explosivecombat | NIETZSCHE; DEAD PHILOSOPHERS' INBOX

I'm assuming it's something you need a direct, honest answer to, as opposed to our usual?

Yes. I'd appreciate it.

I've been thinking all day about Major Armstrong, and what happened in Ishval. The people he tried to help. How what he'd done could've made them better off...but in the end, it didn't make them any worse off, because it was war.

What I called to ask is...

Существует ничего, что я could have said that would've stopped you, это правда?

There isn't, no.

That's what I thought.

Tell me what you're thinking, Locke.

I'm trying to keep the world in perspective. See things from more than just the vantage point of what I think should happen.

I'm upset but it's...

I can't...fix it. I couldn't have helped it. Convincing myself otherwise would just make me spoiled and naive again. But that doesn't make it any easier to swallow.

There's a difference in being self-centered and thinking that you could have fixed everything, and being upset that you couldn't. The feeling is normal. Irrational, of course, but normal.

You just can't allow the feeling to consume your thoughts.

What's mostly been consuming my thoughts is the notion that I'm not cut out for war.

Most aren't. That's why they leave the task of going to war to those who are.

And if it turns out I can't separate my personal and professional lives as well as you?

Decide which is more important to you.

That's not what I meant.

Are you going to find me intolerable, if I can't draw those bright lines as well as you can?

I think a better question is whether you'll find me to be intolerable, because I can.

I want to be angry with you. I want to make demands that amount to insisting that you change, just because I want you to.

Since I can't do either, the least I can do is refuse to look away from who you are and what you do. It's better than pretending you're something you're not, just because I want you to be.

...Locke. If you want to yell at me, if you want to be angry, far be it from me to tell you that you can't. I'm not going to stop you, nor am I going to be offended, because I'm entirely aware of what I am.

I've found that problems arise when someone decides they can't discuss things like this.

I don't understand. I thought you loathed it when you were subjected to talk like that.

How are you not subjecting me to it already? You're telling me "I'm feeling all these things that I can't talk to you about, but I'm going to bring them up repeatedly, along with insisting that I can't talk about them." Isn't being asked about it what you wanted in the first place? We're already discussing it; if you're going to talk to me about it, then at least have the basic decency to do it properly.

[...damn it.]

That was unfair.

That was entirely unfair and uncalled for, and you have my apologies for it. It's been...difficult, lately, and I'm on-edge.

I would prefer to have this discussed properly than sprung on me later. Things like this tend to build and the consequences just get more and more unpleasant the longer it's allowed to continue.

[Ouch. Right in the—

...

Wait.

...

What?]

Do you want to tell me what's been difficult, or would it be better if we stayed with trying to resolve this bit of things first?

We should resolve this first; I want to ensure it happens.

All right.

What I'm struggling with right now, on a personal level, is that I want to be angry at something because I'm upset about what happened, and it's hard to be upset without a target. I don't like to be sad; I like to do things because it makes me feel less helpless to be doing something, and anger is easier than sadness in some small way because anger at least can be channeled toward something.

That's what I'm feeling. Upset, first and foremost, and the temptation is to turn it into anger because then at least I'd know...what to do with it.

But I also know it's unfair to take it out on you. Maybe I'm upset with myself for being helpless. There's a part of my conscience that inherently rebels at things like this, and the fact that I'm not screaming at you and making things into a stark black-and-white dichotomy means I'm struggling with my own morality, as well. And it would be so easy to just take all of that out on you, irrationally, unfairly, because it would make myself feel a little better to do it in the short term for selfish, petty reasons.

I'm trying to be better than that, and to practice what I've learned from you. It isn't easy going, but I'm trying. This is what I was getting at when I asked if you'd end up finding me intolerable.

You're the only one I have to talk about things like this to — I can't very well call someone else and say, "I'm having a moral crisis because I know who committed this attack today, and it's someone I care about, and I'm struggling with the fact that I hate the crime but care for the criminal." But I know that doing that puts you in a position where you're either going to approach anything I'm saying rationally, because that's what you do, or you're left wondering what I expect you to do about it, like there's some implicit demand I'm expecting you to live up to. And often I feel caught between trying to spare you from that and being directly asked to tell you what I'm thinking, when I know what I'm thinking is irrational and seeking empathy instead of answers. And it's...difficult.

I'm still not expecting answers. I think this will pass on its own, sooner or later — it's not something that's likely to develop into a grudge or a tool to use against you in the future, I don't think. It's just...I'm sad. I don't like being sad, and right now I don't know how to fix that, either.

I don't think I'll find you intolerable, first and foremost. I can't very well say that I never will, because I don't happen to be clairvoyant and all, but when it comes to things like this I'm fully aware that most people don't separate things in quite the same way that I do.

Ideally speaking, you would want to tell me to stop, and you would want me to understand exactly how sad this is making you and how helpless you feel, and if I didn't stop doing things like this simply because it's wrong to do things like this, I would stop doing it on your behalf because you don't like feeling sad and helpless. That's what you mean when you say you want to tell me to stop but can't, isn't it?

No. That's manipulative and petty and...once, maybe I would've said that yes, that's what I wanted, but I don't think it is anymore. When you say it like that, all I see now from those sentences is, "I'm the center of the universe and that's why you should change, because this is really about me and you ought to make me feel better so I don't have to be sad anymore."

Ideally speaking I wouldn't feel sad and helpless, yes. Ideally speaking I'd also know how to do that. But at the moment, I don't — other than to give it time, and hope for the best.

[And something about that isn't...striking him well, which he doesn't quite understand because this is going exactly as it should - she's taking what he taught her into account, she's listening to him and everything is going so well, and yet he can't shake the thought that...

...

It's not something that he can put into words, exactly, but it's the same sort of pervasive sense that wouldn't leave him during the battle in that dream they'd all shared. The knowledge that he could fight competently or stay alive or protect Archer, and he could really only pick two options and he'd been unable to work out why at the time but he'd ended up choosing the latter two.

It's unpleasant. He doesn't like it. He'll hate himself for acting on it.

But he looks at that and he can see what's wrong with it (also, really, thanks to Archer) and while he doesn't think he'll hate himself more if he doesn't act on it, he can't say he'll like the potential consequences either. He doesn't even know what those are; it's possible they won't be unpleasant. But that damn thought pattern won't go away, either.

To put it another way, that radio is risking becoming very, very loud.]

And if I rephrase those words, would you see the same thing?

If someone were to say the following to you: "I don't care what you think or feel right now, because I want to get my way. You feel things that I don't, but I understand how your feelings work so I'm going to use those feelings to render it such that I can always be right and you will always be wrong, because you can't help how you feel and I don't care about the topic of the argument - this is a logical battle for me, not an emotional one, and I am very, very good at winning. I like making people think their feelings are defects, not natural processes, because that way they are always flawed and I am implicitly perfect.

And right now, I'm constructing a scenario where it's never acceptable for you to feel anything negative about me, because to do so would be wrong."

If someone were to directly say that to you, would you be the manipulative person in that scenario, or would they?

I need time away from this discussion; I'll contact you tomorrow, and I'll likely be avoidant about this. Don't allow me to be, should you still want to talk.

[And that just

hits her

and]

(no subject)

doitrockapella - 2013-12-17 07:04 (UTC) - Expand

NIETZSCHE; DEAD PHILOSOPHERS' INBOX

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

1/2

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

1/2

(no subject)