Amadeus

If you wish to shine like the daylight, burn up the night of self-importance. Dissolve the self like copper in the elixir; dissolve in Him who fosters all existence. But you are bound by the discord of "I" and "We." The cause of your ruin is this sad dualism.

-Rumi, "Mathnawi"


I was just reading a criticism of feminism, and how it's failed us all, because women aren't really happier now, and maybe things were better in the old days, yada yada. I'm sticking with my theory that history has proved how terribly unwise it is to let your husband be the sole bread winner. It's humiliating for a grown woman to have to ask for money, as if she were still a child, and her husband were her father. It's dangerous to depend on someone else, especially if you're romantically involved with him; love can turn to hate, and divorce is very real. You have to have a career of your own. Even when divorce is out of the question, it's naive to believe men won't take advantage of money to control you, as do women when they are the ones with the power and the money.

The article claims society doesn't need women to work, and that it's basically a capitalistic plot to generate more consumers. But statistics have shown that one of the best measures a government can make to raise quality of life is to encourage higher salaries for women, because men tend to spend any extra money on selfish pleasures, whereas women spend it on their families -- meaning their kids get to wear better clothes, eat better food, get more frequent medical care, etc. There is less child mortality and just generally better quality of life for the whole family, and therefore for the whole country. Getting women in the work place is the most responsible thing to do, for oneself as for society.

The most interesting part of the article for me, though, was when the writer claimed that women use motherhood as an excuse to stay at home, because they've discovered what men have known all along: working is a drag, and it's comparatively speaking less soul-deadening to do house-chores at your own leisure, and to spend time with the kids ("They grow up so fast...") than wasting endless hours in traffic to get to an unrewarding and thankless job, as most jobs tend to be.

From that perspective, it's no surprise that women who still try to get a higher education go for arts and entertainment, as opposed to the more practical professions because, unlike getting a "real" job, arts are fun. This rings true to me, as it confirms my suspicion that the arts is what everybody really wants. People value artists much more than those who provide them with very essential services, like housing, food and water, because artists are sexy. The sexier the artist, the more he is valued. Angelina Jolie just got 15 million for her latest role, and what has she ever done for me? She sure looks purty, though. Art is one great personal ad, and the best artists are those who can sell themselves as desirable human beings. You know a good artist when he makes you say to yourself, "I wish I could paint like that, I wish I could play the guitar like he does, I wish I wrote this poem". An artist is sexy. No one gets applauses and awards for growing turnips.

The character Salieri in Amadeus (1984) thinks he made it as an artist, which is all he ever wanted to be. He has public recognition, a high position in society, money, the works. Even the Emperor himself praises one of his operas as the finest ever made. But then Salieri comes in contact with Mozart, who doesn't get any way near as much recognition, and he realizes his work is nothing compared to his. From that moment on the glory and the fame aren't enough, more than anything he wishes he could be a genius too. This envy consumes him, and he starts living for revenge -- revenge against God, Who endowed this unworthy creature with the fire of His divine inspiration instead of him, Salieri.

I think his life poses an interesting question: what do you do with yourself when you realize you're not the hero of any story, not even your own? What happens to your soul when you realize it's your fate to be one of the many who live lives of quiet desperation, because they can't meet their own standards of greatness? One could say Salieri's biggest flaw is not his envy, but his impeccable taste, which doomed him to recognize genius before anyone else did. If only he could have seen Mozart as nothing more than an enjoyable composer, like most people did, he would have lived peacefully for the rest of his life. But he falls in love with his music, and what's more he knows he's right to love it so. The moment he says "I wish I could be like him, instead of me" he's doomed to self-loathing.

His coping strategy is to try to annihilate Mozart. If he can ruin him, he'll at least get the satisfaction of beating him on some level, of punishing him for making him feel so bad about himself. I don't see how that helps. If you're not a psychopath, what can you do for yourself? Some would say you should focus on other people, try to find a cause higher than your own petty interests, do something for the greater good -- that'll give you a reason for living. This prescription sounds to me pretty much like just a way to get your mind off your own suckitude. Knowing you're a good person who does constructive things that benefit others is small consolation when you know you would have done them anyway, because, hey, you happen to be a good person. Having self-esteem does not necessarily mean you're going to live your life in a wholly self-centered and selfish way. And after a hard day being good to others, you still have to come home to your thoughts, and face, however briefly, the fact that you're not sexy. That actually matters, no matter what spiritualists say.