I felt tired much of today. I woke up around 10.00am and was lying in bed feeling exhausted when my Dad reminded me that I had a psychiatrist appointment that I had forgotten about. I struggled to get dressed and go. My Dad gave me a lift to the psychiatrist, but the twenty minute walk home afterwards was gruelling because I was so tired. I suppose I could have phoned Dad for a lift, but I don’t like to ask for too many, plus I needed the exercise. I was tired by the time I got home.
I’ve struggled to do much today. I really want to sleep, but I felt that I shouldn’t for multiple reasons: I had to cook dinner and finish writing my devar Torah as well as going to shiur (religious class) later and I didn’t want to disrupt my sleep pattern even more. Lately I’ve been going to my Dad’s shul (synagogue) for Ma’ariv (Evening Prayers) before shiur on Thursdays because they’re practically next door to each other and the times work, but today I felt too drained to do two “peopling” events, so I decided to stick to shiur.
I also managed to spend about half an hour working on my novel. I wrote about 450 words, which was good, but I was dipping into very upsetting parts of my memory and psyche for my writing and after half an hour I felt far too depressed and tired to continue, although I would have liked to have written more. When I told E., she felt it was a downside to writing a novel that draws so much on my personal experiences and mostly negative ones at that. I agreed with her, but on reflection, while it is problematic in some ways, I think there are advantages. I wouldn’t push someone with anxiety or PTSD to face their fears, but I think there are advantages to confronting your demons, if you can do it in a safe way. Hiding behind trigger warnings and the like is ultimately a limiting existence. Although I’m not sure if writing is the best therapy; I remember John Cleese saying in an interview that writing is therapeutic, but not very good therapy, which is why so many writers get stuck writing the same idea again and again.
More fun with the not-for-profit sector… I had a meeting with my psychiatrist, which went well. I said I’ve been feeling a lot better this week now I’ve got a new job and she was pleased with that. She asked if I want to take anything for my anxiety, but I was reluctant to take more meds (I take three different psych meds already, all of which are multiple tablets some at multiple times of the day, plus three daily vitamin supplements). She said I can see my GP if the anxiety gets bad and I change my mind. I thought she was going to discharge me, but she offered me a review appointment in six months time, which I took just in case things don’t work out with my new job or for any other reason. I always feel a bit bad taking these appointments when I might be fine, but it’s so hard to get back into the NHS system once you’ve been discharged that I usually take them when I can, which I guess in economic terms is a “perverse incentive” (when the system encourages you to do something that ought to be discouraged, in this case taking appointments that other people may need more than I do).
So that was positive. The negative was hearing back from the charity that works with the NHS to get people with mental illnesses into work. My case worker still wants me to sign papers and insists I have to sign them in person, and by tomorrow. I got annoyed, but I’m basically a nice person so said I would sign them if she could meet me closer to my home than the office where I saw her (she had already suggested meeting in a coffee shop to sign). It’s still a trip out of my way, but it’s not the end of the world and I won’t feel bad.
One thought I had today which is worth reflecting on and possibly expanding on in the future is that I realised that I tend to see all my mistakes as moral failings, even if they are morally neutral oversights or innocent errors (saying the wrong words, accidentally interrupting someone etc.). If I can view simple mistakes as morally wrong, then it’s no wonder I magnify the moral enormity of genuine religious or moral failings.
On the way home I indulged in bad habits and went into a charity shop and bought a second-hand book. I’m trying to cut down on my book buying as I have a stack of books to read, but most of those are heavy-going classic literature or non-fiction. I am trying to get back into reading both of those, but I don’t think they will necessarily be suitable for work days, when I need something lighter to read on my lunch break and on the Tube on the way home (I’m trying to do Torah study during the trip there in the morning). Plus, it was only £1.
The book, Dominion by C. J. Sansom, is a “what if the Nazis had won World War II?” alternate history. There are rather a lot of these. I actually own five of these now, I realise a little to my surprise, including one written before World War II had even started (it predicted what the Nazis would do if Appeasement failed to stop them); and that’s not counting two episodes of Star Trek that aren’t too far from the premise. That’s probably not surprising, as a it’s a major and comparatively recent historical event where everyone agrees that the achieved outcome was better than most of the alternatives. Still, it is a little surprising how relatively few other alternate history premise novels are films are out there in comparison. There are more I think in books published for the science fiction market, but not so many mainstream ones, whereas there are a lot of mainstream “Hitler wins” novels. Of the five I own, four (Fatherland, Dominion, Making History and Swastika Night) were published as mainstream novels, not specialist science fiction ones and the fifth, The Man in the High Castle, was I think originally published by a science fiction publisher, but my copy is the Penguin Modern Classics edition (so far as I know it’s the only Philip K. Dick novel to be published by that line, which is telling in itself) and of course now it’s a streamable TV series. And that’s not counting ones I don’t own, like the Small Change series, the somewhat related The Plot Against America or the fake documentary film It Happened Here (all vaguely on my enormous ‘to read/watch’ list).
I realised I own a couple of other alternate history novels with other premises. The novella Great Work of Time by John Crowley is a borderline time-travel/alternate history story focused on changing time to stop the British Empire falling. It’s definitely worth a read if you like time-travel or alternate history stories. Red Son is kind of a “what if the Communists had won the Cold War?” story, albeit with the twist that they win because Superman lands in the Ukraine instead of Kansas. Yes, it’s a Superman graphic novel, but an intelligent one and also worth a read. And The Difference Engine by William Gibson and Bruce Sterling is a steam-punk speculation on what would have happened if the Victorians had developed computers. Strangely, Doctor Who has dealt more with threats to change history than scenarios where history has already been changed in an alternative history sense, but the parallel universe thread in Inferno is basically a “Hitler wins” type scenario, while Turn Left was a very personal alternate timeline story with major changes to the fictional narrative spiralling out from a minor difference.
It’s strange that I would not have mentioned it alternate history as a subgenre that particularly interests me until now, but my bookshelves say otherwise. Maybe it’s not surprising, as I guess alternate history is where my interests in history and science fiction dovetail.