Sanity is an intersting concept, to me, but not one which is easy to define.

Usually, we talk about sanity being the opposite to madness, just as black is to white. However, it seems unusual that one of the attributes that is so critical to human existence within society is so poorly defined, and that its explanation relies almost exclusively on the absence of other diametrically opposed characteristics.

We could all readily identify someone who was mad- we all know the signs: Talks in riddles, makes no sense, screams, eyes role, is aggitated, has no logic or reasoning, believes things are not what they appear, repeats the same things again and again, is obsessed with engaging in particular activities.

But what does a sane person look like? Have you ever seen one? If you saw someone and they lacked all the above characteristics, would that mean that they were sane, could you be sure? And if you were mad, how would you know when you had safely returned to the suggested bliss of sanity?.

To me sanity, as I think most people would think of it, is the ability to deal with the endless stresses of adjusting to a world which can be unfulfilling, unfair, unpredictable and undecihperable (a very un world) without the manifestation of certain reactions to it.

On a near daily basis the sane person is expected to shift seamlessly between identities, behaviour and reaction, without ever rolling their eyes, screaming out in despair in crowded places or frothing at the mouth. Is this fair? Fuck no. It seems to me to be insane that we should be expected to put up with everything and not display, at least occassionally, a certain madness.

God knows that I have had extended periods when I have questioned whether I might be losing it. Now that I think about it, these periods were probably the periods that prove my sanity, not bring it into question.

Am I mad??