g, when I"Here, when the message is getting more vague, the rules of communication get twisted. The message probably isn't what happened when the other one was in the toilet, but: "I have a better life than you do" or "my life is just as exiting as yours". There is kind of a subtext being spoken, a very simple but powerful, and somewhat insecure message secretly being transferred. But the interesting question is: who is the receiver of this questionable message? At the same time as she is trying to convince the other, she is convincing herself, and barely passing time. But what results, is a circle of lying. Lying to others, lying to herself. And moreover this sort of action feeds into a picture of how and what people should be. It breaks down like this: everybody is colouring the "truth", trying to convince themselves and others that they are somebody. But at the same time, when others are doing the same, this gets harder and harder. This turns into a paradox, people are seeing the things they should be, or what they want to be and while trying to fit in these narrow categories they drift further and further away from the ideologies and moral codes from which the original models of behaviour and being were developed from. For an example a person going on about how much fun he/she had last night sort of builds a standard of what has to happen to have a really good night out. When the actual reality is totally something else. The experience itself suffers inflation and the thing that matters is how well it can be represented. There is a saying "it doesn't matter if a story is true, but how good it is." Which is an interesting point, isn't the experience of telling the story just as important as the experience itself? Maybe so, but I emphasise the consequences. Trying to re-live an incident again by telling it as a story and exaggerating it, is somewhat related to drug abuse. The effort of boosting the experience with overstatements, and ...
