Friday, March 16, 2007

on the subject of wholeness, or, i have 14 contact hrs per wk

arthur took my shoes from from the chair and with the carving knife shredded the canvas into uneven strips. he didnt look at me, or seem aware that i was still there, still existant. with every tear his knuckles were white with effort. when he wasfinished he took the other shoe and with one sharp jerk caught it clean in half. the steel on rubber on wood shook me, and never left the room.
"which is more whole, lucy?"
i stared at the dying shoes, but neither spoke.
"one is shredded, but has all its parts intact. the other loses half of its material but thehalf that remains is undamaged. which is whole? which is more whole?


Blogger Sweets said...

The shredded one is more whole, for reasons so obvious I don't even feel the need to explain them.

Curse your minimal contact hours.

8:29 pm  
Blogger Kitty-kit said...

why is it more whole?

2:36 am  
Blogger Sweets said...

Well, from my interpretation of the text, the shredded one still has its many strips attached together, while the other is in two clean parts. To me wholeness does not represent sticking to the original form, but to whether or not all the original matter is present and connected. All of the shoe is still there, so as an object it is whole, its just no longer technically a shoe.

1:55 pm  
Blogger Kitty-kit said...

i like it. any disagreements out there?

9:52 pm  
Blogger Mephistopheles said...

Yeah, it's philosphically undermined, but you're getting my dissent via postcard, so you can put it up here then if you like. I don't wanna spoil the surprise.


10:11 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ha ha . . well seeing you said "the other is in two clean parts" there my friend I declair that the 2nd shoe with the partially material torn shoe is more wholesome!!!

10:17 pm  
Blogger Sweets said...

Woah, hang on... did... did someone posting anonymously just agree with me while phrasing it as if they were making some incredibly witty rebuttal? Is that what happened? I'm asking that seriously, I have no real idea whats going on in that syntax-mangled comment. Count to 10 and post again.

3:51 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100000000!

7:13 pm  
Blogger Kitty-kit said...

but why is it more whole? why is the one that is now rendered a shade of its former self more whole than that which retains its original form with less of its material?

2:23 pm  
Blogger Sweets said...

Some definitions of "whole" I found include "including all components without exception" and "complete or entire" which both agree with my previous decision.

Alternatively, I found the definitions "unharmed" and "not impaired or diminished in any way," which both imply neither is whole at all, and any argument over which is more whole is just splitting hairs.

From this increased data, I conclude that if one is more whole it must be the shredded-but-all-parts present one.

5:54 pm  
Blogger The Joker said...

you are all idiots. Neither part of the shoe is missing the other part, yes they are not together, but they still exist. not part was cut out or away, so yes they are both still whole shoes (one mangles still wearable, the other in halves but still a whole shoe just in to parts, if a person is missing an arm, are they not a whole person?) Yes i am comparing shoes to people and i am merely arguing cause i am on the other side of the state but hey its fun and i am bored! don't judge me like you do mangled shoes!

9:00 pm  
Blogger Sweets said...

No, if a person is missing an arm they are still a whole "person" but they are not a whole "human." Yes there is a difference. Its physical form vs concept. A person is defined more by mind, while their human form is matter. Shoes are matter. Your logic relies on saying shoes have souls.

Anyone who makes a pun now will be burned at the stake.

9:31 pm  
Blogger Caitlin said...

Here's a different interpretation for you - I think that each shoe is still as whole as the other. How does one measure wholeness? Is there an objective test or is it completely subjective?

12:15 pm  
Anonymous Bec said...

wow .. that could be like the new ifatreefallsintheforest

i reckon the one thats broken in two is more whole . because, you know, now you have 2 whole halfshoes !

8:13 pm  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home