We are different people to different people, and different people are different people to us.
..............
No aphorism can comment on itself, or justify itself, on pain of ceasing to be an aphorism. But what I am now writing is not part of the above aphorism.
What makes a good aphorism? A good aphorism is pithy, one or two sentences. Three at most. It must lay bare an important truth. A saying clever but false is not a good aphorism. And the same goes for clever but unintelligible. A good aphorism should have 'literary merit' whatever exactly that is. I suggest mine does have some, though you are free to disagree. Note the play on 'different.' The formulation exploits the ambiguity of 'different' as between numerical and qualitative senses. We are qualitatively different people to numerically different people, and numerically different people are qualitatively different to us. Had I written the thing just like that it would have been clear but clunky and devoid of whatever literary value it has.
The thought expressed is not only true but important in the sense that bearing it in mind can help one negotiate the social world with equanimity. We meet people who like us, people who dislike us, and people who are indifferent. Some can't see our faults for our virtues; other are virtues for our faults. One can be discouraged and even depressed at the hostility one arouses in others. One better takes this all in stride if one never forgets that we are:
Different people to different people.
Recent Comments