It's a pretty significant question that requires reflection and introspection, as well as the awareness that, as Cassius implied in Act I Scene II of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, the fault is not in our stars, but in ourselves that we are vaguely dissatisfied with the way our lives are turning out.
Perhaps our mums should have had a serious talk with us about tempering our expectations.
Good times would be better defined as the absence of pain, hunger, thirst, fear or infirmity.
But categorising times as good or bad is purely subjective.
Individual reactions to any situation are closely related to one's underlying personality, previous experience, expectations and degree of insight.
And "times" are not monochromatic but kaleidoscopic - a constantly changing succession of events, not always predictable.
Even the most structured, institutionalised lives are like Foucault's Pendulum, predictably repetitive but imperceptibly moving.
The thing about life that I am sure about is that the Nothing Times - the times that are neither good nor bad - vastly outnumber both.
I guess I'll have to be satisfied with that.
Comments
Post a Comment