Jason Explains It All
Jun. 16th, 2005 10:03 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
penfieldIn response to my most recent journal entry, some concerned readers seem to be perplexed. Chowderhead, for example, writes in and asks: "Is this a joke? Friends like to see friends happy. Enemies want you to be miserable." Please allow me to address your concerns:
ANSWER This is not a joke. Though I have tried to frame the question in such a way as to be amusing, there is a truly valid issue at its core.
QUESTION Why would anyone rather see you melancholy than happy? That's just stupid.
ANSWER You're stupid.
QUESTION Touche.
ANSWER It's possible that I'm more pleasant to be around when I'm cynical and brooding. I think I'm certainly funnier.
QUESTION How can you be funny when you're sad?
ANSWER Misery is the source of all comedy. It is not insignificant that Jewish stand-up comedians outnumber Mormon comedians. It is not a coincidence that most brilliant comedians (e.g. Robin Williams, Eddie Murphy) have gotten less funny as they have gotten more wealthy and powerful.
QUESTION Are you comparing yourself to Robin Williams and Eddie Murphy?
ANSWER Well, I am very hairy, and my girl does like to Party All The Time.
QUESTION And aren't happy people more fun overall?
ANSWER In a party situation, perhaps, but not necessarily on a regular basis. And not if it's an integral part of their persona. Sometimes, when you see a really happy person, you just want to punch their teeth out. This is why people hate cheerleaders, and car salesmen, and Kathie Lee Gifford.
QUESTION I do find myself wanting to reach through my TV and strangle Katie Couric sometimes.
ANSWER Happy people are also simply less interesting to talk to.
QUESTION Why do you say that?
ANSWER Because happy people are usually obsessed with their own happiness and what's making them happy. It's like a drug addict focused on nothing but their current high or their next fix, only the drug is dopamine and they are less likely to throw up.
QUESTION Dopamine. That's good shit.
ANSWER Less happy people, however, have the time and the inclination to let their minds wander on a wide variety of subjects, usually leading to profound insights or breathtaking artwork. Think of all the brilliant, clinically depressed artists in history: Van Gogh. Emily Dickinson. Kurt Cobain. Snuffleupagus. Who would you rather have a conversation with: Edgar Allan Poe or Mary Lou Retton?
QUESTION Are those my only two choices?
ANSWER Sometimes you don't even have to be interacting with them. Let's look at another example from the world of entertainment. You probably remember the hit TV show "Friends."
QUESTION Yes, I enjoyed that show for the first few seasons until it started sucking uncontrollably.
ANSWER Aha. Remember the character of Ross? How in the first few seasons, he was sweet and hapless and sympathetic, because his life was in a shambles and he had an earthquaking crush on Rachel? And do you remember the character of Monica, how she used to be biting and cynical, but still retained a vulnerable side because she couldn't find a decent guy in New York City, despite the fact that she was smokingly hot and was a gourmet chef and lived in a Central Park apartment the size of my high school?
QUESTION Vaguely.
ANSWER Then you probably remember what happened next. Ross finally bagged Rachel as well as a number of subsequent guest star foxes, gained all this confidence, and turned into a screaming jackass. Monica got married to Chandler and transformed, almost overnight, into a shrewish harpy. Their happiness should have theoretically made them more pleasant; instead it made them unbearable. I call this The Gellar Paradox.
QUESTION What about Joey?
ANSWER Joey remained the only enjoyable character on the show during the later seasons because he was the only character who was less happy at the end than he was at the beginning. When the show started, he was a dumb, self-satisfied pretty boy who didn't really arouse much affection from the audience. By the finale, he was a warm-hearted, sensitive lug -- and the only one of the friends who was by that point not getting laid on a regular basis. Coincidence? I don't think so.
QUESTION But depressing characters can be whiny and annoying, too. Wouldn't it be depressing hanging around with sad people all the time?
ANSWER Perhaps, on a large scale, like if you're surrounded by a thousand sad people, in Rwanda or an internment camp or something. But by and large, I think it makes people feel better being around sad people.
QUESTION How is that possible?
ANSWER Because being around a sad person makes them feel happier by comparison. "I may have my troubles," a person will think, "but at least I'm not this guy." And this is especially true for friends, and moreso for close friends.
QUESTION That makes no sense. A friend wants his or her friends to be happy, not sad, right?
ANSWER Yes, this is true. Wanting to see a person happy is one of the defining characteristics of friendship.
QUESTION Ah, so then...
ANSWER Shut up, I'm not finished. A friend wants to see their friend happy. My friends want to see me happy. But that was not my question. My question was: which me do you prefer -- the happy me or the sad me.
QUESTION So you are suggesting that people may prefer you when you're sad, but want you to be happy anyway?
ANSWER Exactly. This is what friends are for: to put up with you when you're happy.
QUESTION That's counterintuitive.
ANSWER But it's true. It's easy to be a friend when your friend is sad. The playbook is open wide: commiserate, comfort, console. Being friends with a happy person is much more difficult.
QUESTION How so?
ANSWER Don't you think some people are more pleasant to be around when they're not so chipper?
QUESTION Hey, I'm the one asking questions here.
ANSWER Sorry.
QUESTION It's okay.
ANSWER My point is, happy people can be really annoying, and arrogant, and obnoxious.
ANSWER But not you.
QUESTION Thanks. Though some people may not agree with you.
ANSWER Then they're jerks.
QUESTION It just makes me love them all the more.
ANSWER This is not a joke. Though I have tried to frame the question in such a way as to be amusing, there is a truly valid issue at its core.
QUESTION Why would anyone rather see you melancholy than happy? That's just stupid.
ANSWER You're stupid.
QUESTION Touche.
ANSWER It's possible that I'm more pleasant to be around when I'm cynical and brooding. I think I'm certainly funnier.
QUESTION How can you be funny when you're sad?
ANSWER Misery is the source of all comedy. It is not insignificant that Jewish stand-up comedians outnumber Mormon comedians. It is not a coincidence that most brilliant comedians (e.g. Robin Williams, Eddie Murphy) have gotten less funny as they have gotten more wealthy and powerful.
QUESTION Are you comparing yourself to Robin Williams and Eddie Murphy?
ANSWER Well, I am very hairy, and my girl does like to Party All The Time.
QUESTION And aren't happy people more fun overall?
ANSWER In a party situation, perhaps, but not necessarily on a regular basis. And not if it's an integral part of their persona. Sometimes, when you see a really happy person, you just want to punch their teeth out. This is why people hate cheerleaders, and car salesmen, and Kathie Lee Gifford.
QUESTION I do find myself wanting to reach through my TV and strangle Katie Couric sometimes.
ANSWER Happy people are also simply less interesting to talk to.
QUESTION Why do you say that?
ANSWER Because happy people are usually obsessed with their own happiness and what's making them happy. It's like a drug addict focused on nothing but their current high or their next fix, only the drug is dopamine and they are less likely to throw up.
QUESTION Dopamine. That's good shit.
ANSWER Less happy people, however, have the time and the inclination to let their minds wander on a wide variety of subjects, usually leading to profound insights or breathtaking artwork. Think of all the brilliant, clinically depressed artists in history: Van Gogh. Emily Dickinson. Kurt Cobain. Snuffleupagus. Who would you rather have a conversation with: Edgar Allan Poe or Mary Lou Retton?
QUESTION Are those my only two choices?
ANSWER Sometimes you don't even have to be interacting with them. Let's look at another example from the world of entertainment. You probably remember the hit TV show "Friends."
QUESTION Yes, I enjoyed that show for the first few seasons until it started sucking uncontrollably.
ANSWER Aha. Remember the character of Ross? How in the first few seasons, he was sweet and hapless and sympathetic, because his life was in a shambles and he had an earthquaking crush on Rachel? And do you remember the character of Monica, how she used to be biting and cynical, but still retained a vulnerable side because she couldn't find a decent guy in New York City, despite the fact that she was smokingly hot and was a gourmet chef and lived in a Central Park apartment the size of my high school?
QUESTION Vaguely.
ANSWER Then you probably remember what happened next. Ross finally bagged Rachel as well as a number of subsequent guest star foxes, gained all this confidence, and turned into a screaming jackass. Monica got married to Chandler and transformed, almost overnight, into a shrewish harpy. Their happiness should have theoretically made them more pleasant; instead it made them unbearable. I call this The Gellar Paradox.
QUESTION What about Joey?
ANSWER Joey remained the only enjoyable character on the show during the later seasons because he was the only character who was less happy at the end than he was at the beginning. When the show started, he was a dumb, self-satisfied pretty boy who didn't really arouse much affection from the audience. By the finale, he was a warm-hearted, sensitive lug -- and the only one of the friends who was by that point not getting laid on a regular basis. Coincidence? I don't think so.
QUESTION But depressing characters can be whiny and annoying, too. Wouldn't it be depressing hanging around with sad people all the time?
ANSWER Perhaps, on a large scale, like if you're surrounded by a thousand sad people, in Rwanda or an internment camp or something. But by and large, I think it makes people feel better being around sad people.
QUESTION How is that possible?
ANSWER Because being around a sad person makes them feel happier by comparison. "I may have my troubles," a person will think, "but at least I'm not this guy." And this is especially true for friends, and moreso for close friends.
QUESTION That makes no sense. A friend wants his or her friends to be happy, not sad, right?
ANSWER Yes, this is true. Wanting to see a person happy is one of the defining characteristics of friendship.
QUESTION Ah, so then...
ANSWER Shut up, I'm not finished. A friend wants to see their friend happy. My friends want to see me happy. But that was not my question. My question was: which me do you prefer -- the happy me or the sad me.
QUESTION So you are suggesting that people may prefer you when you're sad, but want you to be happy anyway?
ANSWER Exactly. This is what friends are for: to put up with you when you're happy.
QUESTION That's counterintuitive.
ANSWER But it's true. It's easy to be a friend when your friend is sad. The playbook is open wide: commiserate, comfort, console. Being friends with a happy person is much more difficult.
QUESTION How so?
ANSWER Don't you think some people are more pleasant to be around when they're not so chipper?
QUESTION Hey, I'm the one asking questions here.
ANSWER Sorry.
QUESTION It's okay.
ANSWER My point is, happy people can be really annoying, and arrogant, and obnoxious.
ANSWER But not you.
QUESTION Thanks. Though some people may not agree with you.
ANSWER Then they're jerks.
QUESTION It just makes me love them all the more.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
asdf
Date: 2005-06-16 04:41 pm (UTC)In your poll, you listed thoughtful and empathic as two of your "melancholy" traits. Why can't you be happy and still be thoughtful and empathic? (Your answer above is that only unhappy people have the time to be thoughtful.) (And that makes no sense.)
The way you've created the choices, they read more like:
+ I want Jason to be an annoying jackass who is arrogant and obnoxious. But happy.
or
+ I want Jason to be a friendly gentleman who is funny and thoughtful. This Jason is "more pleasant to be around." But he's unhappy.
Re: asdf
Date: 2005-06-16 04:57 pm (UTC)HAPPY: self-assured (+), energetic (+), goofy (+/-), loud (-), flaky (-)
MELANCHOLY: cynical (-), sarcastic (-), humble (+), thoughtful (+), empathic (+)
On further reflection, the negatives for MELANCHOLY could have been stronger. I should have included "whiny." Perhaps this was an unconscious attempt to tilt the scales slightly, since I anticipated complaints such as Chowderhead's.
I stand by my implicit assertion, though, that happy people are less thoughtful than unhappy people, because I believe they are more likely to think exclusively about themselves, and in a more shallow manner.
Unhappy people are more critical and analytical, because they are trying to solve a problem, i.e. their doldrums. If happy people were to really criticize and analyze their situation, they would probably see that they don't have so much to be happy about.
But that could just be me, being cynical.
It's a vicious cycle. Or circle. Is it cycle or circle? It's a vicious round thing.
Re: asdf
Date: 2005-06-16 05:38 pm (UTC)Re: asdf
Date: 2005-06-16 05:39 pm (UTC)Re: asdf
Date: 2005-06-16 07:30 pm (UTC)Unhappy people, however, tend to become self-absorbed and bemoan the fact that they are unhappy and blame it on everyone else (themselves sometimes included), sometimes isolating themselves to get away from the "happy people." An unhappy/sad/melancholy person is one who generally does not enjoy life.
Case in point: my mom is an "unhappy person" at the moment, and has turned into a vapid bore, who thinks only about herself, and blames all bad things on everyone else. She is taking no proactive steps to help herself, thus continuing the cycle of unhappiness.
Katie Couric, Used Car salesmen, and cheerleaders are not examples of "happy people," they are examples of shallow, conceited people, who may or may not be happy. Also--I believe that your Friends example was quite weak. Ross for the last few seasons was always trying to win Rachael back, and still was a whiny, unwatchable dolt. Your assertion that he had everything he wanted, thus happy, is simply not true. All the characters, regardless of their happiness, became caricatures of their earlier selves.
As for your examples of great artists, you are under a grave misconception--most of those artists were not melancholy, but had bi-polar disorder (Michaelangelo, Mozart, Beethoven, Van Gogh to name a few). Most of their greatest art was conceived during their upswings in mood--when you might call being "happy." When they were not happy, crazy things happened: they drank so much they contracted consumption and died, cut off their ears and committed suicide, or destroyed their own work. So, to align yourself with that leaves me no option than to say that I would rather see you happy.
I hope that you take this as a thoughtful response to your poll and subsequent postings, and continue to tackle interesting issues about life.
Re: asdf
Date: 2005-06-16 08:02 pm (UTC)Tragedy is the Greatest Genius
Date: 2005-06-17 03:45 am (UTC)There's plenty of happy people out there I could be friends with. There's also a lot of unhappy people, too. But I fancy something a bit more unique: a friend who can be tortured, neurotic and sometimes plain weird -- but with style, flair and elan. That's entertaining. That keeps me laughing.
Tragedy and pain has always been the greatest inspiration of genius. Leonardo da Vinci was not a happy man. Tchaikovsky was not a happy man. Napoleon was not a happy man. If you're happy all the time, you're probably best suited for a job waiting tables at Fridays or working at one of those little kiosks in the center of the mall.
You know, what? Screw it. I don't have to tell you people shit. You know this. Fuck, whatever.
Re: Tragedy is the Greatest Genius
Date: 2005-06-17 01:44 pm (UTC)Re: Tragedy is the Greatest Genius
Date: 2005-06-17 02:01 pm (UTC)I'm sure Pat Sajak has an off day once in a while, but he's essentially a guy who's happy all the time.
Re: Tragedy is the Greatest Genius
Date: 2005-06-17 02:09 pm (UTC)If so, I will reconsider my vote.
Re: Tragedy is the Greatest Genius
Date: 2005-06-17 03:49 pm (UTC)I just looked up melancholy in the dictionary on my desk (Webster's New World, 3rd College Edition), and it defines melancholy as: sadness, depression of spirits, gloomy, lamentable, deplorable.
Since Mr. Pants' original poll asked if we would rather see him happy (albeit maybe tortured in the romantic sense of the word), or melancholy, I still stand by my previous assertion. Happy is better. Happy does not mean one cannot be cynical, have a broken heart or be a multi-layered, interesting person. I would rather have a Luke Skywalker-type friend than a Darth Vader-type friend.
So there Mr. Ethos.
Oh--and when I was small, goldfish NEVER had smiles. Those were something that was added past the time that i ate them. Personally, I would find it a little disconcerting to be eating something that was smiling back at me before the moment of obliteration.
Re: Tragedy is the Greatest Genius
Date: 2005-06-17 06:04 pm (UTC)