top of page

Spectrum

I wrote this on the eve of my 19th birthday. A time where, in retrospect, I see I was processing a lot. This sense of numbness is the lesser discussed cousin of the bold vignettes through which emotions are often discussed. I look back on who I was when I wrote this, and I see someone who is trying to find the appropriate response through the only way they knew how. Trying to intellectualise, to abstract, to find an elegant, philosophical answer to the concrete ugliness in the world.


If it is any help this did dissipate. I'd love to be able to give a crystal clear moment where the world bloomed into full technicolour. Minds do not work that way. Instead, I had a gradual awakening.


Feeling happier does not always come in the form of a silver bullet, a day where everything is dandy, but a slow and imperceptible removal of the gauze through which we see the world.


You can be doing better, even if you do not see it.


I've noticed for a while that I don't seem to feel things like I used to. When I say I've stopped feeling things, it's more that a part of the emotional spectrum has been cut off. I'm missing out mainly on the primary colours, and to a lesser extent the jewel tones. I've been left with pastels and watercolours and so am aware of muted versions of emotions, without the genuine article.


The last time I laughed until my sides hurt was April. I've cried a grand total of 4 times at uni - for half of those occurrences I felt entirely disconnected from my body. A passive observer. I haven't felt properly angry since Christmas, and haven't been in love. I don't get jealous anymore, and I'm taking stupid risks because I don't feel fearful. It has resulted in my walking for entire days just to feel a sort of bone-ache exhaustion. I've had low level, slow burning motivation but few actual starts - at the gym, I can now run and endure for long time, but struggle to push myself to  sprint beyond where it starts to hurt. So that's sadness, rage, happiness, fear - all absent.


I feel content, I can feel frustrated, I can get pangs of sadness - but only in the kick-in-the-stomach sort of way rather than the heart-wrenching feeling of before. I have the teal of absorbed, concentrating, the darkish red of lust, the pale pulsating blue of worry. I can do the orange of wry amusement. And I can recognise the appropriate response in some cases - I can see that some actions provoke a necessary display of anger - in some instances, my body has provided the requisite response (tears) even as in my head I'm noting this as interesting and registering the lack of corresponding emotion it has been accompanied by. But you can see from the colours below, it's a far more limited range. I'm working in the minor keys.


This would be a surprise to a lot of people. I am, to some, a caricature. The number of interactions where people think they've got a rise out of me - eyebrows furrowed, wrinkled nose, flushed cheeks, a rise in my voices pitch and pace. A cartoon. So many interactions with people thinking they're unique in provoking this response without realising I have a hyper-expressive exterior. The representation of me is an abnormally emotive response, at odds with my inner discourse. If people annoyed me as much as they thought I'd be perennially agitated. As it happens, I'm not. Sometimes I barely register the actions or teasing that are intended to provoke the response, or my manifestation of the response itself. I'm so used to playing this role, it comes unthinkingly - it's part of my version of phatic chatter, the daily pitter patter.


And I've been trying to think why. What is the reason for this change in access to proper feeling? It's not that I'm emotionless. I feel - but I remember feeling more intensely. I have 3 explanations, working in tandem.


The Physiological Explanation: Anyone who knew me from the ages of 13 - 16 would have said I was an emotional teenager. Crying, daily at points, often not knowing why. Happiness was flying; sadness, total despondency. Part of me thinks this new life could just be life in the absence of teenage hormones. That the former intensity of emotion is, in an odd way, drug induced. Now I understand, a little, relapse. Sobriety brings a fading, a dulling of life, and with time, memories of colour become ever more embellished. It's strange. I remember feeling absolutely wretched, the world collapsing in on me, and yet part of me does want to experience that sheer force, that power of emotion. Is its absence just adult life?


The Psychological Explanation: When something bad happens, the body can just refuse to process. Abdicating responsibility by wrapping you in a shroud of indiscriminate numbness. Feeling a step removed from everything isn't that unusual, and it is possible this is some sort of coping mechanism in response to certain events. Seeing, observing, producing a response has allowed me to function as normal but it seems a teetering, sticky-tape-and-hope solution. It's only been four months, but even now I feel like anything other than an easing back into emotion would be overwhelming. And just like I didn't have control over the initial response, I doubt I'll have control over how it leaves.


The Fiction Explanation: Finally, I think a part of it could be because of the amount I read, particularly as a child. I embodied the Matilda, the Jo March - the weird kid who disappeared at friends houses to read. The caricature of a vociferous reader beloved by middle class parents. I've always been good at middle reading. An in-between of skimming, and the slow, concentrated remember-every-detail sort. I'll remember the key details, plot and characters - broad, quick brushstrokes.


As a result, I've always seen the world through stories. I fit people into archetypes. Boxes of heroes, villians, wronged and wrongdoers. I've read enough that the templates are varied and nuanced. Nonetheless, they will never be expansive enough to include quite how complex people actually are. That's one risk - when you're confronted with deviations, it's tempting to try and fit people into the way the story should flow. Actions are pulled in different directions under a filter.


And in some ways that is always going to be a necessary part of fiction. The number of inane thoughts that run through your brain - the nature of writing stuff down. It is the nature of the medium, in part, that causes this. To communicate something through printed text you have to evoke something stronger than what is present - what exists. As a result everything has to be more colourful.


This creates its own problems. If expectations of life, of the world are derived from fiction, from things you actively choose to read because they are sufficiently enrapturing/ interesting/ enthralling, the inability to choose a sufficiently enrapturing/ interesting/ enthralling life can be galling. Expectations are for someone to sweep you off your feet, for crushing lows and dizzying highs. Oscillating between images of yourself as beautiful and hideous (never a 7.5); as angel and as monster; 'special' and crushingly quotidian. 'Moderate', 'okay', 'pretty good' - no one ever made stories about those. Even if they do it is a sort of hyper-normalcy. To be written is to merit being pointed out.


And I think in part this is the problem. The real world can never really live up to the bright colours of stories and emotions that you can find in a book and it will take time to realise that these metaphors, these climactic show downs are limited to those pages.


I'd be really interested to hear what people think of the Fiction Explanation I alluded to. In more depth, I think that part of the problem is our only attempts to access the minds of others is through books, stories, words on an online journal. With this as our benchmark, is it inevitable that the real world will always fail to meet that standard?

5 Comments


Scott Hughes
Scott Hughes
Sep 03, 2020

I think there is a definite element of that reluctance tied in with a lot of the narratives we consume. I feel as though Britain is in this unfortunate role (deserved or not is obviously a broader debate) of a backdrop for a lot of narratives wherein the like wider themes and moralisations could transcend their environment and have relevant cultural impacts in many other parts of the world. Or alternatively, when British culture is brought into the foreground of a narrative it often feels as though its often to outline deep seated flaws in that culture: critiques of empiricism, the social stratification, portrayals of the country as a once prosperous and good nation that has lost its way etc.…

Like

Lauren Levine
Lauren Levine
Sep 03, 2020

Interesting! I love how you’ve developed the point concerning creativity and exposure to the creative process into one that this is in fact necessary if we are to overcome this gap by pointing out that lives are often much closer to fiction than we give them credit for. If we took the perspective of a writer we’d go a long way towards overcoming this disjunction. It’s (strangely) a much more positive take - rather than the gap between fiction and life being inevitable, it’s instead the product of our own reluctance to apply such grand terms to our own lives. Makes me think - do you think this is culturally sensitive? Can’t help but think a very British reluctance to…

Like

Scott Hughes
Scott Hughes
Sep 03, 2020

In reference to your fiction explanation I think there is a huge amount of merit to the notion that as avid readers and writers there is a tendency to superimpose elements of fiction over the top of our daily existence. However, I think there is also possibly an underlying human element in the prevention of perceiving the real world as comparatively beautiful or dramatic as fiction, which I think is often quite heavily rooted in our fear of self-analysis.

For example, in the context of a novel it can be easy to understand the depths of sadness to a character as we are guided through it: characters such as Frankenstein’s Monster become all the more tragic and captivating from our…

Like

Lauren Levine
Lauren Levine
Sep 01, 2020

So I think there are two points of consensus (that language converts things into "more-than" or 'extra' and that this tension between our narratives and those of characters can lead to a sense of failing to live up to expectations).


I don't know if agree that it is necessarily beautiful/ sublime, as literature can be 'Waiting for Godot' style, in that it is pointing out the cripplingly dull. If that is beautiful, we are at risk of expanding our concept of beauty to mean far more than what we commonly take by the world.


I think you make an interesting point about artists, and if creativity is a chance to bridge this disjunction. To take a pretty dull example, I…


Like

Olivia Gurney-Randall
Olivia Gurney-Randall
Sep 01, 2020

I think the fiction explanation is really fascinating and something I have thought about in considerable anxious depth before. The point you make about fiction attempting to write about normality and the banal is intriguing. As you make clear, books and literature that claim to be about entirely non-fantastical subjects will, by virtue of language, install those subjects with an element of the fantastical. My argument here is that language is the vehicle through which the mundane is converted into the artful, the special, the beautiful etc - I think essentially one writes, to a large extent, either to represent beauty or to make beautiful through words and how they fit together to form an image. Hamlet's famous 'to b…


Like
bottom of page