Untitled

Chuck Close, “Big Self-Portrait”, 1967-68.

 Eric Kandel’s The Disordered Mind: 

Our ability to recognize faces resides in the right fusiform gyrus of the inferior medial temporal lobe of the brain. People with damage to the front of that region are face-blind, like [Chuck] Close. People with damage to the back of that region cannot see a face at all. Close is probably the only person in the history of Western art to paint portraits without being able to recognize individual people. Why, then, did he focus on being a portrait artist? Close says his art was an attempt to make sense of a world he didn’t understand. For him, it’s not so strange that he makes portraits. He was driven to make portraits because he was trying to understand the faces of people he knows and loves and commit them to memory. For him a face has to be flattened out. Once he flattens it, he can commit it to memory in a way that he cannot if he’s looking at it head-on. If he looks at you and you move your head half an inch, it’s a new head for him that he has never seen before. But if he takes a photograph of the face and flattens it out, he now can effect the translation from one flat medium to another.

Close is at the top of my list of artists whose physical shortcomings lead to their signature work.

Source

You all know what I mean.

How could Katniss possibly choose between Peeta and Gale? 

How could Bella ever choose between Jacob and Edward?

How could Ilsa Lund choose between Rick Blaine and Victor Laszlo?

It’s a plot device. It lets them draw out the drama for as long as possible. It’s a cheap way to produce romantic conflict where there otherwise wouldn’t be any. And we see it all the time. 

Usually it’s built on this foundation: a woman loves two men but must make an impossible choice between them. It’s an overused trope that at first seems to challenge our views on monogamy (hence, the drama and conflict) but in the end, reinforces toxic monogamy because– make no mistake– she will eventually end up with one of them, usually for arbitrary reasons. 

Gale’s weaponry results in Katniss’ sister’s death, so she can’t possibly continue a relationship with him. 

After Edward’s disappearance– and then reappearance– Bella suddenly realizes she can’t bear to live without him. So she chooses him. (But don’t worry, because Jacob imprints on her infant child. So it’s all good).

Rick Blaine basically makes Ilsa’s decision for her and she leaves on a plane with Victor.

It’s frustrating to see plots set up two love interests so equally– creating a situation where it would be utterly impossible to choose between them– and yet, when all is said and done, a choice is made. 

You can usually learn more about a person’s insecurities based on the questions they ask.

I don’t mind being asked questions about my relationship dynamic. It’s different than the way most people live, so I understand the confusion they have at first. I had the same worries and concerns. I read books and blogs and talked to people. That’s what helped me get up the courage to face my insecurities and embrace polyamory. 

So when I get these questions, I don’t get upset. I try to answer them to the best of my ability. But I usually try to point out that a lot of these “what if” questions can still happen in a monogamous relationship. 

“What if your monogamous partner starts having feelings for someone else?”

“What if your monogamous boyfriend falls in love with your best friend?”

“What if your monogamous girlfriend goes out to dinner with another guy?”

It could happen. Even to you. 

For monogamous people, these situations would cause emotional turmoil and feelings of betrayal. Perhaps couple’s therapy. Maybe even a divorce. 

So sometime’s it’s hard for people to try and understand a relationship where these things are encouraged instead of stopped and where your partner’s feelings for another person are supported instead of shamed.