In the "Can atheists be nice?" thread, Curtis and I have been rappin' about wonder. Another word for wonder is "mystery." It seems to me that life presents us with such a mystery, one that can never be resolved. It's my conten- tion that one can't find a real "solution" to life's mystery, because the very nature of life *itself* is irresolveable mystery. No matter which "solution" you find, if you dive into it deeply enough, it opens to Yet Another Mystery.
To me, that's just NEAT. I *like* that about life, the never-being-able-to-figure-it-out-ness of it all. I guess that would make me a pretty shitty detective. I'd probably be a lot like Columbo, schlepping along in his beat-up raincoat and his beat-up car, collecting clues while feigning stupidity to throw off the bad guys. But unlike Columbo, I'd probably never solve the "crime." I might not be convinced that there had even *been* a crime. Sure, there's a body and all, but did that body ever really exist? If it didn't, how could it be killed, and by whom? Someone else who doesn't exist? :-) Alternatively, I can identify with Dennis Potter's character in "The Singing Detective," digging the fact that the plots are "all clues, no solutions." Or like Philip Jose Farmer's Ralph von Wau Wau, the superintelligent German shepherd detective he spun off from his fleshing out of Vonnegut's "Venus On The Half Shell." A friend of mine on alt.buddha. short.fat.guy once said, "Given a choice between a dog biscuit and a Buddha nature, is there any question which a dog would choose?" My version of Ralph would probably say, "It's really fun trying to solve this mystery and all, but really...there are butts to be sniffed and trees to be peed on, and miles to go before I sleep." So who would you be? Which detective -- real or fictional -- best personifies your approach to solving the mystery of life? Would you be Mongo the chess master dwarf, dazzling his oppon- ents with strategies planned 30 moves ahead? Or would you be like US Customs Agent Dave Kujan in "The Usual Suspects," all bluster and bullying, toying with the poor, crippled witness to unravel the mystery and pin the crime on the person you've already decided is guilty, completely unaware that the person being toyed with is you? Would you be like Sherlock Holmes, effete and superior, so sure of the "rightness" of your conclusions that the only fun in it for you is making everyone working with you to solve the mystery feel like shit because they're not as smart as you are? Would you be Sam Spade, searching everywhere for the dingus, only to discover that the Maltese Falcon is nothing but painted lead? Or would you be like Rick Deckerd in "Blade Runner," finding out at the end that, as another character says earlier in the film, "I'm not in the business. I am the business?" Would you be like Detective Lieutenant Ed Exley in "L.A. Confi- dential," and end up solving the mystery, killing the bad guys, and having a medal pinned on your chest? Or will you end up like Jake Gittes, with a look on your face so devastated that one of your cop buddies has to say, "Forget it Jake. It's Chinatown?" Which detective is you? Whose approach to mysteries and the solving of them most resonates with you and your approach to solving the mystery of life? Having pondered this subject this morning, I have to say that I'd probably be most like David Addison in "Moonlighting," all play and no work, adlibbing snappy dialogue a mile a minute like Phillip Marlowe on laughing gas, fumbling along and some- times resolving things, sometimes not, but always managing to have a good time. I might not solve the mystery, but it's a sure bet that I'm gonna get laid a lot more than Sherlock Holmes or Dave Kujan.
