Sometimes, Blog Commenters Are Smarter Than Me And, Because They're Not Jerks, I Don't Ridicule Them
I got so bent out of shape by Amy’s positive thinking inspirational hope crap (see last post), I completely overlooked a great comment by Lucy. Not my daughter Lucy. Blog Commenter Lucy. But what if Blog Commenter Lucy, like, really IS my daughter Lucy, but only from the future? That would make my blog the coolest blog in the world – way better than Dooce’s and Dad Gone Mad’s combined. It’s not like their blogs are wormholes where the future communicates with the present. Their narrative structures are rigidly sequential. Pshaw.
Anyway, Lucy was concerned about The 365 Day BHJ Fitness Regime (see 2 posts ago) and compared me to Frank and April from Revolutionary Road. I didn’t light her up like Amy because, basically, I’m not sure what the fuck she’s talking about. Also, if she gets too mouthy, I can use the blog to go back in time and remind Jenna to TAKE HER FUCKING PILL - negating Lucy’s existence and all her blog comments from the future.
Anyway (again), Lucy said that “Frank and April couldn’t catch satisfaction because they wouldn’t admit that the things that interested them were unsophisticated, sloppy, boring. [They] were tragic because their ambitions didn’t complement their tastes.” Like I said, not sure I get this because my tastes are awesome. And pretty fucking sophisticated too. I read books. Huge ones that would blow your mind.
Frank and April were obviously trapped in a tragic mire of negative thinking.
Lucy continues “There is a dishonesty in too strictly disciplining yourself because you aren’t admitting to your emotions, your real-time mood, observations and the subtle ways those things interact with your environment.” Just tell me this. Is there a way for me to use the above statement to cram a peanut butter cup in my mouth? I don’t have to get it. Just yes or no?
LUCY: “What if you’re running to a place where routine and formula are more important than an honest analysis of yourself, your environment and the present? What if this is too simple? What if there is more choice, more contingency and more responsibility involved in changing your body in 2010? … I hope our choices aren’t limited between indulgence and a promise. Instead, I think the choice you are coming closer to is more like this: either remain in an iron, rewarding routine, or subject yourself to a complicated, vague and painful negotiation between your body, your personality, your surroundings, your self image, your wife.”
I think, and again I’m not sure I sincerely “get” her, the divergence here is between routine and negotiation. I am usually a big proponent of flexibility and remaining negotiable. However, I know myself pretty well insofar as I make no sense to myself.
Take drinking for instance. If I try to have a couple drinks and not get in fist fights, I inevitably fail. I get mouthy as all hell and don’t stop drinking until I pass out. So there came a time where I had to become inflexible about drinking. I just can’t do it. No more negotiating. And I think that’s where I’ve arrived in terms of my health and fitness. If I give myself the wiggle room to not run on a particular day, that will inevitably turn into two days, a week, 6 months. Those are facts borne out by the last 5 years.
So I’ve merely decided to run every day – like I decided to not drink. There will absolutely be a future me who wants to drink. A future me will definitely want to take the day off running. What’s the value of resisting those futures? What’s the value of honoring them? Good questions, Lucy. I’m not sure I know.
Honestly, I thought the mile minimum was sort of a nod to flexibility. If, on any particular day, I only have time to run a mile, I can rip that off in 7 minutes, not a huge time commitment. But I’m still hesitant to wholly disagree with you. I might be using fitness to avoid honest analysis. It’s extremely possible. There are huge gobs of stuff roiling around all of us that wants to be avoided. I’m no truth hero. I’ve told you all along that I’m a liar.
However, I love the idea that all systems, especially “air tight” ones, conceal a flaw. The harsher the rule, the more severely it calls to be broken. So I’m going to knock a day off for Lucy. On The 364 Day BHJ Fitness Regime, you get one day off. One blemish in the name of flexibility. And regarding the no meat rule, I get to eat unagi. I mean. Who really cares about unagi? They’re fucking eels. Eels are terrifying water creatures. Eating eels creates a less hostile and frightening ocean environment.
How’s that? Does that work for you, Lucy? You could always just go to your room.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Reader Comments (18)
I'm relieved that you didn't "get" much of what Lucy said, because I was confused by it, too. When I read Revolutionary Road a few years ago, I was stunned that I had never read it before. It was maybe one of the best books I had ever read, and I've read them all, I thought. But I didn't see the connection between you and those two. Anyway, despite not understanding, I did like what she said, I think, or at least it sounded good and god knows, more to my liking than that other woman's positive rant. I kept meaning to go back on and get Amy's take on my fourteen year old daughter's uncontrolled epilepsy -- just wondering how to get her to focus enough so that the seizures would stop.
Thanks, as always, BHJ, for brightening or perhaps darkening my day -- it's just the way I like it.
If DGM's blog could accept future comments from his kids, they would most liklely leave comments blaming their dad for their depression.
Hey your strict discipline just got into my flexibility. No your flexibility just got into my strict discipline. Now go and have a peanut butter cup.
"Eels are terrifying water creatures. Eating eels creates a less hostile and frightening ocean environment."
And now I have Diet Coke on my screen. I should know better by now than to read BHJ and have Diet Coke anywhere near my mouth. But, truly, this seemed like a deep and though provoking post, not a "choke beverages out one's nose funny post" - apparently, I should stand by my "do not mix beverages with BHJ" rule unequivocally.
When somebody just gets done reading a book (or watching a movie, I would guess, in this case), they often find evidence of the characters and the conflicts of the characters in everything they see, do, read, hear, etc. This does not necessarily mean they are smarter than you.
Also, yeah, flexibility is cool but obviously Lucy is not an alcoholic.
after originally reading that comment on your last post i re-read it 3 times. i too was confused, mostly by the Revolutionary Road/Frank content. I see you as pretty much opposite to Franks character, personally, from what i read here anyway. I found this whole dialogue really Interesting, to say the very least. I told my husband about the BHJ 365/4 Fitness Regime and he completely agreed with your methods as well.
I recently decided to test your meothods and performed aI little beat-up time on myself and felt more inspired to get my shit done than i have in a long time. i suck at times, i know that. i think by showing myself how much of an ass i can be to myself about said sucking, out loud, i became motivated to not have to deal with *that* crazy bitch again, thereby fueling the low-productivity fires to just get on with getting it done. Motherfucker! It worked!
great post.
After reading your pissing match with Amy and then reading Lucy's comment I was reminded why I don't comment here very often. Amy just seems like a pushy busy-body and Lucy makes me feel effing stupid. I'm mostly just a stalker here because I love the way you write.
While I was hesitant to get on board w/ your former fitness plan--you've sold me on the 364+unagi regime!
You just gave a day to a reader. Time travel, or no, your blog is definitely better than anything Dooce could hope for.
yes
Slacker.
I hate unsolicited psychoanalysis
I kind of like the extreme discipline thing...I can relate to "give an inch take a mile" as my whole fitness and healthy eating plan resembles miles and miles of slacking. I am also glad that you could give yourself a one-day unagi break (and isn't that the mind control thing Ross did on Friends?). You're just damn near close to perfect, BHJ!
Now--back to work. Strap on those running shoes, lace up the jock strap, and hit the road you loafer! I've got important couch sitting to do because my mile of couch sitting isn't done yet. (Apparently I'm half asleep, because I'm beginning to see my post is incoherent...staying up later than normal because that will *guarantee* the snow day tomorrow. Miss those in Vegas??)
For me, what is tragic about Revolutionary Road is that April tried to realize her bigger dreams (even if her dreams were vague). Frank paid beatnik ideas lip service, but he ultimately sold out. He may not have known himself very well, but he was still a hypocrite.
Wiggle room, yes, okay, good. Iron regime (ie, boundaries, ambition), also good.
I read the beginning paragraphs four times before accepting that they were referencing me. I almost lost my cool. Thanks for talking with me. I feel happy about that. I’ve spent the last 28 hours calming down.
I don’t know why my writing continues to be so unclear. My thinking lacks clarity, too. I can feel it. Yeah. So what? I’m a slob, too. That mud and gritty water had some active assistance getting into my bedroom.
Here’s what I meant:
I really haven’t read Revolutionary Road. I only read a review of its movie interpretation. Maybe you do have a lot in common with Frank. Or, Leonardo Dicaprio. That could be fun. I don’t know. I wanted to focus on one idea that the reviewer summarized, an idea about one way that people’s ambitions can be damaging, even damning.
Generally, the reviewer hinted that people often work hard and force themselves to act, look and think in sophisticated ways, even when “sophistication” doesn’t actually satisfy them. Even when that sophistication bores them, makes them suffer, makes them tired. People want to be sophisticated and to be better so badly that they will do things like force themselves to look at abstract art and to eat spinach salads, even if those people hate art and greens.
If we consider this idea about the costs of “sophistication”, I think we can better understand some traps that can come with people’s attempts to change themselves.
I think that this trap goes like this: to get to their ideal version of themselves, many people end up neglecting, denying and losing who they actually are. Ok, fine. So what? Neglecting and denying an undesirable, wimpy, possibly alcoholic, “actual self” seems warranted. It seems like a good idea to ignore genuine, honest desires to eat chocolate chips and watch “Jersey Shore”. Alright, you forget about “Jersey Shore” and chocolate. Instead, you go sit through lectures about politics in the Middle East, read classic books, investigate modern art, and do three minutes of abdominal exercises every day. Instead of doing the stupid things that please you and that feel fun, you plan out an admirable routine, bend your life to a nice formula. Aren’t you better this way?
Probably. But, I think people who have such plans of betterment and self-discipline need to be careful. By sitting through these lectures, reading those books, defining those muscles, you aren’t necessarily becoming a different and better person. You’re not changing your tastes, your desires to watch “Jersey Shore” or eat chocolate. You’re just ignoring them. You’re circumventing them.
I see two important consequences of ignoring your bad tastes in this way:
1. You’re establishing a relationship of distrust with yourself. Imagine that your body wants Klondike bars: Oh, but does it? Does it really? Can you be sure? What it should really want is a multivitamin and a fiber drink. You’re bored by political discussions. But, should you be bored by politics? Maybe you should feel differently. Maybe this boredom with politics stems from a lack of effort. Maybe you’re lazy. If you distrust yourself in this way, I think it becomes very easy to miss out and overlook things that genuinely satisfy you. I think it becomes very easy even to overlook possibilities that might satisfy you.
That said, sometimes it is best to distrust yourself. Like, if you are dumb, depressed, in love, or addicted to drugs. In those cases, what you want and what may satisfy you can lead to serious trouble. For sure. I am just saying that a lack of caution can turn useful, inspiring and necessary distrust into something harmful and limiting.
2. When you ignore your tastes and make ’better ’ rules and routines for yourself, you don’t necessarily become a different person. You are the same person, only now you follow different instructions. You have the same tastes and personality, just subordinated to and disciplined by new, different rules and priorities.
The question becomes: if these rules and priorities don’t necessarily originate in or correspond to your tastes or your individual worldview, where did they come from? Whose rules and priorities are they? Society’s? Are they rational? Are they wrong? Are they moral? Are they good enough? Good enough to risk your betterment, your enlightenment on?
In short, yeah, eat the peanut butter cup. Maybe it will bring you insight. Maybe you’ll remember something. Maybe you’ll rapidly develop a peanut allergy. Better find out. Maybe after that you will feel like running further, down a different route.
Also, from Kenny Shopsin and Carolynn Carreno's book, "Eat Me: The Food and Philosophy of Kenny Shopsin".
[This is sort of along the lines of what I was thinking about. Here's some background: Kenny runs a restaurant].
" I am addicted to the Internet. Among other things, I like to see what people are saying about me, but I also like to see what people are saying about food in general. One of the sites I visit regularly is Chowhound, where food-obsessed people like to talk about what they ate last night or where they are going to eat or where they can go for a specific food. It seems that the majority of entries read something like ‘I’m going to such-and-such restaurant. What’s the best thing on the menu?’
When I read that, I think: Why would you give a shit what the best thing on the menu is? Maybe you don’t like the best thing on the menu. Maybe the so-called best thing is deep-fried yak brains, and maybe, just maybe, deep-fried yak brains don’t appeal to you. Why don’t you just order what sounds good to you? Well, I already know the answer. It is because people are afraid of being mediocre, of being ordinary.
It wasn’t that way twenty or thirty years ago; it was easier to be satisfied. People didn’t have cell phones. There were no flat-screen televisions. They didn’t feel the need to indulge in eighteen-course dinners that some jerk-off restaurant reviewer described as ‘orgasmic’. They didn’t have any of the media hype we have now that is supposed to make us happy or even contenders for happiness. People were more content with their ordinary lives and their mediocre desires.
Even today most people’s taste – whether it pertains to food, art, drama, or sex – if they are really honest with themselves, is just not that highly evolved. The difference is that people are not happy with that simplicity. When it comes to food, which is the only subject I know anything about, they reach higher than they have the palate to appreciate, sometimes they reach so high in terms of what they order or go to cook at home that I am not sure they even know what they’re eating, much less like it…I have a lot of character defects, but reaching above myself in terms of my own desires is not one of them. I don’t pretend to like things or try to like them because someone told me to or because I think I should like them." (Shopsin, 205-206).
Now, I got to get some rest.
i think that i see what Lucy is saying (above), and i think that i agree with a lot of it. i think that, for me, the 365 (or even 364) fitness regime would be too much, because, for ME, it would snowball on itself, become an entity unto itself, eclipse me, and before i knew it i would be running for four hours daily and eating nothing at all, and i would lose twenty pounds in two weeks and start getting anemic bruises down my thighs. that is what i would do, that is what i have done - extremes are bad for me, they don't work, they do lead to self-denial, like Lucy said (if i understood that aspect of her comments correctly).
that said, agreeing to follow my desires doesn't work either. i do like chocolate, i do like mind-numbing internet or television absorption, and when i give myself free reign in those arenas, they build on themselves too, until i am doing them even more than i want to be doing them, in some sick mashup of hedonism and self-denial. before i know it i am spending thirteen hours in an internet forum, eating caramel popcorn by the bin, and gaining twenty pounds in two weeks, with my face swelling from water retention and uselessness. which is all, of course, just as unhealthy as the previous scenario.
i don't think that Lucy was advocating complete hedonism, i'm just saying that in my case (and i don't think i'm alone), "wiggle room" can be as much of a downward spiral as rigidity. (as i'm reading this over, it is sounding a lot like BHJ's comment about alcohol. maybe this downward spiral isn't all too common; maybe i'm a pleasure addict. i don't know.)
anyway, that doesn't leave me a lot of options. i'm not really sure what to do; it's something i've been working on. i hope that i can reach a medium. someone told me once (a wise friend? or maybe i read it?) that sometimes you need to treat yourself as you would a small child whom you love: kindly, but sternly. you need to allow yourself one hour of mindless TV, but recreation for the rest of the evening has to be reading, and you go to bed at eleven no matter what. only one bedtime song, and no trips to the kitchen.
also, i don't think that people exercise and eat spinach salad and go to the art museum and read dostoevsky just to elevate themselves, or make themselves appear elevated. i think that there are many reasons for attempts at (physical / mental / emotional / cultural...) self-improvement: the spinach, of course, is just healthier than the chocolate, and the dostoevsky will keep my mind sharp as i get older, help make neural connections that will tell me where my goddamn keys are next week. going to the art museum will help me understand (or try to understand) other minds, other lives, other worlds. and if i ask a critic what a restaurant's best dish is, maybe i really want to try it - want to know what the restaurant is celebrated for, want to try something that i wouldn't have on my own and that may blow my mind. it may not, of course. but i want to know.
also, things that are "good for you" ARE pleasurable. often. the spinach is delicious, actually, and even if a person doesn't like it, surely they'll like the raspberries or the pine nuts or the couscous or something else on this hippie plate. the feeling in my stomach after i finish pita and hummus with artichoke is a blessing, and the feeling in my stomach after i finish a mushroom swiss burger with fries is pain, condemnation, a bit of a sap of my will to live. and if i eat the healthy foods, my body will learn that they feel good, and my tastes will cultivate as such. similarly, running feels amazing, but only after the first fifteen minutes. those first fifteen minutes are hell, but my body slogs through them because it remembers the runner's high that i've taught myself comes eventually.
of course, sometimes i AM just trying to be / appear sophisticated (there are books i have bought because i want them prominently on my bookshelf, and about food - woo - i won't say that i don't worry about the way that my body looks) and there are tons of other reasons for self-denial too - part of me wants to set a good example for the kids, part of me wants to save money (the spinach is cheaper!), part of me wants to contribute positively to society (i.e., spending money at mcdonald's vs. spending money at the farmer's market).
it's all so multifaceted.
also, i have never, NEVER thought that americans' big problem (i am an american) is trying to be too highly evolved. i know that this point is tired, but i think that our society has sunk rather low, into a reality-TV-bacon-cheddar-burger fiasco, and it seems to me that in the cost/benefit analysis of (a) trying to reach too highly, for whatever reason, vs. (b) trying to be honest about my desires and let myself do what i want - i and my descendants will be better off if i shoot high.
I'm here because of your post at Stef's today. And dammit, man, I had big plans to veg out and watch a movie and now I'm going to read your blog all night, I can tell.
I'm commenting on this particular post because it made my brain hurt a little, and it made me think about peanut butter cups and eels simultaneously and I don't think that's ever happened to me before.
I can only imagine where reading more will take me.... can't wait to see.
-Ellie