Every now and then one comes to a realization of one of life's great truths as if there were such things. Raised in a culture that celebrates romantic love and fed on literature that worships soul mates, we believe that our perfect match is out there, and it's just a matter of meeting that person. Perhaps, that is true, but I find it highly unlikely, and it is even more unlikely that one will ever meet that person if, in fact, he does exist. Still, it's a highly romantic notion, and so we indulge it--if we could just find him! then we will be complete. That is the premise of the beautiful song "Origin of Love," though I believe the primary human condition is aloneness (not to be confused with loneliness), but perhaps that's just the solipsist in me. I also like that we believe that true love triumphs over all even though love of all sorts--passionate, familial--is as often destructive as not. Is there any proof that love is inherently good? Harold Bloom happily reminds us that the Macbeths are the happiest married couple in all of Shakespeare. Speaking of marriage, I've always found it to be a business arrangement, first and foremost. It's the primary reason I think that gay marriage hasn't been widely granted. It's not because the general public can't stomach the thought of two men or two women together--though that may be part of the case--or even religious--whatever the rhetoric--but because marriage is a sign of power with its various rights and privileges (tax breaks, inheritance, visitation rights, etc.). It's the same reason that slaves couldn't get married either. A sort of Foucauldian power struggle if you will. On a side note, there's a scene in Eyes Wide Shut where a man is talking to Nicole Kidman and he tells her something to the effect that the only reason women got married back in the day was so that they could then sleep with whomever they wanted. I've always liked that notion that marriage is a business arrangement separate from love affairs. But I digress. In one of my favorite songs by Alanis Morissette, she lists the twenty-one things she wants in a lover--not necessarily needs but the qualities that she prefers. I've been thinking about my own list, and it starts with a variation of the desert island question. Dr. P once remarked that he married his wife in part because she loved the film Raising Arizona, and that if she hadn't the relationship would have ended. So I've started with the tastes I would want to share when it came to books, movies, music, etc. The rules are you only get to choose one item from each genre where compatibility is essential though it may differ from your personal favorite or desert island choice. Again, this perfect person probably doesn't exist, but isn't it pretty to think so?
NOVEL I've chosen novel over book because I like the idea of a work of fiction representing a facet of a person. My novel would be To the Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf. One of my favorite novels, this stream-of-consciousness work perfectly captures the minutiae of daily life making it one of the seminal modernist novels.
FILM I'm a film buff, and I think that the films one has in one's personal collection says a great deal about his character. The film I've chosen, naturally, is The Hours directed by Stephen Daldry. A drama centered on characters instead of plot, it has so many things that I love: Meryl Streep, Virginia Woolf, literature, life, loss, and the transcendental moments that change our lives.
PLAY | MUSICAL Ideally, this would be based on a live staged production, but we no longer live in an age of ideals, at least not the Wildean one. So this may be a musical or play in any format you like: live, the book, a film version, or the soundtrack. Mine would be the play Angels in America written by visionary Tony Kushner and the brilliant miniseries directed by Mike Nichols. In the best of all possible worlds, Angels would be required American reading because it has everything in it: sex, religion, politics, and America.
ALBUM I haven't entirely decided on the rules here. Should best of collections or soundtracks be allowed? Maybe but it should be a single disc. I would choose Little Earthquakes Extended by Tori Amos. Earthquakes is Tori's seminal album. It remains her most accessible and her best. The extended edition includes four B-sides: "Upside Down," "Flying Dutchman." "Take to the Sky," and "Sweet Dreams." In real-life we may make mixed CDs of our favorite songs and artists, but that's not part of this game. Anyway, Earthquakes was a transformative album for me, and there's nary a song on it that I don't like.
TELEVISION "TV knows everything." Also, it's our true national pastime. I love television, and I don't think I could be with a person who didn't. Here you have to choose an entire television series. I have at least five, but the one that matters the most is The West Wing even though I haven't yet seen the final season. Still, the first four seasons alone are some of the best TV ever seen on network television. Yes, it's political porn, but that's part of why it's so good. What I love the most about this series is the characters--what I've learned is that what matters most to me in any novel, film, series is the characters--especially the women: C.J. Cregg, Donna Moss, Abigail Bartlet, and Amy Gardner. The men are pretty great too. Furthermore, the writing is excellent, the drama is earnest, and it's hysterically funny--more so than many sitcoms. Any show that can make jokes out of syllogisms and dangling modifiers gets instant respect from me.
POETRY I just added this category, and I'm not sure what to do with it. I think we should allow selected and completed works as well as books published by the poet, but anthologies are too easy. I can't decided what mine would be. The Waste Land by T.S. Eliot would be my desert island choice, but I'm not sure if that's the criterion I want to select. Perhaps I would choose the extant handful of Emily Bronte's poems. Or the poems of Emily Dickinson, Christina Rossetti, or Octavio Paz. Obviously, I need to read more poetry, but for now I suppose I will settle for The Waste Land.
I can't think of any more categories of media for now, except perhaps visual art but that seems like an entirely too messy genre to contemplate right now. I couldn't even begin to choose a favorite painter, though I suspect Salvador Dali would be in the running. Perhaps video games too though I generally don't play them. Mine would be Zelda: Ocarina of Time. And there are, of course, many other important qualities such as personality, clothes, and whether or not he prefers gin to vodka. Anyway, prove me wrong, if you know a gay man with these exact same interests, I need to know. What would be your personal selections?
The one thing we all seem to miss is that souls inhabit bodies and to name those qualities we find necessary in the body in which our soulmate might inhabit is deemed inappropriate or superficial, and yet, before we know the spoken cognition--language is the unifier of all your categories--of our soulmate we must at first, indeed, at minimum, notice his physical appearance, make conclusions about it, regard it as attractive, repulsive, or somewhere in between. Then, when the soul is revealed, we have what is necessary to make beautiful the nose that has been previously unacceptable, or more lovely the voice that was already appealing, or make loathesome the mouth thought to be disgusting.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe unconditional love exists. I could posit that perhaps it does for a parent toward a child. Maybe it does generally, but we have examples in life and literature where self has mattered more than genetic offspring. So if business arrangement means contractual, then I would agree. Sometimes we need to make more attractive something that simply...isn't. So we call it by another name.
I think this is an interesting idea - picking the exact book, movie, etc. It's like the Nick Hornby quote about it not mattering so much what you are like as what you like, and then Barry making an actual survey and giving it to a girl.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the more meet people, the more I wonder if that's every going to be what works for me - especially because things that used to be turn ons for me - like having the guy love The Waste Land (although I have a much more special place in my heart for Prufrock) now kind of freak me out because I'm currently in a place where I want a relationship where I still get some things that are very much mine. So although I want a guy who can appreciate Shakespeare and is willing to see Shakespeare with me, I almost wonder if I would prefer it if that was as far as it went and the rest of Shakespeare could stay mine. Somehow I feel like this is the wrong way to feel about it, but at the same time, it does make a less specific criteria. :) I have some very specific ideas about this, but I think I'm going to stop explaining them now. :)
Rae, shouldn't you be studying right now? As always, thank you for your thoughts--you make me stop and think. When I started this, it was more just saying that the guys I would want to be with would be Virginia readers and Tori lovers. I did not mean to get caught up in a metaphysical discussion of love. Though that was kind of fun. I agree that physical attraction is important, but I guess (or hope) that it's less important to me than their mind and personality. And I would agree that maybe unconditional love exists generally between mothers and offspring, but we've seen cases where that isn't true or where it's gone devastatingly awry. And for whatever reason, maybe because I'm gay, marriage does seem to me more of a business contract than a sacred, religious vow. Or maybe because literature would be much more boring without infidelity.
ReplyDeleteMegan, thank you for explaining your ideas--I enjoy hearing them very much. I do like the idea that some things should be my very own. And I think that instead of someone loving The Waste Land or The West Wing as much as I do, I would want them to be able to appreciate it. And I would want them to have new and exciting things that they love that I could appreciate too. However, a Tori fan's a must! :)
You know, it's interesting, I've thought about this off and on for a while now. I think it's very common for people to want to have things in common with their partner, but I think it might be the things that you don't have in common that might be more important. Sure, it'd be really easy to get along with someone that has many many of the same interests as you. The way I see it, differences will add depth (not to say that similarities will cause shallowness) in a relationship.
ReplyDeleteI know your request was for media, but my mind keeps going back to things like hobbies. I enjoy taking photos, and that is something that would be easy to share with someone special. On the other hand, if I was with someone that wasn't necessarily interested or adept at creating photographs, that could be a very beneficial part of a relationship. I'd be excited to show my photos, and she'd (hopefully) be able to appreciate the beauty of the image.
I've got to put in a plug for love. Everyone needs a Thomas. And even if he doesn't love Tori and Jane Kenyon or even if he never fully appreciates the Gilmore Girls, he makes my life infinitely better and I wouldn't change a thing about him.
ReplyDeleteI agree that marriage is hardly a romantic pinnacle, but I must also agree with your critics about similarities. Certainly there are things we want, and maybe even need, to have in common withe the people we love, especially if there's any kind of long-term committment involved. As discussed above, though, it's our differences that keep us giggling, make our discussions interesting, and make us most excited to spend more time together/learn more about one another. I can't imagine having the same quality of conversations if we both just agreed all the time about everything.
I've never believed that everyone has a single soulmate, but I earnestly believe that once you find a soulmate, he'll appreciate, or will put enormous effort into trying to appreciate the things you love just because he loves you that much.
I'll certainly keep my eyes open for your dream clone, but I hope you won't close off the idea of finding someone who doesn't love Tori and West Wing and Wasteland so you can share the joy of introducing him to these wonderful joys and have the pleasure of being intoduced to new and exciting things, too.
Dain, I agree that while we want people who share our common interests, the differences can be more intriguing. And I like you pointed out hobbies. Of course my hobbies tend to center around reading books and going to see films, so...
ReplyDeleteKristen, you are always a delight. Someone had to speak up for love, and I'm glad you stepped up to the plate. I don't believe in soul mates, at least not the "one," instead I think there are various people with whom we are more or less compatible. And I think it's the compatibility which is more important than having the same tastes. So I guess I think of these things as a barometer--that I would rather be with someone who enjoys watching television with me or sharing books than someone who always wants to go on bike rides or play video games, but even those differences might be interesting. And I would love to share and discuss and debate and argue about books, music, movies, TV, etc.
Thank you everyone for your comments and insights. I enjoy them all, especially when they challenge me. =)
Hmmm. I love your sense of introspection. I, too, see marriage as a business arrangement before a romantic entanglement, but then I blame that on growing up around arranged marriages. For me, an arranged marriage is a social contract wherein two people agree to raise a stable, nurturing family founded on common values and mutual respect, and that pesky romance business is a bonus. Maybe I've been in the marriage & divorce class for too long and it has been making me cynical.
ReplyDeleteI cannot say that I know what things I would have to have in common with a husband, especially since I so fiercely guard the parts of myself that I feel make up me. The more I read about what you like, the more I want to like it myself, just because it seems to much fun to like it.
I do like "The Origin of Love" as a song and I heard it long before I saw the film of its origin. The reply to the song, the Tommy Gnosis version of Wicked Little Town, sometimes makes me want to cry.
Nagi! Hah. My lover/boyfriend/significant other is a lawyer-by-education and I believe law school and his few years practicing did the same to him: cynicized him (yes, that's a word because I just made it a word). But I'm not a lawyer, have had no M&D classes and I certainly believe it's a contract, but I'd like to think I'm practical, not cynical ;)
ReplyDeletePS GB, too bad iTunes doesn't have some way to kick a few cents back to you; I've bought about $20 worth of music since reading your blog.
ReplyDeleteAmber, thank you for bringing up arranged marriages. Sometimes I think an arranged marriage would be awesome. It does simplify things--in some ways. Pesky romance indeed. And as long as I can find someone who is as interested in all the things that I like as much as you do, I'll be in good shape. Also, I've only seen Hedwig once, so I totally forgot about "Wicked Little Town." Thanks for reminding me.
ReplyDeleteRae, I'm glad you enjoy the music I have on my blog. I do try. And it would be sweet if iTunes gave me kickback. I could totally use it.
I knew it was a good idea to come and see what had happened since I commented.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with Dain's comment too. I always think I want someone just like me, but I've been going on some intermittent dates lately with a guy who is a LOT like me, and I'm starting to think it's going nowhere because I'm bored. I don't want to discuss things with myself in boy form. I mean, I find myself interesting and I do love to hear myself talk, but then I want something new coming out of other people - not just myself regurgitated. (Grossest imagery ever, right?)
The only thing I know for certain is that I could never be with anyone who didn't love Harry Potter. It's strange, I know, but really, it would just bother me. :)
ReplyDelete