In Which the Rolling Stones are sort of Right (but still funny-looking)

The other day, I lost my phone. You've probably heard me whinge about it, in fact. A nice lady in the Physiology Department thoughtfully picked it up and locked it in her office overnight, but then rather frustratingly took the next day off sick and didn't give anyone permission to open her office with the spare key. The upshot of this was that yesterday after waiting rather more than an hour, I was allowed to see my phone through a window, and hear it ringing, but not actually get it. Something about this was really really frustrating. Maybe it was the fact that I could easily have obtained it if the security guard were less of a Letter of the Law guy. Maybe it was the immediate presence combined with the unobtainability. Maybe it was the fact that the other girl in the office was not sure whether the office'd be accesiible at all this week. Maybe it was just that she suggested I ring to see if the woman was in today, but couldn't grasp that that would be difficult while they held my phone prisoner and at the same time was unable to understand why I might really sort of need my phone back within the week.

Probably, though, what it was was the helplessness. It was enough to almost make my eyes mist up, the frustration of it all. Everyone hates feeling helpless. I mean everyone. Like, this is a big enough deal that they use it to give rats depression when they need to test their antidepressant meds and stuff (obviously, the rates of success with therapy alone in rats are poorer, presumably due to the language difference). Maybe it's especially bad for me because of how I'm spoilt and usually can get things that I want. Not, like, a pony and a yacht and an iPhone, but I have a lot of nice things, and very rarely do I ever really suffer, I guess.
I almost feel guilty listening to that song "Common People"; so far in my life, ultimately a lot of the time it's a case of "if you called your Dad he could stop it all" (I assume.I mean, I've always found it better not to test this hypothesis; what if it's a one-time privelage? Or not really the case at all? I'd rather keep my illusory safety net intact, in this case). Possibly, of course, it's not 'worse for me because of living such a nice life' but actually 'not worse at all'. Possibly it only seems that way to me because of the self-absorption which could well be a symptom of that very (putative) spoiling.

Plus, it really sort of annoys me that after all this ridiculousness, when I finally do get to get it back, all I'm likely to say is "thanks for keeping it safe, sorry about the billion alarms and stuff". You know, rather than saying even so much as "maybe handle that differently if it ever comes up again, eh?".

It really reminds me of that (other) song, the one by the Rolling Stones which has the refrain "you can't alway get what you want; (you get what you need)". But I wonder, is that necessarily true either? Sure the meaning of the word 'need' is perhaps a little plastic. I "need" to be at uni today, but I could live if I never went again. I need food and drink, but I could probably go a day or so without it. But what about air? You definitely need air, but people suffocate, right? They don't get what they need. So, does Mick Jagger just not write for those airless losers, or is death a mere nothing? Does it still not count as a "need", because those people could totally surmount their "desire" for air if they just manned up a little? Or am I wildly overthinking a lyric by the same people who brought us "Brown Sugar" a love song which casually uses the imagery of a slaver raping his slaves? Probably it's that last one.

Still! Obviously the take home message here is that while we're unanimously certain that you can't always get what you want, you probably don't always get what you need. Unless.... unless it's a cunning use of the continuous present tense? So, "you get what you need", can mean that you are so far in receipt of what you need, which, given a specific enough definition of "need" must be true for all listeners. Since if the only things you really need are the things which are stopping you from dying, then if you're alive to listen to the Stones at any given time, you're fine at that particular time? Unless you're dying while listening, in which case we'll call it poetic irony.

Maybe this is the same as religion? Or rather the problem solved by religion. Once you have the construct of an eternity to work with, you can overcome the problems with saying that the deity gives you "everything you need". In fact, you just sort of add cred to the "not what you want but what you need" thing, since the less of the air-that-you-want you have, the closer you are to acheiving the enjoyable-eternity-that-you-need. (Note again that this does not constitute a comment on the validity or otherwise of religions in general or particular.)

*****

{This row of stars is one of those ones which symbolises either a total break in subject or the passage of a longer amount of time than you might otherwise think.}

So, what with my desperately unpredictable internet connection it has taken me so long to be able to upload this that I've actually gotten my phone back before I've had a chance to post. But! All's well that ends well, and I'm going to do the sensible thing and end this post here and start a new one to do any new subject nattering.