August
6, 2002
don't stay together for the children
Listening to: Jack Johnson - Sexy
Plexi
Reading: The World's Shortest
Stories edited by Steve Moss
The world's shortest stories, or as they call it -
55-fiction - is everything the quotes at the back of the book make it out to be. The
stories sometimes are such literary canap�s that it
passes off coolly as a piece of story that tugs at the corners of your mouth and memory.
Sometimes they also pass off as a six-sentence (or so) joke. Both have the potential to
work if pulled off right, though jokes within an assigned number of words can hardly be
called literary canap�s too often, no? I wish I
could quote some of the lovely stories I read from the compilation (there's one of a tree
standing majestic and tall. They used 37 words I think to describe its history, beauty and
endurance, 8 to describe its current state and 10 words of hasty dialogue between a logger
and a foreman to explain its fate) but as it is I might be on the verge of violating other
copyrights, lol.
Today in school there was interesting
discussion aplenty (mostly unrelated to actual education, of course). I know divorce is
supposed to be pretty common almost all over the world, but it occured to me that I
haven't really met that many people whose parents were divorced. To my recollection I can
only think of one, and well more recently two (Mollick). Isn't that strange?
Anyway today somehow we got around to talking about that, parents being divorced etc.
There were slight role reversals and slight changes in the story but other than that we
were basically on the same track. It just was strange to me that I should actually be
quite used to hearing stories like hers by now because they're stories of mine too, but I
took it all rather strangely. But of course it's a good thing that you don't hear many
other people your age with divorced parents.
You know what concept I don't believe in?
Staying together for the children.
It's ridiculous!
Okay, well maybe not many people will agree with me (Blink 182 for example). Speaking from
the 'children's point of view, I find it hard to believe that couples with deteriorated
relationships feel they should fake happiness and try to find what they have already lost
for the sake of their children. If they feel they still have it in them, that's a more
acceptable reason. But for the children?
Personally I think the kids would get more screwed up if they discover their parents don't really love each other and should've left each other years ago. It'd hurt the child a lot more. Why shroud the children in naivete? What's wrong with two people going their own way, avoiding the arguments, and taking care of their children at the same time? My mum was all fine for it, my dad struggled to "keep the marriage together" from 1994 all the way to the end of 1998 in court even though he was the one with the new wife.
Until today he refuses to admit to me that he remarried. He's under the delusion that the news would break me into two, cause me to go out and turn slutty while downing shitloads of E or something.
I guess the point I'm trying to make in this entire venting session is that there's nothing wrong with 'staying together'. Giving it a second shot. There's no need to do it for the children though. There's no need to worry about that fairytale-ending image that he/she'll eventually discover doesn't exist years later. It doesn't (or at least shouldn't) affect children that seriously. A spurt of maturity here, an artistic streak there, a foul mouth here and there. If they turn out "screwed up" it'll be of their own accord and influences.
You know what does suck? Trying to be happy when you know you aren't. Now, I love how brightly my mum's face lights up sometimes. Back then, she smiled but her eyes would still remain so sad.