Making do

 


A heaviness descends as life gets more existential by the passing of years. The bliss of childhood comes from not having any responsibilities, and an unlimited earnestness and easiness to live life according to one’s passing interest, now sports, now sketching. Aging into teenage years, one becomes more definite, more attuned to one’s likings and preferences. How those preferences come about is not so obvious and requires a lot of psychological insights and study of the individual. The age-old question of nurture or nature comes into play: what parts of our growing personalities did we bring by birth, and which ones did we impart from the surroundings we grew up in. Certain aspects of our surroundings and the effects they might have on us is undeniable. For someone born after the iPhone and the ubiquity of the internet would have different taste and traits than someone born in the 1990s, pre-internet, pre-technological penetration. But something remains innate to each and everyone of us? Can we all be scientists, comedians, intellectuals, sportsman? Is the feasibility of becoming any of these, regardless of the external conditions, equal for everyone? Or does something inside, a part of us, foretell, or provide the prospects of us becoming a certain intellectual or sportsman? The question of whether we became what we could have, must be left out here since it would involve the conditions grew up in. My point being, that as we grow out of our childhood, and then teenage years, we become more specific, predictable, more aware and guided by the complex web of external and internal influences that we call personality.

It should go without saying that what we do is mostly what we prefer to do, whether it is something we recently discovered, or have become habitualized into doing. It is also a given that we have certain things in our lives in the growing up years that we have to do: to go school, college, tuition, religious classes, language centres and so on. Moreover, those must do tasks cover most of our lives, by which I mean our days. As the great Marianne Moore pithily wrote, ‘How we live our days is how we live our lives’. We only get to explore little of what we like, and thereby have little insight into how forbearing those activities or hobbies might be for us in the long run. But while the education we go through is essential for making us able to attain the basics of literacy, that same education might squander our capacity for self-awareness, introspection, exploration, and an idea of who we might like to be. We become inevitably involved, and dangerously so as well since we don’t realize it at that time, into a process of getting up a ladder of grades, learning to memorize things that we might not yet understand, and learning to depend on institutions and teacher to always be our guides, without any better judgement from ourselves. This inability to anchor what will eventually become our own lives has a very severe and debilitating effect once we grow up.

Once in the twenties, one has made some friends, possibly broken one’s heart, and have only started to taste some of that freedom one so dearly sought in the teen years. It only means that one’s engagements increase in number, as one moves from a family-centred life to a friend-centred one. Therefore, one’s attention towards one’s inner life shrinks even further, resulting into a life that is lived on external stimulants. Not that there is anything wrong with it, after all that’s the norm; we live our lives on external queues. But what one dearly misses out on is personal development, something that is so important in leading a meaningful life, a life that has a reason to be. But the sad as well as good news is that not all of us become so existential about life. Most of us are okay, and remain so, with doing just what life requires, from one age into another. Living on default becomes a natural order of things, where life under capitalism leaves little room for what appears to be needless and unproductive ponderings about the purpose of life or more immediately, one’s resolve for living it well. Financial requirements force us to get a lengthy period of education, followed instantly by getting a job and pursuing on one’s career. Building a family comes next, and occupies the next twenties years or so: to marry, have kids, and get them into adulthood. From this viewpoint, only the very latter years of life might beckon us towards looking inward.

There’s nothing wrong with leading a life of such normal prospects. Most of us do, and not all of us are cut out to be philosophers. Besides, great meaning can be found in leading a life that might appear tranquil on the outside: whether it comes from doing a job that meaningful for others and you, loving your wife and caring for passing parents, raising kids and seeing them become good individuals. But what I am pointing towards here is a more existential, if less popular, way of living where the normalcy of life doesn’t come easy for you. Your mind is tuned to exploring the vastness of life and the possibilities that lie therein. It could be through any field, this exploration, be it the sciences or arts, but the ultimate aim is to live a life as if it were meant to be something more, something bigger. And those few of us, which I’ve quantified from a general perception as well from my own life, go on a journey of life that’s much richer, arduous, difficult, and eventually, hopefully, fruitful. It is not comparison that I am trying to reach at here between these ways of living, but a study of different lives, and how one might differ from other.

The unbearable lightness of being, also known as boredom, falls in the camps of the existentialists than, say, ‘the normal people’. There isn’t a clear line between when a person is existential or when he is normal, for the lack of a better word. What makes the distinction however is how they live their lives when the life itself doesn’t seem to be all that engaging. While a normal person might go out with friends, spend idle hours of the phone doing nothing significant, the existential would be sick worried about the unbearability of such empty time. The approach towards time is a reflection of a person’s approach towards life in the grander scheme. How one spends a day reflects how one accommodates to a live a whole life. Therefore, for the normal people, passing away these empty hours, whenever they come (which I assume is less often, or either they don’t feel the gravity of it as much) is not as much as problematic issue as it might be for an existentialist. The normal person in life wants to be what he or she already is, a normal being with a normal life hoping for a normal life. The existentialist is burdened by the existentialist freedom that he has been cursed with, since he or she is always responsible for what they do and what they become, or choose not to. We are condemned by our choices, or as Sartre put it, ‘We are our choices’. Then, the idle hours present a snapshot of how unbearable such lightness might feel: one is but compelled to make do, to involve in something – even more arduous, to involve in something meaningful.

Kierkegaard’s analogy of a passing train with life explains perfectly the limitedness of people living in the present, but always hoping for desired results in the future. Kierkegaard says that just as someone is unable to step off a running train to able to look at it, so is man unable to step off from life and study it. Life can only be understood backwards, but must be lived forwards. Then, living it the present puts us a great disadvantage where we hardly ever know what course of action would be best for us in the long run, and we usually make a pathetic use of our, indeed limited and finite, time on this planet. There’s a line in Lil Wayne’s brilliant song ‘Mirror’ that says, ‘Look at me now, I can see my past’. The privilege of lessons and wisdom comes only through experience – the experience of having lived a life that shall never return. The present is less generous; it demands action with little of wisdom or lessons, that one might need to the future course of action. But if history repeats itself, and if there is nothing new in the world than the history we don’t know yet, maybe a glance back in life is all we need to make cautious, sensible decisions for the time that is lying ahead – gnawing at us with its possibilities, and mocking us for our burden of choosing.

Where does one’s age fit into this existential journey of making life bearable by filling in the hours with what we can only guess to be fruitful in the long run. As I mentioned before, growing up presents us with more freedom that we lacked, and ironically desired, in the earlier years of our life. The friend-centred life is amazing at first, but soon enough you run into problems of what my teachers, and I too, call ‘the practical life’. Friends continue to be the lifeline of one’s life as it gets more tumultuous by the years. Family demands, and the social or peer pressure, puts us in a tight spot to continually prove our worth and goodness, in a series of life-consuming activities that, unfortunately, mostly fail to bring any meaning in our lives. Living seems like a debt we pay for a life we never applied for. Yet friends lighten things, brings a communal strength to one’s bearings, and helps us see our good sides no matter how nasty life gets. A romantic partner, however, is certain when it comes to its objective goodness added into life. A broken heart is an unhealthy thing to carry around in your twenties, yet carrying someone you so recklessly love and is equally loved back by, without any side knowing any better, can dangerously distract you from the serious matters of life creeping up on you. It is only too late, when the relationship finds itself into the bonds of marriage, that one realizes life can still be cruel, despite a ‘romantic permanence’. But the sad reality is, as compromisable as the latter case seems, it usually the broke heart that one remains with at the end of a relationship rather than a bonded marriage. A broken heart, then, is a serious indication of you messing up things when you really want to do good, if you want a stable start in the ‘practical life’.

Loneliness, on the other hand, doesn’t sit well with someone in their twenties either. Whether it is that they’ve heard of love, as La Rochefoucauld wittingly said, or that they start their search for a romantic partner after the pronouncement of their loneliness by the coupledom of their peers – people at this age tend to fall in love, or want to fall in love. But while loneliness might be extremely painful and an inhabiting emotion the longer it sticks with a person, the positive consequences of, this otherwise, essential loneliness is highly attractive. An adolescent must suffer from loneliness if he is to understand himself, the life that he has led, leading, and will lead, and most importantly how does he exist alongside others, what makes him is own individual. The compulsion of making do, if one is of an existential nature, amplified by loneliness, often marks the beginning of someone become themselves. It is not only the age of discovery, since one has but very little to discover, but an age of forging oneself in light of what finds in the darker corners of loneliness. It is an age of looking inward, and feeling the need to embark on a mission of filling it in with something lasting. Instincts are usually our best guides, and if not, then exploring is the best way to making fate happen, where you strike against what you feel like you should be doing for your whole life.

The problematic, depressing, and unsavoring nature of making do has a lot of unforeseeable advantages on its other end. The key is to start doing what one eventually makes do. Originality, or if you don’t like this work like I don’t, then individuality, self-awareness, and becoming your own person usually comes at a cost of living some existential years, facing up to the meaninglessness of life and its ordinariness, and then making something out of it, anything that you genuinely abide by and love. I will close this otherwise meandering, but hopefully pointing journal at times, with a Victor Frankl quote: ‘The meaning of life is to give life meaning’.

 

November 17, 2022.