Translator: Cecilia Krause Reviewer: Claudia Sander
“Love then also just? Not that I know.
I know he becomes a raw material
that life means to transform into anger or rhyme. “
When love turns into rhyme,
turns poetry, such beautiful the Leminski.
And when it turns into anger,
becomes a process, most of the time, and ends up in a family court.
I am a judge for nearly 23 years,
and of these 23, 16 I spent a family court.
And it was there, in that space,
where I could watch as a privileged spectator,
the outcome of the end of love.
And I was very distressed and perplexed,
because as you can talk about justice, when love ends?
People live in a society,
we live in a society that worships an idealized love, romantic love,
a love “till death do us part,” and every time we face
with some setbacks or the completion of a project
resulting in the end of love, frustration is very large.
And the expectation of those who arrive in family court
It is a very painful expectation,
because love never ends while pros two,
or hardly happens.
No one is taking breakfast at seven in the morning
and then one looks at the other and says:
“Yeah, our love is gone, what a coincidence that is love.”
It is not how it happens.
Love ends and not always end up at the same time.
And that that is a statement of love end,
when it comes to justice, he hopes that the judge is fair.
And that means, pro judge, be fair at the end of love?
For that person, it means restoring the affection does not return.
And the frustration is too large, and the grievances are too large,
and the parade of tragedies routinely before my eyes,
They made me realize the anguish that is to have a place of power,
which is the place of judge and can not be useful for those people,
the experience of that pain, which is so individual.
I realized, in these 16 years, surely more than 20,000 audiences.
And there was an audience where I finished my work,
finding it had obtained a satisfactory result at least
to ease those pains of those who sought justice,
as if asking permission
to be able to live the end of love without so much pain and no sadness.
And I had the opportunity also to follow during this period,
the profound transformation undergone by society,
and especially families, in recent years,
because few institutions have changed as much as families.
To give you an idea, until 1977, divorce was forbidden in Brazil.
People died married and unhappy.
Until 1988, we are talking about yesterday,
a married man who had a child out of wedlock
It was forbidden to hold the record of this child,
because the constitution protecting marriage,
and the children were treated differently.
Fortunately relations have changed
and, most often, they have changed for the better.
Today affective relationships, family members are more plural,
They are more horizontal, are more democratic,
but, as in life nothing is flat,
also we suffer more shallow relationships.
And I was able to follow
the breakdown of these ways to relate over time
when for the first time, I received a very young man to divorce couples,
and they had been married for three months.
And they came in the audience to do the ressentidíssimos divorce,
an ill-looking to the other,
and I said: “But are you sure that you want a divorce?”
“Marriage was not quite what we expected.”
I said, “Well, what you expected it to be a wedding?”
And then you realize that there is confrontation between expectation that is created,
motivated and fueled by this consumer society,
it’s reality;
because idealized marriage is one that plays music,
the couple have soundtrack for breakfast in bed,
people wake up in a good mood,
no one sets the table, no one takes towel on the bed,
and the daily life happens without anyone having to do anything,
without any opposition can be experienced.
So when we begin to notice the arrival justice
a generation that grew up without learning to be counteracted
and that the first setback is a fight provoked by love order,
You start to reflect: which path we are treading
and what kind of society we want, incensing values
that they are not actually values that relate to humanity.
Because no one has to live in hell to get married,
no one is obliged to submit to the yoke of the other or to the obedience of the other,
but there are rules of coexistence, care and responsibility
and especially affection, if not worked and cared for,
they are not natural attributes of humanity.
And justice, in this context,
I realized that I could do this during the hearings:
add these values of culture, art,
justice, education,
which are all values that are born from the same root of humanity.
And maybe my previous experience the judiciary has helped me a lot,
because before being judge,
I was screenwriter and producer was theater.
And often in the audience, I needed to help me from fiction
to be able to show some couples
that “Othello” by Shakespeare, who was a jealous,
suffered from a condition that he could see in fiction,
but I did not see in their lives.
Other times I interrupted the audience ran on the computer
and fished some text of Roland Barthes’s “Fragments of a Loving Speech”
which it is almost a bible for those couples
relating, they fall in love and separate.
So it was possible to use fiction, film references,
reference books, mythological references
for those people enxergassem
as naturally victims of pain
which are natural humanity itself.
Tolstoy is a phrase that says happy families look-all,
and that the unhappy are unhappy each in its own way.
Of course he wrote it as a superautor that is,
but if he were family judge surely change a bit this phrase,
because both families happy as unhappy are profoundly different.
And a judge needs to understand that the pain experienced by those
It is individual.
Judge’s family that does not like people,
who has no desire to understand
the contradiction that is our human condition,
should not be family judge;
because we are poor, wandering, contradictory beings,
often make mistakes, we hit others
and what we have in common is precisely this humanity
so dense, so strong and that makes us say affection,
despite all the mishaps
and despite the perception that love one day comes to an end.
Conduct these hearings in a more human way,
trying to understand what each had to say of his place,
It was extremely useful, first to appease my anguish
before the inability to resolve those conflicts;
then, because I realized that people, when they were authorized
to be less perfect and less idealized,
They could experience grief and sadness with more autonomy.
Because this same society that idealizes that beautiful family
margarine photography,
that family that everyone is happy all the time,
this same society demands of us a permanent happiness,
a perpetual euphoria that is incompatible with our human condition.
So it’s like a judge authorize someone
the right to experience the sadness and pain,
that they are natural, that pass but are natural.
And it came to a certain audience, and this is not common,
because usually those seeking justice or quick fix,
those seeking justice or a judgment, a decision.
It happened many times I need to lose a long time
for that that couple had a chance
vomiting resentments,
to bring the remains of love to a courtroom,
which is a space that historically
is not made for that, it is not designed for that,
but that is often the only space
where those people can talk and can look for alternatives,
pras not big issues of separation,
but pras more mundane issues
and that matter very little pros numbers and pras statistics.
How do you tidy suitcase and leave your home?
What time do you desaparta the dress suit?
What do you do with a book when it is signed pro couple
and the author is a passion of the couple?
Who gets these leftovers?
How do you manage this everyday?
So sometimes it was necessary to extend slightly the time of the hearings,
to try to understand what kind of conflict was that
and what kind of expectation it was one that came in my stick to a decision.
And there was a story that touched me deeply,
it was a story that at the hearing came a mother
asking for custody of three children.
She had left home four years ago
and had no further contact with these children.
Very tense environment, all very difficult,
the father did not want at all that she stayed with the custody,
because, he said,
she would have abandoned their children during this period and has now returned to fetch.
And the story is that the mother was ill, she had a deep crisis of depression
and he had to leave home to be treated.
And after four years, a little better, already rehabilitated and under therapy,
I wanted to go back and take relationship.
The father resisted, and I thought that crazy man be so hard,
because as you will blame a person
because she suffered an illness or had depression.
I could not blame the woman
more than she had already suffered from the disease.
The story continued rolling and after all, in the audience,
comes the revelation that he was already with another woman.
I was getting angrier still.
I said, how can you?
Leaves woman with depression,
not want to leave his mother approaching children
and, moreover, he is with another woman?
And all the stories that come in family court have many versions.
And it’s a place where I learned to judge people very little,
because I learned that you can not judge without hearing.
And here comes the parent version.
The mother had a chronic depression for over ten years
and he always took care of the woman during that period.
He worked boarded,
he turned to give account of women’s crises, children,
He never held the woman’s family with nothing
until one day he came home, the children were three days without eating
and devastated woman.
He no longer had to ask for help,
called to mother, mother in law asked to take the woman and the time went.
He organized, continued looking after the kids and walked away.
She was doing the treatment and did not return to the living, not looking,
or as part of treatment or lack of will, is unclear.
But the fact is that he did not ask her divorce,
because she needed the health plan he had.
And he did not dare to break the link
and maintained the health plan so that she could be treated.
So it was not a story of many desamores.
It was a story of a tragedy,
where everyone was right in his view.
And that process took about two years,
because I could schedule hearings every three months
with the presence of children, with the rapprochement of children,
with the attempt to bring their mother back to that family atmosphere.
And at the end of two years, the guard finally was shared.
They divorced and each was living liquidating their children,
because parenting and marital are different things.
Then there are arrangements that do not depend on just a decision.
Depend listening and depend on time.
And if for many years I was responsible for observing and deciding
desamor of these various processes and separation,
I also had the good fortune to perform many weddings,
because, as a family judge,
I was fortunate to be able to perform marriages, which I love.
And always these marriages from that experience I had,
these breaks, for frustrations, idealizations and broken promises,
my care was that the couple promised each other
not eternal love, an ethereal love, a love “till death do us part”
loyalty for life, sexuality monopoly, no.
What I was asking is a promise to the other daily care
with affection, with responsibility
and with the certainty and freedom that one was with the other
By choice and by love.
And this is the invitation I make to you,
because I believe, really, that justice is much fairer
The more affection you put on justice.
No, the more affection, the more freedom,
the more likely we get justice.
Thank you.
(Applause)
“Love then also just? Not that I know.
I know he becomes a raw material
that life means to transform into anger or rhyme. “
When love turns into rhyme,
turns poetry, such beautiful the Leminski.
And when it turns into anger,
becomes a process, most of the time, and ends up in a family court.
I am a judge for nearly 23 years,
and of these 23, 16 I spent a family court.
And it was there, in that space,
where I could watch as a privileged spectator,
the outcome of the end of love.
And I was very distressed and perplexed,
because as you can talk about justice, when love ends?
People live in a society,
we live in a society that worships an idealized love, romantic love,
a love “till death do us part,” and every time we face
with some setbacks or the completion of a project
resulting in the end of love, frustration is very large.
And the expectation of those who arrive in family court
It is a very painful expectation,
because love never ends while pros two,
or hardly happens.
No one is taking breakfast at seven in the morning
and then one looks at the other and says:
“Yeah, our love is gone, what a coincidence that is love.”
It is not how it happens.
Love ends and not always end up at the same time.
And that that is a statement of love end,
when it comes to justice, he hopes that the judge is fair.
And that means, pro judge, be fair at the end of love?
For that person, it means restoring the affection does not return.
And the frustration is too large, and the grievances are too large,
and the parade of tragedies routinely before my eyes,
They made me realize the anguish that is to have a place of power,
which is the place of judge and can not be useful for those people,
the experience of that pain, which is so individual.
I realized, in these 16 years, surely more than 20,000 audiences.
And there was an audience where I finished my work,
finding it had obtained a satisfactory result at least
to ease those pains of those who sought justice,
as if asking permission
to be able to live the end of love without so much pain and no sadness.
And I had the opportunity also to follow during this period,
the profound transformation undergone by society,
and especially families, in recent years,
because few institutions have changed as much as families.
To give you an idea, until 1977, divorce was forbidden in Brazil.
People died married and unhappy.
Until 1988, we are talking about yesterday,
a married man who had a child out of wedlock
It was forbidden to hold the record of this child,
because the constitution protecting marriage,
and the children were treated differently.
Fortunately relations have changed
and, most often, they have changed for the better.
Today affective relationships, family members are more plural,
They are more horizontal, are more democratic,
but, as in life nothing is flat,
also we suffer more shallow relationships.
And I was able to follow
the breakdown of these ways to relate over time
when for the first time, I received a very young man to divorce couples,
and they had been married for three months.
And they came in the audience to do the ressentidíssimos divorce,
an ill-looking to the other,
and I said: “But are you sure that you want a divorce?”
“Marriage was not quite what we expected.”
I said, “Well, what you expected it to be a wedding?”
And then you realize that there is confrontation between expectation that is created,
motivated and fueled by this consumer society,
it’s reality;
because idealized marriage is one that plays music,
the couple have soundtrack for breakfast in bed,
people wake up in a good mood,
no one sets the table, no one takes towel on the bed,
and the daily life happens without anyone having to do anything,
without any opposition can be experienced.
So when we begin to notice the arrival justice
a generation that grew up without learning to be counteracted
and that the first setback is a fight provoked by love order,
You start to reflect: which path we are treading
and what kind of society we want, incensing values
that they are not actually values that relate to humanity.
Because no one has to live in hell to get married,
no one is obliged to submit to the yoke of the other or to the obedience of the other,
but there are rules of coexistence, care and responsibility
and especially affection, if not worked and cared for,
they are not natural attributes of humanity.
And justice, in this context,
I realized that I could do this during the hearings:
add these values of culture, art,
justice, education,
which are all values that are born from the same root of humanity.
And maybe my previous experience the judiciary has helped me a lot,
because before being judge,
I was screenwriter and producer was theater.
And often in the audience, I needed to help me from fiction
to be able to show some couples
that “Othello” by Shakespeare, who was a jealous,
suffered from a condition that he could see in fiction,
but I did not see in their lives.
Other times I interrupted the audience ran on the computer
and fished some text of Roland Barthes’s “Fragments of a Loving Speech”
which it is almost a bible for those couples
relating, they fall in love and separate.
So it was possible to use fiction, film references,
reference books, mythological references
for those people enxergassem
as naturally victims of pain
which are natural humanity itself.
Tolstoy is a phrase that says happy families look-all,
and that the unhappy are unhappy each in its own way.
Of course he wrote it as a superautor that is,
but if he were family judge surely change a bit this phrase,
because both families happy as unhappy are profoundly different.
And a judge needs to understand that the pain experienced by those
It is individual.
Judge’s family that does not like people,
who has no desire to understand
the contradiction that is our human condition,
should not be family judge;
because we are poor, wandering, contradictory beings,
often make mistakes, we hit others
and what we have in common is precisely this humanity
so dense, so strong and that makes us say affection,
despite all the mishaps
and despite the perception that love one day comes to an end.
Conduct these hearings in a more human way,
trying to understand what each had to say of his place,
It was extremely useful, first to appease my anguish
before the inability to resolve those conflicts;
then, because I realized that people, when they were authorized
to be less perfect and less idealized,
They could experience grief and sadness with more autonomy.
Because this same society that idealizes that beautiful family
margarine photography,
that family that everyone is happy all the time,
this same society demands of us a permanent happiness,
a perpetual euphoria that is incompatible with our human condition.
So it’s like a judge authorize someone
the right to experience the sadness and pain,
that they are natural, that pass but are natural.
And it came to a certain audience, and this is not common,
because usually those seeking justice or quick fix,
those seeking justice or a judgment, a decision.
It happened many times I need to lose a long time
for that that couple had a chance
vomiting resentments,
to bring the remains of love to a courtroom,
which is a space that historically
is not made for that, it is not designed for that,
but that is often the only space
where those people can talk and can look for alternatives,
pras not big issues of separation,
but pras more mundane issues
and that matter very little pros numbers and pras statistics.
How do you tidy suitcase and leave your home?
What time do you desaparta the dress suit?
What do you do with a book when it is signed pro couple
and the author is a passion of the couple?
Who gets these leftovers?
How do you manage this everyday?
So sometimes it was necessary to extend slightly the time of the hearings,
to try to understand what kind of conflict was that
and what kind of expectation it was one that came in my stick to a decision.
And there was a story that touched me deeply,
it was a story that at the hearing came a mother
asking for custody of three children.
She had left home four years ago
and had no further contact with these children.
Very tense environment, all very difficult,
the father did not want at all that she stayed with the custody,
because, he said,
she would have abandoned their children during this period and has now returned to fetch.
And the story is that the mother was ill, she had a deep crisis of depression
and he had to leave home to be treated.
And after four years, a little better, already rehabilitated and under therapy,
I wanted to go back and take relationship.
The father resisted, and I thought that crazy man be so hard,
because as you will blame a person
because she suffered an illness or had depression.
I could not blame the woman
more than she had already suffered from the disease.
The story continued rolling and after all, in the audience,
comes the revelation that he was already with another woman.
I was getting angrier still.
I said, how can you?
Leaves woman with depression,
not want to leave his mother approaching children
and, moreover, he is with another woman?
And all the stories that come in family court have many versions.
And it’s a place where I learned to judge people very little,
because I learned that you can not judge without hearing.
And here comes the parent version.
The mother had a chronic depression for over ten years
and he always took care of the woman during that period.
He worked boarded,
he turned to give account of women’s crises, children,
He never held the woman’s family with nothing
until one day he came home, the children were three days without eating
and devastated woman.
He no longer had to ask for help,
called to mother, mother in law asked to take the woman and the time went.
He organized, continued looking after the kids and walked away.
She was doing the treatment and did not return to the living, not looking,
or as part of treatment or lack of will, is unclear.
But the fact is that he did not ask her divorce,
because she needed the health plan he had.
And he did not dare to break the link
and maintained the health plan so that she could be treated.
So it was not a story of many desamores.
It was a story of a tragedy,
where everyone was right in his view.
And that process took about two years,
because I could schedule hearings every three months
with the presence of children, with the rapprochement of children,
with the attempt to bring their mother back to that family atmosphere.
And at the end of two years, the guard finally was shared.
They divorced and each was living liquidating their children,
because parenting and marital are different things.
Then there are arrangements that do not depend on just a decision.
Depend listening and depend on time.
And if for many years I was responsible for observing and deciding
desamor of these various processes and separation,
I also had the good fortune to perform many weddings,
because, as a family judge,
I was fortunate to be able to perform marriages, which I love.
And always these marriages from that experience I had,
these breaks, for frustrations, idealizations and broken promises,
my care was that the couple promised each other
not eternal love, an ethereal love, a love “till death do us part”
loyalty for life, sexuality monopoly, no.
What I was asking is a promise to the other daily care
with affection, with responsibility
and with the certainty and freedom that one was with the other
By choice and by love.
And this is the invitation I make to you,
because I believe, really, that justice is much fairer
The more affection you put on justice.
No, the more affection, the more freedom,
the more likely we get justice.
Thank you.
(Applause)
Please follow and like us: