have you had a long distance breakup?
Culture: Past Lives, relationships and In-Yun. Philosophy: Rebecca Lowe podcast, respect. Chi Thai’s book on her immigration story. Events: London meet-up 17 March; unofficial EV Unconference 26 Apr.
Culture: Past Lives (mild spoilers for film), relationships and In-Yun
Philosophy: Rebecca Lowe podcast, respect
My friend Chi Thai’s book on her immigration story
Events: London meet-up 17 March; unofficial EV Unconference 26 April
Links: Miranda July (life advice); Aella, Ross Douthat (religion); home education
The video call breakup is a modern phenomenon. In the age of the letter, the long distance written word romance and breakup must have been common although we had less agency in our relationship choices then.
I’ve never had a video call breakup. My time of romancing was pre the Zoom age and Skype was barely a thing. I’ve had two important breakups by email and two important voice calls filed with tears.
(One of those voice calls was not a breakup but telling someone they had lost a job which I’m putting into the same type of category).
I watched director Celine Song’s Past Lives on the plane.
Past Lives (2023) by Celine Song is a poignant drama about love, fate, and the Korean concept of In-Yun—the idea that past connections shape present relationships. The film follows childhood friends Nora and Hae Sung, separated when Nora emigrates from South Korea. Reuniting years later in New York, they reflect on what could have been, navigating the tension between destiny and choices.
Relationship movies resonate with their viewer in different ways because we’ve all had different relationships and because our interior lives are mostly hidden.
In a shared experience in live theatre, we can often imagine the whole audience is experiencing a similar moment and we are transformed together.
In the solo airplane seat, does the movie viewer who has never fallen in love experience the same scene as the movie viewer going through breakup?
I would suggest not.
The scenes that resonate with me will be different to others in such a movie.
Distance in both time and space is an ever present force in the film. For me, one of the most moving scenes was the split by video skype call.
The split was not a true deep romantic split in the sense they were not an acknowledged boyfriend and girlfriend. Yet on another level this split was as deep as many people will see.
It called to me all my splits over distance. These splits perhaps combine into some mega meta gestalt split and I found the scene very moving.
The dark screen, the time zone, the beeps from Skype - a modern environment for the long distance split.
All those important splits I’ve had, rolled into one skype call scene.
Another set of scenes features walking with a wheelie bag. I think many would hardly note the bag, but I found it’s presence echoing with all my wheelie bag travels.
Wheelie bags are an item of my older travels. The back pack the item of my younger travels.
Taking a wheelie bag through paths of Brooklyn and Manhattan while on a friendship date, a would-be romance date, or a I-don’t-know-what-this-relationship-is date recalling all the other walking talking dates.
Friendships and relationships are made by walking and talking together.
I think these relationship movies and perhaps you can put Before Sunrise / Sunset (Linklater) here, and maybe In the Mood for Love (Wong Kar Wai), and Lost in Translation (Coppola), in part, echo with us due to the what-ifs and the relationships we’ve all had or might have had.
Another intriguing parallel is the backdrop of the city. Past Lives has Seoul and New York. Lost in Translation has Tokyo. Before Sunrise / Sunset has Paris and Vienna. I’ve walked as a stranger in most of those cities. There is an echo of urbanism that intertwined with these films.
The second last theme I will pick up (and there are many others possible: Korean-American-Canadianism, ambition (can you not win a Nobel or Pulitzer from Korea?), tropes (would I be the bad white villain), time, distance, cinematography; play writing…) is In-Yun
The Korean concept of In-Yun (인연) refers to the idea of fate or destiny that connects people across lifetimes. It suggests that every encounter, no matter how brief, is the result of past-life connections. The deeper the bond in a previous life, the stronger the connection in this one. This idea is often tied to relationships, especially romantic ones, implying that some people are destined to meet again due to accumulated ties from past existences.
Fate is not a unique concept but I find it notable the pervasiveness of In-Yun into modern Korea in every day conversation, arts, literature, relationships and even careers.
In-Yun can make you dwell on missed opportunities and what-ifs, but I think the flip side is that you can take comfort when relationships don’t work out.
People could find comfort in In-Yun, believing that some connections are only meant for a short time, while others are meant to last a lifetime. Or, that connections can rekindle in another life. In-Yun offers an explanation for both loss and connection.
I judge both Korean characters are moved by In-Yun in a way the American is not.
The last little note is the point of ambiguity left at the end (why is she crying?). This ambiguous scene echoes the ambiguity at the end of Lost In Translation (what is whispered?) and even the ambiguity at the end of Before Sunrise / Sunset (do they meet up again? - although resolved in part in the future films).
Now that all those films end on these unexplained scenes I think it how somehow puts some fratricidal pressure to do something similar in any future relationship film in this mode.
Three distantly adjacent connections in my head this week.
I can hardly imagine the life of Miranda July. She gives you a little glimpse of it through her Substack. Her latest musing is:
Let’s do some math. If you have your child roughly every other four days that means you have four days (and nights) without them. If you want one night to be able to go out with a friend and one night to yourself (that night being one of the goals of getting divorced) that leaves two nights for your girlfriend. Is that enough? It is for me but then I’ve also really soared in romantic relationships that were 98 percent iN mY hEad, fantasy. Hard to tell if I’m living the dream or if I’m living IN a dream; my life is suffused with the knowledge that I have a girlfriend, a built-in dreamy vacation. And that vacation is itself drenched with freedom because the relationship is technically open (not a lot of acting on that, but still thrilling and new to me). Does this sound awesome to you or psychotically avoidant? And if it sounds awesome, are by any chance a MOM?
I somehow think there is a movie in that. Taking a walk with Miranda on the one day she has off. Her life advice is a very popular one of her posts (where she advises her friend who is thinking about blowing up her life; and many women invited to give advice in comments). Post here. (I am in part intrigued by July, as I very tentatively dip into 1 person shows and she does performance art from time to time)
I can hardly imagine the life of Aella who was on my podcast, but she was recently profiled in in The Atlantic by Helen Lewis. A day walking round Tokyo with her taking about life would be pretty intriguing too.
In-yun takes matters of past lives on faith. I listened to Ross Douhaut talk about why he has faith in conversation with Tyler Cowen (who I don’t think has religious faith).
It recalled to me my time at Havard on a scholarship aged 20 / 21 with my room mate who was training to be a priest at the Divinity School explaining and arguing to me about ideas of faith and transubstantiation. If you have an open minded interest - and particularly if you want to glimpse a good faith American catholic conservative Christian explain matters of faith then it’s worth a listen.
I had an excellent conversation with philosopher Rebecca Lowe. I have had philosophy conversations with these thinkers:
Jonathan Wolff (philosophy and public policy; disability, society of equals, musical performance)
David Edmonds on Derek Parfit (on Parfit’s life, also trolley problems; future sleeves)
There is an impression that modern philosophy has become esoteric and disconnected from the every day. There is some truth to that I feel having read some philosophy papers and books but I still think the ideas influence public policy at the very highest level (Larry Temkin on Inequality and healthcare in China; Jo Wolff on rail accidents and health access UK policy).
At the high level there are two very broad schools of thought. One school is named consequentialism. Consequentialism is so important that the other school(s) are named in opposition to it are called non-consequentialist.
Consequentialists argue that the morality of an action depends solely on its consequences.
Summed up in the aphorism: “The ends justify the means.”
Rebecca Lowe is not a consequentialist. Her Substack is titled ‘the ends do not justify the means’. It was thoughtful to chat with someone who is committed to consequentialists and utilitarians being morally wrong.
I did find it interesting though that both schools of thought can get to an answer such as eating animals today is morally wrong but from very different lines of argument.
Here is my conversation with Rebecca
Political philosopher Rebecca Lowe discusses her views on freedom, equality, and the ethical implications of emerging technologies. Currently writing a book titled 'Freedom in Utopia,' Rebecca delves into philosophical debates concerning obligations to extinct animals, the ethics of eating meat, and the future potential of lab-grown meat.
On questioning norms and making choices:“Think hard about what the norms are that you follow unthinkingly. There are many ways to live a good life, and it’s for you to work that out for yourself, because you’re the only person who can have any epistemic access to that.”
On fiction and its philosophical role:“I feel quite strongly that people who don’t spend time reading fiction are really missing out on one of the great things about being human—the capacity to separate out from your daily life, think about other worlds, imagine.”
She also touches on the moral considerations surrounding artificial wombs, the possible role of ChatGPT as a tool for philosophical inquiry, and her disillusioning experience running for political office. Rebecca emphasizes the importance of decentralization, freedom, and respect in society while also sharing her creative process and insights into leading a fulfilling life.
I was in Boston last week. I don’t have major insights. American life was seemingly chugging along. I was mostly in a hotel and I didn’t see much else apart from my conference. What I can tell you is that healthcare innovation continues at a steady pace.
The vibe was different to my trip to Nashville in December. Food prices still noticeably rising and taxi / Uber prices also felt up (in part as tipping remains high at 20%+). I noted Cambridge announced itself a sanctuary city for trans and allied people. And much of the conversation I heard revolved around economics and political economy (though those are the work circles I live in) although some of the young people I chatted with were thinking about innovation and where they could have careers.
My brilliant friend, Chi Thai has a book out:
The poignant story of one family's perilous journey from Vietnam to the UK.
On the first day, we ate rice cakes.
On the second day, they were all gone.
On the third day, the water ran out.
On the fourth day, we reached the sea…
This picture book tells the true story of Chi Thai’s refugee crossing from Vietnam to the UK, at just four years old ... leaving her home behind, and setting out across the vastness of the sea in a tiny boat. It's a deeply personal account, rooted in important history – and yet, her story resonates with those of families all over the world today, forced to make perilous journeys of their own. Buy her book here.
Events
I am hosting a meet-up on Mon 17 March in London, if you want to come long please do. A wide mix of people turn up. RSVP here.
I am hosting an UnConference for Emergent Ventures winners + Friends. If you think this might be you (as a friend who might benefit from an EV UnConference meet-up) let me know and will send an invite. Brief details:
Date: Sat 26 April, 2025
Time: 9am for 10am - 5pm then also dinner.
Venue: Central London
What is an UnConference?
Unlike traditional conferences with pre-set agendas and passive listeners, an UnConference invites all attendees to participate actively.
Everyone is encouraged to propose topics, lead discussions, and contribute to conversations in a meaningful way.
While a conventional conference treats attendees like a passive audience to be entertained by the organizers, the UnConference format gives everyone a say by building something together.
Finally if you made it to the end - Welcome to all those recent joiners to the newsletter from Naomi Fisher’s letter. If you are interested in the education strand then check out my podcast with Naomi Fisher on self-directed education with a UK perspective and also Peter Gray with a US view. The pod with Daisy Christodoulou on the importance of knowledge in education (and also video assisted referees) is also good.
Thanks and be well.