Читаем I Am a Strange Loop полностью

The real point of the Twinwirld fantasy was to cast some doubt on a dogma, usually unquestioned in our world, which could be phrased as a slogan: “One body, one soul.” (If you don’t like the word “soul”, then feel free to substitute “I”, “person”, “self”, or “locus of consciousness”.) This idea, though seldom verbalized, is so taken for granted that it seems utterly tautological to most people (unless they deny the existence of souls altogether). But visiting Twinwirld (or musing about it, if a trip can’t be arranged) forces this dogma out into the open where it must at least be confronted, if not overturned. And so, if I have managed to get my readers to open their minds to the counterintuitive notion of a pair of bodies as the potential joint locus of one soul — that is, to be able to identify with a pairson such as Karen or Greg as easily as they identify with R2-D2 or with C-3PO in Star Wars — then Twinwirld will have discharged its duty well.

One of my inspirations for the Twinwirld fantasy was the notion of a married couple as a type of “higher-level individual” made of two ordinary individuals, which is why bumping into the O du angenehmes Paar scrap of paper was such a stunning coincidence. Many married people acquire this notion naturally in the course of their marriage. In fact, I had dimly sensed something like this intuitively before I was married, and I remember how, in the anticipation-filled weeks leading up to my wedding, I found this idea to be an implicit, moving theme of the book Married People: Staying Together in the Age of Divorce by Francine Klagsbrun. For instance, at the conclusion of a chapter about therapy and counseling for married couples, Klagsbrun writes, “I believe that a therapist should be neutral and impartial toward the partners, the two patients in the marriage, but that there is no breach of ethics in being biased toward the third patient, the marriage.” I was deeply struck by her idea of the marriage itself as a “patient” undergoing therapy in order to get better, and I must say that over the years, a sense of the truth in this image helped me greatly in the harder times of my marriage.

The bond created between two people who are married for a long time is often so tight and powerful that upon the death of either one of them, the other one very soon dies as well. And if the other survives, it is often with the horrible feeling that half of their soul has been ripped out. In happier days, during the marriage, the two partners of course have individual interests and styles, but at the same time a set of common interests and styles starts to build up, and over time a new entity starts to take shape.

In the case of my marriage, that entity was Carol-and-Doug, once in a while jokingly called “Doca” or “Cado”. Our oneness-in-twoness started to emerge clearly in my mind on several occasions during the first year of our marriage, right after we’d had several friends over for a dinner party and everyone had finally left and Carol and I started cleaning up together. We would carry the plates into the kitchen and then stand together at the sink, washing, rinsing, and drying, going over the whole evening together to the extent that we could replay it in our joint mind, laughing with delight at the spontaneous wit and re-savoring the unexpected interactions, commenting on who seemed happy and who seemed glum — and what was most striking in these post partyum decompressions was that the two of us almost always agreed with each other down the line. Something, some thing, was coming into being that was made out of both of us.

I remember how, a few years into our marriage, the strangest remark would occasionally be made to us: “You look so much alike!” I found this astonishing because I thought of Carol as a beautiful woman and utterly unlike me in appearance. And yet, as time passed, I started to see how there was something in her gaze, something about how she looked out at the world, that reminded me of my own gaze, of my own attitude about the world. I decided that the “resemblance” our friends saw wasn’t located in the anatomy of our faces; rather, it was as if something of our souls was projected outwards and was perceptible as a highly abstract feature of our expressions. I could see it most clearly in certain photos of us together.

Children as Gluons

Перейти на страницу:

Похожие книги

Сталин и враги народа
Сталин и враги народа

Андрей Януарьевич Вышинский был одним из ближайших соратников И.В. Сталина. Их знакомство состоялось еще в 1902 году, когда молодой адвокат Андрей Вышинский участвовал в защите Иосифа Сталина на знаменитом Батумском процессе. Далее было участие в революции 1905 года и тюрьма, в которой Вышинский отбывал срок вместе со Сталиным.После Октябрьской революции А.Я. Вышинский вступил в ряды ВКП(б); в 1935 – 1939 гг. он занимал должность Генерального прокурора СССР и выступал как государственный обвинитель на всех известных политических процессах 1936–1938 гг. В последние годы жизни Сталина, в самый опасный период «холодной войны» А.Я. Вышинский защищал интересы Советского Союза на международной арене, являясь министром иностранных дел СССР.В книге А.Я. Вышинского рассказывается о И.В. Сталине и его борьбе с врагами Советской России. Автор подробно останавливается на политических судебных процессах второй половины 1920-х – 1930-х гг., приводит фактический материал о деятельности троцкистов, диверсантов, шпионов и т. д. Кроме того, разбирается вопрос о юридических обоснованиях этих процессов, о сборе доказательств и соблюдении законности по делам об антисоветских преступлениях.

Андрей Януарьевич Вышинский

Документальная литература / Биографии и Мемуары / Документальная литература / История