Thomas Sullivan: WOULD YOU WRITE A BOOK FOR ME? or WHAT DO YOU REALLY KNOW ABOUT SEX, LOVE AND TERROR?
Yoo hoo! Attention everyone who has been broomed out of a job by Donald Trump. And you uncounted millions over and above the counted millions who all are out of work — gotta minute? Also to the rejected, the downtrodden, day dreamers, spurned lovers, adventurers, searchers, fantasizers, philosophers, natural-born psychologists, sob sister, questers, trapped housewives, romantics, gigolos, Delilahs, or otherwise unfulfilled souls with holes in their lives, I’ve got a job for you. You’re hired! If you want to be.
Here’s the standard contract:
On call 24/7. Report to shift muse. Irregular hours, no days off. Weekly pay = 0. Monthly pay = 0. Guaranteed annual income = 0. Retirement = 0. Health insurance = 0 (think of the “0” as the first letter of Obamacare, as in your first free brain surgery is a frontal Obama-ty). Paid vacation = 0. Additional employee benefits = 0. In case of actual sale and publisher eventually coming across with the green scratch, subtract Federal tax, State tax, Local tax, both ends of FICA, 15% agent fee, additional agent fee if sub-agenting, business expenses, and all fees, penalties and taxes yet to be invented hereafter in the known and unknown Universe.
Agreeable? Good. Congratulations, you are now a fully functioning writer. Take a pen with you the next time you go into the bathroom (hopefully you’ll find paper already there). Here’s your first project:
See, I’ve got some questions and the research is murder. No, no, not murder as in research for a mystery (though there’s some spooky stuff I’d like help with too); actually, my questions go more toward character relationships, emotional stuff –you know, whathcamacallits…gender relationships, sexual romance and whatever.
Like I said, the research is a killer, on account of my approach to romance is a little out of the mainstream. Actually, I’ve only met one woman whose instincts/thinking about “luv” were the same as mine, so what do I know about normalcy? I have two requirements for falling in love with a woman. One, she must be totally insane and two, she must be utterly intransigent. The insanity is necessary so that she will fall in love with me in the first place, and stone solid stubbornness ensures that communication will be blocked at some point, effectively annihilating all that I am and leaving me free and independent once again. Yeah, it’s partly theory, but that’s because of my extremely limited experience, having kept myself off the market 99% of the time (why are you applauding?). Hello? Ah…still there and semi-conscious? Good. So I figure I can shortcut the research by getting the benefit of your experience and insight. Here are six questions, five of which you’ll see could underwrite relationships:
If a woman HAD to choose, would she rather have a man be emotionally faithful to her or physically faithful? And if a man HAD to choose, would he rather have a woman be physically faithful to him or emotionally faithful?
Fear, guilt, love. Which one drives the bus? Which one motivates the strongest? Which one trumps? And especially I’d like to hear views on which one(s) win if they go head to head against each other.
Which of the following two nightmares would be the scariest: just as you are about to awaken you 1) feel cool air all around you and know that when you open your eyes you will find yourself on a two-foot wide rock ledge jutting out from the side of a cliff, staring into a steaming abyss 9,000 feet below, or 2) you sense that a person who has been dead for a long time and that you miss the most in your life is lying conscious in the bed beside you, though they don’t seem to be breathing.
React to this statement: men are great dumb beasts when it comes to communication and love, but women train in those skills from early ages and are far more practical about emotions over time.
React to this statement: a man is less likely to fall romantically in love with a woman than a woman is with a man, but if he does, he falls hopelessly and idealistically in love whereas most women are more realistic.
React to this statement: living fully and loving fully (romantically) are mutually exclusive.
Feel free to e-mail me your responses at mn333mn@earthlink.net or just chunk something in below where it asks for Comments. I rather suspect that writing a novel this way is going to be the ol’ making-sausage method. Not pretty, but if it fries up nice in the pan, well, the proof is in the . . . uh, pudding (no), putting (no), sausage (no), blood pudding (no), eating (no) – you see why I’m hiring this out? Hiring being euphemistic. I mean, I hope the phrase “you get what you pay for” doesn’t apply here, ‘cause this ship sails empty. Think of it as a balloon payment on your future as a writer. And you know what balloons are filled with. Floating off now…
Please use your newly hired imagination to pretend the photo above is relevant (floating…empty ship = empty canoe floating on ice pack). It’s from my monthly newsletter which you can get free just by emailing mn333mn@earthlink.net . The newsletter is mostly inspirational stories and a rave about nature w/photos that has a large and growing global readership. Past newsletters are at this author’s website under Sullygrams & Columns (http://www.thomassullivanauthor.com/sullygrams.htm ) and usually go up within 1 day of being sent out.
May I also invite you to follow me on Twitter? It’s just something fun you can peep at without having to interact. The only thing that changes after you create an account by making up a username and password is that when you click on your account page you’ll see the tweets of anyone you wish to follow, though they won’t see you. Or simply click this link anytime: http://twitter.com/thomassullivan. Sample of a recent Tweet: The Easter Bunny just saw his shadow. Which means we’ll have 6 more weeks of basketball… Your thoughts are welcome, your attention valued.
Thomas “Sully” Sullivan
I’m going to email you my answers, you crazy man. But first, I need to figure out what they are…
I’m speechless. Simply because I could say so very much. Hmmm…much easier to condense my thoughts when I’m in my favorite genre, food! Hmmm…think I’m safer sticking with food today. It occurs to me, no, no, must get back to the old food blog. It’s too early in the morning for this topic.
Thanks, Carole. Hesitation can only mean deep waters are being stirred. I’m putting on a life jacket…
– Sully
Well, you are what you eat, Jeani. Digest something marinated and it will “gel” your thoughts so that you can get back to us. Then the readers here can digest whatever you put on the table. I know whatever you serve up will be both “rare” and “well done.”
Bon appétit!
Sully
[Andrew's comment transferred from the front page blog to this archive]
Andrew
April 16th, 2010 at 10:06 am
Everything I’m writing is of course subjective and representing what I think is the majority. Exceptions to any of my thoughts absolutely exists.
I’d say for a woman, emotionally faithful over physically. I’ve seen men get second chances because of assurances made that they didn’t love the other woman. Even so, the trust is broken, which is emotional and difficult to build back. I think on some level any type of cheating carries emotional unfaithfulness.
For men, it’s the opposite because men are visual and territorial. For a guy to know that another man has touched his woman in a way only he should, might be too much to get over. A bunch of secret love letters or emails would cause damage, but it’s fixable damage to a guy.
Fear rules everything. Why feel guilty? Afraid that someone will find out what you did? Why continue to look for love after countless failures? Afraid to grow old alone? Why be angry with the new guy at the office? Afraid he might do your job better than you could ever? And so on. I believe it’s behind all of our decisions even if it’s just in droplet form. I also think it’s one of the most important emotions. Sure, without it we’d take more risks, but not with any sensible thought behind them. Fear makes you look before you leap.
The nightmare one is easy; #2. Just to escape the pain of sensing a loved one I already said goodbye to in bed but unable to breath, I’d jump off the abyss of nightmare #1.
1st statement reaction: Men and women are equally dumb when it comes to communication and love with the opposite sex. Amongst their own everything makes perfect sense.
2nd statement reaction: Again, men and women can equally fall romantically in love, but the difference is how it happens. Men are the foot draggers in this situation. A buddy of mine is getting married after 8 years with his girl. It took me 4 to marry mine, but the girls knew we were the guys for them long before that. Men are definitely afraid to be locked into something they can’t get out of and will tread slowly until they feel it’s the right move.
As for falling hopelessly in love, guy or girl it depends on mindset. Are you looking for someone to share your life with or because your life will have no meaning without someone in it? Big difference.
3rd statement reaction: Living and loving fully don’t have to be exclusive. Part of a full life might be a full love life. It just depends on what you value most.
Hope this helps. If you’d like me to elaborate on anything let me know.
One more thing, the May/June issue of Scientific American Mind is out and the cover story is “His brain, her brain; how we’re different.” I always get good ideas to apply to my writing from magazines like this.
Thanks for a mother lode of reactions, Andrew. Most interesting. Your responses not only delineate the typical as distinguished from those exceptions you allow for, they also trigger me to imagine what it would take to overcome the mechanisms, dynamics and reflexes you describe. Endless possibilities depending on the insights and imaginations of various personalities. Exactly what I’ve been churning around in my head for some time now…
– Sully
I expect my full 0.0 cents per word for this project as contracted:
I would posit that to most of the women I’ve known, a man who could not be physically faithful was not BEING emotionally faithful, so I don’t believe there is an answer to this unless you further define emotionally faithful.
It is fear and guilt that allow love to drive anything, and guilt derives its power, at the base, from fear of being caught … even if it’s your own conscience that catches you and your own standards that weigh you down…so fear is king when it comes to making things happen. Even when you react courageously, it is a reaction to fear.
Since you said that the person I most loved is simply unconscious, and *may* not be breathing, I choose that one. I know CPR…and I am the sort of guy who likes to help, be needed, and fix things. I’ll take a chance at having a loved one back over pointless cliffs.
I don’t believe either sex to be more practical or practiced in love or emotions. I believe that men tend to react in more violent aggressive ways, and so society prefers the way women react, on average, but I believe the whole idea of answering this smacks of stereotyping by gender, which I detest. That very stereotype causes society to assume, as often as not, that the male is a jerk, which has always bothered me.
From my experience a man is more likely to convince himself he’s fallen in love romantically when, in fact, it hasn’t happened, and may not, while women – while not quite as quick to commit to such feelings are more likely to really *have* said feelings. Myself? I’ve always been at least as likely to fall romantically in love…I am currently very much romantically in love and have been for a very long time…what is truly rare is when both parties fall romantically in love and sustain it.
If you are in a relationship where you love more fully, or powerfully, than your partner, it is not possible to live fully while sustaining this. If you and your partner understand that there are compromises…you can live fully within the world surrounding your love…as long as the love does not cause huge sacrifices that eat chunks of your heart mind and soul. For instance, if you have always wanted to run a marathon but because your partner doesn’t like sweaty socks you quit running or cut it way back and moon over it, you aren’t living fully. If you find a way to reach your goal AND provide your share of the relationship, you are…
Living fully in the way you state it seems to posit a single way this can happen. I would say that there are infinite variations, and in any given life, all that is required is living moment to moment fully.
There you have it…
D
Leave it to you to come up with something completely unanticipated but VERY thought provoking.
In quick answer mode, my answer to your six questions are as follows:
One. I think both men and women would value emotional faithfulness over physical faithfulness. Although a lack of one erodes the other, emotional faithfulness seems to be the longer lasting of the two.
Two. Fear, guilt and love are all strong motivational factors in a person’s character. Three factors…but all contributing to the make-up of one character; they all drive the bus. Consequently, they can, at any one time, erode the motivational force of each other. Two–notably fear and guilt–often feed off each other to the detriment of love. In fact, the couches of shrinks are kept ever warm by the reclining bodies of those whose guilt and fear factors have joined forces to go heads to head against love.
Three. It would be scariest to wake up next to a long-dead, conscious but nonbreathing friend. The reason is that ledges and steaming abysses are at least somewhat known to us—if not from real-life experiences, at least from movies and such. Long-dead, conscious but nonbreathing friends are not at all known to us. Fear of the unknown has traditionally been found to be much greater than fear of the known.
Four. The results are still being debated on how much the traits you mention are hard-wired into the character of humans and how much is developed by upbringing. If the latter is more accurate, the scene is shifting as the traditionally “expected” roles of men, and especially of women, are changing.
Five. I think the statement is fairly accurate within our culture. Men tend to place the object of their affection upon pedestals designed and constructed by women with a tremendous amount of assistance by Hollywood.
Six. The two might be mutually exclusive at a particular moment; but, if the love is genuine and based in reality, it will tolerate some amount of stress.
Thank you for including the links to the Soosalu interview and the Lockert comments. Both were most interesting.
By the way, your statement that “It’s as if I’m a non-person, some not quite human free spirit who spouts poetic fantasies and therefore doesn’t count” might be “as if” but are otherwise waaay untrue.
Amalgam
Fascinating, absolutely fascinating. You should see the e-mails that are flooding in, Davey. What strikes me most is that everyone seems to have so much to say, as if these topics have been kicking around inside them for a lifetime — even if the answers are unresolved or changing.
Of course, yours would be resolved, at least to your satisfaction. No dust on your philosophical approaches. And I’m betting that Patricia matches you there. Much appreciate that you shared here, compadre. Looking more and more like I’ll need to do a summation of this next month.
– Sully
Yowser, they just keep flowing like liquid gold, Bob, Robert C., Bobby, “Amalgam” Jones. The IV. Your analytical mind deconstructs and constructs in the same fell swoop. The gestalt towers ever higher on things central in life. At this point, consensus has it that the epicenter is a tie between fear and love…with guilt a close third. I like that. Kind of defines by people by type for me. Courage comes in there somewhere too, methinks.
And for those reading Bob’s reference to the two interviews of me from Australia (Grant Soosalu’s) and Norway (Jan Lockert’s), I should have put those in the column. Jan’s has been up for a while, and Grant’s just went up this month. Both are prominently linked from my web site as well as on the interview page. The quote Bob mentions is here, and shows that I must have o.d.-ed on truth serum: http://enhancingmylife.blogspot.com/2010/04/freedom-part-2.html
– Sully
[Brian Hodge's comment transferred from the front page blog to this archive]
Brian Hodge
April 16th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
You know, Sully, if you work this crowdsourcing angle enough, you could probably delegate at least 90% of the labor on this novel. The last 10% being order and optimization … the overriding Sully-touches.
Sure, I’ll bite! I’m working to hit a deadline today and tomorrow, but let me pick away at these over the weekend and send you the results by e-mail.
Damn, I’ve been outed again. You know, I hate to think there’s someone else whose life training has left them on the same low tier as me, but methinks you are too savvy about the wrong things. How doth one glean so much ability to see around corners, Sir Hodge?
Ah well, gold is still gold in a sullied hand. I look forward to your intrepid and penetrating insights, my friend.
– Sully
[Brian Hodge's comment transferred from the front page blog to this archive]
Brian Hodge
April 16th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
How doth one glean so much ability to see around corners
A consequence of my bent and crooked nature, no doubt…
“React to this statement: men are great dumb beasts when it comes to communication and love, but women train in those skills from early ages and are far more practical about emotions over time.”
I don’t believe men have cornered the market on being inadequate in communication and love. There are a great many women who “trained in those skills from early ages” and remain stuck in the skill level of a junior high girl! I’m sure everyone knows a fiftysomething woman who still believes her man should be able to read her mind. Perhaps therapy should be a pre-marriage and pre-parenthood requirement.
Jeani
Who was it said, “All problems are communication problems”? Ground floor premise there, and whatever character interactions I describe, it will come down to that. “…read her mind” — yeah, that’s a prelude to oblivion. Can anything relationship-wise exist without some kind of communication? Remove same and you have extinction, even revision as quickly as past communication can be forgotten. Thanks for zeroing in on that inevitable fact, Jeani.
– Sully
“React to this statement: living fully and loving fully (romantically) are mutually exclusive.” As someone who has been madly in love with the same man for decades, I’m especially interested in people’s comments to that statement.
I’ll try to oblige next month with some kind of summary, Jeani. But so far the consensus seems to be that living fully and loving fully (romantically) requires two extraordinary people and is pretty rare. Imagine the possibilities of that in characterization. Unusual dynamics fire my imagination!
– Sully
[Andrew's comment is transferred from the main page blog to this archive]
Andrew
April 18th, 2010 at 12:35 pm
Tom
Glad to help and it was fun. When it comes to behavior I can go on and on.
Late to the party. I was stuck on some ledge. Look for an email, my friend.
Admit it, you enjoyed waking up on that ledge.
– Sully
Great detailed information, I just bookmarked you on my google reader.
Sent via Blackberry
Thanks, Beth. If this is Beth from the T-sax/biker fest at Elm Creek may you ride with the wind and find all the water towers.
– Sully