
“I guess, in a sense, arguments and troubles are what strengthens a community. Which of course makes perfect sense now I think about it… growing stronger through struggle, beauty through brokeness. Sometimes I guess it takes tension for you to see that you care more about the person than their faults. And when you realise that… true community is strengthened.
In the ‘old days’, when a vase or something was broken, the Japanese would stick the pieces together again, lacing the cracks with gold. Apparently something that was once broken and had been repaired made it more valuable, so the cracks where enhanced with gold to show it’s ’story’… to show that the item that was broken was precious enough to care about, to repair, and to cherish…”
http://whatisyourownopinion.wordpress.com/wp-admin/index.php?page=tag-surfer
I have been pondering this for a time… and I am not sure of its truth. My thoughts have been along the lines… must we have conflict and struggle to build strong relationships? It would seem in our culture that we invest heavily in this theory as we see media accounts of celebrities as well as movie and television renditions of this very phenomenon.
Take, for instance, an episode of Gilmore Girls… any episode… does even one go by where there is not conflict with parents, friends, boyfriends and girlfriends, husbands and wives, ex-husbands and ex-wives, employees, work associates, pets, etc? (the answer is “no” by the way) Granted the idea of a television show is to highlight some progress from problem to solution… so I suppose it is inevitable that we need conflict and resolution. That is how it is done. (think of a Survivor episode for example) And if there is no conflict, as I would suppose is very possible on many “reality” shows with all of its “boring” continuous filming, then the producers make sure there appears to be conflict and violence brewing so that it can be resolved in a satisfactory fashion, and keep the interest level high.
This being said, I believe the point is… do we need to go to the lengths of conflicting and then resolving in real life just to prove … what? Aha… that we can emulate a television “reality” show! So… if we do not argue and disagree with someone once a day we are not truly alive? And then when we fall into each other’s arms for a good “cry-fest’… which of course we see with each episode of Gilmore Girls… we remind ourselves we really care for this person and have proved it by being angry with them, harshly showing them this fact and then… not repenting or asking forgiveness (of course not — no one ever admits they were wrong) but just exploding and then crying in ecstasy after all that emotion has run its course. Has anything been resolved? Has anyone changed? Did some good come of it? Not so much… but anger was vented and was not this the goal after all?
And again I beg…What is your own opinion?
June 25, 2007 at 6:32 pm |
I like your reasoning, but ‘Wah!’
June 26, 2007 at 7:44 pm |
You know, an element of storytelling is that you must always have your characters go through a series of conflicts in order to reach the eventual (hopefully satisfying) resolution. All good drama is built around this framework.
I think that what has happened as we’ve absorbed the idea of “narrative” as the structure of our lives is that we’ve brought the elements of narrative drama into our own personal experience. Because no conflict means a flat plot (and little interest to viewers), no characters are allowed to have smooth, seamless experiences. And now that we live in an entertainment-based society, most of us think of ourselves as characters–protagonists, please!–and thus refuse to have a placid, unruffled experience.
After all, only the smug, self-satisfied characters in the great melodramas value manners and composure over the sweeping sensibilities displayed by the more “genuine” and “relatable” characters!