Something I started writing in English. Like always, though, the things I write in English (instead of in Greek) have almost no planning at all, and are at best some sedated mimesis of Poe :/ That said, feedback is welcome!
"
Most people do not think of the meaning of any term; not even of terms which by their very nature relate something to be acted upon. Take vengeance, for example: While it is common knowledge that vengeful behavior can be either planned, cold-blooded, or happen on the spur of the moment during a fit of rage, not many individuals who have taken the law into their own hands are actually aware of what it is they were to accomplish. Certainly anyone who has hit back can tell you that the aim was to avenge the first injury; ask them why, though, and they are more likely to stare or scoff at your question than notice their gross unfamiliarity with the very nature of the undertaken task and fulfilled end.
Indeed, they seem to be experiencing vengeance itself as a mere mimesis – to a symmetric or asymmetric degree – of the harm done to themselves, brought about by its infliction on the original offender. Yet this is far from an explanation of what vengeance is, for in my view it should instead be regarded as a description of its external characteristics; in this sense, their response would be as false as that of a child which we asked to define a triangle and all we got was a crude drawing, revealing in the process that the child knew nothing of the defining principles of that specific geometrical form.
But if one harms you, and you harm them in turn, the defining aspect of your act isn’t that you harmed them, but that you did so in response to your own injury. And why did you feel inclined, or even forced, to respond in such a way to your injury by them? What is, in other words, the spirit of vengeance itself? I believe it is the spirit of reciprocating an ill, and as to the underlying reason behind the reciprocation… I find that to be a sense of neutralizing the original ill suffered.
It is as if the original attack had to be repelled and then answered back, to sufficient degree, and we often read about those murdering in passion, feeling that they had to kill so as to acquire sufficient closure. Now murder is a case of particular interest, when it is vengeful, because here we may more easily notice just how irrational the impulse to answer back or to harm in turn is in regards to achieving an actual negation of the results the original (usually also murderous, or leading to complete ruin on some level) attack: The vengeful murderer simply cannot hope they will return things to the previous state of equilibrium; a loved one was killed, or some other major catastrophic event took place, and they are clearly powerless to reverse any of that – and yet they still do fight back and obliterate the guilty party, neutralizing the force which forever altered the resting point of life’s precious and so fragile pendulum. AND YET if asked, assuming they did destroy in a moment of rage, they will always explain away their action by speaking of reciprocals and closures. Because, as I already noted, they confuse the description of their operations with the meaning they had, not being the least bit conscious of the latter. And it’s no wonder they are unaware of the meaning: the meaning is seemingly illogical; they never would be able to cancel the old harm by bringing about its reciprocation.
Some meanings are illogical, but this does not at all connote that they remain equally illogical if analyzed further… What is already telling in such seemingly illogical meanings is that they serve as a blocking point for the human intellect, like a barrier which forces you to recall you already are very tired, and may as well go back to your familiar surroundings instead of continuing this tiresome journey. If you think that the difficulty – which may seem insurmountable – in moving past this barrier is a result of there being nothing else to examine past this point, you are very simply arguing something to the effect that the gorge, the mountain, the dense forest, the sea or any other physical obstacle ahead of you, signifies you have reached some surprisingly close-by land’s end, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Since, however, we have quite abruptly reached this first obstacle while examining the passionately vengeful psychical disposition – and arguably reached such a place without substituting the common path with a deliberately erratic counterpart – we would do well, prior to moving on with our examination of what might lie behind the obstacle which stopped us, to first examine up to the same point the second type of vengeful disposition, which is the calculative one. And provided it is indeed exceeding in calculation the first type, we have no reason to be surprised if it so happens that it takes us a little more time to cover the analogue ground up to the corresponding first obstacle:
A vengeful individual, who will act in cold-blood and with the help of machination, shall not of course limit himself or herself to merely reciprocating the critical blow. While the end-result is still to deliver that blow, the act is prolonged and – if we may call it that - “enriched” by the extension both in time and in planning needed before the full scheme is unfolded. Furthermore, it is typically the case that vengeful actors of this second type have an added end to meet, which is to avoid being named as the agent of vengeance; unlike with the direct attack the agent of the impulsive vengeance unleashes on the victim, the agent of the calculative vengeance remains typically indirect up to the final moment, so as to negate suspicion – knowing full well that the Law reserves its leniency only for those who act on impulse.
"