It’s a given: Nobody can be on an unending “high.” Many, however, strive for the constant high through the gamut of human activities, such as meditating, using drugs, exercising, competing, spending, boating, farming, working, playing, and, to put it delicately, romancing. The topography of human life is only intermittently, however, an elevated plain. Some process is always at work irregularly eroding to create “lows.” Some process as common as needing to go to the bathroom, to go to supper, or to go to change the thermostat can erode a meditation. Name the activity intended to maintain a high, and you can just as easily name an interruption, possibly innocuous as in the case of going to supper to possibly life threatening as in the case of encountering a storm while at sea. Want to prolong the high caused by drugs? Roll a joint that reaches to Pluto. Want exercise to prolong your high? Never pull a muscle.
Of course, we still strive for the highs, and, when we understand the topography of life, we also know that our lows are not interminable. Ideal highs are interrupted by real lows, and vice versa. We have a number experiences and psychologies to explain why, why they don’t last, why we recognize highs and lows by contrast. Highs and lows: This topography of life has long been the subject of the human mind. Friedrich von Schiller, who penned the famous “Ode to Joy” that Beethoven used in his Ninth Symphony, wrote that highs and lows result from an antagonism of the “two impulsions”:
"From the antagonism of the two impulsions, and from the association of two opposite principles, we have seen beauty result, of which the highest ideal must therefore be sought in the most perfect union and equilibrium possible of the reality and of the form. But this equilibrium remains always an idea that reality can never completely reach. In reality, there will always remain a preponderance of one of these elements over the other, and the highest point to which experience can reach will consist in an oscillation between two principles, when sometimes reality and at others form will have the advantage. Ideal beauty is therefore eternally one and indivisible, because there can only be one single equilibrium; on the contrary, experimental beauty will be eternally double, because in the oscillation the equilibrium may be destroyed in two ways—this side and that" (Letter XVI, Letters on the Aesthetical Education of Man found at Project Gutenberg http://www.gutenberg.org/files/6798/6798-h/6798-h.htm#link2H_4_0020) .
True story: One day I went 15 miles per hour over the speed limit, and the cop gave me a ticket. I decided to fight city hall and challenge the citation in traffic court. So, I went, having received a 9:00 a.m. time for my appearance before the traffic court judge to argue my case. I went about a half hour early to make sure I would be prompt only to find that everyone scheduled for that day had a 9:00 a.m. court time. It was a “first come” summons, and I seemed to be one of only a few out of about 100 people who did not know the system. So, I signed in, and entered, to my surprise, a very large room with many people already seated and awaiting the judge. The judge entered at 9:00 a.m., sat at his bench, and began hearing what people had to say.
“Guilty,” said the judge as he used his gavel to punctuate each person’s status. The process went on uninterruptedly for about 45 minutes, and then something different happened. Pushing back from the elevated bench, the judge engaged in a conversation with the next defendant, heard the story and the plea of innocence, and said, “Not guilty.” The next defendant faced the “guilty” verdict as did those who followed for about another 45 minutes. Once again, the judge pulled back, listened, and proclaimed, “Not guilty” with a bang of the gavel.
I sensed a pattern, somewhat irregular, nevertheless, a pattern. The judge was stern for about 45 minutes, and then he needed some comic relief. I was watching a play with a structure that would please the Bard. Shakespeare knew to incorporate such relief in his tragedies.
His maintaining a constant stern demeanor was taking a toll on the judge, especially since not all the traffic violations were serious matters. As one woman said, “I could not get into the right lane because other cars were blocking me.” The judge responded, “Well, I see you were just the victim of circumstance. Not guilty.” Bang!
Where would I be in the timescale of traffic court? What was my role as an actor? There were still many people in the room whose cases had not been heard. Where was I on the sign-in list? My circumstances did not look promising. I had no way of knowing my fate.
About another 45 minutes passed, and then, JOY. As my name was called, I saw the judge push back from his bench. I told my story. “Not Guilty.” Bang! Joy!
Bound by reality’s fluctuations and topography, we ascend and descend, not in any regular pattern, but rather in an unpredictable and varying landscape of experience. Would equilibrium be pleasant? Would the uninterrupted plain be a place of constant joy? We will never know, but we can find joy in the undulations of our personal landscape.
Of course, we still strive for the highs, and, when we understand the topography of life, we also know that our lows are not interminable. Ideal highs are interrupted by real lows, and vice versa. We have a number experiences and psychologies to explain why, why they don’t last, why we recognize highs and lows by contrast. Highs and lows: This topography of life has long been the subject of the human mind. Friedrich von Schiller, who penned the famous “Ode to Joy” that Beethoven used in his Ninth Symphony, wrote that highs and lows result from an antagonism of the “two impulsions”:
"From the antagonism of the two impulsions, and from the association of two opposite principles, we have seen beauty result, of which the highest ideal must therefore be sought in the most perfect union and equilibrium possible of the reality and of the form. But this equilibrium remains always an idea that reality can never completely reach. In reality, there will always remain a preponderance of one of these elements over the other, and the highest point to which experience can reach will consist in an oscillation between two principles, when sometimes reality and at others form will have the advantage. Ideal beauty is therefore eternally one and indivisible, because there can only be one single equilibrium; on the contrary, experimental beauty will be eternally double, because in the oscillation the equilibrium may be destroyed in two ways—this side and that" (Letter XVI, Letters on the Aesthetical Education of Man found at Project Gutenberg http://www.gutenberg.org/files/6798/6798-h/6798-h.htm#link2H_4_0020) .
True story: One day I went 15 miles per hour over the speed limit, and the cop gave me a ticket. I decided to fight city hall and challenge the citation in traffic court. So, I went, having received a 9:00 a.m. time for my appearance before the traffic court judge to argue my case. I went about a half hour early to make sure I would be prompt only to find that everyone scheduled for that day had a 9:00 a.m. court time. It was a “first come” summons, and I seemed to be one of only a few out of about 100 people who did not know the system. So, I signed in, and entered, to my surprise, a very large room with many people already seated and awaiting the judge. The judge entered at 9:00 a.m., sat at his bench, and began hearing what people had to say.
“Guilty,” said the judge as he used his gavel to punctuate each person’s status. The process went on uninterruptedly for about 45 minutes, and then something different happened. Pushing back from the elevated bench, the judge engaged in a conversation with the next defendant, heard the story and the plea of innocence, and said, “Not guilty.” The next defendant faced the “guilty” verdict as did those who followed for about another 45 minutes. Once again, the judge pulled back, listened, and proclaimed, “Not guilty” with a bang of the gavel.
I sensed a pattern, somewhat irregular, nevertheless, a pattern. The judge was stern for about 45 minutes, and then he needed some comic relief. I was watching a play with a structure that would please the Bard. Shakespeare knew to incorporate such relief in his tragedies.
His maintaining a constant stern demeanor was taking a toll on the judge, especially since not all the traffic violations were serious matters. As one woman said, “I could not get into the right lane because other cars were blocking me.” The judge responded, “Well, I see you were just the victim of circumstance. Not guilty.” Bang!
Where would I be in the timescale of traffic court? What was my role as an actor? There were still many people in the room whose cases had not been heard. Where was I on the sign-in list? My circumstances did not look promising. I had no way of knowing my fate.
About another 45 minutes passed, and then, JOY. As my name was called, I saw the judge push back from his bench. I told my story. “Not Guilty.” Bang! Joy!
Bound by reality’s fluctuations and topography, we ascend and descend, not in any regular pattern, but rather in an unpredictable and varying landscape of experience. Would equilibrium be pleasant? Would the uninterrupted plain be a place of constant joy? We will never know, but we can find joy in the undulations of our personal landscape.
RSS Feed