Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
The Hogs of Entropy 0110
`"8a 88 ,a8888a, a8"'
"8a 88 ,8P"' `"Y8, "moo." a8"
"8a 88 ,8P h0gz Y8, a8"
"8a 88,dPPYba, 88 -of- 88 ,adPPYba, a8"
"oink." a8" 88P' "8a 88 entr0py 88 a8P_____88 "8a
a8" 88 88 `8b #110 d8' 8PP""""""" "8a
a8" 88 88 `8ba, ,ad8' "8b, ,aa "8a
.a8" 88 88 "Y8888P" `"Ybbd8"' "8a.
>> "an informative reply to mogel's 'a guide to modern love on the <<
>> information superhighway' from dto #5 without any stupid inside <<
>> jokes -- and this has no quotes by guido sanchez!" <<
a dialog by -> jamesy & murmur
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jamesy: Ok, Truth.
Murmur: Where does infatuation end and love begin?
Jamesy: you can't fucking ask that! it doesn't make any sense! that's
not how you play truth and dare, you're supposed to ask personal
questions.
Murmur: When did your relationship with Rachel advance beyond mere
infatuation? NO WAIT, not WHEN, HOW?
Jamesy: Don't you just wanna know where we had sex the first time? oh
well, nevermind. I think the main thing you need to understand
about infatuation is that it quickly disappears. I mean, a new
toy is only new for so long. Eventually, you need to either throw
it in a box with your old toys, or find reason to keep it out on
the desk next to your laptop and pictures of kathy ireland. when
you're with someone for long enough, the excitement of being
around them is really gone. it's not a bad thing, per se, that's
just how things work. but you need to take the relationship
further, otherwise it feels stale and begins to whither like your
flaccid grandmother.
it's very important that relationships have a strong bond of
friendship. if you don't enjoy just being with the person, it's
going to be hard to get past infatuation. you eventually need to
get to a point where you enjoy doing anything with the person, not
just screwing around. although that's important, it's also
important to simply enjoy the time with them.
now, HOW it happened is a much harder question to answer. my
relationship with rachel matured after time. it wasn't easy; we
had a lot of problems in the beginning. but we learned to trust
each other just for the sake of trusting each other. well, i
should rephrase that; SHE learned to trust me. i always trusted
her, because she never did anything to break that trust. i,
did, though, because i was an evil bastard back then. but, after
being with someone for a while and looking back and realising how
important of a part of your life they are, that is when you get
past infatuation. reflection, i guess. honest reflection,
though. if you're not honest with yourself, it can become another
form of infatuation.
did i just devalidate everything i just said? I can't tell.
Murmur: That was, uh, scintillating. Seriously, though, I think the
most meaningful comment was the last -- if infatuation really is
a temporary thing, something that can't last, then once you take
a look back and actually consider what's going on, you've got to
recognize that the infatuation is being replaced by something
else. What that something else is, though, might not be what you
think.
Jamesy: it might be a giant void, sucking at your inner being. i hate
it when that happens. and apparently, it's happened 11 times in
the computer underground. but, yes, i know what you mean.
Infatuation can only last as long as you don't take the time out
to reflect on what you're doing. However, as i stressed before,
you can mindfuck yourself when you reflect. "this is so perfect
for me!" might be a nightmare for the other person. you have to
be honest with yourself and what you have in front of you. TRUTH
OR DARE, MURMUR?
Murmur: uh, yeah! er, truth.
Jamesy: Have you ever had an experience where you felt love developed
very quickly?
Murmur: What do you mean by "very quickly"?
Jamesy: Like, within a very short period of time.
Murmur: A week? A month? A year?
Jamesy: You can define "a very short period of time" for YOURSELF,
ASSFACE.
Murmur: uhhh, okay. hmmm. well, it's not like i can speak from all that
much in the way of personal experience. i guess i'd have to say
yes -- but only conditionally -- because i can really only claim
to have seriously been in love once. i think we sort of knew
each other for about a month and a half or so, then we started
like, talking for about a month, and then we dated for three and
a half months. these are, mind you, two people that haven't ever
had a "significant other" before. by the time we broke up, i was
in love. i don't even question that. and i guess that that
might seem like a short period of time -- overall, it was really
only about three to four months, i suppose, that it took me to
come to this conclusion -- but i don't really know if that's a
"very short period of time" or not. and since it was the first
time, and since i was younger and stupider, i was really kind of
in this stupid secondary dimension where i thought nothing could
go wrong -- but i was nonetheless, from my vantage point in that
dimension, very much in love. i was willing to let develop
quickly. i wanted love to develop quickly. i had the romantic
image that when you date you date on the expectation that it will
be dating for life. and if the rest of your life begins today --
then i wanna be in love for the rest of it. if that makes sense.
uh, does that answer the question?
Jamesy: Sure. Do you think there's a difference between this fast and
furious love you speak of and, say, the love a couple that have
been married for 25 years have? how does love evolve? is it a
flower, waiting to bloom, or a mutual stock that hits an
unexpected boom?
Murmur: as i explained to that girlfriend, basically, people have these
buckets of love in their heads. these buckets are limitless;
once you reach a certain level, you've reached love, and love
just continues to grow and grow and grow. or it can recede. is
there a difference between "fast and furious" love and the love
of 25 years? sure. but at its very core, it's the same basic
concept. love, of course, will be different from person to
person, so it's difficult, quite arduous indeed, to attempt a
generalization.
how does love evolve? love is like a stock market, i guess, as
ridiculous as it sounds. well, i don't know. you said that
infatuation carries with it a time limit; but i don't think
that's necessarily true, really, when i stop and think about it.
i truly believe that a couple can remain infatuated with one
another for years and years and years, well beyond the point of
having fallen in love, exactly. there are things that can damage
love and there are things that can boost it -- people through
"demonstrating" their love can really deeply impact their
partner, or, people can do things like, say, kill their partner's
father, and things like that may tend to undermine the love.
love really can be played out like a business in a lot of ways --
but to me that may only be truly bad if you're talking about
someone that would treat his or her business with anything less
than a sincere amount of care for what they're doing. treating
love like a cigarette company and treating love like a record
store, therefore, are two different things. i think the one is
sad, and the other can really be a good thing. please pardon the
rather absurd analogies.
sometimes no matter how much love you put into a business -- no
matter what you invest, time or money wise -- it collapses on
you. it's the same thing with relationships. how many people
are there that really wish they could have been happy with their
spouse/fiancee/etc. but realized that there was just something
missing, something they needed to find in someone else? there
are so many different potential elements of love -- there's trust
and there's respect, but then there are things like romance too
-- just like there are a lot of potential factors in a business.
the main thing is that you can't be mechanical when approaching
either one. it's not about number crunching, it's about
hunches, it's about aesthetics -- i'm not sure what you might
call that when it comes to a business, but i think that might be
the romance factor in a relationship.
there's also the problem of owning a mom and pop hardware store
and then having menards pop up next door -- but, uh.. yeah.
Jamesy: Infatuation certainly has a time limit in the framework of a
_relationship_. that's what i was speaking of. of course, if
you're not actually seeing someone, simply obsessed with them, you
may very well end up obsessed with them all your life if you are
never given the chance to do anything with them. but that usually
doesn't happen, because the person being obsessed over is usually
smart enough to totally ignore the obsessive one and get far, far
away from them.
Murmur: wait! that's not what i'm talking about! what about the concept
of having a "twinkle in your eye"? isn't there a dose of
infatuation in love? or what would you call that?
Jamesy: i don't think you can be infuated with someone you understand.
if you understand the person, if you truly know them, there isn't
something so mystical about them that is so alluring.
Murmur: then what would you CALL the allure?
Jamesy: i wouldn't. when you love someone, you don't have a twinkle in
your eye, unless you have floaters, and then you should probably
see your doctor about high blood pressure. love is a continual
flow of emotion and feeling between two people. if you see that
as a "twinkle in the eye," maybe that's the physical
representation of that concept that you envision.
Murmur: "physical representation". well. hrm. okay. so, then, JAMES
HETFIELD OF MILK & TEA, TRUTH OR DARE?
Jamesy: Dare!!!
Murmur: damn you!! okay. uhm.. yeah! i dare you to SELL ME YOUR
GIRLFRIEND!
Jamesy: what happens if you don't do a dare? do you remember?
Murmur: uhh.. you lose.
Jamesy: okay! i lose!
Murmur: er, okay. i win!
Jamesy: TRUTH OR DARE, MURMUR? BEST TWO OUT OF THREE!
Murmur: you bastard. fine. truth.
Jamesy: name the capitol of the czech republic.
Murmur: you spelled "capital" wrong. and it's Prague. truth or dare?
Jamesy: TROOF!
Murmur: let's go back to "physical representation". how important a role
does physicality play in your relationship? and from as
objective a position as you can stand, why do you think this is
good or bad?
Jamesy: in terms of a relationship, physicality is essential. it's part
of the whole process. whether we like it or not, our little
programs in our heads dictate the way we feel about potential
mates. and sexuality is a sure-fire way of expressing these
feelings. what would be the difference between a friendship and
a relationship without physicality? there wouldn't be any. sex
is what makes relationships a go-go.
i don't want to put a value judgement on whether or not sex is
"good" or "bad." i've had very positive physical experiences as
of late, so of course i'm going to say it's "good." but most
people aren't as lucky as i am. it can be a very stressful
thing. but, like any other part of a relationship, communication
is the key. once you're honest to each other and open, it'll
all work out. in this context, an open and honest one, sexuality
is wonderful.
Murmur: the question wasn't so much "is sex good or bad?" but rather more
one of how it relates to other facets of the relationship. for
many, the relationship begins with a kiss -- and sexuality is
used as benchmarking for the progress of the relationship. of
course, some people just bang the first night out, more or less
disvalidating that concept. so, uhm, yeah, this isn't going
anywhere.
oh, hell, i'll come up with something later. go on.
Jamesy: sexuality is important because it is a non-verbal form of
communication. there are so many ways to address the way you
feel about someone through sexuality. granted, you may not be
able to say, "are you hungry? let's go to steak and shake!" but,
in terms of feelings, it's a reliable way to show you care about
someone else. of course, you have to know what you're doing,
and that's why you need to purchase my newest self-help novel,
"zibble-zen and the art of body massage."
Murmur: but of course. "chapter five: how to make jungle noises."
Jamesy: truth or dare, murmur?
Murmur: truth!@#@!@#
Jamesy: tell us about your first sexual encounter, and how it paved the way
for your six (count em, six) links on the sexchart?
Murmur: "paved the way"? grrreat. define "first sexual encounter" for me
so i know where to begin, then.
Jamesy: the first time you got your nudies wet with another's saliva!
Murmur: uh, i was in the wrong house in the wrong city in the wrong state
with the wrong person at the wrong time. didn't seem like it
then, granted, but, well, that's often how things work -- you
just don't know what hole you've gotten yourself into.
Jamesy: luckily, i can't say the same for me. i find myself continually
in a state of euphoria about this wonderful incarnation of the
next buddha i am currently with. but anyway. does the fact that
your first sexual experience was in a fairly flawed relationship
make you hesitate from being sexual again? do you view it in any
different light because of past pain?
Murmur: since i think i can better answer the question better from a
broader perspective, i'll do that. do i hesitate from being
sexual again? yes and no. it comes and goes in cycles. there
are a couple of ways i suppose i'd put it -- no, if i had it all
to do over again, i wouldn't do that the exact same way, that was
really fucked up. but at the same time, i've been involved in
pretty meaningless brief flings -- they never materialized into
the aforementioned (as pixy might put it) cum guzzling -- and
i've come away with mixed perceptions of that. i guess there's a
few things at work here. the most successful relationship i've
been in to date, that first one, was also the least sexually
inclined. and the best way i can put my current stance is that i
have my own limits right now but they're not all that limited.
at the same time, however, that doesn't mean i'm out looking for
all available hand jobs.
i think that being involved in some sexual sense with too many
people can really cheapen things when you get involved with
someone that you're actually really serious about and not just
really horny about, yes. prior to the unfortunate transpirings
of last spring (the wrong state scenario and so on) i was
involved in this brief little fling that just this week the other
person involved just flatly informed me was really a case of me
being horny more than anything else. and she was right. and i
really can't explain myself, and i really don't think i need to.
i don't think i've done anything bad or wrong in that sense.
i've done things i regret, but not on moral grounds. i regret
them sort of in the same way i would regret having spent a dollar
on a lottery ticket, or losing money at the kentucky derby. that
kind of cheapens what i'm saying but it's not like i feel bad in
the same way i would if, say, i'd hit you with a car and you
couldn't walk anymore. does that make sense?
while at one end of the spectrum i wish i had a lot of stuff back
because i think it would make me purer or more righteous for any
woman present and/or future, i have to accept that if not for my
past experiences, i wouldn't be here. fact is that the best
relationship i had failed because i was inable to maintain it,
mostly because i had no experience with what i was doing and got
all stupid in the head.
Jamesy: so, your basic word of advice to people is, "don't get all stupid
in the head?" how would you define that in more specific terms?
Murmur: well, that sounds kind of silly in and of itself. let me put it
in vaguely more meaningful terms.
okay, see, there's sex. and sex can take place with someone you
really really love or sex can take place with a two bit whore
from decatur. now, you said that sexuality, physicality, is an
important aspect of a relationship. well, i suppose i'm not
enough of a gigolo to speak for it very well myself, but i can
very clearly see using sex for sheer _physical_ gratification
taking away very strongly from the employment of sex as a means
of physical and _emotional_ gratification. screwing around with
someone when all that matters to you is your cock is fine and
dandy in and of itself, i suppose; but i don't think you can
really very seriously do that and then go back and apply a whole
lot of emotional meaning to it when it's become such an
uber-physical act for you.
the problem is that i've brought myself to over-generalize so
much at this point that i don't entirely believe what i'm saying
in my own context. let me try to put things as they are for me.
i've done a lot of stuff i'm not _proud_ of -- but it's not like
you're supposed to take pride in it, necessarily. nonetheless,
there are a lot of encounters i look back upon with far more
positive inclinations than negative, and then there are those
most specifically to the contrary.
sex for the hell of it, just general making out for the hell of
it, to me seems like a really fucked up concept. and i speak
somewhat from experience on that. i'm not talking about things
like going to a party and without really specifically meaning to
picking a chick up with a spatula -- because that's youth and
frolic. i'm talking about things like going over to see a whore,
someone you don't really like all that much, 'cause there's not
much else to do. things like that really cheapen encounters
you're going to have with people you really like and grow to
care about -- if done repeatedly.
from where i'm standing right now, the only way i can really put
it is that i'm not uptight about "doing more" most of the time,
yet i'm quite content with whatever may happen. i sometimes tend
to feel bad when i want more out of a situation than whoever i'm
with, and i can't even entirely begin to explain that, but even
while i say that -- there's no replacement for actually being
with someone you really, really, really think is wonderful,
someone who when you're done doing whatever you're doing you're
more than willing to jump up and get into a good-natured argument
or debate or scrabble game or whatever. none of liz phair's
"fuck and run" for me, if you will. at least, that's the
current mindset, and it's been known to change in the past.
Jamesy: I can't believe we're talking about love and relationships to the
tune of interstellar overdrive, but that's ok. here's my
explanation. yes, you're completely correct. but there is a
difference in the communication involved in a flip-and-fuck with
someone and the communication involved with being with someone
you care a lot about. one is a lot of groping and the other is
much more sensual. although blind groping is relevant in
meaningful relationships as well, that is not the way to
communicate the way you feel about someone else to them.
Murmur: well, one would hope that someone you care a lot about you don't
just go blind groping about for after. something like that.
uh, who's turn? oh, yeah. JAMES HETFIELD OF OBL
oh christ, truth or dare?
Jamesy: DARE
Murmur: bastard. i dare you to... DRINK THIS PITCHER OF HOT AND VERY
BUBBLING LAVA!
Jamesy: okay!!! <drinks lava> AAHAGHGGHGHGH!GGGH!GH@#%^@@%$ <dies>
Murmur: oh dear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
* (c) HoE publications. HoE #109 - written by jamesy & murmur - 6/11/97 *
