A Conundrum

Because I work as a medical editor, I have access to a lot of medical resources. So the other day I took the Beck Depression Inventory. Astoundingly, I got a score of 5, which isn't even anywhere near depressed.  To be depressed you have to have a score of at least 11.  True, two of the questions were worded in such a way as to make me answer them in such a way as to yield a score of 0, but even if I'd answered them differently, my total score would only have been a 7.

For example I answered "I feel I have failed more than the average person" "No", but then, I don't see myself as a demographically average person.  Do I feel I have failed more than someone from my original sociodemographic background?  Or do I feel I have failed more than most of the people my age that I would be socializing with?  The answer to both of those questions would have been "yes".

Then there's "I get as much satisfaction out of things as I used to."  I answered that question "yes", which yields a score of 0, but for me that is not the question.  For me the question is do I spend as much time doing things I get satisfaction out of, and the answer to that is "no".  I have neither the money, the time, or the family structure (either single, or with a partner who is as healthy and solvent as I am) to do them.

So I am not depressed.  My therapist says she agrees.  But says I am "unhappy" most of the time.  Actually that is not true.  I talk to her about the things I am unhappy about, by way of trying to change them.  And I suppose I write here about the things I am unhappy about.  Most people I socialize with would not describe me as unhappy, and in fact I enjoy most aspects of life in the world other than pursuing my livelihood alone at my laptop, and engaging with my partner about her housework issues, medical issues, and money problems.  The source of my unhappiness is that these things that are unhappy making take up most of my time.  But I can't see myself spending my tiny rind of free time doing the kind of phony networking you have to do to find other sorts of work and I don't really believe that there is any other source of work that would be this readily available that I would like that much more.  And I am not going to abandon my partner, even though she really isn't that any more: more like a child that I cherish and care for because she can't take care of herself.

The "conundrum" is that being bored makes me unhappy and being unhappy makes me boring.  What do I have to talk about that would interest anyone?  My immediate enivrons are stuffed with people who do all kinds of interesting things.

Here's an example.  Yesterday the church had a panel discussion about "faith and the performing arts".  Probably that is not something anyone would ask me to talk about but in point of fact no one there (or anywhere) has ever asked me to talk about anything.  Nor have very many people that I know expressed even the slightest interest in me, other than as a human being (which is important) with a life that has ups and downs (people were very kind to me when my mother died, when my pets died, and during various times when my partner has been ill and things have been stressful).

Something interesting that, actually, two people said at that talk was how much they hated "self-promotion" and the press.  I can understand about hating self-promotion: there's something tacky about it.  But the press is another story.  I would love to get someone from the press interested in me.  The question is how to do it?  You don't have to be a celebrity, politician, or serial killer.  At least half the articles in the New York Times Magazine, for example, are about relatively ordinary people who belong to a demographic that someone wants to write about.  So how are these people found?  I probably belong to at least five demographics that someone would love to write about.  Are ads placed somewhere?  (I guess now it would be done online.)

For example, I would have been a perfect person to be interviewed for This article. So where did the author find his subjects?

One thing I miss about 12 step programs is that everyone is allowed to tell their story and every story is deemed equally interesting.  I think the reason I am hesitant to go back there is it doesn't seem a good use of my time.  I have to sit and listen to someone talk for a half hour and then may or may not get called on if I raise my hand, once I start speaking they set a timer, and no one is allowed to refer to anything I said during the meeting because that is considered "cross talk".  If I were going to get involved with a group of some kind I would want something small, where everyone gets an equal share of the talking time.

I think a lot of my being unhappy is being situated in the wrong peer group.  Not just about singing, but about a lot of things.  Most people I know have interesting careers (or did), travel, and come to the table (literally and figuratively) with things to talk about.

And the more bored and boring I feel, the unhappier I get, and the unhappier I get, the more boring I am, and so on and so forth.

I might feel completely different about myself if f I knew and spent time with more "average" people: women my age with high school diplomas who have had a spotty employment and marital history and would be bowled over by all the literature I've read, the art I've seen, and the music I've sung, however well or badly I've sung it.  But people like that are as rare as hen's teeth where I live.