who gets to decide which "image" or "self" a person has is the real one? psychologists? professors or intellectuals with prestige? assholes on the internet?
Gotta agree with Zhao here, on letting people "become" and "fake it". Personally, I don't believe there is a 'faking it'. Even if something someone says is wrong or idealistic or perhaps pseudy, it still might come from true feelings, so it's ok with me. I mean, as far as our "real" selves, isn't that which someone invests themselves in, which becomes from their desires and passions and beliefs, as much their real self as the "reality" of whatever mundane or traumatizing experiences they inevitably had to endure at whichever point like we all have? Why should they be tethered to that, if they see life as more than the most dull, reductive facts, having to take a shit, limitations (however temporal), mechanistic processes, bills, etc? It's like some materialist, Darwinist, logical-positivist types have to suck the LIFE out of everything, force a cold, dead, fatalistic reality on everyone. "No, you're not not educated enough; no, you're not 'properly' creative, no, your happiness doesn't reflect this bland reality, you're a FRAUD". Everyone I've personally ever respected would probably be considered pretentious, narcissistic, and I'm sure riddled with (pharmaceutical company perpetuated) "disorders". People of creativity and imagination and faith. Should these people just resign to depression and never try, never grow, never express themselves because they MIGHT BE WRONG or look foolish? Of course, that's not to say there aren't a lot of things I've heard that make cringe, art that makes me gag (this includes things I've said, old high school art I dig up), so I can't fault anyone's opinions in here either. And of course, if people are going to take the risk of expressing themselves, they have to accept the fact that not everyone will approve or agree, and that's okay.
Reality is what we agree on, and I resent that.