“I am not like others, look at me please please please!”

My friend’s post on Facebook inspired me.

He shared a link to the article http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/oct/04/i-married-myself-wedding. Ms. Grace Gelder who decided that she is the best partner for herself for ever and ever. And she made a normal wedding ceremony with herself.

OK, I think it was really funny and cute to have such a party and so on, but I really wonder if it was worthy of writing an article in The Guardian. Thousand of people ale living as singles. The most of them (it seems to me) suppose themselves to be the best partner for themselves — that’s why they chose such way of life. But they don’t make any philosophy of their decision, they just live, discreet and happy (I hope so).

I would not have been so disgusted if Grace’s wedding had been just for her relatives and friends. It’s her business, not mine. But the article seems to me to be just a kind of showing off and — maybe — a way of self-advertisement (since the girl is a photographer).

OK, let’s treat her decision as an expression of full self-acceptance. She said: “And just because I married myself, it doesn’t mean that I’m not open to the idea of sharing a wedding with someone else one day.”. I really doubt if it’s possible. Firstly she would have to get divorced with herself, and it’s mean… but what does it mean in fact? That she would act in disagreement with herself? Is it really good and praiseworthy? And if she is still innamorata di se stessa she will be unfaithful to herself with a man — it sounds really strange, does not it?

What is more about weddings… Russian (let’s say, all post-USSR) psychologists speaks very much about psychological incest which is very popular in our society. It means that a mother (rarely father) is so deeply connected with her child that she treat it as her husband — the opposite is also true. It does not mean that they make sex, but they are co close in their hearts and minds that any boyfriend/girlfriend is not possible (well, maybe only for making sex). This phenomenon was the first thing that came to my mind while reading the article.

And the last thing. My friend commented on his sharing that we need people who break rules imposed by society. OK, maybe breaking rules can be useful sometimes — but what rule the girl broke? That we have to have a partner? Ha ha ha. It’s not a rule anymore. I think now we can do anything we want and it’s accepted by different parts of society. And if we are talking about more general social rules — if we live in society we are obliged to keep up the rules of this society. I strongly believe in it. If you don’t like them — feel free to create your own society :).

Utopia and dystopia

I am sure you know what utopia and dystopia are. Generally speaking, utopia is about the best life system and dystopia is about the worst one. A classical example of utopia can be that written by Thomas Moor and a typical dystopia can be presented by Ninety Eighty-Four written by George Orwell. Some time ago I was interested in such works and I have read some novels, so I could pick up main characteristics of an ideal and un-ideal world.

So, in an utopia people generally live in accordance with nature — as in Men Like Gods written by Herbert George Wells, where happy population of a parallel universe exist with full acceptance of their human entity — for example, they wear almost nothing because nudity is just natural thing.

Utopian people also have some strict rules or religion which serves their development. I liked very much a conception of an individual mutualism described by Harry Harrison in his fantasy fiction The Stainless Steel Rat Gets Drafted. As the author says: “A basic tenet of IM is from each according to his needs, to each according to the wealth of society”. It sounds like communistic slogan, but it works if everybody is intelligent and sympathetic.

Another question is money. There were no money in all utopian fiction I have read. In that book about Steel Rat people use wirrs — work hours. They say: the wealthier society is becoming, the less people should work, so the more the wirr costs and the wealth of society is growing, people work less and so on.

Talking about dystopia, the total control is the main thing. Government wants to know even what you think. Another characteristic feature is intentional lowering of cultural level, as in well-known Fahrenheit 451, where books were burnt down. Also very often natural aspects are blamed, as in the film Equilibrium, where emotions were forbidden. People must follow very strict rules and mainly there is any kind of revolution in a dystopian fiction.

Nevertheless, sometimes utopia and dystopia is mixed up, as in modern teenager novel The Giver written by Louis Lawry. We see a typical dystopian world where everything is regulated, people have to suppress their sexual attraction, old members and unnecessary kids are killed by lethal injection and so on. But in the same time:

  • everybody respects everybody,
  • they are happy,
  • every member gets a job according to his interests and children start to learn their job at the age of 12,
  • children are given only in families which want this; they are being brought up with all possible attention and respect,
  • couples are formed up according to their personal qualities, they are in very good relationship even without having sex,
  • there are no serious crimes, everybody has everything he needs,
  • euthanasia is humanitarian and the day of death is a big holiday for old people: they remember the best moments of a life of a hero of the day, thank him for his life and are truly glad for him (he is authentically happy). I strongly believe it’s much better than crying and lamentation traditional in our society.

Sisterhood Everlasting — Ann Brashares

Sisterhood Everlasting (Sisterhood, #5)Sisterhood Everlasting by Ann Brashares
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I like the whole series of Sisterhood, but try as I might, I couldn’t finish this book. I am really sorry to say it seems to me be boring and sometimes flat.

(view spoiler)

In short, I was able to identify myself with the girls in previous books and now I cannot, even I am in their age. (hide spoiler)]

View all my reviews

Shit happens as a universal religious concept

Taoism: Shit Happens.
Hinduism: This shit happened before.
Islam: If shit happens, take hostages.
Buddhism: If shit happens is it really shit?
Nihilism: Who gives a shit?
Protestantism: Shit happens if you work hard.
Catholicism: Shit Happens, I deserve it.
7th Day Adventist:Shit happens on Saturday.
Mormonism: Knock Knock, Shit Happens.
Judaism: Why does shit happen to me?
Krishnaism: Shit happens, ring a dingy ding.
Jehovah’s Witness:People now living will see shit happen.
Marxism: This shit is going to hit the fan.
Paganism: Each shit has its own name.
Atheism: Bullshit!
TV Evangelism: Send more shit.
Hedonism: There’s nothing like a good shit happening.
Rastafarianism: Let’s smoke this shit.

Frozen, part two

I continue watching Frozen, and:

1. OK, I might be not right saying that isolation is not the best way of learning :). But Elsa is so powerful and she can do so precious things that I really doubt she couldn’t control herself. And if gloves had made her “accident-free” — why she didn’t just wear them every time she have to come out? No need of locking in a room 🙂

2. Olaf the Snowman is super, SUPER! 🙂 I strongly believe it is the best Disney’s comic character for ever — better than the Donkey in Shrek, and the Horse in Tangled, and Sid in Ice Age. The big Snow Mech is also very nice, finally a bit of ginger in the sweet story :).

3. It’s all their parents fault. I believe. It’s a classical psychological story, when a pushed away child desperately tries to be accepted.

4. If Anna already knows about the magic, why not to tell her about the accident in the past?

Nevertheless, I have found the moral conclusion of the movie quite good: speak with others and be able to regret. Everything would have been nicer if producers had paid more attention to logic and had created more original faces.

Frozen sense

Yesterday I tried to watch Frozen (I hoped to have a nice evening), but I could get through only about 40 minuts — and then I gave up. I don’t know if I am too old for such movies, but this first fragment is a complete nonsense. Let’s have a closer look.

1. The first scene, when workers cut ice. The picture is nice, the song is nice, but what they are doing for?

2. I suppose the parents of Elsa and Anna to be a king and a queen. They are rich, they live in a big castle, but they have no slaves, no friends, nobody. They have no sense of safety, too. Elsa has some potentially dangerous magical abilities. What’s more, the sisters are about 5-6 years old — and the parents allow them to play completely alone. Would you leave your children without any supervising, if you know one of them carries a bomb with itself, metaphorically speaking? The accident is just a matter of time.

3. The gnome king cures Anna, but why she have to forget about magic?

4. The gnome king also bewares the parents about growing up Elsa’s power, and now the parents are double, triple-thoughtless. “Och, let’s reduce staff and lock Elsa in a room for ever end ever end ever, it’ll teach her to control herself” (the quotation is not exact, but the sense is the same). How a little girl is supposed to be able to understand what to do? The parents don’t think about real teaching Elsa, which would be doubtlessly more effective. Let’s imagine Elsa can not freeze, but fire… They just breed a domesticated tiger who one day bites off their heads.

5. The parents don’t explain the situation to Anna letting her suffer and burdening Elsa with the sister’s suffer. Anna is still allowed to stay without any supervising — it’s a miracle she hasn’t killed herself with a bike!

6. Elsa is running away after the incident in a dance hall. Let’s remember — she is running on two her feet, so she couldn’t get to far. Anna immediately wants to find her and ride on a horse — and as far as I know, she searches Elsa for 1/3 of the whole movie time. WTF?? She could just run after her and so it would be done.

And faces… I have a very strong feeling that guys who make 3D models in Disney have just created a set of such models and use them in every movie (changing just hair/eyes/clothes). Characters look like in Tangled and move in exactly the same way.

Anna and Elsa
Rapunzel

Nevertheless, I liked songs (especially the first song and then Anna’s song about a snowman) and all these frozen effects, so the movie isn’t such bad 🙂