"I'm okay with being unimpressive; I sleep better." -Garden State A week ago I finished reading Deadeye Dick by Vonnegut. The main character is what he dubs himself, a "neuter" - one who is neutral with the world, is neither homosexual or heterosexual, is not impressive (and is okay with it). In the book, they usually excel at a certain trait or subject but are mediocre at the rest. Usually outcasts, misfits, weirdos, creeps etc.
"To be is to do" - Socrates
"To do is to be" - Jean-Paul Sartre
"Do be do be do" - Frank Sinatra
So anyway, I wonder how many people consider themselves a neuter. After finishing the book I wondered if I'd fall under the term. I came to the conclusion that I am antisocial and do not mind being unimpressive. However, I don't think the sexual definition applies to me and I don't excel in anything in particular."To do is to be" - Jean-Paul Sartre
"Do be do be do" - Frank Sinatra
So taking the definition of a neuter into a broader sense and stretching it to someone who is antisocial, how many of you consider yourselves antisocial?
I have problems some times communicating with strangers. I find myself at times easily intimidated because of either age, knowledge in whatever, trivial things, etc. At times though I feel an energetic connection with a complete stranger and just talk to them.
Most of the time, though, I just don't feel compelled to talk to anyone. I'm not hostile towards anyone either. I'm sort of apathetic towards individual people that just don't strike me appealing.
I'm not sure what my original point in the post was supposed to be, or if there was one... So I'll just end it with recommending Deadeye Dick. Oh, and the Socrates, Sartre, and Sinatra thing is in the book. You'll understand it when you read it. (o:
Hmm, I also consider myself to be antisocial at times.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I wish there were other forms of communication available to us; instead of the simple language of words, signs and symbols, which we have inherited. I wish there were something more powerful, more reliable; something which does not rely heavily on words for expression. More often than not I find that words are clumsy and wooden. I wish that we (humankind) could communicate with each other better. It is something we almost reach through touch; but what I am seeking is just that little bit extra. It would be something which, in times of need, expresses that certain… I don’t know… that je ne sais quoi!
I don’t mean telepathy, that would be too intrusive, and I don’t mean I want to walk around brushing into everyone I meet (that would probably make me a lunatic or a pervert wouldn’t it?). It is just that I wish communication were a lot easier. It really is hard to explain; which, of course, is exactly what I mean.
Well,, that's interesting Gabriella ... the i-Magi-Nation blogs discuss the same things you observe about the character in that book:
ReplyDeleteYou say ... dubs himself as not impressive (and is okay with it):
" ... daleks neither particularly seek attention (the feminine impulse), nor approval (the masculine impulse)" (extract from OBD104)
You say ... he is neither homosexual or heterosexual:
" ... dalek propagation arises from proto-daleks, not from reproductive processes. As such it is memetic rather than genetic." (extract from OBD105)
You say ... I wonder how many people consider themselves a neuter:
" ... dalek gender equates to approximate androgyny." (extract from the dalek Glossary)
" ... daleks are approximately androgynous - a fusion of masculine and feminine traits, with some slight emphasis toward one pole or the other." (extract from OBD104)
Now, it is kinda understandable that you would feel that the sexual aspect wouldn't really apply to you, as you are young and very much saturated with hormones! It is only when that hormonal cloud lifts later on in life, that you look back and discover that it was like being permanently drunk for twenty years or whatever, without ever realising it at the time! Hormones are very potent, and their effect is transparent at the time because it is persistent and uninterrupted ...
"As Mindpoles enspiral (entwine with) each other, they grow and develop at different rates, thus one is dominant relative to the other. This early imbalance is necessary to engender an organism for procreative purposes - for, being transient, it must first at least try to replace itself to compensate the 'factory' of Life for it's own existence. (extract from OBD105).
You say ... they usually excel at a certain trait or subject:
" ... dependent on the dalek whose range of specialised knowledge is of most value and relevence to the current Focal Point of the Magus, then that dalek will be ac-knowledged as Q, the defacto leader of the Magus for the moment." (extract from OBD104).
You say ... I came to the conclusion that I am antisocial:
" ... daleks view "I to i" as more than just an ego-shedding process, it is also a process of Atomisation and alienation." (extract from OBD201).
So there's a lot of common ground between the character in Vonnegut's book, and daleks. And er, maybe your new profile picture is a subliminal allusion to the dalek eye! I mean, there are supposed to be one billion daleks out there ... somewhere!
OK then,
All The Best!
interesting viewpoint - i personally consider myself an introvert, preferring solitude to 'action' - and although this introverted-ness does delve into anti-socialism, i'm mostly shy around extroverted, or in particular, very strong 'a'-types.
ReplyDeletenow on occasion, i do meet fellow introverts, and the natural conversation of listening, waiting and reluctance to vomit words for the sake of making noise generates stimulating, engaging conversation - i usually find other introverts through body language, eye contact (thoughtful eyes are easy to make out) and overall tone of voice - as i mentioned, i get quite intimidated or frustrated around extroverts
communication is easy - its patience to listen and think that some people lack
Reply to Scrybe -- I know how you feel. I, too, wish there was a less flawed/faster way of communicating other than these languages and tools we have come up with. Maybe there is one..and we all just oversee it.
ReplyDeleteTo Dalek -- In regards to the sexuality, it might be about the hormones, but I am the exact opposite of not pertaining to any sexuality. I fall under all; biologically, romantically, etc. I just don't see the point in limiting myself to a particular gender. I don't particularly plan on procreating, so I don't see it as big deal for me. Well, in other words, if I feel a strong attraction to a person, I'm not going to let whatever is (or isn't) in their pants dictate how I act/feel/etc towards them.
Rudy Waltz, main character, does sound a lot like a dalek. Hah, very interesting..
cc'd -- I feel a sense of frustration around extroverts as well. It's really odd since one of my closest friends is an extrovert. Those are the people I'm not compelled to talk to. I don't find myself shy around them, just apathetic, as how I mentioned in my post.
I find the internet a place for me since it is really easy to distinct from different types of people (and easy to ignore those you don't like). It's not that is difficult to be able to tell them apart in real life scenarios, but it's just that one can find in a larger mass people compatible with you online. Also the anonymity of the interweb, I think, encourages interaction with people.