Asakiyume mita

So when the author said, "I know what you're imagining, but no one has no one," and then there are examples of how no one has no one, is she stressing to the reader that yes, as the reader imagines, no one has no one? Or was it she who was pointing out to the reader that no one has no one because (opposite reading) readers *don't* realize that no one has no one?

I think indeed we are always predicting the tearing apart of the fabric of society, and yet, of course, as long as there are a handful of people present someplace, there is a society. I guess someone is always feeling unease or distress about changes and someone else is feeling exhilaration at those same circumstances. (And there are others who may not be feeling either of those things.) I wonder what this reality means, or rather, what we can do with this recognition...


Watching sports and theater are different from participating in those things, and I agree that doing them isn't somehow morally or spiritually better than watching them--after all, they're both things that require audiences! So being in the audience is fulfilling a necessary role. But I do think too that people lose something if they feel that the thing they're watching is something they themselves could never do. Or maybe it's not even that they're thinking wistfully, "Oh I could never do that," but simply that it doesn't occur as a possibility.