so damn long to figure this out?
Posted by noa on March 13, 2004, at 9:15:21
In reply to Re: Epiphany! » Racer, posted by shar on March 12, 2004, at 23:20:34
Racer,
Good for you to have had that epiphany!
Taste in art is so subjective, obviously. And what moves one person won't necessarily move another.
And perhaps you aren't a "sentimental type" like the mass-market world out there.
Posted by Racer on March 13, 2004, at 9:43:40
In reply to Re: Epiphany!, posted by noa on March 13, 2004, at 9:15:21
Yes, I do like "Charlotte's Web," so I guess there's nothing seriously wrong with me! LOL But the real magic books were much more to my taste. "A Wrinkle In Time," "The Egypt Game," "Charlotte Sometimes," "The House At Green Knowe," "Half Magic," "The Court Of The Stone Children," and, of course, all the books with horses. On the other hand, my mother and I used to read to one another when I was little, and those books were often history or capital L literature. Dickens, etc, so I didn't get a whole lot of children's books until I was a little older. So, I'm weird, what can I say.
Thank you both for joining me in my celebration of my own weirdness. I'll stick with my beloved Housman and the Divine Heine, and continue reading "The Great Influenza" for fun, and look forward to reading "Hidden History" and "The Creators," both by Daniel Boorstin. He died recently, at a ripe old age, so I finally grabbed them from my mother's shelves. Mother is the curator of a collection of art, as well as being an artist herself, and he came out once to see her collection while he was still Librarian of Congress. Mother was very impressed with him, and bought many of his books, although I don't think she's read them all. She did talk about him for a long time afterwards, and he was apparently quite impressed by her -- as who wouldn't be? So, I've always had in my mind to read his books, but haven't had the motivation until now.
This revelation, by the way, fits into something else I've been muddling over. I know I've complained that this new therapist is more interested in "Diagnosing" me than in treating me. It's easy for me to fall into worrying about "my diagnosis," for the same reasons I worry about why something like "The Little Prince" doesn't touch me. Must be something profoundly wrong with me, right? Well, just as I can yawn and pass on over "Old Possum's Book Of Practical Cats," and swoon over "A Shropshire Lad," I can admit to being a difficult woman in many ways, and still say that outcome, what we do about it, really does matter more than Officially Sanctioned Diagnosis.
And you know something? In those moments of clarity, I *know* that it's perfectly OK to be difficult for some people, challenging for some people, without having to have some sort of psychological disorder to neaten the edges of character. Personality does not necessarily connote Personality Disorder.
(And, in trying to nail me into a box which simply does not fit me, this therapist is asking me to deny my perceptions and accept what someone else is telling me. Guess what? That's what got me here in the first place. Doing the same things that made me sick to begin with is NOT therapeutic. Can't make me believe it is, when I know that it isn't. If I ever do start to believe it, you'll know that I've finally gone over the edge for good.)
Thank you all for being here when I need you. Peanut Butter M&Ms and books and upolstery fabric shopping and fibers and yarns and fabrics and Alison Moyet on the stereo (well, the mono -- one channel shorted on my receiver...), and my wonderful eFriends here on this board. I guess there is hope I'll get through this. Thank you for holding my hand.
Posted by noa on March 13, 2004, at 11:04:46
In reply to noa and Shar, posted by Racer on March 13, 2004, at 9:43:40
Also a favorite of mine, and (despite the cold war anti-communism sort of message of the story) it really does speak to your desire not to be pigeonholed or made to be like all the rest!
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble 2000 | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.