Each
day I am witness to a drama called my body. Headaches, muscle aches, sores,
cuts, abrasions, fatigue, arousals, heartburn and sinusitis. All the shocks
that flesh is heir to. Nothing, so far, too terribly serious. No
life-threatening disease. No broken bones. No amputations. No phantom limbs or
prosthetic devices. No physical therapy. Just routine visits to my doctor for a
physical once a year, a colonoscopy every five years. Future maladies must be
considered as characters in a narrative that is still in development. And now
that I’m old, it is inevitable that the plot will, as they say, thicken. It
cannot help but thicken. No one gets out alive.
But why
a theater ? Why that metaphor ? Are diseases characters in a tragedy ?
Yes, absolutely. I like that idea. Diseases are characters. Awful, despicable
characters with cruel but transformative powers. They themselves are
evil, but the changes they bring about are quite often salvational.
Or
should we consider the body a comedy ? I mean, look at it. It’s funny. The
arms and hands are always looking for a way to justify themselves. If they’re
not holding something they become awkward and embarrassed. They need to be
encumbered to be unencumbered. The legs have an undeniable dignity but the feet
are goofy. They just are. It’s the toes. They look so whimsical, and all they
can do is wiggle. Genitalia can be summed up in a word : grotesque. But
the real clown of the body is the head. The head is, essentially, an exaggerated
coconut with an exuberant geography of runnels, pools, and freakish
protuberances.
Tragedy
or comedy, the body is not a sitcom. Its theater is more asbtruse. It smacks of
country longing. Haylofts and heather. We should, in the words of Polonius, consider
the body a pastoral-comical, historical-pastoral,
tragical-historical, tragical-comical-historical-pastoral. If the body is a
drama, it must be emblazoned with all the fevers native to its existence. The
would include woodbine, ayahuasca , and Beaujolais.
The theatrical metaphor works best from
the Cartesian point of view. This is the thought that the mind and body are
separate. It is not new. It was popular in Europe in the Middle Ages. I am
reminded of the medieval morality plays dramatizing a contentious dialogue
between Everyman and a host of abstractions, such as Knowledge, Death,
Good-Deeds, Beauty, Strength, Discretion, Five-Wits and Fellowship.
I like this idea. I like this way of
framing experience. Here, for example, is a contemporary morality play by Yours
Truly:
Everyman: I want to drive a car anymore.
I want to fly.
Body: You can’t fly.
Everyman: Why not?
Knowledge: Because the body doesn’t have
wings.
Everyman: Who asked you?
Discretion: Be nice.
Everyman: I’ll try.
Death: Hey, dude what’s happening?
Everyman: I don’t want to die.
Death: Don’t worry. I’m on vacation. But
you do know, sooner or later, it’s going to happen. My advice is to party while
you can.
Five-Wits: That’s actually pretty good
advice. Have you had any of this Merlot?
Everyman: I quit, remember? I’m in a
twelve step program now.
Alcohol: Oh sweetie, that’s too bad, we
had some great times together.
Everyman: We sure did. I wish we could
get back together some day.
Sobriety: Careful. You’re on a slippery
slope.
Slippery Slope: Yes. Please get off.
Strength: I will help you.
Everyman: Thank you. You’ve always been
a good friend.
Fellowship: We all get by with a little
help from our friends.
Death: Lend me your ears and I’ll sing
you a song and I’ll try not to sing out of key.
Ears: I hear you, man.
Mind: I’ve had enough of this. I’m
leaving.
Everyman: Where are you going?
Mind: Anywhere. So long as it is out of
this world.
1 comment:
I believe that a long step toward public morality will have been taken when sins are called by their right names.
Post a Comment