Tuesday, July 18, 2006

A note about modesty.

Modesty, in the sense of ego or suppression thereof, is a tricky subject. I have noticed something about it recently that I'd never thought of before; it is a two-way street.

Modesty is like selflessness. To be selfless, you do not demand things for yourself, but you provide them to others. Modesty works the same way with respect. However, if someone were truly selfless, he would starve, so we must figure, since some people have been labeled selfless, there must be a reason they survive. I submit that it is because the people around him will allow him the things he needs in recognition to the fact that he does not ask for more, and few people, if any, would try to argue or deny him that, because of his good record of reasonability in what he deems rightfully his.

However, though I have never been considered modest, and have always been arrogant, egotistical, and a braggart, I have noticed that when I do stay silent about my capabilities, or ignore my victories, no one will reciprocate by acknowledging me. Maybe it is because they assume I am already pleased with myself and need no reassurance, but it fucking grates on me to hear the person I just defeated be praised while not one word passes as to my skill.

I've won thousands at poker, and not one of my friends or family is in the positives, and yet no one ever talks about how good a player I am. I've beaten 15 other players ten times in a row at Halo, and no one ever congratulated me. I won a multi-table tournament against live players in the casino, took $1,100 for first place, and neither the dealer, nor the runner-up, nor the pit boss who paid me my prize spoke one single word about having won after three hours of play with pure skill. I placed 2nd out of 953 players recently, winning 120 times my buy-in, and my poker mentor criticized the hand that set up my second place finish in lieu of winning.

I have tried recently to be more modest, to brag in jest only, to be self-confident but not a braggart, and in the time that I have been trying to do this I did not receive any acknowledgement or recognition from anyone, despite multiple victories and significat accomplishments in that period of time.

However, I considered the following:

Perhaps this is the case for everyone. Perhaps no one gets recognition or acknowledgement, let alone praise or admiration, that they do not give to themselves. Perhaps there is no reciprocation for the modest, perhaps they simply do not ever receive these things, and do not mind. Perhaps it is my mind which is warped, that I would not enjoy an anonymous victory. Perhaps I only defeat opponents because then people will know I was the victor. Perhaps if there were no notoriety to be gained, no reputation to be earned, I would not have a reason to win. Perhaps there isn't, and all the winning and defeating I've done in the past twenty years has all been a misguided, pointless attempt to fill the hole within me that craves admiration and recognition, at points causing me to demand that the most trivial details be highlighted to fulfil my need.

After completing this train of thought, something about the premise struck me. "Perhaps no one gets recognition or acknowledgement." Maybe this is both true and tragic. Perhaps other people desire these things and find themselves unsated, unslaked, just as I do, maybe not to such a psychotic extent, but in a more reasonable measure. If this is true, it would be like people with their god-myths declining sex before marriage: A bunch of horny-as-hell teenagers not giving each other what they need. As the enlightened understand, the obvious and most helpful course of action is to remove the barrier and have people fulfil each other's needs in a symbiotic and reciprocal way, so that everyone gets what they need without taking anything away from each other. That gave me a idea.

After dismissing an orgy with teenagers as illegal, I went with the next best option. I thought that maybe I should offer a testimonial to the people I know in person, who I know well, and give them the recognition and acknowledgement that they deserve. Perhaps that will satisfy their needs, and will give them a great feeling.

I resolve to do this soon. Due to chronological order of acquaintance, I will present Wanderer first with something along these lines, and then Lisa. And maybe people who we commonly know who do not necessarily read the blog, like Rockman and the Hammerchucker we all know and love. and maybe they will feel that they have finally gotten what they've earned.

6 Comments:

Blogger Wanderer said...

Interesting reflections. I think you probably have the truth of it in the concept that riciprocation tends not to be received by any. I am not sure that this occurred to me before, but you have given me something to reflect on during the latter hours of my shift.

I hope if you do pursue said writings it is almost as enjoyable as the teen-orgy might have been. I may just have to do the same. I would probably wait on you of course, as I would prefer not to measure up to what you had already offered than be bested by it. (Chronology being the difference in the definition.)

4:40 AM  
Blogger Arthur Brokop II said...

I too found your reflections interesting MC. It brought to mind one of my biggest pet pieves - false hummility. The ones who whine that they are no good, just to get someone to say how good they are. I confess ignorance about poker and would probably think that winning at poker was more luck than skill. I wouldn't expect to be complimented on a win on a slot machine (a gambling habit I broke not that long ago)but I do like positive comments on my teaching, and try to praise my students acheivements. Is modesty and hummility the same thing? That it is a form of selflessness is an interesting observation.

11:26 AM  
Blogger Hegemon said...

I'd say modesty was more like false humility. i can be modest, but I can never be humble. For me, modesty is an act. hey, I can't change who I am, nor would I want to, and I'm an egotistical guy, but what I can change is whether or not I'm an egotist out loud.

1:23 AM  
Blogger Hegemon said...

Incidentally, poker is 99% skill. Stupid homegame crap like five card draw or things with wild cards are more luck, but real, casino style poker, is all about skill.

In fact, referring to someone as 'lucky' in poker is actually an insult.

11:22 AM  
Blogger Arthur Brokop II said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

5:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ok, if it shows up, RD didn't leave a comment here I did...linked from his sight...
anyway, MC what I said was
Mr. Warf once said that poker with a bunch of wild cards (etc) was a woman's game. I wouldn't know, I prefer spider solitare.
maryellen

5:53 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home