Pre-Success Ego Ride Syndrome (PSERS)

A comment posted on Joana & Astro's Blog, about a post that Joana transcribed from this blog:

"Who is the authoress of this rant? If she believes what she says is true,why doesn't she have the courage to put her name to it? Grenville Green 18/01/2010 22:42"

Sir,

With all due respect, and do be very parsimonious about how much of it you think is deserved as it’s a very valued resource by me, let me start by telling you that your questioning, in the manner you do it, of my use of anonymity only reveals that you’re either naïve, a fool or evil. Or that you’re all of them.

You speak lightly of courage. Do understand fully the term before throwing it around needlessly.

Don’t confuse bravado with bravery. To stop, with one’s bare hands, a train in its tracks is not being courageous at all; only being amazingly stupid. Or just desperately seeking to make news, as many will do many a strange thing to attract attention upon themselves.

I rather like to be able to live another day, without any medal but able to continue the fight, then to die in a glorious blaze and be done with my usefulness then and there.

But that’s me. I will concede you the ability in getting me all worked up to the point of almost starting angrily ranting away, as you so eloquently described my writing. Unfortunately for you, I rarely act based purely on emotion. For that I must feel passion, and you most certainly instill none.

Answering your question directly, I AM the authoress you so desperately seek. Allow me to present myself. My blog name is Textusa, as, by the way, is explicitly said and shown, and you have right here the place and the means to question and confront my opinions directly.

The link to this blog was provided by Joana in her post, as always. That fact that you took your “self-defense” there does reveal a significant amount about your personality, independently of you considering this little corner of the internet not worth your while. As also does the content of the response itself.

I being J. Doe or L. Doe, is totally irrelevant unless you wish to act legally against me, which is a threat/trait, amongst many, such as being arrogantly self-important, that you seem share with the McCanns.

That said, Textusa is and will be, until I decide or be forced otherwise, good enough to identify myself for now.

This worldwide phenomenon called Maddie has revealed to be much more important than any of its participants ever could have anticipated.

It is the first globalized crime.

In that summer of 2007, every little corner of the world turned their eyes to what was happening in Praia da Luz. In hindsight, I only remember the landing of the moon raising so much fuss for such a long period in time. Even the Pope was involved.

This is so much so, that today the blogs/forums on the subject are hit from all over the planet.

Two factions quickly formed: the Pro-McCanns and the others. If one is easily defined, the “others” presents a challenge to be named. We’re certainly not “anti-McCann”, because it’s not the couple we seek to prosecute, but ALL those that were involved in the crime that evening; and we’re not “pro-Justice” as although we do seek Justice we’re seeking about single and specific crime, so the term would be too ample.

We’re a nameless “club” with a very clear intent: for Justice to be adequately served in the case of Maddie McCanns vs. Whomever.

Although some within us have quite correctly warned that we are still far, far away from any significant victory (which may never even come as those involved are both too cunning and powerful), success is almost palpable. Maddie has unquestionably conquered the world.

So the moment the sun is to set for the culprits there will simultaneously be a grand sunrise that will light up humanity’s new heroes: those that, with an unrelenting tenacity, made the establishment bow unto the will of truth. Greatness is the least that can be foreseen for these heroes.

Thus many are now desperate in positioning, the earliest possible, themselves so that the light will shine upon them, even if only by indirect reflection.

Unquestionably, the ether world of the internet will be valued and glamorized. We bloggers and respective commentators will be pointed out as examples to be followed by the entire Human Race.

I call this the Pre-Success Ego Ride Syndrome (PSERS). Calling attention upon oneself in order for one’s effort is to stand out above ALL efforts from others. Irrelevant of the magnitude of was done.

It was the PSERS that killed 3A. Not the pinkies, in their various tonalities, but the harsh bickering between those that were consciously fighting for a spot in center stage, on the set where that glorifying spotlight is suppose to shine upon.

It’s natural for one to desire and enjoy recognition for one’s efforts in any task undertaken. But glory is a very vain and picky friend. It accepts very, very limited amount of reservations. There are thousands of movies produced every year, but only one wins the Oscar. And many, who have won it, have been forgotten and weren’t able to overcome being swallowed by forgetfulness.

If in this “movie” the Oscar for the Best Male Performance, figuratively speaking, is already taken, those for the Female and Genderless Performance are still up for grabs, although you know to whom I would give them to, were I a juror, which I’m not.

The “main” Oscars are not the subject of this post, but rather the Best Supporting and the Almost Best Supporting ones. Or even the one for the Best Way-Back-There-But-There Performance.

Fighting for those are the little vicious Success-Seeker-Bugs (SSB) populate, all filled to the brim with PSERS. A vicious deadly fight until death tears them apart. Literally.

And that is what I think you are, a Success-Seeker. My other post was a simple, albeit firm, protest against the importance, or relevance, given to a traitor to the truth in an event where truth was supposed to be worshiped.

It didn’t, it doesn’t and it won’t ever make sense.

It was nothing against you in any way. Yet you responded so angrily that I can only assume that I offended you, or that you take as personal any offense that may be directed towards that specific gentleman.

You must agree that an odd reaction, by any standard, for someone who just had a long chat with another person, to come so harshly in its defense.

Let me dismiss, very quickly, some comments made in a whitewashing attempt to clean the gentleman slate by saying that both Gonçalo Amaral and Dr. Paulo Sargento are sufficiently intelligent to see through the bloke if that was the case.

Starting with GA, only a purposefully simplistic mind is able to come up with the idea that an honoree, ANY honoree for that matter, pre-approves the invitees to his/hers honoring dinner. I can just imagine Amaral, of all people, holding a piece of paper and picking, name by name, those that he saw fit to honor him.

Totally ridiculous, right? No, not to some. Dr. Sargento is a very close friend of the gentleman. And real close friends do real unreasonable things. Especially if that close friend happens to be a pushing-manipulative-glory-seeking one.

And please don’t even start saying that just because of his professional skills he couldn’t possibly be manipulated. That is as ridiculous as stating that a cardiologist cannot have a heart problem.

My protest was not about his presence. He made sure that that was unavoidable. If I were him, I wouldn’t have set foot at the dinner, but he and I do differ both in honesty and shame standards. I didn’t care, or took notice, with whom he had had a chat with. It could have been with Mother Goose, or any of the fictitious characters that roam around in that gentleman’s head.

So I was surprised by the aggressiveness of your remark. And the senseless attack on my anonymity, an attack that I’m used to, but coming from pinkies. It was nothing against you in any way whatsoever. Yet you responded so angrily that I can only assume that I offended you.

So surprised was I that I just had to back and read that post again. Here, I must once again diverge from the intent of this post to make the following clear: the blog where I read the report is one that I respect the most, and have no reason to stop doing so. Also, I have for the author of the post, Tony Bennett, the same respect, as he just wrote what he was told.

Your name Mr Green, was totally unknown to me. As it didn’t ring any bell, my first and obvious move, in order to prepare this response, was to google up your name. Surprisingly, for someone who, according to himself, deserved an enthusiastic applause by those present in a dinner that was NOT in his honor, just because his name was mentioned by someone, it turns out that you’re basically, like me, just a nobody, or an anybody:

Opening up one of the links, I did find your name in one of Rosiepops comments, where you appear ranked third, out of fourth, on her insulting priorities. Second from last, which, with your ego, must make you feel insulted to so inconsiderably insulted:

Let us just go over the content of your report, as per written in the post:  

“So far as he’s [Grenvile Green] concerned, it was very much ‘mission accomplished’. He was able to demonstrate by his physical presence in Lisbon British support for Goncalo Amaral,” 

Could have been “a physical presence of British support in Lisbon”… but no, it had to be HIS presence. A somewhat unrealistic and egocentric view of oneself, but it can just be me being ill-intentioned in the reading. 

“As Amaral entered the court, Grenville shouted: “Good luck from England, Goncalo Amaral”. This led to a couple of British journalists taking an interest in him and interviewing him.”

Here I couldn’t avoid establishing a parallel between this and the infamous “DL on Oprah” episode.

Firstly, this kind of behavior is absolutely not tolerated in any Portuguese Court, as the people of the Country are naturally circumspect in these surroundings, and is completely unthinkable in such a press-sensitive case as the one reported.

If it happened, the kicking out of an British-Amaral.supporting citizen had been kicked out a Portuguese Court, with an obvious emphasis on the “British” part of the support to Amaral.

Well, I don’t remember reading that anywhere. Only the F-word slander stunt. It escaped me, must have.  

“He also met Joana Morais who was very friendly to him. She spent time in the court surrounded by what appeared to be translators and supporters of Goncalo Amaral. Once inside the court, he was introduced to Amaral; the two men shook hands and Grenville gave him a Grenville-style bear hug.” 

Who hasn’t heard about the famous Grenville hug? Oh, you too? I thought I was alone on this one. Important to notice the first attempt of being intimately linked with the most popular figures in this: Joana and GA.  

“Grenville got tickets for the fund-raising event on day one from his hotel.” 

Another “DL on Oprah” flashback… Tickets for a fund-raising in Portugal?

Totally out of cultural context.

I don’t recall such an event ever. It’s habitual in Portugal when one is invited to a reception/dinner for one not to pay single cent (most usual), or, if it’s the case, to expect a bill AFTER the event.

The Portuguese are very suspicious of paying anything beforehand. It’s the merchant part of their heritage. Oh, and were the tickets available in every hotel in Lisbon?  

“During the main address by one of Amaral’s supporters, Grenville heard his name mentioned. This was followed by a round of enthusiastic applause from those present. A little later on there was a reference to the work of the Madeleine Foundation.” 

A “main address”, but done by an unidentified supporter.

Maybe the microphone was passed around, so that anyone could express their gratitude to the detective. But then it wouldn’t have been a main address.

And the ticket buying beforehand made the thing much too formal for such. I wonder who was the anonymous hero that brought to the attention of all the presence to Mr. Green, lest he go unnoticed, allowing everybody to express their heartfelt gratitude through an enthusiastic applause.

I forgot that Mr Green abhors anonymity. These things called details are rather bothersome, aren’t they? Notice that it was his name that originated the spontaneous collective gesture and not that of any organization that he could be linked to.  

“During the dinner Grenville asked if one of the Portuguese people would pass a gift from him to Amaral. The gift was of a fridge magnet showing a 1939 to 1945 war poster. The poster showed a child digging in the garden and his mother planting a seed against the slogan: ‘Dig for Victory’. When Grenville began to explain the link between the poster and Goncalo Amaral’s work, the Portuguese chap said: “Come and explain to Mr Amaral himself, I’ll translate for you”. Grenville went over and explained that whilst the British child was digging to plant seeds, he had been digging for the truth. Grenville told him that he’d also bought one for his own fridge at home and said that every time he looked at it he would think of Mr Amaral. When Grenville had to go when his taxi arrived, he and Stephen tried to slip away quietly but were spotted by Mr Amaral who came over to shake hands and thank him warmly for coming. He also said through a translator: “I hope you can come to Portugal again; I want to tell you that if you do you will be made very welcome.””

Not withstanding the rather negative remarking about Gonçalo Amaral’s linguistic capabilities, nor the paternalistic way by which he’s reported to have been treated, so typically British at the pinnacle of the Empire, let me tell you that passing on a gift to an honoree in room with just 60/70 people is as ridiculous as it sounds.

Your desperation to associate yourself with Amaral is such that I was quite surprised of not having read that you never are to wash your hand again…  

“At the dinner Stephen was very well received, many people chatting to him. Grenville had a long chat to Duarte Levy. He also bought Amaral’s new book: ‘The English Gag’ which he hopes to get a Portuguese person to translate for him.”  

The crucial paragraph. When I first read it, I reacted as I said I did, nothing more, nothing less. But now reading now the thing again, well, I think that it’s FAR from innocent the accidental, almost innocent, dropping of the fellow’s name in the report.

 I just wonder if it was on your own initiative, or was it on request? Don’t answer, please. Anything you say won’t be used against you. It will simply not be used.

“That’s about it, I’m sure Grenville will add a few more tales when he has a moment.” 

Ah… so all were tales then. All is explained when it’s explained well.

As if confirming all of the above, let me just transcribe on of the comments that appeared below yours in Joana’s blog. Pity she didn’t try the reception desk of any hotel in Lisbon:  

"Anonymous said... I do wish I had been able to hug Mr Amaral! Why were donors to his defence fund not told about the fundraising dinner? And who is Stephen - have I missed something? 18 January 2010 21:53"

Mr Green, may you and DL find the spotlight you so desperately seek. I don’t think either of you will, but, in any case, please don’t count on me.

Nor with so many who commented the post. We are also aware that you two aren’t alone in the quest for unmerited glory, but do take into account that I don’t take lightly attempted pulling of wool over one’s eye.

To finish, let me look at my box where I keep my “respect”. As I suspected, it’s intact.

Thank you not having me wasting any with you.


PS - To those that think that this type of post only benefits the Pro-McCanns let me say what I’ve already have said before: a sick body must be treated.

To neglect the cure, and all pain associated with it, is to kill it. I take all these comments as a virus laughing out loud upon looking on someone being vaccinating and saying “I just love the way you hurt yourself with a needle…”