Posted by: Sk | February 18, 2009

7 Personal positioning to ideal creatures

Although I may from far understand the hooligan’s fascination around Inès de la Fressange and even, yes, that a Russian prince may desperately fall in love with such a creature, I’d take myself far distances from this strange being. I’ve to say that there is something around the character that I honestly don’t like very much, and this may seem incongruous to some who may think that such a lot of ink spent on the subject is proof for an absolute devotion.The contrary is though perhaps nearer to the truth. In fact, a concept has little to do with reality, on the one hand, and on the other, it may serve purposes and goals that have nothing to do with a personal involvement.If I were honest (which I never really am), I’d put my female ideal more around Rita Hayworth or Zarah Leander, around Sofia Loren and Ana Vissi, to say, than around Inès de la Fressange. To say, a balanced range going from Jeanne d’Arcs and Natasha spies to almost innocently the world turning up side down common house wifes. It’s true that I prefer in literature Ms Marple to la Dame aux Camélias, and women who try to vindicate female roles without though getting into fires, lions, spy stories, such as Simone de Beauvoir, or others, I rather don’t like.Precisely Inès de la Fressange is the kind of staying in the middle concept that I really don’t understand. Claiming from her attitude a clear rejection of patterns that do submit female to male, she does though submit to these patterns in her general social organization, so that you may end up asking yourself what the damn she’s really up to.I do think that there is a fundamental equality between women and men, although men see things differently than women, and vice versa. I do thus think that it may be my right to aggress violently all attempt of making one prevail on the other, but this implies to take far distances from social organizations, which as such, actually and nowadays, do warrant nothing but men’s right to do whatever they like. As Inès de la Fressange seems to pretend to both, I rather tend to see her position as ‘opportunistic’. You get social advantages from submission to social rules and on the other hand you try warranting for yourself a freedom of acting where you’re bombing up the established.My concept of the world, which does fundamentally base itself on links whose foundations are to be found on corresponding feelings, to the point that I’d reject even business with some one I can’t trust, because even money does not pay up the stress coming up from a relationship with some one whose unique thought is how to cheat you, does in fact crash with Inès de la Fressange’s in almost radically opposed ways.Which does though not imply at all that I’d agree with the way the person as such has been dealt with. First. Nor, that I may not draw out a principle resuming a whole nation’s behavior (France) in her somewhat erratic comings and goings. Second. On top of that, it is possible to think that her presence (as proved) does fill up affective and even social gaps, which is always of financial interest, even if I’d tend to prefer clearer, more defined and brilliant characters.Mr judge of California wants now to know what may be the fundamental reason of my cold distances to the person (with which he’d finally definitely agree after having had a look at Ms Chatterley) is, and perhaps the clearest image can be taken out of the way she’s made up her own house (http://inesdelafressange.wordpress.com). It’s obvious that in her sphere of consciousness and awareness, there are no men, or even worse, she seems to express by the negligent underlining of female features the absence or rejection of the male, fundamentally. Not that I’d say she’s homosexual, even worse. In homosexual (women) there is a somewhat deriving fascination of the male world they try to integrate into their surroundings, so that in a more or less deviated way, the complementary pole of man to woman is somehow kept. Here, you’d say that there is a simple, cold, indifferent rejection of one other that is complementary or different to one self.If there is a character I hate, it is the one of the woman who gets all social advantages from marriages and children and the rest, and then searches affective compensation for the indifferent transaction in the arms of some Brandon Sheena, she despises for not fitting into common social patterns. Although I wouldn’t categorize Inès de la Fressange that way, there is something reminding of it. In her case, I’d rather say that the suspicion she’d be homosexual determined by appearance, does push her into a role that has no real affective backing, without that saying much more than the incapacity of men to love a woman by herself and not a fleshy appearance. In this case though, my own positioning would have rejected an involvement, precisely because it has no affective backing, which seems to be obvious, although I’ve had no verbal confirmation on the point. On the other hand, life is complicated and affects many aspects determining decisions that can’t be easily judged.What seems to fascinate my attention is thus not Inès de la Fressange as gender determined some one (representing an ideal of woman or man), but the possibility of deviating hatred or rejection or revenge or jealousy into gestures. This possibility, which is then the same for men than for women, is a way of channeling repressed unconscious feelings that avoids shouting, violently closed doors, physical aggressions or provocations. Seen from that point of view, Inès de la Fressange’s more or less undetermined appearance does fit me well: as such, in my way of understanding, she’s there to transmit a universal value in its possibility that can be translated into more male, more female, more homosexual patterns through a unifying principle. And this can avoid even a blood bath if well managed.If you see at things from your own, somehow egotistical point of view, both aspects underlined, to say: the judicial mistake and the soft revolution are enough for me to justify an idealization without taking into consideration other features I wouldn’t that much agree with. They are more common and less interesting, and you just don’t have to deal with them necessarily.Now it’s true, that if I knew her personally, I’d certainly start quarrelling with her 5 minutes after starting a conversation, and this in a somewhat ironical distant way, which would mean at the end nothing but: you can’t defend yourself alone. The worse of all is that’d she’d certainly not react negatively to such a deliberate offense but would give in to the evidence without maintaining her own character, until fuchsia tee shirts and falling leaves would appear in front of my nose, I’d … have no answer to.It’s obvious that the use of characters drawn out of real people may certainly give light on determined problems or hint at possible solutions, without that implying at all that you may talk of a personal involvement.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: