I've been to the edge, and there I stood and looked down. And then I turned around and walked away. I've been back for a few visits but have kept turning around. I lost a lot of friends there. Anthony and Ernest and Robin and so many others didn't turn back. It's easy for me to sympathize.
But maybe it's better to give them contempt. Moral opprobrium, disgrace, dishonor, could help the marginally committed to turn back.
Contempt for such great human beings, who did far more with their lives than I ever will? No. Just for one choice.
The ability to not sympathize with that choice is a blessing, an apple you may be better off not eating.
Your logic makes no sense. You left out the part where bourdain abandoned his nine year old daughter. Mental illness is not an excuse to abandon children. Bourdain deserves more than contempt —- he deserves vilification.
If he’d had zero kids, I’d sympathize and say RIP, what a tragedy.
But he DID have a kid. A kid he abandoned. Bourdain is not just mean for that decision — he’s borderline evil.
>Mental illness is not an excuse to abandon children. Bourdain deserves more than contempt —- he deserves vilification.
What you're saying here is "I acknowledge that guy had a condition that made his thought process irrational. But.. what an asshole for making an irrational decision!"
How can you call that logical?
If you want to deny the existence of Mental Illness, thats one thing. But to acknowledge it exists and still blame the patient for succumbing to it? That my friend, a level of mental gymnastics that even climate change deniers or flat earthers would envy.
You just debated a straw man because I never said what you just quoted me as saying.
All thought processes are irrational because humans are not rational beings. He’s not an asshole for making irrational decisions — by that logic we’re all assholes. He’s an asshole for abandoning his fucking child.
Lots of people make irrational decisions WITHOUT abandoning their children. Those people are certainly NOT assholes. Bourdain does not fit that description.
You’re doing mental gymnastics to excuse the abandonment of children that are absolutely next level. Here’s Occam’s perspective:
Abandoning children is bad. There’s no excuse for it. Full stop. The end.
You’re currently a child abandoner apologist. It’s not a good look.
Why is the highest purpose in life children? Of course he had a responsibility for another human being, but why is that the highest good? Are we not allowed to strive for more? Or consider other higher goods?
According to the article, prior to Bourdain's publication of Kitchen Confidential when he was in his early 40's, his outside-the-US travel experience consisted solely of a few trips to France as a child and one trip as an adult to Japan:
> He just talked about what traveling the world would be like for him. He had gone to France as a kid, he had gone to Japan once, and that was it.
The fact that Bourdain not only achieved massive professional success after toiling in obscurity well into his 40s, but more specifically became the most famous traveler in the world after barely having traveled in 2+ decades of adult life is pretty damn impressive. Definitely gives weight to the argument that "it's never too late"!
Watching old episodes is very ambivalent: The constant joke/open secret discussion of his own self-worth/esteem is still refreshingly honest - even after his death - but now takes on a harrowing new (Although in hindsight perhaps unseen) meaning.
I'm not too sure which the last series is, as I was only introduced fairly shortly before his death to Bourdain's work, but as someone new to him — all his appearances have that faint background noise of world weary despair. It's not overwrought and doesn't in any way taint his shows, but it's a distinct undercurrent. Perhaps I'm sensitive to his language and vaguely grim manner because I've in a very small way seen into various worlds of despair, but I was in no way surprised by his last choice.
It's sad, but he seemed to have lived a good life and at least was in control of his final journey — most of us aren't.
I don't think anyone was surprised by his choice. It was part of his person. He knew the other side well, and didn't try to hide it.
That's what made him stand out to me. He wasn't singing the praises of every place he went to. He was a real human being, exploring and talking about what he saw and felt while he was bouncing from place to place. Always a little dismissive, but not because he didn't care about the people or places he was visiting. More because he was an observer to the world, not a participant.
The news of his death kind of shocked me in that I had just stayed a few months earlier in the hotel he died in... News article was a photo of the hotel and I was all recalling the great memories of the trip, until read the headline! :( Brutal!
Apparently it was his favorite hotel, which didn't surprise me to hear. If you ever get the chance, trust his (and my) judgement and at least visit the town of Kayserberg, France!
I think his women brought him down, he had very unhealthy relationship with his girlfriend and the mother of his child. Seems to me like he was very naive in his dealing with them and they took advantage of him, both financially and cheating. It is very humiliating for any man, certainly for someone in the spot light. Most starts don't care but maybe he was someone who actually cared and was a bit more normal deep inside.