A Clown’s Mask

Lately, I’ve noticed how differently people perceive me compared to who I really am, and really feel. The vast majority of people I’ve met – both those that know me well, and strangers that I’ll probably never meet again– the consensus of other people is that I am cheerful, optimistic, and enthusiastic. However, this is far from the truth. As to whether it’s due to psychological defense mechanisms, and/or due to post-trauma- or simply a case of escapism and denial, I may never know– although I have a hunch it’s all the above, as well as a combination of other factors- such is ulterior motivation. But in understanding this unexpected development, I’ve gained valuable insights into the truth behind the Clown’s mask- the suffering and sadness that lies beneath the smile.

An example that first comes to mind is Robin Williams- I just get the impression that his eccentricities (which to a significant extent I share) and deameanor– that like myself, he hides behind a Clown’s mask. This is especially evident in his portrayal in Patch Adams, which so happens to be one of my favorite movies. That story may well be biographical in cerain respects, as “Patch” also escapes his depression and suffering by smiling constantly– pretending to not take anything seriously, treating everything like a joke; and a desire to help other people and make them happy. Though I can’t speak for everyone with depression, I’ve found it’s easier to be “happy” when helping others.

By helping other people, and making others happy, someone dealing with depression can attain an illusionary happiness, which although does not feel real, is better than nothing- better than being alone- self-tortured and melancholic. Even though it’s not real, I can pretend that I don’t exist, and at that point reality becomes irrelevant. I can then share the feelings (or superficial demeanor) of others- share their happiness, as if it were my own. Being caught between this desperate pretension and terrifying truth, I can understand what lies beneath that smile, because that smile is also my own, and I know myself all too well. Even if it’s not real I can pretend– desperately pretend. If I am to have any sense of comfort when with other people, I have no choice but to pretend. I could try pretending alone, but while with other people, it’s a lot easier, because then my pretense is justified– validated, by an external source– because people around me really can’t tell the difference.

Because they can’t tell the difference, and so respond as if I am happy, that satisfies my Ego, and so it becomes as if I actually am happy– the line between reality and fantasy blurs, as reality becomes irrelevant. Logic is fulfilled- the fallacy that everyone thinks I am happy, so I must be happy– is good enough. The Ego is very interesting- see, even after all this time thinking about it, I still don’t understand many aspects of it. One thing that gets me though: is it logical to be happy? Happiness superficially is a good thing, but one could argue that since happiness is the state of being content, it is detrimental to survival. But at the same time, because we know happiness is a good thing at least sometimes, so in order to want to live, we must know or at least believe that happiness is attainable. So the Ego is an agent of Balance, since the only way to ensure both ambition (by which we are able to thrive) and happiness– that requires meeting somewhere in the middle- which is what Balance is.

Balance, as I’ve come to understand, is really another word for Logos, but please note that The Logos and logic are completely different entities, although as logic is decended from Logos, they do share some things in common. The Ego is born of the Logos, and logic is born of the Ego. So even though it might be logical to be happy, logic is only part of the Ego, and whether or not we actually seek happiness, or are happy, depends on other factors, including several that exist outside the Ego. But neither the Ego or logic cares about our happiness–in fact, the Ego does not care at all– it exists for one thing: status quo. In other words, following the pre-existing pattern, and building upon it according to the plan (which itself is born from the pattern), until the plan changes (which is done by other components of the pattern, such as the SuperEgo and its products (such as faith, emotion, fear, etc.)

Although the Ego follows the pattern (status quo), we do not know what the pattern is, or at best, only know part of it. This considered, the Ego is responsible for ulterior motives. Note that when I refer to “ulterior motives”, I’ve not referring to another person having motivations which are not apparent, and different from the ones that are apparent– but more specifically, to different and conflicting motivations that you– and I have, and am not aware of those motivations, because- for example, they are subconscious.

That’s what makes this particularly interesting because, as we know, Freud referred to the Ego as the “Subconscious”, implying a limited level of conscious awareness, and thus control. That is, “conscious motives” are determined by our consciousness (perceived identity- the self), while ulterior motives are determined by the sub part of our subconciousness. Thus, by having people to “be happy” and appreciate my helping them, I can uphold the illusion that I have somewhere I belong; that I am happy. Others think I am happy, and in return people are “happy”, and appreciative in return, which implies that I must be happy, because there are more reasons to be than not to be.