Ricardo Villarreal

Think, Therefore Think Again

How Death Makes Us More Alive

by

Train TracksWe become thinkers the very precise moment when we acknowledge death and discover our own mortality.

I believe the first time I truly grasped the concept of death and realized I will die one day was when I was 8 years-old. I was at home reading the shocking news about the Mexico City earthquake of 1985 and the number of deaths from the tragedy.

I remember the uneasy feeling in my body and the impossibility of doing something about it as I was holding the newspaper and seeing the word “deaths” in the story.

As I discovered that death was real, thinking about how to deal with this topic started to become serious business as well.

In his book, “The Questions of Life”, Spanish philosopher Fernando Savater says that if death is the eternal state of not being, then we have already defeated it: the day we were born.

And even if it is only one time we will defeat death, this one time and opportunity we have of being alive, every day and instant that we continue to live and enjoy life will be triumphantly ours.

With this, not only does one start to think more about life the moment we know we will die, but we also begin to feel more alive than ever.

What do we know about death? Certainly not much. We do know, as Savater explains, that death is very personal and non-transferable. We cannot die for someone else, we can only die our own death.

But death, besides being distinctly personal, is also an accurate concept of true impartiality. Death does not discriminate on race, gender, or socioeconomic class; there is no individual who can escape from it. In the eyes of death we are all equal.

The certainty of death is what gives more importance to our lives. Everything we do, all our work, our hobbies, our social interactions… are all ways of resisting death.

But death is such an incomprehensible thing and so inevitably personal that it also represents the biggest fear for most people.

Some people fear about the unknown that follows death and confront such distress believing in a supernatural after-life world: a mystical place of eternal joy or punishment.

Others, not believing in gods rewarding or punishing humans, fear about the possibility that there is absolutely nothing after death, and that nothing is quite terrifying to them as well.

Perhaps a comforting way to digest this topic comes from Greek philosopher and atomic materialist Epicurus who advises on why we shouldn’t worry nor lose sleep over death: There is nothing to be afraid of because we never coexist with death and we will never feel death, as feeling is an activity (and privilege) of the living.

To feel distressed about the (gazillion) years ahead of us in which we will no longer be alive is just as capricious as to worry about the billions of years before we were born.

If we did not feel any pain being absent for all those billions of years, why should we feel concerned about a future of eternal absence?

Savater also mentions that part of the anguish we feel about death has to do with facing two difficult realities: all the joys of life we will miss when it comes to our own death, and because it will leave us without those we love in the case of others’ deaths.

It’s the conscience of death that makes life a very serious issue to think about. It’s mysterious and marvelous, a type of miracle for which we must fight and constantly reflect.

So death inevitably makes us thinkers. But not thinkers about death itself, but about life. And that should make us feel more alive and grateful.

A popular proverb says, “no one is too young to die, nor too old to live one more day.” It’s up to us to fully take advantage of the time we have and live the best life we can.

 

 

Reading like Nick Hornby

by

Nick Hornby“I’m beginning to see that our appetite for books is the same as our appetite for food, that our brain tells us when we need the literary equivalent of salads, chocolate, or meat and potatoes.” – Nick Hornby

“The Polysyllabic Spree” by Nick Hornby is a book about reading that I’m sure you’ll enjoy reading if you love to read. Literally.

With his distinctive witty narrative and open conversational style, the bestselling author of “A Long Way Down” and “Fever Pitch” brilliantly unveils the imperfect and humanizing side of reading we all can relate to.

Let’s face it, reading is quite a challenging task, frequently threatened by all kinds of possible distractions.

And that is the pillar battle in Nick Hornby’s book, as each chapter represents one month of a year-long reading journey, where at the beginning of each episode he enlists those books he bought vs those books he read.

The challenge is quite entertaining as many of the books he reads are not even those he originally purchased. And in the mix of his hilarious explanations, his book commentaries and recommendations are spot on.

As he takes us on this natural and spontaneous reading expedition, he invites us to explore our own reading habits, our unique relationships with books, and even the detours and struggles we face when trying to read.

When it comes to those ever-present obstacles, the author accurately points out that reading is a domestic activity, and is therefore susceptible to any changes in the domestic environment.

Not that this is my case, but let’s say you are comfortably sitting with a book one evening, and your very imaginative and hyper-active four-year-old boy is running around the house while holding a toy spaceship and making sound-blasting special effects.

In such case, you must surrender to the planetary troops that are aggressively pushing you towards an asteroid field, and attempt reading at a later time, perhaps right after the spaceship captain takes an intergalactic bath followed by him going to his zero-gravity sleeping capsule to rest for the night.

Because reading is a very personal activity, we also have our own rules.

For example, I read in both English and Spanish, so I have this rule: I like to read the book of the author in their native tongue primarily.

However, if the author’s language is neither English nor Spanish, then I will proceed to read it in the closest language. Let’s say, if the author is German or Swedish, I would read it in English; if the author is Portuguese or Italian, I would read it in Spanish.

But then I can’t explain why I chose to read Japanese author Haruki Murakami in Spanish, or Greek philosophers in English. Of course, it also depends on availability.

Back to the book, Nick Hornby has a few confessions he shares that I felt very identified with, but also a little bit guilty of such conducts.

For instance, he spends a lot of money on books, many of which he knows he will never read. Anybody else guilty of this?

But let’s say you did start reading a book, and at one point you realize it’s not your type or you simply can’t finish it. Well, it is OK to abandon it. There is no reason to persist with a book that is not working for you.

And while some books are badly written, Hornby reminds us that sometimes they are badly read as well. Not enjoying a book could be our fault too if we don’t provide the commitment and concentration that a book requires.

Now, when it comes to how we organize our reading list, there are (almost inevitably) events that alter the order of your pile of books-to-read.

One of those common events for me comes from book recommendations from a close friend or relative who has a proven track record of recommending great books.

When that happens to me, I feel I must stop whatever I’m reading or update my book cue accordingly in order to give VIP preference to that book recommendation.

Other altering events are realizing an author I like has released a new book or discovering a totally interesting book by accident (like it happened to me with this one).

But altering your book order and putting books aside for later can also be a pain in the Rumpelstiltskin. Especially when you realize there are several books you have put aside which have remained unread for years.

And I’m talking about real physical books in your home! I’m not even going to mention those books I have on my Amazon shopping cart “saved for later”.

One thing is very true: there will never be enough time to read all the books you want.

In fact, Nick Hornby reveals a depressing fact from Gabriel Zaid’s book “So Many Books”, which estimates that it would takes us 15 years simply to read a list of all the books ever published (author and title to be precise)!

The lesson here is to stop wasting time reading books you hate and the more reason to prioritize and focus on enriching, enjoyable, and substantial books.

What books to read? If you are open to new ideas, Nick Hornby has some great recommendations throughout the book covering many genres and authors.

As soon as you immerse yourself in this book, you’ll realize he is not only a tremendous book critic, but his love of books is so contagious you might want to start your own reading list challenge.

At the end of the day, the ultimate goal we readers have is to secure a temporary peacefulness that will allow us to achieve the maximum enjoyment of reading. But can we?

 

Una Subasta de Vida

by

La Mejor Oferta - Giuseppe TornatoreTodos tenemos secretos que guardamos en los misterios de la vida y del amor.

El principal misterio de “La Mejor Oferta” de Giuseppe Tornatore, se encuentra en la existencia del libro mismo.

Y es que el autor italiano, conocido internacionalmente como el gran cineasta que nos conquistó con “Cinema Paraíso”, “Malena”, y “La Leyenda de 1900”, nunca pensó en publicar este thriller detectivesco que homólogamente llevó también a la pantalla grande.

Con toda honestidad, Tornatore nos advierte en el prólogo que nunca pretendió darle autonomía literaria a éste texto, que presenta como un esbozo narrativo, un híbrido de cuento y guión, sin llegar a ser ninguno de los dos.

“La Mejor Oferta” (Editorial Anagrama) es un relato de pocos pero complejos personajes, con una trama de amor y misterio, y, si han seguido la obra de Tornatore, sabrán que hay garantía de un final impactante e impredecible.

Virgil Oldman es un subastador profesional experto en arte. De sesenta y tantos años, es un hombre muy culto, solitario, y con una obsesión por utilizar guantes.

Su vida cambia cuando recibe la llamada de Claire Ibbetson, una joven que lo busca para ayudarle a subastar los muebles y las obras de arte de la villa de su familia, donde ahora vive sola.

Pero Claire padece de agorafobia severa y no puede salir ni de su cuarto, mucho menos ver a Virgil.

Aún así, Virgil acude con gran interés a cada cita en la Villa Ibbetson, conversando con Claire del otro lado de la puerta de su habitación, y empeñado a que un día ella saldrá de su casa para poder verla.

Quizás para Claire, Virgil pudiera ser esa escapatoria que necesita para finalmente enfrentar la vida. Y para Virgil, quizás Claire sea su última oportunidad para encontrar el amor.

Así como en las obras de arte, las vidas de los personajes tienen sus propios misterios y secretos, similares al de una pintura cuyo trasfondo es más interesante que la pintura misma.

Gracias a sus años liderando subastas, Virgil ha acumulado una colección de arte que consiste en cientos de retratos de mujeres que guarda en secreto en un sótano blindado en su casa. Los límites de su amor no han podido traspasar al que les tiene a éstas musas que lo observan y arropan en silencio.

Claire, por su parte, se rehúsa a hablar sobre su pasado. Su misterio e introversión la hacen más atractiva para Virgil e irremediablemente aparece la chispa del amor.

Pero, ¿qué nos revela Virgil al hablar de su experiencia cuando desde niño estudió los oficios del arte aprendiendo a distinguir en las obras las falsificaciones de los originales?

Como el admirado experto de arte que es, nos señala, “el arte del falsificador es un arte como cualquier otro, porque toda falsificación esconde algo auténtico… en la copia que hace de la obra ajena, el falsificador siempre cae en la tentación de poner algo propio.”

Ante la última subasta que significará su retiro del mundo de las artes, Virgil buscará con Claire asegurar esa felicidad que nunca tuvo y ganar la subasta de su vida.

¿Será su amor por ella la mejor oferta?

 

Saramago y la Democracia

by

Elecciones¿Puede la democracia ser la salvación del futuro de la humanidad y de garantizar un mundo socialmente justo?

Es posible que sí, pero implica que la democracia se discuta y se reinvente, nos dice el escritor y Nobel de Literatura José Saramago en la conferencia “El Nombre y la Cosa” (2006), que quedó plasmada en el libro del mismo nombre.

Entrando en materia sobre la democracia, Saramago nos traslada brevemente a su origen en Grecia (Siglo IV, a.e.c.) citando dos principios de Aristóteles:

Por un lado, “en la democracia los pobres son soberanos, porque son el mayor número y porque la voluntad de la mayoría es ley.”

En segunda instancia, con el objetivo de garantizar la igualdad y la libertad, Aristóteles nos dice: “la igualdad pide que los pobres no tengan más poder que los ricos, que no sean ellos los únicos soberanos, sino que lo sean todos en la proporción misma de su número.”

Así que muy pronto topamos con una discrepancia y ponemos en duda la legitimidad de la democracia, pues nunca en la historia de la humanidad los ricos han sido una población mayor a los pobres, y los ricos siempre han gobernado el mundo, al día de hoy.

Pero, ¿qué hay del poder del voto que inventaron los griegos? ¿No es el voto la expresión máxima que, siendo derecho de todos, valida el funcionamiento de la democracia?

Pues no. Resulta que dentro del mismísimo proceso de votación encontramos un verdadero conflicto democrático, ya que el voto es al mismo tiempo entrega y renuncia de nuestra voluntad política.

Saramago nos ilustra cómo en el preciso instante de ejercer nuestro derecho al voto e introducirlo en la urna, nuestro sufragio ya no nos pertenece como electores. Y a partir de ahí el político, diputado, o gobernante utilizará el poder según sus intereses, que en muchas instancias no es el del ciudadano que introdujo su voto en la urna.

Por eso es muy sencillo ver que no funciona este proceso democrático. Solo basta darse cuenta del tipo de gobernantes que tenemos; políticos que han abusado de este hueco que hay en el proceso democrático que no los obliga a ser dignos representantes del pueblo.

Porque confío que ninguna población sana, de raciocinio medianamente decente, y con un mínimo de respeto, elegiría a los corruptos que tenemos en el poder.

Dice Saramago, una democracia bien ejecutada debe ser como el Sol que a todos ilumina por igual.

Pero el poder no lo tiene la gente. Es más, el único poder que existe es el económico, el que todo lo mueve, el que controla las cuerdas del teatro llamado gobierno.

Y ese poder económico no es democrático porque no lo eligió el pueblo, ni tampoco contempla la participación ni el bienestar del pueblo.

Ese sistema de organización social que equivocadamente llamamos democracia, es realmente una plutocracia, un gobierno de los ricos para los ricos.

¿Qué hacer entonces? Pues debemos reformar la democracia. Y para ello tenemos que empezar por discutirla, por admitir que no funciona para el beneficio de la gente.

El autor nos advierte que de no hacer nada y de continuar con un concepto de democracia cada vez más putrefacto, no solo terminaremos por perder enteramente la democracia, sino que se perderá también la esperanza de ver un día dignamente respetados los derechos humanos para todos.

La dimensión política del pueblo debe ir mucho más allá del sufragio. Votar cada cierto número de años no es suficiente para mantener una democracia efectiva. Debe haber mayor participación ciudadana.

Si el verdadero poder es el económico, y el principal problema es que ese poder no es de la gente, pues la respuesta está en buscar la manera de que sea la ciudadanía la que penetre y tome el control de los organismos económicos y financieros de los que autoritariamente se les ha aislado.

Para acercarnos a un sistema democrático más justo, Saramago señala que una democracia política debe ir de la mano con una real democracia económica y estar aunada a una democracia cultural.

Pero esta fórmula estructural tampoco servirá de mucho en una democracia que no se autocritica, en una democracia que no se autoevalúa, y que no haga por vigilar la manera en que los gobernantes usan el voto que los puso en el lugar que ocupan.

Solamente a partir de la reflexión, del pensamiento crítico, y del deseo genuino de dialogar y tomar acciones constructivas podemos contribuir a reformar la democracia y a transformar nuestro mundo en uno más justo.

 

Misogyny Killed the Woman Star

by

virginia-woolfe-a-room-of-ones-ownCan you imagine how different (and better) the world would be today had women always enjoyed the same opportunities as men to freely exercise their creative genius and influence humanity through their works of literature?

In her celebrated book “A Room of One’s Own” (1929), Virginia Woolf lectures us on the injustices women writers suffered before the nineteenth century when it came to creating and producing fiction.

It also protests against how women were portrayed as characters in fiction books written by men. Remember, books were mass media back then and the negative descriptions of women further influenced how they were treated.

Puzzling to Virginia Woolf is why women were completely absent when it comes to the creation of extraordinary literature during the times of Elizabeth I (1558-1603), considered to many the most splendid age in the history of English literature. A period which also witnessed the genius of William Shakespeare.

But during that time, the archaic mentality of men was such a deterrent that they deemed impossible for any women to have the genius of Shakespeare.

And so it is here where Virginia Woolf debates this argument by creating the imaginary figure of Judith Shakespeare to masterfully address this terrible injustice. The hypothetical scenario of what would have happened had Shakespeare had a wonderfully talented sister demonstrates a contrasting parallel among the two.

In those times, the Shakespeare brother William would have easily sought fortune in London and would have freely practiced his art surrounding himself with everybody in the industry. Access to the royal family would have also been attainable.

On the other hand, his extraordinarily gifted sister Judith would have unfairly remained at home. Despite her genius and her unusual creativity, she would have never been sent to school. A monumental loss for humanity.

Without a doubt, a plethora of extraordinary talented women existed then (as they have always had), and it would be delusional to think the contrary.

But men, in their opposition to women emancipation, created a hostile environment where they would have ridiculed, humiliated, and made life a living hell to any woman who dared become a writer.

I absolutely agree with Virginia Woolf when she says, “Genius needs freedom; it cannot flower if it is encumbered by fear, or rancor, or dependency, and without money, freedom is impossible.”

That is precisely what her title “A Room of One’s Own” refers to. Give women a room of her own and the financial comfort that removes all obstacles from expressing her art and speak her mind; allow her the concentration needed in order to achieve prodigious work; suppress the unhappiness suffered by inequality that interferes with her creation; and we’ll see geniuses.

“Literature is open to everybody and there is no lock you can set upon the freedom of a mind”, says Virginia Woolf. And there should be no locks preventing the advancement of women.

Reading this book as a man made me think of the great damage we men have done in limiting women’s full potential, of all the wonderful genius creations by women that never flourished because of us men.

A lot has improved from the time Virginia Woolf published “A Room of One’s Own”, but us men today need to do more to make up for this tragedy and support feminism. There is no excuse.

Yes, this book was written almost 90 years ago! But its powerful message still echoes today as an inspiring instrument of the feminist movement, and it will continue to remain relevant at least until we reach full gender equality.