Would you rather live one life that lasts 1,000 years, or 10 lives that last 100 years each? Both sound awful. Part of me thinks that the continuity of a single life would have more advantages, though. You could continue to build on what you have, without having to repeat childhood and assorted learning curves.
If you believe in reincarnation, then we already live several lives of a hundred years or less. We don’t remember them. I’m assuming that in this exercise we do. More of a Shirley MacLaine thing than a tenet of an Indian religion. Presumably that way we get to learn from our mistakes, but don’t have to carry around other baggage like a poor credit score.
One Life That Lasts a Thousand Years
I’m not sure what this question has to do with writing. To try and frame it in that context, I guess you’d be able to build a body of work. There would be historical or cultural value in comparing what you’re writing now versus what you wrote a few hundred years ago. Even if you wrote fiction, it would chronicle how tastes changed over time. What would Shakespeare be writing about today, or Dickens? I’d kill to read a David Mitchell or Jonathan Lethem novel from a hundred years from now.
The Merry Writer is a writer’s game on Twitter run by Ari Meghlen (@arimeghlen) and Rachel Poli (@RPoli3). Each day there’s a new question, and each month there’s a new theme. In these posts I expand upon the answers that I’ve posted on my Twitter.