Mère

Chapter 8

The next day I went over to Abel’s house. His sister answered and said he wasn’t there. I then went over to Daniel’s house, assuming that Abel would be there. Sure, enough Abel was there, however, Daniel was crying. They were both sitting on the couch and Abel held Daniel in his arms.
“What happened?”, I asked Abel. Daniel got up, went into the bathroom, and locked the door.
“Do you remember Lucy, from school?”, asked Abel
“Yes…”
“She committed suicide…yesterday.”
“Jesus…”
“I know. Daniel is devastated.”
“Well…why did she do it? Did she leave a note?”
“She did.”
“What did it say?”
“Well…Daniel told me it said something about how she couldn’t handle all the rumours about her and how she couldn’t escape her past or something…”
“Oh…did Daniel get the letter?”, I asked
“Yeah, she emailed it to him and her parents…”
“Why would she send it to Daniel specifically? I thought they were just a fling?”
“I thought so too, but I guess not…”
“What can we do?”
“We can stay with Daniel until his parents get back from their business trip.”
“They’re gone again?”
“Yeah…bad timing.”, said Abel
“Well, this isn’t going to be easy. You know he’s going to want to drink.”
“Of course, but should we let him?”
“What else can he do?”
“I could take him to a church gathering and he could talk to the pastor.”
“Really? You think that will help?”
“I do.”
“I don’t think a pastor telling him that he will get to see Lucy in the afterlife is going to help him.”
“That’s not what the pastor would do.”, said Abel, with a stern expression
“Well that’s what most of them do.”
“He needs family in a time like this.”
“We’re his only family I guess.”
Daniel got out of the bathroom and went straight into his room. He locked the door.
“Are you okay?”, I asked, through the door
“Go away!”, he said. I could hear him sobbing into his pillow
“Listen, we’re here for you Daniel.”, said Abel. Daniel remained silent
“Maybe we should go.”, I said to Abel. “Sometimes you have to be alone during times like this…but we will check up on him.”
“Okay.”, said Abel
Shortly after that, I went home and saw my mum sitting on the couch. She was looking at photos of my father. She usually did this when she felt sad and needed to be cheered up, however, after seeing the photos she would get more depressed.
“Mum?”
“Yes…my darling?”, she wiped away her tears
“What are you doing?”
“Just looking at some old photos, dear…here.”, she showed me a photo of my father, holding me, when I was a baby.
“Oh…we kind of look alike.”
“Yes…you have his nose.”, she smiled
“I look more like you though.”
“Why do you think you’re such a handsome boy?”, she pinched my cheek
“Mum…”
“Yes, my darling?”
“Where do you think we go when we die?”
“I believe we go to heaven.”
“But only if you believe in God?”
“Well…yes, darling.”
“What if you commit suicide and don’t believe in God?”
“I don’t know…”
“Shouldn’t God have mercy on the people who commit suicide?”
“Maybe he does.”
“Well…do you think Dad went to heaven?”
“I do.”
“Why?”
“Because he was a good man, and a good husband.”
“What if someone was a good man and a good husband, but didn’t believe in God? Would that person go to heaven?”
“I don’t think so…”
“But why? They were good, weren’t they? Shouldn’t that be enough?”
“Darling, I believe that the only person who can judge humanity as good or bad is God. So, if God deems you good then you will get into heaven.”
“How do I tell if God has deemed me as good?”
“Pray to Him and ask Him.”
My mother always wanted me to pray. I just couldn’t bring myself to it. I couldn’t kneel and pretend that someone was hearing me, my heart wasn’t in it. Lucy’s death made me feel something I’d never felt before. It gave me perspective on mortality. I had never known someone who died before. My father died, when I was a baby…so it didn’t affect me, but Lucy…even though I barely knew her, I knew her nonetheless and she was gone forever. I can’t lie and say that I mourned for her, but I will say that her death spurred me into philosophy to an even greater extent. We started a new year of school and Vanessa had returned from her trip to Spain. At that time, I had already begun reading what some adults wouldn’t bother to read. From psychology to philosophy, I couldn’t get enough. I wanted answers, answers to the mystery of life. I had already read Beyond Good and Evil, and I was ready to move on to something else…a new perspective. I decided to read some existentialist philosophy, for the existentialists had insightful views on life. I read so much that when Mr. Palmer gave the class a speech assignment, I decided to make mine about existentialism. I stood in front of the class, when Mr. Palmer called out my name, for my turn. I never enjoyed speeches, however, what made me hate them was the built-up anxiety I had before saying the speech. Once I spoke, I became much more confident. This time Vanessa sat in the front row of the class and listened intently. She had her head rested on her hand and never took her eyes off me. This made me nervous, at first, until she winked at me and mouthed the words, “You’ll be fine.”. I took a deep breath and then began…
“Gooday to the teacher and my classmates. Today, I would like to talk to you about, Existentialism. The existential crisis is no trivial enigma, for it throws one's understanding of reality itself into question. I have been inspired by the existential thinkers to attempt my own take on the topic, yet I wish to further my understanding of the topic by perpetually analysing their works. The main question of existentialism is whether there is a reason for all of this, by which I mean life and reality itself. We may never have an answer, and perhaps are not meant to have an answer or maybe already have an answer. The existentialist thinkers, such as Jean-Paul Sartre, Soren Kierkegaard, Albert Camus, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Friedrich Nietzsche, Rene Descartes and Baruch Spinoza, have inspired me to ask questions about reality and how/why there may or may not be a purpose to existence.
Jean-Paul Sartre brings into question, the absurdity of reality. Think about eating dinner at the dining room table with your family. It sounds banal enough, yet when you think about it you are sitting down at a piece of chopped wood, with mammals that are of the same species as you and you put the mangled and chopped carcasses of animals into your mouth, while the ball of matter, that you reside on, surrounded by water, with pieces of land floating on it, spins so quickly, yet so slowly, that it takes twenty-four hours for a single revolution, all the while as it hurdles around a ball of flaming gas that is so much larger than the planet you call earth, that it could burn us all into nothingness, as the universe expands to such an extent, at such a fast rate, that any possible life on the other side of the expanding universe will never know that we even existed. Sartre calls this peeking into “the absurdity of the world”. He believed that this realization is what leads to true freedom, with the luring possibility of “Angoisse” or anguish. This engenders a richness of possibilities, yet the anguish of existence is apparent, for everything is terrifyingly possible. Sartre believed that there is no God-given purpose and that humans are ultimately making it up as they go. He believed that nothing is preordained and that humans are free to cast aside their existential shackles whenever they please. Sartre also used the term “bad faith” to describe what circumscribes humanity from realizing their true freedom. “Bad faith” is the belief that things must be a certain way or that you must be a certain way. He characterizes this with the example of a waiter, who believes that he is first and foremost a waiter, rather than a free human being, as the waiter has convinced himself that he has to be a waiter and could not be a pianist or a fisherman. This concept of freedom, according to Sartre, was often hindered by Capitalism, which is why he was such an avid supporter of Marxism. He saw that most people never truly achieved their freedom because they thought, ‘Oh, I wish I could be a writer but there is no money in that field’. This encumberment, caused by the pursuit of money, gives rise to generations of people shackled by their want for monetary gratification. Sartre’s insistence that things don’t have to be the way that they are is influenced by his belief that life does not have a preordained meaning, thus, alleviating the pressures of religion and tradition. As much as I find myself agreeing with Sartre on his criticism of capitalism and “the absurdity of reality”, I find myself to be abhorrent to his claim that there is no ultimate meaning to life, for what is left is nihilism.
“There is but one truly serious philosophical problem and that is suicide…Judging whether life is or is not worth living, that is the fundamental question of philosophy.” – Albert Camus. Camus believed that when you truly look at life for how prosaic it is, one realizes that there isn’t a meaning to it all, so why suffer? The nihilist would say that suicide is the answer to all problems, yet Camus was reluctant to acclaim this idea, even though he believed that we must recognize that our efforts will ultimately be futile, that we should endure, nevertheless. Camus wants to remind himself and us that the reason to live is because of the moments in life that bring us joy like love, the summer, nature, food, and friendship. He believed that the pleasures of ordinary life are adequate to provide a reason to live. If that is true, then what of those who experience none of those pleasurable things? What reason do they have to live? One seems to fall back into nihilism even after Camus’ philosophy, as it fails to justify one’s suffering. For even if one has pleasurable experiences, what of those that suffer more than they take pleasure? Surely naivety is not the answer for someone who has recognized their life’s meaninglessness.
Rene Descartes was a fierce rationalist, who believed that reason was the best guide for belief and action. He believed that the human power of logic, introspection, and sound arguments could ameliorate much of what is wrong with the world. “I shall bring to light the true riches of our souls, opening up, in each of us, the means whereby we can find, within ourselves, without any help from anyone else, all the knowledge we may need for the conduct of life” – Rene Descartes. He believed that the way to truth is to take large problems and slice them up into smaller ones, through incisive questions. He called this the “Method of doubts”, which entails solving the problems of life such as, what is the meaning of life, what is love, and other grandeur questions that shake reality to its core, by breaking them down in a careful way. Descartes believed in grounding our ideas in personal experience so that they are ensconced within our reasoning rather than authority or tradition. He had a subjective approach to philosophy that hinged on his speculative reasoning and logical inferences. His relevance to the topic is because of his answer to the question of whether we even exist at all. What if this is all a dream? What if what you see before you is someone else’s dream? His answer to this question was “Cogito ergo sum” or “I think therefore I am”. The fact that you can ask the question of whether you exist renders the question inconsequential. Descartes epitomized the solidarity needed for philosophy, for he believed that the biggest problems of philosophy can be solved by the one, not the many. Descartes also believed in learning how to tame the passions of the soul and identified six fundamental passions namely, Wonder, Love, Hatred, Desire, Joy, and Sadness. He believed that, from these, followed various other specific passions, of which there are infinite combinations of, and that one should not aim to vanquish these passions, as the ancient stoic philosophers believed, but should rather identify and integrate them into one’s life, much like the integration of The Shadow, as proposed by Carl Jung. I find myself analogous with some of his work, although his subjective philosophical evaluation of the meaning of life echoes that of Sartre and Camus, therefore I am reluctant to subscribe to it.”
At this point I had already gone well over the time limit; however, Mr. Palmer did not stop me…
“Baruch Spinoza attempted to reinvent religion, as to accommodate for his world views. He wanted to move it away from something based on superstition and more toward something of reason. He believed that God is not a person that stands outside of nature and judges’ humanity. He believed that there is no one to hear our prayers or concern himself with the quarrels of man. He believed that there is no one to reward us for our virtues or punish us for our sins, yet he did not proclaim to be an Atheist. He believed in a God, just not the one that the religions believed in. He believed that God is a deity that has shaped the universe yet is impersonal to our plights. God is more of a universal consciousness and a being of indifference, according to Spinoza. “Whatever is, is in God, and nothing can exist or be conceived without God.” – Baruch Spinoza. He was also keen on criticizing the notion of prayer, for in some cases of prayer, one appeals to God to change their circumstances. He saw this as self-absorbed, for he saw it as the implication of wanting God to change reality itself to suit your ideal circumstance. “Whosoever loves God cannot strive that God should love him in return” – Baruch Spinoza. He was therefore more in congruency with the philosophy of the stoics, who believed in a continuing attempt to understand the ways of the world, rather than protesting the way things are. He believed that the best way to understand God was to understand the universe and its mechanics, and that rather than asking God for favours, one should understand what God, or the universe wants. He saw that there were two ways of looking at life, one of which was “Sub specie durationas” (Under the aspect of time) or “Sub specie aeternitatis” (Under the aspect of eternity). It is human nature to be divided between the two, yet Spinoza believed that, through reason, we can choose the latter. Spinoza envisaged his philosophy as being the root of freedom from pity, sorrow, guilt, and shame. He believed that happiness comes from aligning our will with that of the universe. I find myself agreeing with his criticism of prayer, however, I find his characterization of God to be bland.
Soren Kierkegaard believed that rationality did not make life meaningful. He said that, through rationality, we have achieved great advancements in science, medicine, and technology, however, rationality has not given life a meaning, according to Kierkegaard. He believed that rationality is not what makes life worth living and that one cannot conclude that life is worth living through rationality. He believed that those claiming to live under the dictation of reason are merely delusional, for even one’s own “rationality” is individualistic. “The crucial thing is to find a truth which is truth for me, and to find the idea for which I am willing to live and die.” – Soren Kierkegaard. He regarded truth as subjectivity, which means that when one makes a choice, reason does not make that choice, you do. “An objective uncertainty, held fast through appropriation with the most passionate inwardness, is the truth, the highest truth there is for an existing person.” – Soren Kierkegaard. He believed that one should make a passionate leap of faith, from an inwardness, when making decisions, which does not mean that one should stupidly go headstrong into risky situations, but rather should understand that you are subjectively using your truth, which according to Kierkegaard is the truth, to mitigate the arduous nature of life. He believed that reason cannot provide meaning to one’s existence or the existence of God, and that one must choose subjectively and make the leap of faith. I agree with his maxim of not arriving to God through pure rationality, for I believe that the totality of God, if He is real, would be outside of our rational conceptualization. “As I grew up, I opened my eyes and saw the real world and I began to laugh, and I haven’t stopped since. I saw that the meaning of life was to get a livelihood, that the goal of life was to be a high court judge, that the brightest joy of love was to marry a well-off girl, that wisdom was what the majority said it was, that passion was to give a speech, that courage was to risk being fined ten dollars, that cordiality was to say you’re welcome after a meal and that the fear of God was to go to communion once a year, that’s what I saw and I laughed.” – Soren Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard is often accredited as the father of existentialism, for he realized that the meaning of life was obfuscated and, perhaps, didn’t exist at all, therefore rendered life purposeless, yet found a way to remedy this with his Christianity. He believed that unhappiness was written into the script of reality itself, yet, through belief in God, became worth living. “Anyone who has given the matter any serious thought will know that I’m right when I say no one can be absolutely, and in every conceivable way, completely content, not even for a single half-hour of his life. No one has come into the world without crying, no one asks when you want to enter the world, no one asks when you want to leave, how empty and meaningless life is. We bury a person, throw three shovels of dirt over him, drive out in a coach, drive back in a coach, and console ourselves that we still have life enough left to live, but really how long is threescore and ten, why not just get it over with straight away?” – Soren Kierkegaard. For Kierkegaard, devotion to Christ was a reason to live and die for, thus, assuaging his angst for existence. He believed that he did not have to justify his belief in Christ with rational thought, for he believed that there was no way to do so. He believed that “to have faith is to lose your mind and to win God.”, and that to give up an attachment to worldly things was the answer.
Fyodor Dostoevsky is regarded as one of the best writers of all time, and a reading of his work is all you need to understand why. “God is necessary and therefore must exist…But I know that he does not and cannot exist…Don’t you see that a man with these two thoughts cannot go on living?”, “Fathers and teachers, I ponder, ‘What is hell?’. I fathom that it is the suffering of being unable to love.” – Fyodor Dostoevsky. His writings had intimations of existentialism in them and he is considered one of the first existentialist thinkers. His belief in God seemed to be what he used to justify his existence, which is why God played such an enormous role as an influence in his work. He, like Kierkegaard, believed that suffering was the default nature of being and that it was ensconced within the foundation of reality, yet believed that life was still worth living. My understanding of his take on reality is that happiness is not a goal of life or existence, but is a by-product of understanding the meaning of life, which is, to contend with the beast of suffering, thus, finding satisfaction in becoming the hero of your own story, by accepting the responsibility for one's suffering and, in the process of this task, understanding that your purpose is being fulfilled, not in the destination, but the journey. In conclusion-”. The bell suddenly rang for our lunch break. The entire class looked at me in amazement, before getting up and leaving class. Vanessa smiled at me, before she got up and left too. Before I could leave Mr. Palmer stopped me and spoke to me.
“Where did you learn all of that from?”, he asked
“I read a lot during the holiday, sir…”
“It was incredible my boy.”. This was the first time I’d heard Mr. Palmer compliment a student.
“Thank you, sir.”
“Listen…there’s a speech competition happening at our school, for some of the senior students. You should definitely take part.”
“That sounds good, sir, I’d love to.”
“I’ll put your name down then.”, he patted me on the back
“No problem, sir.”, I smiled. I walked out of the class feeling like a new person. Vanessa was outside waiting for me.
“Dude!”, she exclaimed
“Hey you.”, I said
“Dude!”, she jumped into my arms and hugged me. “Why didn’t you tell me you were so smart?!”, she punched my chest
“I…I don’t know.”, I said, with my arms thrown in the air
“Dude, you have to tell me about the stuff you read…you’re sexy when you talk about it.”
“I am…?”
“You are.”
“Well okay then.”, I smiled
The boys and girls were separated at our school, and were kept on different grounds, to prevent couples from interacting. Vanessa went to her grounds and I went to mine, but not before she snuck in a kiss on my cheek when none of the teachers were looking.