A friend of mine says that whenever something moves her - a film, a piece of writing, a song - whenever she can feel the truth in it, she gets goosebumps. I think I may possess a gauge that operates from the other end of the truthiness spectrum. Whenever I see or hear or read something that is total bullshit, my eczema flairs up.
This holds true even for nuggets of bullshit that I produce - in a fight with J, a session with my therapist, and repeated instances of tapping out the first sentences of a would-be blog post, calling "bullshit" and starting over. I'm almost obsessive about it and can usually recognize the falseness of a statement before I've uttered or typed the last syllable. "You don't care about poor people," I sobbed to J once in bed.
"What!?"
"I know. What a totally ridiculous thing to say." I couldn't let the contrived, self-indulgent sentiment, I care about poor people! And you don't!, contaminate the air above the sheets for more than a second. The truth was that I felt that he didn't sufficiently appreciate my commitment to the volunteer work I'd been doing for the last four years. So eventually I just said that. And after I said that and the stench of fallacy still remained, I discovered that the real truth was that I wanted him to recognize my volunteer work as very important because I was afraid that I wasn't doing anything meaningful with my life. So eventually I just said that.
So I'm saying I can relate to the reflexive desire to mask one's true, perhaps more compromising, emotions behind a smelly facade of crap. What I can't relate to is the ability to continually emit falsehoods and not end up feeling sort of itchy and nervous about one's responsibilites as a thinking human being.
Take this guy for instance: David Frum, a writer for the National Review, a reputable conservative publication that I read on occasion to see what "the others" are up to. Regarding the recent revelations about Christian evangelist Ted Haggard's homosexual affairs and potential meth use, Frum argues that Haggard's apparent hypocrisy on the issue of homosexuality (i.e., cheating on his wife on a monthly basis for the past three years with a male prostitute, while speaking publicly against same-sex marriage and the "sin" of homosexuality), should not be denounced, but actually admired. Frum's reasoning goes as follows:
"Consider the hypothetical case of two men. Both are inclined toward homosexuality. Both from time to time hire the services of male prostitutes. Both have occasionally succumbed to drug abuse. One of them marries, raises a family, preaches Christian principles, and tries generally to encourage people to lead stable lives. The other publicly reveals his homosexuality, vilifies traditional moral principles, and urges the legalization of drugs and prostitution. Which man is leading the more moral life? It seems to me that the answer is the first one."
Frum goes on to reprimand the media and general public for piling on the condemnation of Haggard for his actions and duplicity, suggesting that, "Instead of regarding hypocrisy as the ultimate sin, could it not be regarded as a kind of virtue - or at least as a mitigation of his offense? If a religious leader has a personal inclination toward homosexuality - and nonetheless can look past his own inclination to defend the institution of marriage and to affirm its benefits for the raising of children - why should he likewise not be honored for his intellectual firmness and moral integrity?"
Reading Frum's article this morning, I could feel the scaly, itchy patches rising on the backs of my legs. The vapors emanating from my computer screen were almost suffocating. As I massaged a glob of Cetaphil into the crooks of my knees, a feeling of despair brushed over me. This man has been given a vast forum and an (I would imagine) ample salary for digesting the world and emitting a thoughtful appraisal of it and this is what he produces? And here I sit wondering if I will have left any mark on the world when I leave it. While this man, with the rare and enviable opportunity to make an impact with thoughtful, honest words, decides instead to leave this skid mark?
Beyond finding Frum's decision to plumb the depths of moral equivocation to come up with his argument depressing or enraging, I find it bewildering. How does one release themselves from reality and truth so completely? How does one's gut or flesh not reject the bullshit immediately on the occasions that it slips past the mind, the mouth or the fingertips?
Some days I wonder if life would be easier without the obsessive need to admit errors in judgment committed to cushion my ego or to fess up to the projection of my own fears and feelings of inadequacy onto those around me. Some days I envy the ability to handle bullshit with bare hands - to scoop it up and squish it through one's fingers until something that resembles solid logic can be constructed from it. I'm sure this ability would make for much smoother living in a sometimes abrasive world, but I guess I've always known my skin's too sensitive for that.
Recent Comments