Have you considered not framing things in terms of chasing some imaginary ideal in the first place?
Years back I read The Unbearable Lightness of Being, which gave me a slightly different outlook on the whole thing:
Quote:
Men who pursue a multitude of women fit neatly into two categories. Some seek their own subjective and unchanging dream of a woman in all women. Others are prompted by a desire to possess the endless variety of the objective female world.
The obsession of the former is lyrical: what they seek in women is themselves, their ideal, and since an ideal is by definition something that can never be found, they are disappointed again and again. The disappointment that propels them from woman to woman gives their inconstancy a kind of romantic excuse, so that many sentimental women are touched by their unbridled philandering.
The obsession of the latter is epic, and women see nothing the least bit touching in it: the man projects no subjective ideal on women, and since everything interests him, nothing can disappoint him. This inability to be disappointed has something scandalous about it. The obsession of the epic womanizer strikes people as lacking in redemption (redemption by disappointment).
Because the lyrical womanizer always runs after the same type of woman, we even fail to notice when he exchanges one mistress for another. His friends perpetually cause misunderstandings by mixing up his lovers and calling them by the same name.
In pursuit of knowledge, epic womanizers (and of course Tomas belonged in their ranks) turn away from conventional feminine beauty, of which they quickly tire, and inevitably end up as curiosity collectors. They are aware of this and a little ashamed of it, and to avoid causing their friends embarrassment, they refrain from appearing in public with their mistresses.
|
The distinction is interesting, but the description is more harsh on the 'epic' womaniser than it is on the 'lyrical', which I disagree with.
First off I'd substitute 'possess the endless variety' for 'experience the endless variety'. Second, the fact that there's an endless variety means it's not really necessary to be a 'curiosity chaser'. As all people are unique, each experience will seem unique and interesting if it can correctly be seen for what this is.
This allows you to experience people with a sincere interest in who and how they are, on a short or long term basis, rather then constantly against some illusory ideal standard that doesn't really exist. One idea is in tune with reality and will lead to satisfaction. The other isn't and wont.
That's my thoughts on this up to this point anyway.