Skip to main content

The evOlving SelF

Image Source: http://art.brainpickings.org/post/89158840685/albert-camus-on-happiness-and-love-illustrated-by

I have this little piece by Albert Camus stuck on to my wall. And my favourite is the first line - "If those whom we begin to love could know us as we were before meeting them, they could perceive what they have made of us."

Once when my friends had come over, they took to offence up on reading this. I understand the reason behind their reaction. Unlike those days when women were expected to 'adjust' in accordance with their men and family, in this modern age we live by rule that 'I won't change for anyone except thyself'. So obviously in that perspective, the line was perceived chauvinistic. But I viewed it through a different lens and made a rather unconvincing explanation to them - "It means to say how the influence of that person's personality and one's experience with that person have transformed our own 'self'."

Even now I stand by my argument, but with better articulation. Thanks to the philosopher Mr. J.Krishamurthy.

As I was reading one of his books (The best birthday gift ever! Thanks to my parents!), I realised the perfect explanation for Camus's line. In alignment with what Mr. JK says, a self aware person would understand herself through experiences. These experiences are formed through our actions and reactions to/with other things, another person, or the society in general. And through such experiences, our understanding of 'ourselves' goes one notch up. This understanding of self flows in a vicious loop with every action, reaction and thus experience. With each loop, our understanding builds and helps oneself gradually evolve as an individual.

Sometimes this loop could become stagnant when the experiences are with ourselves in isolation. We need to interact with society, be it individuals or materialistic entities. These interactions help us bond and un-bond, thus developing relationships that keep loop flowing. For, with every relationship we might get to see a face of our 'self' that was consciously unknown to us till then.

So say we meet someone who till that moment was an unknown stranger to us. Now, as acquaintances we both get to know each other as the individuals we are. Then further in the process we develop a bond - be it friendship, love, mentor or otherwise. We develop a bond, and that bond grows stronger with time. And with time, together and individually, we evolve. Looking back, we would realise how much our bond, that is, your influence in me and my influence in you, has contributed to the present self we are in. And this evolution within each other, influenced by the experiences we had shared through our relationship, we would be able to comprehend only if we had known the individuals we were, before our relationship flourished into something meaningful. And that is that all Camus means to convey is this beautiful comprehension.

Or at least, that is what I perceive and infer, as a reader.

Comments

  1. Camus and Kafka, the deep writing (inner drama)
    Camus and Kafka are not absurd. As literature is a way of describing real and mental life with metaphors, but they reveal the essential existence. What is essential in this literature is to show the loneliness and oppression, through the expression. Phrases and absurd disguise the narrative of symbols, but one recognizes the meaning, what the authors wanted to reveal: the human condition subjected by an ungrateful and inhuman society. These meanings presented in an unusual way is the art of difference, originality. Both authors showed us his personal tragedy, and opened new paths to literature. They are paradigms of deep writing that offers non-visible dimensions of everyday human tragedy.
    See my Camus’s review: http://www.letraslibres.com/autores/antonio-ramos-z

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think I once read that Camus did not identify himself as an existentialist.

      The way I see it, as philosophers we always thread in between one -ism and another..not really wanting to attach to any. It is the listener's interpretation that buckets a philosopher's philosophy, and thus his public identity.

      As the saying goes, truth always lies in between.

      We will never know whether we have touched it ever...for, every view is biased by individual perceptions, inferences and interpretations.

      Delete

Post a Comment

You can share your thoughts here.