What’s better? To forget, or to accept? A Dialogue Between Camus and the Dalai Lama
How does one heal from suffering? Should one forget what seems to be their fate? Should they accept the fate that has been put forward to them? Michael Gondry’s film Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind explores this particular theme: how do you effectively deal with losing something you’ve built an attachment to? Today, Albert Camus and His Holiness the Dalai Lama will discuss their views on how the film’s main character, Joel, went about processing the cognitive loss of his love Clementine.
The film starts with the happy couple Joel and Clementine. They eventually suffer a very dramatic, harsh breakup, a breakup so harsh that Clementine books an appointment at Lacuna to have all memories of her and Joel’s relationship terminated. Joel is not yet aware of this and decides to visit her at her work to apologize and resolve their issues. Upon the realization that she no longer knows who he is, he finds a letter from Lacuna confirming that he has been wiped from her memory. Inveigled by grief and rage, Joel books the same appointment as her with the hope of erasing her, too. In the process of getting his memories wiped, however, Joel has to relive through them. Midway through, he changes his mind; he isn’t ready to let go of Clementine. He didn’t care whether his memories were good or bad; he just wanted to keep Clementine in his mind. He hides her in random childhood memories, ones she had never lived through, with hope of her being safe there. Despite his strong efforts, the erasure is successful; Clementine is no longer a part of his conscience. Her absence doesn’t last long, though, as they find one another again. The couple receives tapes from Lacuna, describing how they hurt each other in their past memories; notwithstanding, they make the conscious decision to stay together.
With that summary in mind, I now pose the question to the two figures, “Was Joel’s decision to make an appointment at Lacuna an act of healing, or was it an act of avoidance?”
The Dalai Lama responded first,
“Joel’s decision was made unconsciously. Under the influence of these destructive emotions, his apprehension of reality was obscured entirely. The act would be one of avoidance if he had the conscience of knowing whether it would inflict harm on him or others. One cannot ‘heal’ without letting go, yet one cannot progress spiritually while in that altered state of mind.”
Camus responded to this, saying,
“The problem with Joel’s decision was not that he made it unconsciously. His avoidant behavior comes from his refusal to face the absurd, or in other words, the reality of losing Clementine.”
Camus wrote a famous piece named The Myth of Sisyphus, which also explored this theme of “the absurd.” He wrote a line in particular that really encapsulates what he’s trying to say here: “One does not discover the absurd without being tempted to write a manual of happiness” (Camus 3). In Joel’s scenario, he searches for this “manual” almost immediately. He didn’t even consider sitting with and facing his intense grief for Clementine.
The Dalai Lama then replied,
“In Buddhism, we are taught the 3 poisons: craving/attachment, anger, and ignorance. These poisons are considered the roots of all human suffering. Through the point you are making, Joel has been put under the influence of all of these, meaning that he needs to cultivate some very specific antidotes. In order to advance spiritually, to let go of all of this negativity, he does need to confront his reality. More specifically, he needs to combat his anger through compassion, compassion for himself and the pain caused by his past relationship. If he succeeds in doing so, it’ll allow for more mental clarity, paving a path for him to be enlightened as he learns to detach from Clementine.”
In Daniel Goleman’s Destructive Emotions: A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama, Alan Wallace draws a connection between being ignorant and forgetting, “Finally, distraction is similar to forgetfulness, It’s simply a mind that is incoherent, drawn every which way by things that come up, All of those things come out of both ignorance and attachment” (Alan, Goleman, 108), illustrating entirely the extreme effects of being in a state of mind that is incomprehensive with reality.
This led me to my next question. At this point, Joel is actively regretting going through with the process of forgetting his memories with Clementine: “When Joel is trying to salvage all of his memories with Clementine, good and bad, how does that reflect his relationship with attachment?”
Camus responded first this time, saying,
Get laura picard’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
“Attachment is an unavoidable, inevitable human feeling that cannot be combated. With attachment comes passion, and Joel is clearly showcasing it in his fortified attempt to keep Clementine in his conscience. As I wrote of Sisyphus, ‘He is as much through his passions as through his torture’, mirroring Joel’s sense of reflection. To me, his realization represents a state of consciousness and self-honesty– a positive step forward for Joel. In keeping these memories, especially the negative, Joel is facing the reality of his past and is ready to face it properly.”
Camus here is unveiling the positive side of Joel’s relationship with attachment. Going to Camus’s writings, he writes how a positive relationship with attachment comes from knowing your fate. He represents his viewpoint in The Myth of Sisyphus, saying “At each of those moments when he leaves the heights and gradually sinks toward the lairs of the gods, he is superior to his fate. He is stronger than this rock” (Camus 3). Sisyphus’s control over the rock draws parallels to Joel’s attempt to control the mind erasure. In both cases, it’s not the outcome that matters, but the conscious decision to gain control over it.
The Dalai Lama jumped back in,
“Yes, Joel is conscious in that specific moment; he’s gained spatial awareness, but he is still being driven by craving and attachment. Joel’s approach to salvaging his memories with Clementine is not organized; he is shoving her in every possible corner of his mind while in a state of panic and stress. The ‘passion’ Joel has to stay attached to these memories could maybe emit positive emotions, but it will not allow for him to progress spiritually. It was an ignorant decision to decide to wipe her from his mind, but he must now accept his reality and work towards letting go.”
Even Joel’s positive emotions towards Clementine are clouding his reality. This perspective is supported by neuroscientist Richie Davidson, saying “In Buddhist framework the positive emotions that are associated with attachment would also presumably lead to an obscuring of our ability to accurately apprehend reality” (Davidson, Goleman 112). The “poison” holding Joel, or any other suffering person, back from growing and finding inner peace is not always something that’ll inflict “bad feelings”. Rather, these poisons are inconspicuous and hidden from the human mind; they require specific antidotes that won’t be obtained naturally.
Approaching the end of the film, Joel and Clementine have now been sent back to square one. They don’t remember one another, yet they remain drawn to each other. They are aware, though, of the fact that they’ve hurt one another in the past. With their conscious decision to stay together, I pose one final question: “What does Joel and Clementine repeating their cycle mean for their suffering?”
The Dalai Lama’s eyes lit up to the word “cycle”; he explained,
“Joel and Clementine’s relationship can be compared to the karmic cycle of life Buddhists hope to achieve liberation from. In the film, we only see one cycle of this relationship. If Joel commits himself to escaping this negativity, to work on his attachment, this cycle allows for him to make a change. If he decides to remain ignorant, to remain under the influence of these destructive emotions, his karma will accumulate, leaving him trapped in an endless cycle of suffering.”
Camus responds directly,
“What is so wrong about the cycle? Joel and Clementine listened to the tapes; they knew their fate, yet they still made the concrete decision to pursue their relationship. To me, knowing your fate allows for you to accept the negatives. Would you rather know a pain, a familiar one, is coming towards you, or have a pain much stronger come unexpectedly?”
Listening to both of them, I found myself somewhere in between. If life brought Joel and Clementine back together, despite all their efforts to lose one another, there must be some significant meaning, or maybe a mission, through the repeated cycle of their relationship. The issue here, though, is how Joel or Clementine decides to take on this journey to self–betterment– to spiritual growth. We aren’t shown the other variations of their relationship, but we do see acceptance on both parts; they wouldn’t mind doing it again exactly the same way. With that, it may no longer be a story of self-betterment or a journey to enlightenment, but rather a story that stays in its comfort zone, just like Sisyphus, One must imagine Joel as happy.
Works Cited
Camus, Albert. The Myth of Sisyphus. London, Penguin, 2013.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Directed by Michel Gondry, Focus Features, 2004.
Goleman, Daniel, et al. Destructive Emotions: How Can We Overcome Them?: A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama. New York, Bantam Books, 2004.
