So, during what became a more-heated-than-intended discussion with the Rev a while back, I was made to take a bit of a contemplative look at my love for sarcasm, cynicism and negativity, especially, if not mostly, in the media. Mark Twain, Dorothy Parker, Mark Morford and their ilk make me smile; I started an invective collection in high school, and still delight more in a person’s ability to criticize creatively than a person’s talent for verbal back-patting; I find more of use to me in negative reviews than positive, at least in the beginning when I am making the decision on whether or not to read a book or see a film; negative social commentary motivates or brings about change far more effectively than possitive — for example, the Catholic church doesn’t need praise for the things it does right, as, most assuredly, it is already quite smugly satisfied with itself, but it could use constant reminders about its archaic views regarding women, birth control, and queerness (sorry, my choice of word), among other things.
Anyway, suffice it to say, 1)we agreed for the most part that valuable lessons can be learned from any author, no matter how negative or positive their views on life, or how persistent their message; 2)we agreed that we cannot completely know the heart or life of an author by his or her writings; 3)we were both quite emotionally invested in this argument.
This last bit was made clear in his case by (if I understood correctly) his wish that more attention be paid to humanity’s promise, especially that which lies within the soul of each of us (a “divinity” that I agree exists), a wish based upon a painful period of his life during which he struggled with personal negativity and despair. My emotional involvement came from feeling that my character was being judged — although not explicitly — by the vehemence of his debate (which turned out to be an incorrect understanding of his point), and despair at the knowledge that I could not deny my attraction to seemingly negative messages: a flaw in my character was pinpointed, but I could not change it; I had sinned but could not stop. As with most of our “discussions”, it ended for the most part with sincere accord, and perhaps only a few dangling strings of thought to each.
Only in the past few days did I realize that a good portion of our difference in this case stemmed from our points of view (again, as is the case in most of our flak sessions; I say azure, he says cobalt and we argue until a) tired of the excercise, or more likely b) we both realize we were saying “blue”). He was relating to negativity as a force that can pull a man down, harm his quest for inner realization. I came to the table with pockets-, bags– and boxes-full of life experiences in which I was made strong by cynicism in the face of things that I felt were keeping me down, where this negativity helped me keep up the fight to better both my inner and my outer worlds. I see people exercising their destructive voice as those who are continuing the fight, and are working to break down those things they seem as harmful so that rebuilding can take place — a kind of social Kali. He sees it more as a giving-up, or perhaps as a mean-spirited older brother who kicks down every sand castle one builds.…maybe?
I guess I am still confused, but I am, as always, trying to understand. I do love a good debate, tho. Don’t you?
Hmm. I adore a good debate, and have lost a few friends over it. ;^) They just couldn’t be bothered to actually understand that others might have a point of view different from their own.
I don’t think it is negativity or cynicism per se that I like, but good sarcasm. Not the kind that is cruel and hurts people, but the kind that makes a point. Sometimes there’s a really fine line between the two, and some people are so sensitive to any criticism that even a light poking of fun upsets them.
For me, it’s what I was raised with and I just got used to it, even though a lot of the time I didn’t like it. I’ve learned not to use it myself in most cases, but I can still appreciate it when well done from others.
I don’t think personal negativity does anyone much good. Self-talk is pretty important to keep positive, because the brain takes those messages pretty seriously. Even negative talk or sarcasm towards loved ones is a pretty dangerous thing. But, politically, or to make a comment on society, whatever, heck yeah. I think it is sometimes the only “weapon” that is truly effective, especially against those who are so self-righteous that they can’t possibly accept any kind of straight talk.
Just be prepared to lose friends if you use it — you will.
And Morford, Twain, and Dorothy Parker kick ass. Count Molly Ivins in there, too.