|
"I love the paradox," said Anton.
"It's one of the oldest and loveliest," I agreed. "Obviously Mozart didn't invent the paradox and somebody else wrote the story. But Mozart put it on the map for all times to come. With his marvelous music he explores the depth of the emotions involved. Nor did Mozart resolve the paradox. That wasn't his daring. The paradox actually hasn't been resolved to this day. It still stands as it did 250 years ago when Mozart set it to music. We still have not found it possible to step away from our vertically arranged relationships, the relationships that have only legitimacy when they are formally authorized and follow described lines, centered on the lines of domination and property issues. Mozart's daring is that he has dared to step into the infinite world of embracing one another laterally instead of vertically in the small. He dared to put this huge challenge before society in the starched world of 250 years ago. The audiences leaving the theatre found themselves forced to deal with this challenge, to take it home, mull it over, uplift themselves in the process. Very few may have done that or even dared to consider it. That's why nothing has changed. The challenge still remains. We say it is dishonest to be honest. The Count, the scoundrel of the opera, was honest. But we, society, rather choose to lie to ourselves in the name of love, and lie to one-another. That's the continuing paradox, Anton. We've developed the ability to stand on the moon, but we haven't yet mastered the ability to stand securely close to one another, men and women, without a lot of games becoming attached that filter everything out that doesn't fit into the vertical world. And that's the platform the whole world is now built on. So I think Mozart was a revolutionary with a great daring. He stands among only a very few that have dared to challenge the vertical system, and this in society's most intimate domain."
"And you want to solve this paradox for me, right?" Anton said with a grin.
I shook my head slightly. "You have to do this yourself," I said gently, smiling back. "I much rather be like Mozart and leave that to the sovereignty of the heart. You will do what you must do, what either love or fear impels you to do."
"Thanks," said Anton quietly.
"The reason why I can't resolve the paradox for you might the simple reason that I haven't resolved the paradox myself, yet. I can tell you one thing, however, that the paradox is nothing more than a convoluted case of dishonesty with oneself; a convoluted case of denial of reality heaped upon ever-greater denials. And in the middle of all that, as if our strangled bonds of love weren't complex enough, there stands superimposed the doctrine of marriage that comes with axioms attached that are all deeply rooted in the vertical world of hierarchical separation and property isolation. Shouldn't we rather focus on what is real in terms of fundamental principles that enable the
widening circles of love to unfold and to move us? There is no principle that I know of that forbids any form of expanding love. That is why Mozart was daring. He allowed those wider circles of love to unfold, and more importantly he supported them with sublime music. He allowed the two couples to remain in the same house. It also seems that the love that had been admitted instead of being countered brought them closer together, rather than splitting them apart. The principle of love doesn't demand separation. The principle of love certainly does not forbid itself. The principle of love can't forbid love and remain a principle that binds all laterally. The practice of separation into self-confinement that society has chosen for its existence for centuries has no natural basis. It isn't a law built on principle. It is an artificial construct that reflects a vertical, hierarchical system of relationships. This supposed law that demands the self-confinement of society was the Count's biggest problem in Mozart's Figaro. He rebelled against it. And why shouldn't we do so likewise? Why should a law of self-confinement exist? Why do similar laws exist between nations? Why is it so hard to acknowledge the Principle of Universal Love as the foundation for civilization? Why can't this principle be recognized as being valid on all levels? We all long for being treated with the dignity that is due to a human being. Nobody wants the self-confinement of society, except a few oligarchs that aim to profit from the universal division and isolation that opens the floodgates to wars and degrades society and enables universal looting. But human beings wasn't to be free, free to love."
Next Page
|| - page index -
|| - chapter index -
|| - Exit -
||
|
