Happy Belated Valentine's Day, Clubhousers. For the record, I think it's a ridiculous holiday. But, here's a little gift nonetheless. It's a free, downloadable Valentine's compilation which includes some pretty good artists - The Weepies, Matt Wertz, and Bare Naked Ladies. Enjoy!
"He who knows content's content is always content." - Tao Te Ching.
***
The haunting sounds of Damien Rice can be heard in the opening scene of the movie Closer. Indeed, for the first 2 or 3 minutes of the movie, there isn’t a single line of dialogue, just the first half of the song “Blower’s Daughter,” which is linked above. But the reason I’m posting the song, or its importance to the movie, for that matter, is not to be found in the first half of the song. For that, you’ll have to listen all the way to the very end. Take note of the plot twist, if you will, in the very last line. If you’re not looking for it, you might miss it. I’m beginning to fear that it’s a plot twist that we may all experience at some point in our lives, or, at the very least, a plot twist that we must all expend a great deal of mental and physical energy trying to avoid. Still, there are others who choose to embrace it. Either way, like the last line in the song itself, if you’re not on guard for it, you might miss it.
The movie Closer is basically about failed marriages and infidelity. If you haven’t seen the movie, take a look at the trailer. If nothing else, it’ll give you a sense of how depressing the movie is.
Still, the movie has been heralded as being true to life, at least from the perspective of some. However, Closer is not alone in this regard. The cold hard truth has supplanted the formulaic, traditional storybook ending in Zach Braff’s latest movie, The Last Kiss, and in the movie Sideways. Other mediums have followed suit. I just bought Regina Spektor’s album, “Soviet Kitsch,” whose lead track is entitled “Ode to Divorce.” Just the other night at dinner a friend told me about a guy that tried to pick her up, in spite of his brazen admission that he was, in fact, married. He was even still wearing his wedding ring when he asked her out on a date. Is life starting to reflect art? Or have things always been this way?
The late radio personality and language expert John Ciardi once did a segment on the origins of the British idiom – to eat Dunmow bacon, meaning to live in marital bliss. Ciardi recounts, “Robert Fitzwalter, one of the barons of Magna Carta, established in perpetuity, in care of the Priory of lesser Dunmow, a provision to award a flitch of bacon (i.e., a side of pork) to any man, woman, or couple that would appear before the Prior and his monks and kneeling on two designated stones solemnly avow that he/she/they had been married for at least a year and a day without a moment of discord or without ever wishing not to be married but had truly shared one another in uninterrupted bliss.”
While most men would be willing to do nearly anything for some bacon, apparently being happily married is not one of them. Ciardi continues, “In the years between 1445 and 1772, when the custom was abandoned, a record was kept, and it shows, perhaps in tribute to British honesty, that in those more than 300 years exactly 8 Dunmow flitches were handed out.” Eight? Yikes. The chances of a blissful marriage look bleak, especially considering the Prior only required ONE YEAR of happiness. And what, do you suppose, would be the chances for a lifetime of said bliss? Isn’t that what everyone is signing up for when they get married?
But perhaps it is that very notion of wedded bliss that is at fault here. It may give people unrealistic expectations on what to expect from marriage. Perhaps movies like Closer, The Last Kiss, and Sideways, as difficult as they are to watch at times, will prove to be instructive to prospective husbands and wives as to what challenges they might realistically expect to encounter during matrimony.
There may be something else at play here. Maybe people are just really bad at estimating how happy they are, how happy they will be, and how unhappy they used to be. John Stuart Mill once remarked, “most persons have but a very moderate capacity of happiness.” Meanwhile, they expect “in marriage a far greater degree of happiness than they commonly find: and knowing not that the fault is in their own scanty capabilities of happiness – they fancy they should have been happier with some one else.” Of course, this doesn’t just apply to marriages, but all relationships, and even career paths and any number of other matters.
Was Mill correct in his characterization that the human capacity for happiness is generally ‘scanty’? And if so, why? This distinctly human characteristic appears to be related to the pre-frontal cortex. This part of the brain is responsible for a human’s ability to simulate future events. Studies have shown that, across the board, humans have a tendency to overestimate the hedonic impact of future events. Getting that girl, landing that dream job, and winning the lottery counter intuitively will not make you any happier, at least after three months. Indeed, author Dan Gilbert cites studies which show that individuals that won the lottery and individuals who were rendered paraplegic rated comparably in terms of their happiness after one year. Incredible! It’s exactly the opposite of what your pre-frontal cortex would have you believe.
Gilbert uses these studies and other anecdotes to conclude that human happiness is not to be found in the outside world, but is, instead, synthesized inside one’s mind. You’ll be interested to learn that the enemy of such synthesis is freedom, apparently. Gilbert took an introductory photography class at Harvard and taught them how to take and develop photos. Students developed their two favorite photos. The students were told that they could only keep one photo, because the other one needed to be mailed back to “headquarters” as evidence of the final project. The students were then divided into two groups. The first group was told that their decision on which photo they’d keep was irrevocable. The un-chosen photo would be mailed out immediately, never to be seen again. The second group was given more freedom. They were told that the photos would not be mailed out until 4 days later and if at any point before then, they wanted to swap the chosen photo for the un-chosen photo, they would be permitted to do so. Students were then rated on their satisfaction with the photo they had chosen after 3 days. Students in the irrevocable group were FAR happier with their choice. On the 4th day, the option to swap photos expired for the revocable group and they either kept or swapped out their original photo. Both groups were again asked to rate their satisfaction a day later. The irrevocable group again rated FAR higher in terms of their satisfaction with their choice! People that were stuck with their photo loved it. People who deliberated on whether or not they liked their photo ended up not liking either photo. And, here’s the kicker. In another study, students were given the choice to join a class that had revocable choice or join a class that had irrevocable choice. We know that students in the irrevocable class are happier. But, as you would expect, students sided with freedom and chose the revocable class 66% to 33%, even though doing so would ultimately lead to their unhappiness.
Is Damien Rice talking about the problem with revocability in relationships? Implicit in the statement “Can’t take my eyes off of you… until I find someone new” is the suggestion that the new person will share the same fate as the old person. That is to say, even for the new person there will be another still newer person, presumably ad infinitum. So what’s the alternative?
Ciardi, at the end of his segment, offers some insight when he stakes a claim for the ninth flitch of pork: “I am prepared to avow to the Prior of lesser Dunmow in the ghostly company of his assembled monks that I have been married for what seems to be at least 745 years and in that time my wife has never allowed me to feel anything but bliss, nor have I been permitted to wish myself unmarried, nor have I dared consider an alternative – there being none.” With what I can only imagine was a wry smile on his face, Ciardi concludes the segment, “Please send flitch.”
Perhaps Ciardi was only trying to be funny, but I think he highlights an important point. Maybe happiness, in life but especially in relationships, takes a certain degree of coercion – from one’s spouse, the state, societal norms, and religion. Maybe a public marriage ceremony, to be bound by state law and religious custom, and to be subject to public ridicule for divorce all collectively serve to make one’s relationship look more like Gilbert’s irrevocable class. That is to say, maybe it’s our best chance at happiness. Of course, society is moving away from traditional relationships as serial monogamy has become the rule. Not to sound like an old fuddy-duddy, but I think such change is to our detriment.
If research to date has taught us anything, it is that too much emphasis is placed on external events, when we would be better served trying to come to grips with the bounds of our own internal capacity for happiness. Any boy or girl will do, it appears – one who’s as pretty as winning the lotto or one who’s only as charming as suffering paraplegia. Research has established that if, but only if, we’re forced to, we can synthesize the difference. Meanwhile, the above movies show us the alternative: people will invariably want more and more still, no matter how good they have it. Instead of waiting for some hedonic windfall to come one’s way, one should learn to love one’s own modest capacity for happiness. That is as happy as one will ever be. And for those who grow at peace with this notion, the bacon is on its way.
Happy Belated Valentine's Day, Clubhousers. For the record, I think it's a ridiculous holiday. But, here's a little gift nonetheless. It's a free, downloadable Valentine's compilation which includes some pretty good artists - The Weepies, Matt Wertz, and Bare Naked Ladies. Enjoy!
The movie Closer is basically about failed marriages and infidelity. If you haven’t seen the movie, take a look at the trailer. If nothing else, it’ll give you a sense of how depressing the movie is.
about a guy that tried to pick her up, in spite of his brazen admission that he was, in fact, married. He was even still wearing his wedding ring when he asked her out on a date. Is life starting to reflect art? Or have things always been this way?
pork) to any man, woman, or couple that would appear before the Prior and his monks and kneeling on two designated stones solemnly avow that he/she/they had been married for at least a year and a day without a moment of discord or without ever wishing not to be married but had truly shared one another in uninterrupted bliss.”
unhappy they used to be. John Stuart Mill once remarked, “most persons have but a very moderate capacity of happiness.” Meanwhile, they expect “in marriage a far greater degree of happiness than they commonly find: and knowing not that the fault is in their own scanty capabilities of happiness – they fancy they should have been happier with some one else.” Of course, this doesn’t just apply to marriages, but all relationships, and even career paths and any number of other matters.
Gilbert took an introductory photography class at Harvard and taught them how to take and develop photos. Students developed their two favorite photos. The students were told that they could only keep one photo, because the other one needed to be mailed back to “headquarters” as evidence of the final project. The students were then divided into two groups. The first group was told that their decision on which photo they’d keep was irrevocable. The un-chosen photo would be mailed out immediately, never to be seen again. The second group was given more freedom. They were told that the photos would not be mailed out until 4 days later and if at any point before then, they wanted to swap the chosen photo for the un-chosen photo, they would be permitted to do so. Students were then rated on their satisfaction with the photo they had chosen after 3 days. Students in the irrevocable group were FAR happier with their choice. On the 4th day, the option to swap photos expired for the revocable group and they either kept or swapped out their original photo. Both groups were again asked to rate their satisfaction a day later. The irrevocable group again rated FAR higher in terms of their satisfaction with their choice! People that were stuck with their photo loved it. People who deliberated on whether or not they liked their photo ended up not liking either photo. And, here’s the kicker. In another study, students were given the choice to join a class that had revocable choice or join a class that had irrevocable choice. We know that students in the irrevocable class are happier. But, as you would expect, students sided with freedom and chose the revocable class 66% to 33%, even though doing so would ultimately lead to their unhappiness. 
established that if, but only if, we’re forced to, we can synthesize the difference. Meanwhile, the above movies show us the alternative: people will invariably want more and more still, no matter how good they have it. Instead of waiting for some hedonic windfall to come one’s way, one should learn to love one’s own modest capacity for happiness. That is as happy as one will ever be. And for those who grow at peace with this notion, the bacon is on its way.
