I'm a sucker for reflections rendered through solitude. Maybe because I spend a lot of time in my head so it feels familiar. Maybe because I fantasize about truly experiencing solitude though I can't do more than a couple of days hiking on my own. But also because what is rendered strikes me as the only kind of truth worth reflecting on.
After a few months of solitary living in a house in the woods, Axelrod notes, "It was the first period in my life when my thoughts had full license to expand. Nothing going on inside me had to be tamed-- I didn't see people, didn't have to organize myself into a person for anyone's eyes." I know Axelrod's ability to attend universities, travel to Europe and across the US, and now to take a sabbatical of sorts from life in a cabin bespeak his privilege. As one Goodreads reviewer seething with self-righteousness observes,
"Axelrod, a privileged guy attending Harvard loses the sight in one of his eyes at a pickup basketball game. He seems to feel this is incredibly tragic and seems to have massive trouble adjusting to this... despite the fact, he can still read, drive and uh, see. (I have a friend who became completely blind as an adult and is off climbing Kilimanjaro at this moment... it's hard to muster up a ton of sympathy for Axelrod here.) I get he had to make a huge adjustment in his life, but it seems like whatever life goals he set were still pretty achievable."
Yet, I don't understand this response to human suffering and loss. So what, it's on sliding scale? Lose your sight and you have my sympathy, but only lose sight in one eye which then causes you to reconsider your connection with yourself and others and I really don't give a damn. I just don't get it. And that's why the minute I read this review, trying to decide if I should order a copy, I ordered one right up.
Of course, Axelrod is privileged (as just about anyone who is consistently reading books and rating them in Goodreads) but he also has experienced deep loss and pain. We don't get to choose how we feel about loss no matter our outward privileges. It's not the exact nature and scale of the loss that should matter, but what someone makes of that loss in terms of living and being and, in this case, writing.
In an attempt to deal with the loss of vision (only in one eye that is :)) and figuring out what to do next with his life, he accepts a creative award to live in Europe doing anything he wants to except getting married. Again, privilege, because he had access to the literary world and was able to demonstrate his skills. While there he meets Milena and they fall beautifully in love with each other, "I felt as though she had returned me to some unknown part of myself, to some interior country where everything I'd felt and longed for made sense. It was similar to what came over me when I read [right here, I myself was overcome with emotion], but now the feeling was outside of me, too--it was vibrating off the walls, off the bed, and I wasn't alone with it." Go to hell Amerynth and take with you all of your indignities about the lowliness of Axelrod's suffering, your judgments of what counts as tragedy.
I believe we all do about as good as we are able to in this life. We all try hard whether this is deemed trying or not. Yes, we can judge how the fruits of this trying supports us and our fellow humans. And this may mean cutting ties with someone who is dangerous to us or our loved ones; it means denouncing someone who attempts to take away the freedoms of others. There we can judge.
But we can't judge how much another suffers. That is not ours to judge. We cannot evaluate someone's loss. And I think this world would a much better place for all if each of us could work just a bit harder to pause and creatively imagine how someone we perceive as privileged is also suffering LIFE. We all must make it to the other side as intact as possible.