Work In Progress (WIP)

          I was shaken this week, by the news that an old friend had died. The fact that we hadn’t been in touch for more than 40 years does not dim the vivid flashbacks I am still experiencing, though it does cause me to think about the nature of friendship and the circumstances in which it flourishes and dwindles. In our case, the story was one of intersecting social circles at a time before we all settled on our various trajectories, some of which, like ours, never coincided thereafter. So, I can’t help speculating how things went for my former friend. And I mean personally – the stuff behind the headlines of family and career. Did he die at peace with himself, his hopes, expectations and ambitions? Not that any of those things are fixed: in my experience, they can change over time and according to the twists and turns of fate. But was he the same person, in the end, as the one I knew?

          It's a philosophical question and one that has been addressed by many an eminent thinker. It begins with the notion of ‘self’ and what makes an individual a personality, rather than just another ant in a colony. Is it, as Locke contended, the fact of consciousness that defines self? Or is it, as Hulme suggested, merely a bundle of perceptions? Meanwhile, nihilists seem to suggest that the argument is futile, while theologians neatly sidestep the issue by relying on the notion of ‘souls’, which they dreamt up and cannot prove. Since I have nothing definitive to put forward, I will myself sidestep the issue by quoting a stand-up comic, whose name I have forgotten but whose opening lines I remember well: “I’m a man who likes to ask life’s big questions, like: What is our purpose here? Where do we come from? Where are we going? Should we be taking sandwiches?”

          For all practical purposes, we are individual persons and we do have a notion of ‘self’, even if we can but speculate as to how it exists and is perceived. But following on from that, comes another question: are we the same person now as we were before? Or, in analytical language, what makes it true that a person at one time is the same thing as a person at another time? We’ve all heard it said, “He’s not the man he once was,” but what is it that is different? Leaving aside obvious physical changes, are we witnessing altered personality traits or merely an adjustment of ambition (the one being fundamental, the other tactical)?

          In this, I can only answer for myself. The physical parts of me are certainly not as they were, though the changes are due to natural progression, aka ageing. And there are some characteristics that I have never been called upon to test: valour might be an example, as I am of the lucky generation that never went to war. But let’s suppose that I am characteristically pessimistic. Can that be turned around by dint of determination and, if so, would that qualify me as a changed person, or just someone who has changed their behaviour?  My perception of myself is that I have developed rather than changed – and in a good way. I feel older, yes, but more knowledgeable and, therefore, more qualified to make decisions based on logic. Not that I always do, of course: that extra glass of wine often turns out to have been an error of judgement.

         As for my recently deceased friend, I will never know, as all I have now is a snapshot in my memory of our time together. But I am certain that, when it comes to my turn to exit, I would prefer the epitaph WIP to RIP.