Actual minimalism
Alright, it's been a while since my last post. I manage to lose my account name and password and it took this long for Blogger to finally e-mail me my information. Now, onto a bit of theory:
I was having a long discussion about minimalism with Eric a while back. I stated that a good test for a couple would actually be to send them on a far away camping trip where the gear, equipment and other such accessories would be to an all time low and the only real thing to depend upon was each other. I've revised this theory, and I have to explain a bit of background information as to why this theory to me feels a bit out of sync with today's world.
This theory first was announced to me by the father of a friend of mine. The man explained this with the idea in mind that most women of the west island were whores who were after money and had very little interest in the world except for their own benefits. Now, on the one hand, I personally would love to send most of these disgusting bimbos into the wilderness and watch them live while bears slowly rip open their stomachs and eat their intestins. I mean hey, whatever happened to good old natural selection here? I don't want future generations to be anything like these humps of useless human waste. So to me, when this was explained, I first thought the idea was to see if the girl you were with actual was somewhat of a minimalist. The true idea behind this of course is to simply see just how ugly a girl is once she realizes things aren't going to be done for her. If anyone puts this to the test, always keep in mind that in the middle of the woods, you can get away with anything.
Now, back to the idea of minimalism, the actual important theme in question here, it turns out that when I went around believing myself to actually be a minimalist I was speaking out of my ass. If anything, pot smoking turned me into a very self centered individual. I would quickly judge those around me and actually distance myself from a lot of people. I enjoyed spending a lot of time alone. So if this theory was ever to be put to the test, of course I could live 2 weeks in the woods with minimum things, but it would turn out I would never let my girlfriend actually chose the things to bring along. My arrogance made me assume already that I would know what to do and the person I would be with wouldn't know very well and I'd have to somehow make up for the weaker link. The funny part though is how in my life at the moment, I'm even more of a minimalist then if I went out camping for two weeks in the woods: I don't come home for longer then 4hrs a day (sometimes even less then an hour), I'm very rarely alone, and I don't sleep in my own bed. This means that I don't even have what is to be considered 'personal space'. The relationship that I am into actually allows me to live with the clothes I have on my back, and a car...that's it. I don't really have what I would consider to be my room. I'm outside most of the day, without much access to as much as a computer.
Revising this minimalist theory, I can understand how some women deserve a certain banishment, but in the end I'm not sure this test should apply to all grounds. My girlfriend is around me often and she also is on the same page as me with the minimalist side, and she's minus transportation...or at my mercy for it technically. I don't think sticking her into the woods for 2 weeks would do anything but forcefully aggravate us if nature goes sour.
5 Comments:
So... you're actually alive? I must say, it's sad to see you lose your edge. ;)
The survival thing is still extremely interesting to me. I see it as being more of a challenge to overcome -- as a symbol of dedication and collaboration. When we discussed this initially, I think the actual test we were talking about was in regards to how long you could put up with someone in a difficult situation. I know for a fact I would shoot some people if I had to be in a car with them for a few days, for instance. It would be more painful than anything. I won't go into specific details here, but thinking about this hypothetical situation has drastically changed the way I've positionned myself with some women.
While I have no idea how you actually live at the moment, I highly doubt that you can be living a very minimalist life. It seems shortsighted to me. I could say the exact same thing, but I would be kidding myself. I live in my room for a large part of the day, mostly because this is where I do school work. While this may be superficially minimalist, it's a lie. I'm extremely dependent on financial support from my parents, even though I do have a job. Just having the heat and electricity in order for me to live requires a great deal of dependency. It requires you to work within a certain type of system. It is quite easy at our age to live this type of life, as we're all freeriding on the older generation in a number of ways.
The outdoor survival challenge is of interest to me precisely because it does eliminate many of these variables. It requires you to rely ONLY on yourselves for survival and decision making. These skills can then be transferred into the "real world" and, at the very least, give you a new insight on things. Never once have I gone into the wilderness without coming back to civilization with a refreshed perspective (and I've been doing this kind of stuff since I was a kid). I would be kidding myself if I thought I knew anything about survival, as I realize by talking to a friend who does backpacking trips of several weeks at a time, often without encountering other humans (other than those he is with). This is minimalism, and it is why it would be a very revealing experience not only for yourself, but for whatever group dynamic you are a part of.
I was just thinking that one of the reasons I might like this idea is that it's applied Bergmanism or something of the sort. By removing everything that surrounds you and keying in to the nakedness of your exposed personality, you can understand a person with such passion and depth that it is worth the difficult experience. Or something.... :)
I also want to point out the two quotes that I posted at the bottom of the right sidebar on every page (in the "Random Thoughts" section). Both of them really have to do with this whole idea of a nature survival situation, interestingly enough.
This minimalist theory of yours is in essence quite reminiscient of Social Darwinism, it centers everything on the selfish needs of the individual and the idea that only the strong survive! To live a bare bones subsistence kind of life is completely ridiculous when contrasted with the realities of our world. Humanity is on a continuum, it is much better for humans to strive towards a greater collective good, rather to revert back to what was a primitive phase in our evolution.
Your points are valid, but I don't think it has so much to do with a collective good but rather the avoidance of excesses while attaining that good, and a lessened dependence on material goods. The main idea of this forest quest or whatever would really be cooperation. If you put yourselves in a situation where you're both at risk and have to work on a team and rely on each other, I think it could be immensely revelatory.
Post a Comment
<< Home