run it twice

so anyway, i was thinking when Debbie finds out about his affair with Annik, she is grilling him and he says nothing, nothing at all. i am thinking that a lot of people watching that will sympathise with Debbie, and feel, you bastard, you can't even comfort her with an answer. but sometimes there is no good answer. and the villain of the piece, although it's an excusable villainy, is the person who will not accept that.

when mrs z found out about s, she wanted to know about her. i told her I would never say anything about her. i knew it would hurt her not to know, but if you have nothing private, there is no you distinct from the world you are in. i think mrs zen would say that she is comfortable with not having a private her in that sense, and does not have secrets. (although, now, she does have secrets, which is comic. she has a facebook account that i have never seen, and other forums she hangs out in and things she is doing that i don't know about. she thinks i should be jealous, and is hurt that i don't care.)

in Control, Curtis stands speechless. you do not feel that he is scared, although he flinches from Debbie, but that he could if he chose to answer, and he knows perfectly well what the answer could be, but it would not be good for Debbie, because it would be nothing she wanted to hear. later in the film, he does what he has refused to when Debbie first finds out, and lies to her, giving her the answer she wants: that he will dump Annik. i do not know if it is creditable that i said i would not stop talking to whoever i wanted online, and refused to answer any further. it would have been easier to lie, and she would, i don't doubt it, have got over it if i had lied. which is worse? the moral wrong of lying leading to a good outcome? a utilitarian wouldn't hang me for it. or the moral right of refusing to lie? the utilitarian might suggest that the outcome is bad enough to outweigh the moral wrong.

but we cannot know the future, and i saw a defining point in our relationship. i could lie and allow her to think i was the conventional, narrow soul she could happily love, or be tougher, and say if you want to love me, you will have to love me, not some image that if you squint you feel I might make a poorish fit for.

i know this is wrong; i do know it. the poor must compromise, because the world will not meet them halfway. i mean that if you lack power, you must not expect that you can bend the world to your will. even if you feel your will leads to a better life for all.

or is it right, and you must fight to make what you believe is right happen? how can we ever know? you do not get to run it twice.

posted by Dr Zen @ 6:52 pm