8/11/2019 Prometheus:Epimetheus Speaks 19930823_192000

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/prometheusepimetheus-speaks-19930823192000 1/2

8/23/93

Epimetheus/Prometheus Speaks...

This column is the first installment of a new series bearing the title,Epimetheus/Prometheus Speaks. Why the flowery title, you ask? Those of uswith a smattering of Greek Mythology will recognize the name Prometheus as thename of the demi-god responsible for delivering fire to the first men - aparable for the discovery of technology. It's a strange twist of fate thatfewer people know about Epimetheus, Prometheus's brother and fellow Titan, whowas the shaper/creator of mortal man. Their names, translated literally, areForethought (Prometheus) and Afterthought (Epimetheus) - thus bringing us tomy rationale for the naming of the column. Depending on the content of mywriting, I'll categorize the article as being one of Prometheus, thusrepresenting a forward-thinking point-of-view, or one of Epimethus,representing an article that is mainly reflective. In this way, I can paysmall homage to these legendary figures of the classical age, and invoke theirpresence, just like any other humble writer. So without further adieu...

Epimetheus Speaks: Savior Fare

I often wonder how advantageous it would be if civilization returneditself to the Stone Age. This reactionary turn of events may at first seem

strange and unappealing, but I assure you that it would be for the best, allthings considered.

Progress would become a thing of the past. No longer would we need tofear or fret over the future and its ramifications; no doubt we would quicklybecome intensely concerned with our own day-to-day survival. But with the morebasic Maslowian needs aside, we can safely approach the much more vital topicI'd like to discuss.

Sex.

With the restraints of civilization removed, we would not be burdenedwith needless, purposeless, assinine ritual. I daresay we would know by

instinct which members of the preferred sex were available, or else it wouldsimply not matter, as the conventions of today would be dissolved. Sounds mucheasier than answering a personal ad, doesn't it?

Unfortunately, nothing short of a complete societal lobotomy isrequired to destroy the 10,000 years of learned response we call history, andalthough it might somehow be accomplished, it could be easier and moreeconomical to simply examine the problem more closely.

I recently underwent a horrendous ordeal sponsored by an airline I willrefrain from mentioning (though I will not fly their friendly skies again).The most interesting part of this travesty was, oddly enough, the inflightmovie; a little gem now available on video called _Somersby_, with Richard

Gere and Jodie Foster. It was your basic romantic drama formula - with atwist. Gere ends up sacrificing himself in the name of love, a martyr whogives everything to ensure his beloved's future. I'll say this much: hangingfor love isn't very high on _my_ list.

Is this what we are inevitably reduced to? Have relationships becomeso complex and entangled that we must continually sacrifice ourselves tosustain them? If romance novels and romantic films are any accurate reflectionof society's opinion, this is indeed the case.

8/11/2019 Prometheus:Epimetheus Speaks 19930823_192000

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/prometheusepimetheus-speaks-19930823192000 2/2

In an ideal world, there would be no need for this foolishness.Relationships would be tangle-free and for the most part selfless and devoid offeelings of posessiveness. So what is it then that acts as the stumblingblock between what we experience as relationships now and what we would hope isan ideal relationship? In my mind it can only be one of a small number ofthings.

Social convention springs immediately to mind. And and all societalmores can affect the relationship between two people - the way you dress (orin some customs, the way you _don't_), the ritual of dating, the mode ofconversation, and hundreds more examples of silliness that can make or breakyour relationship.

Of course, the continuation of convention is merely the surface of amuch larger, deeper problem. In a country like our own, where culture is fedintravenously via the television tube, reality suffers a severe breakdown.the continual infusion of perfect images subjugates common sense - thesuspension of disbelief rules over all reason. Life and relationshipdifficulties get resolved in half-hour segments on sitcoms; the harsh realityof war becomes a dazzling fireworks display; important details get choppedinto over-simplifed sound bites; and happily-ever-afters ensue. The point ofall this being that the concept of the relationship gets skewed on the screen.Art imitates life, it is said, but in a TV culture like ours, life oftenmistakenly imitates art, in the perpetuation of stereotype and misconception.

So what then is left? How can we end this vicious circle of increasingcomplexity? A good first step towards the improvement of interpersonalrelationships, I think, would be to turn off the TV, drop the romance novel,and talk to your partner; in short, abandon the meal of the savior that ourculture offers us.