It is notorious that the so-called temperamental predispositions are almost always anchored in experience, thus removing much of the meaning they seem to suggest. Much of what psychology says about environmental conditioning and its long-term impacts is definitely true, and it is indisputable that the environment interferes and shapes, its effect being proportional to the exposure time and intensity of the contact. Thus, whether we like it or not, we carry something with us from it, and precisely for this reason, distancing ourselves from it is fundamental in case this something inclines to the undesirable. Blocking oneself and creating psychological barriers to avoid its influence is possible and, in extreme cases, indispensable; but an experience, even if it bears fruit, cannot, no matter how much one may wish, simply be erased.
From the Point of View of Character Formation…
From the point of view of character formation, it is curious to note how the facilities, so desired, are almost always useless and, if available in great quantity, certainly harmful. When we notice the deep scars that hide behind a great character, we have to surrender to this late but perennial beauty that comes from them. It seems irrational to yearn for hardships; however, when we turn our eyes to the past, we must recognize that nothing like them can transform for the better.
If It Is Necessary for the Writer to Establish a Link…
If it is necessary for the writer to establish a link with his time, he can only do so by living it. It is inevitable… no matter how hard one tries, one cannot feel a past or future time as those who have lived or will live in it have felt and will feel it. Therefore, one can only have a notion of a distant time, and a notion entirely dependent on the degree to which the writer felt it in the flesh to then describe it to us. In this way, living his own time can be seen by the writer as a mission for the benefit of those who have not yet been born, and therefore it is perfectly possible, and even necessary, for him to find meaning in that which seems unpleasant and importunate: only in this way can he be useful and indispensable to those who will come.
Inaccurate Definitions
Except by mistake, Freud said of misanthropy “a psychic state”; in the dictionary, we find a dull “lack of sociability”. Both definitions are glaringly inaccurate, for they hide the essentially active character of misanthropy. So we need an expert to redo the shoddy work and enlighten us on the meaning of this very special word. Thank you very much. Misanthropy is a sport. In it, two teams confront each other: that of the misanthrope, consisting of himself; and that of humanity, consisting of all other people. The misanthrope’s goal is to avoid humanity, and humanity’s goal is to harass him. The differential of this sport is that its practitioner practices it all the time, and every step of his life can be considered a move. Let’s take soccer as a reference. If the misanthrope, for example, realizing the threat of an approach on the street, pulls out his cell phone from his pocket and pretends to answer a call, or pretends to be concentrated in order not to take part in a stupid conversation around him, he performs something like a dribble. If he misses any social occasion, it is as if he scored a goal. Fernando Pessoa pretended to be ill to miss a family Christmas: an honest goal. A beautiful goal would be the one Karl Kraus scored when, asked on a train if he was the famous Karl Kraus, he answered the stranger with a resounding “no”. Thoreau, moving to a forest to live among wild animals, scored a goal similar to Maradona’s against England in the 1986 World Cup. And so on… With these few examples, one can already see that misanthropy has nothing passive or passing, being much less a “psychic state” than a daily and wonderfully stimulating practice. Thank you very much.