Old Habits Die Hard…

I am a creature of habit. By that I mean to say I am one given to dealing with similar situations in similar ways. For some this is a reasonable methodology, yielding adequate results; for others it is a recipe for failure, particularly in the light of Man’s general unwillingness to abandon cherished notions even in the face of incontrovertible evidence that his methodology is flawed. I rest assured that any reader encountering the previous statement is somewhat acquainted with examples of both extremes. In light of this, there is a habit of mine that I am beginning to suspect may be sabotaging my efforts both with this journal and with my larger and much less public efforts to date: I avoid becoming attached to people.

This has an obvious purpose and has become such an automatic thing that I hardly notice it any longer. I have stumbled from time to time, with mixed results; however, over the vast majority of my existence it has been a necessary and reliable modus operandi. Only now, it seems to be standing opposite my desires with regards to this journal in particular, and my life in what we shall call the Real World.

I recently delved in to politics here. I detest politics, but the topic allows me to withdraw in to an analytical stance relatively devoid of emotional input. I distance myself from those who might read and perhaps be inclined to comment upon whatever notion I choose to put forth. Discussions of politics and matters philosophical are safe. They lack intimacy, as they do not require any hint of emotional involvement in the topic at hand. They offer no real insight in to who I am and how I truly feel about the world, any person, or myself.

I retreat in to politics and philosophy in this journal whenever I become uneasy with the revelations about myself. Writing of my past and present is too closely akin to intimate discourse. It is as a confession between friends or lovers and when indulged in too freely it renders me incapable of continuing. I divert myself, plunging in to topics I am not truly inclined to discuss in any depth. On the rare occasions when those topics garner an inordinate level of notice they, too, become unsafe for me, but not at the level I feel regarding my more personal revelations.

The conundrum is thus: I write that I may be known even if only to those few who deign to peruse my scribbling, but allowing myself to be open in even the minimal way I have terrifies me so that I instinctively pull away. Smatterings of short bits regarding my life are followed by a retreat in to the minutiae of topics cold and arcane.

Recognizing this is so would seem to be the first step towards correcting it; however, I am loath to make so rash a move.

6 Responses to “Old Habits Die Hard…”

  1. Z, I can’t imagine a “safer” way to reach out and touch the world around you than sharing a piece of yourself on this blog. For what it is worth, I encourage you to continue to make the effort to overcome what I suspect is more habit than nature.

    I lurk among many blogs and rarely comment (sorta like a sponge, I like to absorb the varied thoughts and viewpoints and see what is left after evaporation–geez, that really squeezes everything I can get from that metaphor–if you will forgive the pun). Anyway, you are one of the most unique voices I have encountered and I always look forward to your writing, no matter the topic. I really missed you when you disappeared for awhile. So, you have often written of the crushing lonliness that comes with your longevity (reminds of a story I read years ago: “I have eternal life and it’s killing me”) and I wonder if it brings you any comfort to know that in a world filled with strangers there are people who have come to know your story and who do have empathy for your situation and truly enjoy your company.

    I hope so.

  2. While I can readily understand the desire for human contact, I would also remark that it is likely your excellent instincts which have allowed you to survive this long. I would tend to advise you trust them — for what it’s worth.

    GFD

  3. While I have only recently discovered your blog, I have found all of your posts to be fascinating. I think the semi-anonymity of blogging tends to encourage opening up more than one would face-to-face, but at the same time, you have the ultimate control over what you reveal about yourself. That said, I would miss you if you quit, now that I have found you.

  4. Oh, I have no intention of setting this aside. This was more rumination on my part than anything else. I see the retreat in to politics as a defense mechanism gone slightly awry. The fact that it coincides with some difficult personal choices in my day-to-day life merely brought it in to sharp focus. That revelation was somewhat disconcerting to me- I prefer to believe myself above such things, despite being proven wrong so very many times in the past.

    The purpose of this journal is akin to that of the proverbial toe in the water, an attempt to ken what can be told, what might be believed, and what must be avoided at all costs. I have rules I live by and they apply here as well so there is nothing regarding this journal that can be traced to me. There is no realistic danger for me in this endeavour.

    I believe what provokes the most discomfort is the immediacy of this forum. I have become accustomed of late to thinking very much in the long term. An acceptable action/response cycle could be five decades or more, dependant upon the issues involved. I prefer to think and act carefully and with much deliberation. When forced into snap judgments the results trend towards the very unfortunate for those involved. This pains me, and while I am certain no danger adheres to this journal the part of me that keeps watch upon the doors and the dark crevices remains ill at ease.

    Thirty-five centuries of hiding in the shadows is not so easily set aside.

  5. You come from good genes.

    Biblical Personalities: Methuselah

    “And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years” (Genesis 5:27).
    “As long as Methuselah lived, the Flood did not come upon the world. And when Methuselah died, it was withheld for another seven days after his death to fulfill the period of mourning” (Avot d’Rabbi Natan 32:1).

    The line of Adam is traced through his third son, Seth. Adam lived 930 years; Seth lived 912. But this was not unusual. These antediluvian years were characterized by great longevity. But Methuselah lived the longest of any of the Biblical personalities. This was insured by a Biblical dictum stated in the sixth chapter of Genesis. There God said: “My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for that he also is flesh; therefore shall his days be a hundred and twenty years.”

    What earned Methuselah, Noah’s grandfather, the title of the world’s “oldest man?” There are no hints in the Biblical text. However, the rabbinic literature exalts him: “Methuselah was perfectly righteous. Whatever came out of his mouth ended with the praise of the Holy One, Blessed is He. He studied nine hundred orders of Mishnah” (Yalkut Shimoni, Bereishit 42).

    The Talmud identifies the “seven shepherds” from the messianic vision of Micah as: David in the center with Adam, Seth, and Methuselah on his right, and Abraham, Jacob, and Moses on his left” (Sukkah 52b). Further, when Methuselah died, not only did the angels eulogize him in heaven, but God delayed the punishment of the generation of the Flood for the seven days of bereavement.

    All the preceding suggests that Methuselah was a zaddik, a “righteous man.” And by implication, a more righteous man than his grandson, Noah, who was also called “righteous and whole-hearted,” but Noah’s righteousness is mitigated by the words “in his generation.” That is, Noah is exalted within a debased period of human civilization. Methuselah is and remains exalted in generations inhabited by great men. Thus his goodness and righteousness will always stand at the highest level of both human aspirations and Divine expectations.

    He lived nearly a millenium, and his son, Lamech, begot Noah, who was to rescue humanity from its degradation and its virtual destruction. Only after Methuselah did the Lord perceive man as corrupt, and perhaps not worth saving. It was the life of Methuselah and his forebears, extending back in time through Seth and Adam, that encouraged Divinity to give his earthly creations a chance to start over. The Lord Himself would soon recognize that the quality of corruption, as much as the quality of goodness, adhered to every human soul succeeding Noah.

  6. Perhaps an analogy from the martial arts might help?

    Swordsmen, pugilists, and other fighters spend long hours training. They do so, not just to build strength, but to work out *in advance* the useful and acceptable actions that they might need to take when presented with a “combat choice”. Those choices take place in tenths of a second — far too swift for calculation *at that time*. GOOD martial artists don’t forego the calculation and deliberation; they do it in the palaestra, in advance.

    I believe it is possible to use your journal here in a similar fashion… always assuming, of course, that I’m making any sense at all.