dear forum people,
having watched steven's film on bipolarity, i kept wondering for several days whether there should be a change of perspective concerning the "illness" or not. i understand it makes people suffer, yet it makes them live life in "high" periods in very intense ways as well and most of the interviewed persons of the film wouldn't want to change their personality if they could.
i know that society demands of its members to be "mellow" and functioning day-in day-out with no longer break possible. we cannot handle euphoria and extremes or drop out periods. our work demands constant performances. but is that really the only way to have a healthy life? don't get me wrong, i don't want to relativise the severity of the condition - after all it is leathal to some who suffer deeply. but - as the interviewees who manage to deal with their condition wouldn't want to change their moods into "mellow" for good, don't you think it is time for a change of perspective?
is "mentally ill" something to be constructed to make people function in mainstream society's ways and (post-)industrialisms demands?
why not cherishing the "high" times and giving 200% in whatever one does and then allowing oneself to be "low" and drop out for a while to "recover" from the highness?
is constant mellow really the only way to have a happy and "sane" life?
and am i the only one who is shocked by numb-making pills for people who are not born mellow and even-tempered?
what do you think?
should we consider bi-polarity "light" (without the strong suicidal tendencies and severe dangers, i mean, really wouldn't want to relativise that) as an "illness"?
my guts tell me not to. then again, i am "balanced" most of the time of my life so far.
i would be interested in your position on that.