Originally Posted by
JustRob
I was a "voluntary" patient in a mental hospital in the late sixties and early seventies. They used some pretty heavy techniques then as a matter of course, like Largactil the "liquid cosh" more often associated with prisons nowadays, electric shock therapy and long term depot drugs. Who can say how much of the effects they understood then? I lost a whole week of my life along the way, during which time I was apparently bedridden in hospital and my angel subsequently told me that I didn't know who she was then despite being fully conscious. I didn't remember any of it afterwards, so I can't even be sure that that was the real me or some other personality within me trying to make sense of his existence. It may even have been a temporal shift, my mind reverting to a time before I met her. Maybe that is why it seems to be able to shift in time now, even possibly gaining access to my future memories. Who knows? If so, then that was no doubt an unexpected result, but it proved quite useful during my working career. I certainly had a reputation for dealing with problems before they happened or at least at the instant that they did without needing any apparent time for thought. As the treatment was all ostensibly voluntary I soon just stopped them giving it and have been very happy with my life ever since, now living in comfortable financially secure retirement at liberty to do what I please, within social reason of course.
When people talk about being normal it both amuses and worries me. I've been there and back and can do it as I please now, but perhaps they just don't know entirely what their minds are capable of yet. Who should we trust more, the person who has found the edge of their "normality" and knows how to deal with it or the one who believes that their presumed normality is boundless? "Normality" is as much to do with social conformity as anything anyway. That has always been so. Back when I was in mental hospital I met a homosexual there whom they were trying to "cure". He told me that I was quite safe in his company as he didn't fancy me. Despite definitely being heterosexual I nevertheless felt offended at not having the choice.
So, was it my perception of reality that changed back then or am I still the same person I always was but in a different reality? To tell the truth there's no difference. Each of us sees reality in a different way and just because we often use the same words and come to the same conclusions about its nature, that doesn't mean that we fundamentally see it the same way.
When I give my mind full rein and write fiction the results can be confusing to my readers because I'm taking them into an environment that they may not have fully experienced yet. Ideas of reality and personal identity slip away and all that there is left to cling to is simple rationality and whatever fundamental tenets make us human, but how many of us really comprehend what they are?