"PS Please excuse my not mailing this — but I don’t know your new address." That hit hard.
[deleted]
I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
11–20 of 135 posts
Re: I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
#12As someone in my first real realtionship of 5+ years[0] with someone I love more than I could ever have imagined, this hits pretty hard...
I know it's a bit cliche and cringe to say, but my partner really did become my best friend. If I feel bad, the first thing I search for is being close and talking to them. We understand and support each other completely and do random things together, like described in the letter.
We'll move in together in about a year, loosing them would probably rock me really hard and I currently can't imagine who I'd use as emotional support, as the person in question would be gone.
May we happily be together for a long time [0] only realized now that i've been with them for almost all of my adult life (yes, not that old).
Re: I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
#13I did not know Feynman was responsible for finding the cause of the Challenger explosion. That's remarkable on top of everything else he did.
It's worth reading Feynman's Personal Observations on Reliability of Shuttle, published as part of the Rogers Commission Report.
https://www.nasa.gov/history/rogersrep/v2appf.htm
> "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."
Re: I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
#14Man, when the analytical minded come to grips with emotions it always hits hard for me. I love that he reflects on the impractically of his own thoughts and just accepts how he feels. This love letter hits hard
Re: I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
#15My wife died 10 years ago, so I understand that pain. Dealing with death is never easy. The thing I miss most about my wife is the depth of emotional connection; she knew everything about me being very deeply in love with me and everything I did really mattered to her. It has taken me nearly 10 years to build a network of friends who can give me comparable levels of socialization and attention; I have about two dozen…
I mean this seriously. Why not both? I don’t see the problem with having multiple types of relationships with people, including sex. As long as everyone is on the same page (consensual, they know it’s casual, etc.)
Sorry for your loss and glad you’re doing better.
Re: I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
#16Somewhat related: http://www.rosenfels.org/Feynman After the war, Feynman got a "D" from an army psychological evaluation because he, among other things, told the psychiatrist that he occasionally talks to his late wife. "Thinks people talk about him. Thinks people stare at him. Auditory hypnogogic hallucinations. Talks to self. Talks to deceased wife."
Well, people sure do talk about him, he was on point there. That's what we're doing now!
And why wouldn't he talk to himself? Clearly it would be a conversation with a much more interesting person than most people around him (and yes, I'm aware he worked on the Manhattan Project and the Challenger investigation).
Re: I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
#17My wife died 10 years ago, so I understand that pain. Dealing with death is never easy. The thing I miss most about my wife is the depth of emotional connection; she knew everything about me being very deeply in love with me and everything I did really mattered to her. It has taken me nearly 10 years to build a network of friends who can give me comparable levels of socialization and attention; I have about two dozen…
I mean this seriously. Why not both? I don’t see the problem with having multiple types of relationships with people, including sex. As long as everyone is on the same page (consensual, they know it’s casual, etc.) Sorry for your loss and glad you’re doing better.
I don't think strenholme is saying that those casual relationships are morally wrong, but that they're only facsimiles of the connection found in a deep and long relationship (especially one formed when young), and that pursuing facsimiles maybe brings you close enough to the original that you keep pursuing, but not close enough to ever approximate the original, and if what you miss is the original, then this is not a path to satisfaction.
Re: I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
#18My wife died 10 years ago, so I understand that pain. Dealing with death is never easy. The thing I miss most about my wife is the depth of emotional connection; she knew everything about me being very deeply in love with me and everything I did really mattered to her. It has taken me nearly 10 years to build a network of friends who can give me comparable levels of socialization and attention; I have about two dozen…
> I can see why Feynman became sexually promiscuous afterwards, undoubtedly to numb the pain of losing his wife; seduction allowed him to have a form of that connection, albeit without the depth and love of what he had with his wife.
He married again in 1952 and divorced in 1958 (and married again a couple of years later).
I don't know if sexual promiscuity was part of the divorce complaint but apparently this fragment was in it: "He begins working calculus problems in his head as soon as he awakens. He did calculus while driving in his car, while sitting in the living room, and while lying in bed at night."
Re: I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
#19On one hand I am happy that we have things like Marcus Aurelius' Meditations, on the other I feel that peoples private and unpublished writings should be kept private. It's reasonable enough to let a limited number of researchers access private documents, but the broader public, no. This isn't a letter meant for us, it's not meant for anyone to read and I feel that publishing it is a little disrespectful.
Après moi, le déluge.
After I am dead, publish everything, correspondence, search history, location history, nude photos. I am dead, I cannot care.
Re: I love my wife. My wife is dead (1946)
#20On one hand I am happy that we have things like Marcus Aurelius' Meditations, on the other I feel that peoples private and unpublished writings should be kept private. It's reasonable enough to let a limited number of researchers access private documents, but the broader public, no. This isn't a letter meant for us, it's not meant for anyone to read and I feel that publishing it is a little disrespectful.
I think that once the author has passed, there's no harm to the publishing.
In fact, I'd argue that it shows us true human nature, unfiltered and unedited. If we'd only allowed what was meant to be public, we'd be losing perspective as works meant to be public are carefully crafted for that purpose.