There are times in life when we are blindsided by an event that forces us to fundamentally reevaluate what we believe. Whereas moments before we might have had a black and white clarity of our world, in the wake of the event we are left to contend with the haze of gray. Love is one of those things that can go off like bombshell, and its aftermath can leave you searching for yourself. This is why I ask, “what kind of love have you known?” Some could argue that love is the collection of emotions we develop for another person – compassion, sympathy, empathy, desire, etc. Others could argue true love is something entirely transcendent of those emotions. To them, such emotions may be no better an approximation of true love as a soy burger is an approximation of real meat. This is where the split between true love and diligent love rests – one occurs naturally and the other is by choice. In true love, LOVE is at the core of the natural relationship and the individuals are inherently attuned to the purity of that love. With diligent love, the INDIVIDUAL is at the core of the chosen relationship and the love that exists can only exist within the limitations of the individuals.
I’ll ask, starting with true love, “how comfortable are you with being completely at the mercy of your relationship?” In true love, one should always choose to act in love’s best interest, which oddly enough is always in the individuals best interest (even if it does not always appear so). As much as love can demand from a person, the people involved in a true love relationship can have no complaints with how that love ultimately affects them – regardless of the outcome. If true love is something greater than the individuals, then those involved must accept all the things that may come from that love. There is no issue of fair or unfair in a true love scenario. When true love exists, the ego can never be affected because true love is not about the individual.
True love is never a parasitic relationship. The symbiosis, at it’s worst, is a self-perpetuated dialectic that can never exist in a state of degradation. Before it could ever reach a point of corruption, love would act as the Bushido committing Seppuku, dying honorably rather than being contaminated by lesser emotions.
However, many people settle for the lesser, more manageable emotions because the hands-on control is far more palatable than submitting to the uncertainty of true love. (A person could search their whole life looking for true love that might never come, so why not take the safe bet rather than be alone? Alone: the claustrophobia caused by confronting one’s self.)
A healthy collection of strong, though lesser emotions, is the foundation of diligent love – the love that one must work for each and every day. With diligent love, the bonds that tie people together are as replaceable as guitar strings. So it’s not only an issue of choice, but it’s also a matter of upkeep. And while a relationship might start out in tune with the right emotions, in time those emotions are often neglected as a result of individual apathy, laziness, entitlement, resentment, etc…. I’m in no way trying to sound derogatory when talking about what I call ‘diligent love, it’s just that it can be prone to debasement. But even when a couple is aware of the poor state of their bonds, most people cannot walk away from the relationship because the sanctity of familiarity has usurped the sanctity of love. This is usually the moment that tugs at a person’s hindsight when they say, looking back, “I should have just ended it back then rather than sticking it out for X years to try and make it work.”
No matter how diligent you are to keep up with the maintenance, there are basic elements found in true love that can not be forced by any hand -- no matter how skilled -- into the relationship of diligent love. True love simply is, or it isn’t. And if it isn’t, is what you have enough? Well, the answer to that will require a choice that is yours to make.
If you answer a HEARTFELT YES, then you assume the responsibility of continuously renewing the bonds. But then what right do you have to complain with how that love spits you out? (This is the analog to the question of the true love: how comfortable are you with being completely at the mercy of love?) As long as you gave it your best, isn’t that enough?
And if you answer a FEARFUL YES, then you run the risk of having your identity being defined by the obstacle course you call a relationship. In a diligent love scenario, the individual and their ego are exposed to the whims of the other person involved. When this happens, a person will develop defense mechanisms to cope with any perceived indignity caused by the other person. When too many defense mechanisms are in place, a person begins to deny their reality because it has been altered to make life more bearable. Defense mechanisms (some of them) are designed to protect the individual, but this is how diligent love is ultimately debased -- it is in these moments of denial when fear and anxieties begin to create the chasm that separates the individuals in the relationship. These sad people can often be seen walking around Wal-Mart, arguing in hushed tones about which of their relatives has type 2 diabetes, or anything else of equal unimportance.
Many times, people forgo the idea of choice and submit to the will of an imperfect relationship as a way to absolve themselves of any emotional responsibility -- more denial. This allows them to be the “VICTIM;” a label many people shy from, even if it ‘walks like a duck’. If you refute the label of victim, then you must acknowledge your willing participation in the relationship. If there is turbulence, then you have to factor in idea that you are ultimately at the mercy of your own choices and that there is a point where the turbulence is self-inflicted. Here is where a person will confront a realization: no one will ever lie to you as much as you will lie to yourself.
I’m not trying to dictate how love should work; I am trying to highlight some of the elements associated with how love fails. Though love can be an overwhelmingly nebulous current, the individual always has the power of choice to use as a floatation device. If I choose to be apart of a relationship, I also choose to accept my own responsibility in that relationship. If there is love, then there is love. If there is not love, and the relationship continues to exist, then the relationship is extended out of something other than love – best case scenario: compassion, empathy, understanding, etc; worst case scenario: fear, resentment, a sense of entitlement, etc. If letting go of a person is best, then love will allow one to let go. The existence of true love is a selfless act of faith and the existence of diligent love is an exercise of freewill (a currency we all have, yet so many choose to hoard).
So what do you think love owes you? Well, it depends on what kind of relationship you are in.
And here we find ourselves full circle. I’ve separated love into two forms: true and diligent. I am aware that we are humans that do not exist in a vacuum, and so while what I’ve written out is mostly black and white, this is purely for the sake of how it looks on paper. When faced with the reality of the moment, we will find that our relationships exist in the gray areas; in spite of all the knowledge we might have, we can only hope to improvise in a way that leaves us with the most leg room and the least amount of casualties. But so long as you are as honest as you can be with yourself, it is okay to exist in the gray areas. There is truth, and honesty is the best map we have to navigate through the gray towards it. Even if we have to negotiate seemingly insurmountable ambiguous personal paths, as long as we are completely honest with ourselves, we will get there.
But will that pay the bills?
No comments:
Post a Comment