Stuff to See!

Roleplaying For Fun and Profit

In between acquiring yet more toys, listening to baseball games, and pondering a career change from nice guy to homewrecker, a thought returns to me, one which has had much currency in my so-called life: to what extent am I just a bit player in the drama which is this world?
I've known many people in my short time on this planet, most of them by name, and in a great many cases I feel I have a pretty good understanding of what's important in their lives. I consciously try to think of these people as fully formed human beings, rather than compartmentalizing them and identifying them purely by their dominant personality traits. It seems obvious to me that a large part of the human experience lies in establishing a comfort zone by which repeated stimuli can be identification tagged to reduce random fear which can shorten life as we may know it.
The idea of archetypes, though, still has some relevance. To what extent do we think of people based purely on their roles in our lives? Mention phrases like 'the class clown', or 'the jock', and most people will smile and nod knowingly, perhaps reflecting upon examples of said roles personified in acquaintances from their past or present. As much as I hate this reduction of the fully formed humans I know, I've been known to do this as well, although with a wink and a nod to the notion that these people are more than just a set of stock characteristics. I guess most people do this, consciously or instinctively, as fits their approach to this thing called life we all get a chance to experience once.
Most repellent to me, however, is when this way of thinking is applied to me. Why does it bother me so? Is it because I know that I am more than just one outstanding trait? The most consistent archetype, if such I can call it, which follows me is 'the intellectual eccentric', which is fitting, but misses somewhat the whole picture.
Most of the identification tagging and filing of my impression on the lives of others is tied to what context in which I operate in their lives. At work I've been tagged as 'the math guy', although my educational background would suggest something totally different (not much use for Latinists or literati in my line of work). A former supervisor tried to sum me up with a phrase much like the above (I think she said that 'he's a math guy', although I don't remember the context of that discussion). In a narrow sense she was right; I am rather good at math, and that certainly helps in my field, or did at the time.
At the same time, it really doesn't matter much what people think about me, since I know they'll think what they will regardless of what impression I'd like to have. On the whole I guess I'm well-liked, although not entirely understood, which suits me fine. I'm not sure I understand myself most of the time, having tried for reasons I can't fathom to turn randomness into a way of life, while at the same time maintaining structure which increases the familiarity of things which happen around me, lest I die of fear and old age at 24 (for the record I am past that particular number, although not by much).
But people who insist on this identification tagging routinely disgust me. I'm sure there are those out there who live entirely like this, reducing their human contacts to the roles they play, referring to them in terms of themselves (he's 'my best friend', or 'my drinking buddy'). Is it really this bad, though? What's the alternative?
Given that life is complicated enough for one, it is not really feasible to empathically or vicariously identify others through their own experiences, so it makes sense that people, being the centers of their particular universes, will relate all things to themselves. I guess my goal has been to understand the way individual people relate to their existence, rather than to my own. Sure, I can rattle off the various roles people have played in my life, but I don't tend to think of them in those terms. Even the phrase 'best friend' is mildly repulsive, not because I don't have one, but because the ones I have are much more than that role in my life and I consciously make an effort to express that.
Should I identify these people based on their accomplishments? Or hobbies? Or skills? That's part of the picture, much like the roleplay is part, but that approach still misses most of the point. A quote from recently deceased sports journalist Ralph Wiley (more identification tagging....arrgh): "All a man has in life is the integrity of his work". An interesting epitaph this could be, considering that this was the leading sentence in his last article, and it has a certain merit which bears tangentially on this dilemma I have. A similar quotation from Al Pacino's character Tony Montana in the movie Scarface: "All I have in this world is my balls and my word, an' I don't break them for nobody". Taken together, I think these quotations have a lot to say about the role of the individual in the world setting.
Wiley's quote focuses on the results of one's labor and how they mesh with the world at large. The Tony Montana quote has to do more with intangibles like honor and courage. Both have a place in this discussion, since people are judged quantitatively by what they do, and qualitatively by how they do it. Some people are more result-oriented, others more intention-oriented, but most people have aspects of both in their makeup. I tend to be more result-oriented (ends justifying means), but there is a place in my world view for intentions as well. I'd like to think I'm judged by what I have done for others as well as myself more so than why I have done it (especially since the why is so ephemeral), and on the whole I guess that is the case. As the opinion at large seems to be more positive than negative, it can be inferred that I have done more good than harm in this world, although I may occasionally rub people the wrong way whatever my intentions may be (usually, for what it matters, just to speak my mind and make sense of the apparent randomness which happens around me).

Transition

On a similar note, I smell another road trip in my future. I've been told that my faint praise of Columbus, Ohio is somewhat off the mark (you mean someone actually reads this crap?). I hear Red, White, and Boom is happening in honor of Independence Day this upcoming Friday night (July 2nd, that date on which the Declaration of Independence was actually drafted in 1776). According to one of my contacts in Columbus this is not to be missed (although I did miss it once upon a time in 1994 when I was actually in town for July 4th). Unless things go horribly awry, I should be able to make it for that event. It's been a while since I've seen my father anyway, so this isn't a bad idea, although hopefully my truck will be up to the task. We'll see.
Actually, in retrospect, I don't know Columbus all that well, and my experience with that city consists mostly of spending lots of time with a Baltimore expatriate who fiercely hates the city, so my opinion may be biased, although in truth I don't share the hatred.
There's something about wanderlust that's oddly attractive to me. I've always prided myself on having an active imagination which is not constrained to the realities which surround me. And there's something about being in unfamiliar territory which throws my understanding of myself into sharp relief. Considering it's been nearly four and a half years since my last trip to Ohio's capital, much may have changed in the meantime, hopefully not for the worse. Again, we'll see.

Amalgamation

Naturally, with the continuous advance of technology, it seems that we can add some new figures to the list of current archetypes. "The cell phone guy", "The internet stalker", "The web guru", "The computer nerd"...the list can go on and on, no doubt, but those are a few which come to mind.
But I'm looking for more interesting roles, so how's this one: "the eunuch who owns the harem"? For whatever reason the idea of a eunuch owning a harem has come to my sprained mind recently, perhaps as the high concept around which to write an absurdist short story. What does a eunuch need with a harem? Does he keep it to make his neighbors envious? Does he retain the services of a harem for guests from out of town, or foreign dignitaries? Did he have the harem when he wasn't a eunuch, before that horrible tractor pull accident in which he lost his testicles? I don't know. I just put it out there and see what happens with it.