415 lines
22 KiB
Plaintext
415 lines
22 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
`"8a 88 ,a8888a, a8"'
|
|
"8a 88 ,8P"' `"Y8, "moo." a8"
|
|
"8a 88 ,8P h0gz Y8, a8"
|
|
"8a 88,dPPYba, 88 -of- 88 ,adPPYba, a8"
|
|
"oink." a8" 88P' "8a 88 entr0py 88 a8P_____88 "8a
|
|
a8" 88 88 `8b #110 d8' 8PP""""""" "8a
|
|
a8" 88 88 `8ba, ,ad8' "8b, ,aa "8a
|
|
.a8" 88 88 "Y8888P" `"Ybbd8"' "8a.
|
|
|
|
>> "an informative reply to mogel's 'a guide to modern love on the <<
|
|
>> information superhighway' from dto #5 without any stupid inside <<
|
|
>> jokes -- and this has no quotes by guido sanchez!" <<
|
|
|
|
a dialog by -> jamesy & murmur
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: Ok, Truth.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: Where does infatuation end and love begin?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: you can't fucking ask that! it doesn't make any sense! that's
|
|
not how you play truth and dare, you're supposed to ask personal
|
|
questions.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: When did your relationship with Rachel advance beyond mere
|
|
infatuation? NO WAIT, not WHEN, HOW?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: Don't you just wanna know where we had sex the first time? oh
|
|
well, nevermind. I think the main thing you need to understand
|
|
about infatuation is that it quickly disappears. I mean, a new
|
|
toy is only new for so long. Eventually, you need to either throw
|
|
it in a box with your old toys, or find reason to keep it out on
|
|
the desk next to your laptop and pictures of kathy ireland. when
|
|
you're with someone for long enough, the excitement of being
|
|
around them is really gone. it's not a bad thing, per se, that's
|
|
just how things work. but you need to take the relationship
|
|
further, otherwise it feels stale and begins to whither like your
|
|
flaccid grandmother.
|
|
|
|
it's very important that relationships have a strong bond of
|
|
friendship. if you don't enjoy just being with the person, it's
|
|
going to be hard to get past infatuation. you eventually need to
|
|
get to a point where you enjoy doing anything with the person, not
|
|
just screwing around. although that's important, it's also
|
|
important to simply enjoy the time with them.
|
|
|
|
now, HOW it happened is a much harder question to answer. my
|
|
relationship with rachel matured after time. it wasn't easy; we
|
|
had a lot of problems in the beginning. but we learned to trust
|
|
each other just for the sake of trusting each other. well, i
|
|
should rephrase that; SHE learned to trust me. i always trusted
|
|
her, because she never did anything to break that trust. i,
|
|
did, though, because i was an evil bastard back then. but, after
|
|
being with someone for a while and looking back and realising how
|
|
important of a part of your life they are, that is when you get
|
|
past infatuation. reflection, i guess. honest reflection,
|
|
though. if you're not honest with yourself, it can become another
|
|
form of infatuation.
|
|
|
|
did i just devalidate everything i just said? I can't tell.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: That was, uh, scintillating. Seriously, though, I think the
|
|
most meaningful comment was the last -- if infatuation really is
|
|
a temporary thing, something that can't last, then once you take
|
|
a look back and actually consider what's going on, you've got to
|
|
recognize that the infatuation is being replaced by something
|
|
else. What that something else is, though, might not be what you
|
|
think.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: it might be a giant void, sucking at your inner being. i hate
|
|
it when that happens. and apparently, it's happened 11 times in
|
|
the computer underground. but, yes, i know what you mean.
|
|
Infatuation can only last as long as you don't take the time out
|
|
to reflect on what you're doing. However, as i stressed before,
|
|
you can mindfuck yourself when you reflect. "this is so perfect
|
|
for me!" might be a nightmare for the other person. you have to
|
|
be honest with yourself and what you have in front of you. TRUTH
|
|
OR DARE, MURMUR?
|
|
|
|
Murmur: uh, yeah! er, truth.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: Have you ever had an experience where you felt love developed
|
|
very quickly?
|
|
|
|
Murmur: What do you mean by "very quickly"?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: Like, within a very short period of time.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: A week? A month? A year?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: You can define "a very short period of time" for YOURSELF,
|
|
ASSFACE.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: uhhh, okay. hmmm. well, it's not like i can speak from all that
|
|
much in the way of personal experience. i guess i'd have to say
|
|
yes -- but only conditionally -- because i can really only claim
|
|
to have seriously been in love once. i think we sort of knew
|
|
each other for about a month and a half or so, then we started
|
|
like, talking for about a month, and then we dated for three and
|
|
a half months. these are, mind you, two people that haven't ever
|
|
had a "significant other" before. by the time we broke up, i was
|
|
in love. i don't even question that. and i guess that that
|
|
might seem like a short period of time -- overall, it was really
|
|
only about three to four months, i suppose, that it took me to
|
|
come to this conclusion -- but i don't really know if that's a
|
|
"very short period of time" or not. and since it was the first
|
|
time, and since i was younger and stupider, i was really kind of
|
|
in this stupid secondary dimension where i thought nothing could
|
|
go wrong -- but i was nonetheless, from my vantage point in that
|
|
dimension, very much in love. i was willing to let develop
|
|
quickly. i wanted love to develop quickly. i had the romantic
|
|
image that when you date you date on the expectation that it will
|
|
be dating for life. and if the rest of your life begins today --
|
|
then i wanna be in love for the rest of it. if that makes sense.
|
|
uh, does that answer the question?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: Sure. Do you think there's a difference between this fast and
|
|
furious love you speak of and, say, the love a couple that have
|
|
been married for 25 years have? how does love evolve? is it a
|
|
flower, waiting to bloom, or a mutual stock that hits an
|
|
unexpected boom?
|
|
|
|
Murmur: as i explained to that girlfriend, basically, people have these
|
|
buckets of love in their heads. these buckets are limitless;
|
|
once you reach a certain level, you've reached love, and love
|
|
just continues to grow and grow and grow. or it can recede. is
|
|
there a difference between "fast and furious" love and the love
|
|
of 25 years? sure. but at its very core, it's the same basic
|
|
concept. love, of course, will be different from person to
|
|
person, so it's difficult, quite arduous indeed, to attempt a
|
|
generalization.
|
|
|
|
how does love evolve? love is like a stock market, i guess, as
|
|
ridiculous as it sounds. well, i don't know. you said that
|
|
infatuation carries with it a time limit; but i don't think
|
|
that's necessarily true, really, when i stop and think about it.
|
|
i truly believe that a couple can remain infatuated with one
|
|
another for years and years and years, well beyond the point of
|
|
having fallen in love, exactly. there are things that can damage
|
|
love and there are things that can boost it -- people through
|
|
"demonstrating" their love can really deeply impact their
|
|
partner, or, people can do things like, say, kill their partner's
|
|
father, and things like that may tend to undermine the love.
|
|
|
|
love really can be played out like a business in a lot of ways --
|
|
but to me that may only be truly bad if you're talking about
|
|
someone that would treat his or her business with anything less
|
|
than a sincere amount of care for what they're doing. treating
|
|
love like a cigarette company and treating love like a record
|
|
store, therefore, are two different things. i think the one is
|
|
sad, and the other can really be a good thing. please pardon the
|
|
rather absurd analogies.
|
|
|
|
sometimes no matter how much love you put into a business -- no
|
|
matter what you invest, time or money wise -- it collapses on
|
|
you. it's the same thing with relationships. how many people
|
|
are there that really wish they could have been happy with their
|
|
spouse/fiancee/etc. but realized that there was just something
|
|
missing, something they needed to find in someone else? there
|
|
are so many different potential elements of love -- there's trust
|
|
and there's respect, but then there are things like romance too
|
|
-- just like there are a lot of potential factors in a business.
|
|
the main thing is that you can't be mechanical when approaching
|
|
either one. it's not about number crunching, it's about
|
|
hunches, it's about aesthetics -- i'm not sure what you might
|
|
call that when it comes to a business, but i think that might be
|
|
the romance factor in a relationship.
|
|
|
|
there's also the problem of owning a mom and pop hardware store
|
|
and then having menards pop up next door -- but, uh.. yeah.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: Infatuation certainly has a time limit in the framework of a
|
|
_relationship_. that's what i was speaking of. of course, if
|
|
you're not actually seeing someone, simply obsessed with them, you
|
|
may very well end up obsessed with them all your life if you are
|
|
never given the chance to do anything with them. but that usually
|
|
doesn't happen, because the person being obsessed over is usually
|
|
smart enough to totally ignore the obsessive one and get far, far
|
|
away from them.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: wait! that's not what i'm talking about! what about the concept
|
|
of having a "twinkle in your eye"? isn't there a dose of
|
|
infatuation in love? or what would you call that?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: i don't think you can be infuated with someone you understand.
|
|
if you understand the person, if you truly know them, there isn't
|
|
something so mystical about them that is so alluring.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: then what would you CALL the allure?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: i wouldn't. when you love someone, you don't have a twinkle in
|
|
your eye, unless you have floaters, and then you should probably
|
|
see your doctor about high blood pressure. love is a continual
|
|
flow of emotion and feeling between two people. if you see that
|
|
as a "twinkle in the eye," maybe that's the physical
|
|
representation of that concept that you envision.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: "physical representation". well. hrm. okay. so, then, JAMES
|
|
HETFIELD OF MILK & TEA, TRUTH OR DARE?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: Dare!!!
|
|
|
|
Murmur: damn you!! okay. uhm.. yeah! i dare you to SELL ME YOUR
|
|
GIRLFRIEND!
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: what happens if you don't do a dare? do you remember?
|
|
|
|
Murmur: uhh.. you lose.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: okay! i lose!
|
|
|
|
Murmur: er, okay. i win!
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: TRUTH OR DARE, MURMUR? BEST TWO OUT OF THREE!
|
|
|
|
Murmur: you bastard. fine. truth.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: name the capitol of the czech republic.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: you spelled "capital" wrong. and it's Prague. truth or dare?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: TROOF!
|
|
|
|
Murmur: let's go back to "physical representation". how important a role
|
|
does physicality play in your relationship? and from as
|
|
objective a position as you can stand, why do you think this is
|
|
good or bad?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: in terms of a relationship, physicality is essential. it's part
|
|
of the whole process. whether we like it or not, our little
|
|
programs in our heads dictate the way we feel about potential
|
|
mates. and sexuality is a sure-fire way of expressing these
|
|
feelings. what would be the difference between a friendship and
|
|
a relationship without physicality? there wouldn't be any. sex
|
|
is what makes relationships a go-go.
|
|
|
|
i don't want to put a value judgement on whether or not sex is
|
|
"good" or "bad." i've had very positive physical experiences as
|
|
of late, so of course i'm going to say it's "good." but most
|
|
people aren't as lucky as i am. it can be a very stressful
|
|
thing. but, like any other part of a relationship, communication
|
|
is the key. once you're honest to each other and open, it'll
|
|
all work out. in this context, an open and honest one, sexuality
|
|
is wonderful.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: the question wasn't so much "is sex good or bad?" but rather more
|
|
one of how it relates to other facets of the relationship. for
|
|
many, the relationship begins with a kiss -- and sexuality is
|
|
used as benchmarking for the progress of the relationship. of
|
|
course, some people just bang the first night out, more or less
|
|
disvalidating that concept. so, uhm, yeah, this isn't going
|
|
anywhere.
|
|
|
|
oh, hell, i'll come up with something later. go on.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: sexuality is important because it is a non-verbal form of
|
|
communication. there are so many ways to address the way you
|
|
feel about someone through sexuality. granted, you may not be
|
|
able to say, "are you hungry? let's go to steak and shake!" but,
|
|
in terms of feelings, it's a reliable way to show you care about
|
|
someone else. of course, you have to know what you're doing,
|
|
and that's why you need to purchase my newest self-help novel,
|
|
"zibble-zen and the art of body massage."
|
|
|
|
Murmur: but of course. "chapter five: how to make jungle noises."
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: truth or dare, murmur?
|
|
|
|
Murmur: truth!@#@!@#
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: tell us about your first sexual encounter, and how it paved the way
|
|
for your six (count em, six) links on the sexchart?
|
|
|
|
Murmur: "paved the way"? grrreat. define "first sexual encounter" for me
|
|
so i know where to begin, then.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: the first time you got your nudies wet with another's saliva!
|
|
|
|
Murmur: uh, i was in the wrong house in the wrong city in the wrong state
|
|
with the wrong person at the wrong time. didn't seem like it
|
|
then, granted, but, well, that's often how things work -- you
|
|
just don't know what hole you've gotten yourself into.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: luckily, i can't say the same for me. i find myself continually
|
|
in a state of euphoria about this wonderful incarnation of the
|
|
next buddha i am currently with. but anyway. does the fact that
|
|
your first sexual experience was in a fairly flawed relationship
|
|
make you hesitate from being sexual again? do you view it in any
|
|
different light because of past pain?
|
|
|
|
Murmur: since i think i can better answer the question better from a
|
|
broader perspective, i'll do that. do i hesitate from being
|
|
sexual again? yes and no. it comes and goes in cycles. there
|
|
are a couple of ways i suppose i'd put it -- no, if i had it all
|
|
to do over again, i wouldn't do that the exact same way, that was
|
|
really fucked up. but at the same time, i've been involved in
|
|
pretty meaningless brief flings -- they never materialized into
|
|
the aforementioned (as pixy might put it) cum guzzling -- and
|
|
i've come away with mixed perceptions of that. i guess there's a
|
|
few things at work here. the most successful relationship i've
|
|
been in to date, that first one, was also the least sexually
|
|
inclined. and the best way i can put my current stance is that i
|
|
have my own limits right now but they're not all that limited.
|
|
at the same time, however, that doesn't mean i'm out looking for
|
|
all available hand jobs.
|
|
|
|
i think that being involved in some sexual sense with too many
|
|
people can really cheapen things when you get involved with
|
|
someone that you're actually really serious about and not just
|
|
really horny about, yes. prior to the unfortunate transpirings
|
|
of last spring (the wrong state scenario and so on) i was
|
|
involved in this brief little fling that just this week the other
|
|
person involved just flatly informed me was really a case of me
|
|
being horny more than anything else. and she was right. and i
|
|
really can't explain myself, and i really don't think i need to.
|
|
i don't think i've done anything bad or wrong in that sense.
|
|
i've done things i regret, but not on moral grounds. i regret
|
|
them sort of in the same way i would regret having spent a dollar
|
|
on a lottery ticket, or losing money at the kentucky derby. that
|
|
kind of cheapens what i'm saying but it's not like i feel bad in
|
|
the same way i would if, say, i'd hit you with a car and you
|
|
couldn't walk anymore. does that make sense?
|
|
|
|
while at one end of the spectrum i wish i had a lot of stuff back
|
|
because i think it would make me purer or more righteous for any
|
|
woman present and/or future, i have to accept that if not for my
|
|
past experiences, i wouldn't be here. fact is that the best
|
|
relationship i had failed because i was inable to maintain it,
|
|
mostly because i had no experience with what i was doing and got
|
|
all stupid in the head.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: so, your basic word of advice to people is, "don't get all stupid
|
|
in the head?" how would you define that in more specific terms?
|
|
|
|
Murmur: well, that sounds kind of silly in and of itself. let me put it
|
|
in vaguely more meaningful terms.
|
|
|
|
okay, see, there's sex. and sex can take place with someone you
|
|
really really love or sex can take place with a two bit whore
|
|
from decatur. now, you said that sexuality, physicality, is an
|
|
important aspect of a relationship. well, i suppose i'm not
|
|
enough of a gigolo to speak for it very well myself, but i can
|
|
very clearly see using sex for sheer _physical_ gratification
|
|
taking away very strongly from the employment of sex as a means
|
|
of physical and _emotional_ gratification. screwing around with
|
|
someone when all that matters to you is your cock is fine and
|
|
dandy in and of itself, i suppose; but i don't think you can
|
|
really very seriously do that and then go back and apply a whole
|
|
lot of emotional meaning to it when it's become such an
|
|
uber-physical act for you.
|
|
|
|
the problem is that i've brought myself to over-generalize so
|
|
much at this point that i don't entirely believe what i'm saying
|
|
in my own context. let me try to put things as they are for me.
|
|
i've done a lot of stuff i'm not _proud_ of -- but it's not like
|
|
you're supposed to take pride in it, necessarily. nonetheless,
|
|
there are a lot of encounters i look back upon with far more
|
|
positive inclinations than negative, and then there are those
|
|
most specifically to the contrary.
|
|
|
|
sex for the hell of it, just general making out for the hell of
|
|
it, to me seems like a really fucked up concept. and i speak
|
|
somewhat from experience on that. i'm not talking about things
|
|
like going to a party and without really specifically meaning to
|
|
picking a chick up with a spatula -- because that's youth and
|
|
frolic. i'm talking about things like going over to see a whore,
|
|
someone you don't really like all that much, 'cause there's not
|
|
much else to do. things like that really cheapen encounters
|
|
you're going to have with people you really like and grow to
|
|
care about -- if done repeatedly.
|
|
|
|
from where i'm standing right now, the only way i can really put
|
|
it is that i'm not uptight about "doing more" most of the time,
|
|
yet i'm quite content with whatever may happen. i sometimes tend
|
|
to feel bad when i want more out of a situation than whoever i'm
|
|
with, and i can't even entirely begin to explain that, but even
|
|
while i say that -- there's no replacement for actually being
|
|
with someone you really, really, really think is wonderful,
|
|
someone who when you're done doing whatever you're doing you're
|
|
more than willing to jump up and get into a good-natured argument
|
|
or debate or scrabble game or whatever. none of liz phair's
|
|
"fuck and run" for me, if you will. at least, that's the
|
|
current mindset, and it's been known to change in the past.
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: I can't believe we're talking about love and relationships to the
|
|
tune of interstellar overdrive, but that's ok. here's my
|
|
explanation. yes, you're completely correct. but there is a
|
|
difference in the communication involved in a flip-and-fuck with
|
|
someone and the communication involved with being with someone
|
|
you care a lot about. one is a lot of groping and the other is
|
|
much more sensual. although blind groping is relevant in
|
|
meaningful relationships as well, that is not the way to
|
|
communicate the way you feel about someone else to them.
|
|
|
|
Murmur: well, one would hope that someone you care a lot about you don't
|
|
just go blind groping about for after. something like that.
|
|
|
|
uh, who's turn? oh, yeah. JAMES HETFIELD OF OBL
|
|
|
|
oh christ, truth or dare?
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: DARE
|
|
|
|
Murmur: bastard. i dare you to... DRINK THIS PITCHER OF HOT AND VERY
|
|
BUBBLING LAVA!
|
|
|
|
Jamesy: okay!!! <drinks lava> AAHAGHGGHGHGH!GGGH!GH@#%^@@%$ <dies>
|
|
|
|
Murmur: oh dear.
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
* (c) HoE publications. HoE #109 - written by jamesy & murmur - 6/11/97 *
|