Wednesday, June 9, 2010

Nineteen...

     “I betrayed you,” she said baldly.
     “I betrayed you,” he said.
     She gave him another quick look of dislike.
     “Sometimes,” she said, “they threaten you with something—something you can’t stand up to, can’t even think about. And then you say, ‘Don’t do it to me, do it to somebody else, do it to so-and-so.’ And perhaps you might pretend, afterwards, that it was only a trick and that you just said it to make them stop and didn’t really mean it. But that isn’t true. At the time when it happens you do mean it. You think there’s no other way of saving yourself and you’re quite ready to save yourself that way. You want it to happen to the other person. You don’t give a damn what they suffer. All you care about is yourself.”
     “All you care about is yourself,” he echoed.
     “And after that, you don’t feel the same toward the other person any longer.”
     “No,” he said, “you don’t feel the same.”
     It’s a “primitive” thing to be reduced beneath love by an outside force. The act is so unfamiliar to our species, it’s nearly unheard of in our society as bare discussion.
     How could they feel the same? How could they not hold high dislike for one another? Perhaps this is dislike of realizing one’s own instincts, particularly how far a human will go to protect themselves. I would be disgusted with myself if I were forced to betray you, but not deniable. I couldn’t feel the same about you because I wouldn’t be able to feel the same about myself.

     This is my favorite example of the realistic weaving of love.

3 comments:

S. L. Boots said...

That is one of my favorite passages from the book. When I read it the first time, I cried because it penetrated me so deeply. I remember reading it over and over again. I thought I had misread it, misinterpreted it. But no, it was there. The truth.

Is it love if, when stripped to its core, it doesn't exist? it can't exist?

Alexis Voltaire said...

@ Shad B.: Neurologically.. I have no clue. I would find it more fascinating if it didn't, but I think the odd desire for the love would remain. What a complex situation, it's what makes it all the much more beautiful to me.

S. L. Boots said...

Not simply neurologically. I am not speaking of science, but of the actual emotive responses a person has.

In the case of this passage: If every single person were put into that situation and experienced the same things, could we ever label something 'love' again? Knowing that, given certain conditions, that feeling of love disappears?