I'm not sure when exactly,
friendship is a funny thing, creeping up on you slowly
you get used to having someone around,
when they are around long enough,
they become
a permanent fixture in your heart.
I'm not sure when exactly,
that Sadness and I became friends.
But, in any event,
we are close.
I'm sorry I can't laugh and
talk of nothing all the day long
with friends who don't know Sadness
the way I do.
I don't hate you, Sadness
I wish more people weren't so afraid of you
I find you
perfectly beautiful
a lonely and often quiet soul
and all the more beautiful for it.
I don't blame you, Sadness
for your all-consuming nature
and the wall of unavailability
we've built around us.
I just wish more people could
know you like I do
revel in you like I do
enjoy you like I do
and see really,
how you co-exist with Joy,
and not not invite you to parties.
Showing posts with label friendship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label friendship. Show all posts
Monday, January 6, 2020
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Ideals versus People
Despite what has been said about no man being an island, we aren't quite the Pangaea that one might think. Rather we seem to be connected by the currents of activity which happen to thrust us together - a rapid version of continental drift that pulls us apart, and brings us in close apposition. We never quite touch, although at times it seems we come close to it. Perhaps it is our fallen nature that prevents of from ever fully sharing in each others' world.
In interacting with others, it pays to realise that ideals are weak things, and that ideas are only as strong as their impetus to realise, or actualise them. People build up so many ideas about what they want in relationships, about what they are looking for, that they are invariably disappointed. There is nothing wrong with developing these ideas of the sake of conversation, but the double-edge to ideas is that they very often stick around. They influence day-to-day decision-making subtly and pervasively such that the expectations you have of someone, the way you relate to them, and the impression you form, are all coloured by your preconceived notions.
When it comes to ideals, is it not more exciting to hold off thinking about them until you find yourself actually in a relationship with someone? Then, you can build on each others' perspectives and craft ideals and worldviews together, rather than endlessly turning these over and over in your mind before you start, building them up as barricades and hindrances that fortify a lonely island. Some think otherwise. Some think that by doing so, by preempting future troubles and concerns, and by firmly establishing their conceptions, they can avoid later strife or error. The problem is that there is a disjunct between theory and real life, and that ideas can never comprehensively address people and the intricacy that is life.
Colleague, boss, housemate, coursemate, brother or sister, prayer buddy, brother- or sister-in-Christ, bible study member, non-Christian friend, mother, father. Each seems to have its own set of predefined relational contexts and social norms. Whatever happened to just loving someone? Christians in particular seem to spend their time forging ideals and trying to get people in church to conform in the name of obedience, yet I fear an indviduals' path tends to take a narrative ethic rather than an absolute one. I have found that every person's moral dilemma is different, and there is no exact similarity between one person's choice and another's - that one action might be made in virtue according to one person's decision, but the same action might be made in vice in someone else's.
Yet there are so many meaningless church sessions trying to standardise the way we think about an idea, and attempting a reductionist's approach to moral decision-making. Ideas about sex, marriage, and gender roles, particularly, come to the forefront in the church where I am at. And I don't know how comfortable I am in the pews listening to what is said sometimes, as I see model become uniform reality, and a failure to recognise sinfulness within the paradigm, while readily recognising the sinfulness outside of it. Oh, we are such a sinful, fallen world. But when we do this, this is godly. But how very untrue this is! Within that very system of action it is possible to see where sinfulness can seep in, in the form of pride, selfishness, and all a manner of insidious ways, and this makes us no less prone to sin than the next person.
The strange thing is that I realise there is a role for this type of thinking in certain contexts. There are some things about morality, and about God, which are irrevocable. It is good to know what these are, and to be clear in them, and to be reminded of them, and to let these govern life decisions. Broad strokes paint a picture that I agree with, but the devil is in the details, and perhaps it is in these that I find real life prevails over human hermeneutic preaching.
Over the past year or so, I'm coming to appreciate more and more the simple reality that relationships in true reality, in God's kingdom, are best thought of in the context of being brothers- and sisters-in-Christ, and being accordingly loving. My experiences have led me to see that supporting someone with love means intimacy and empathy. It means rooting for them when they are struggling in the absence of judgement. This holds true whether you are relating as a colleague, boss, housemate, coursemate, brother or sister, or significant other. We can support each other by showing our care in the ways that we can, and realise we can never be perfect for someone, even so. Even more importantly, loving someone means forgiving them, or making the choice to forgive them preemptively. How much of blame and unforgiveness in a relationship comes from someone not being able to address our own personal flaws, our own inadequacies, rather than their intentionality to hurt you.
Perhaps loving someone is not about doing what is right, doing what one ought to, because the underlying emotional truth is that in thinking in this way, in doing so, you are only stroking your own egotism and self-righteousness. Instead, what is right is defined by the process of loving others.
In interacting with others, it pays to realise that ideals are weak things, and that ideas are only as strong as their impetus to realise, or actualise them. People build up so many ideas about what they want in relationships, about what they are looking for, that they are invariably disappointed. There is nothing wrong with developing these ideas of the sake of conversation, but the double-edge to ideas is that they very often stick around. They influence day-to-day decision-making subtly and pervasively such that the expectations you have of someone, the way you relate to them, and the impression you form, are all coloured by your preconceived notions.
When it comes to ideals, is it not more exciting to hold off thinking about them until you find yourself actually in a relationship with someone? Then, you can build on each others' perspectives and craft ideals and worldviews together, rather than endlessly turning these over and over in your mind before you start, building them up as barricades and hindrances that fortify a lonely island. Some think otherwise. Some think that by doing so, by preempting future troubles and concerns, and by firmly establishing their conceptions, they can avoid later strife or error. The problem is that there is a disjunct between theory and real life, and that ideas can never comprehensively address people and the intricacy that is life.
Colleague, boss, housemate, coursemate, brother or sister, prayer buddy, brother- or sister-in-Christ, bible study member, non-Christian friend, mother, father. Each seems to have its own set of predefined relational contexts and social norms. Whatever happened to just loving someone? Christians in particular seem to spend their time forging ideals and trying to get people in church to conform in the name of obedience, yet I fear an indviduals' path tends to take a narrative ethic rather than an absolute one. I have found that every person's moral dilemma is different, and there is no exact similarity between one person's choice and another's - that one action might be made in virtue according to one person's decision, but the same action might be made in vice in someone else's.
Yet there are so many meaningless church sessions trying to standardise the way we think about an idea, and attempting a reductionist's approach to moral decision-making. Ideas about sex, marriage, and gender roles, particularly, come to the forefront in the church where I am at. And I don't know how comfortable I am in the pews listening to what is said sometimes, as I see model become uniform reality, and a failure to recognise sinfulness within the paradigm, while readily recognising the sinfulness outside of it. Oh, we are such a sinful, fallen world. But when we do this, this is godly. But how very untrue this is! Within that very system of action it is possible to see where sinfulness can seep in, in the form of pride, selfishness, and all a manner of insidious ways, and this makes us no less prone to sin than the next person.
The strange thing is that I realise there is a role for this type of thinking in certain contexts. There are some things about morality, and about God, which are irrevocable. It is good to know what these are, and to be clear in them, and to be reminded of them, and to let these govern life decisions. Broad strokes paint a picture that I agree with, but the devil is in the details, and perhaps it is in these that I find real life prevails over human hermeneutic preaching.
Over the past year or so, I'm coming to appreciate more and more the simple reality that relationships in true reality, in God's kingdom, are best thought of in the context of being brothers- and sisters-in-Christ, and being accordingly loving. My experiences have led me to see that supporting someone with love means intimacy and empathy. It means rooting for them when they are struggling in the absence of judgement. This holds true whether you are relating as a colleague, boss, housemate, coursemate, brother or sister, or significant other. We can support each other by showing our care in the ways that we can, and realise we can never be perfect for someone, even so. Even more importantly, loving someone means forgiving them, or making the choice to forgive them preemptively. How much of blame and unforgiveness in a relationship comes from someone not being able to address our own personal flaws, our own inadequacies, rather than their intentionality to hurt you.
Perhaps loving someone is not about doing what is right, doing what one ought to, because the underlying emotional truth is that in thinking in this way, in doing so, you are only stroking your own egotism and self-righteousness. Instead, what is right is defined by the process of loving others.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Dreamers and do-ers.
Lately, I've realised that who we are is not defined by 'he who has the most toys', whether toys means riches, accolades, achievements, romantic or social conquests or even, in the Christian context, whether you are serving or leading in multiple ministries. Rather, we are defined by two things: how we choose our battles, and what we believe in (and if that be Christianity, so be it). When life happens, it is not the toys that we have that equip us to deal with the situation, but the beliefs that we have, that then drive our actions. How we respond when a loved one dies, or when we go bankrupt, will depend a lot on our outlook and beliefs. Similarly, what we believe in determines the battles we pick. All in all, you might say that our reality is shaped by our beliefs.
Pragmatism for me has always been both a foreign, and often a slightly unsavoury concept, particularly as it plays out in a social context. Relationships of convenience - whether mail-order brides, green card marriages, friendships between colleagues, truces between competitors - have a particular sense of hollowness for me. At some points in my past I daresay I would rather shun my needs than have them met by hollow relationships.
Yet needs must be met, and pragmatism is a survival instinct, as ingrained as someone being extra-nice when they want something from you. I still find that when I want something, I operate in exactly that way. I do make an extra effort to be nice to my superiors, or when I need a favour, or even as viscerally as when I am physically attracted to someone. In reverse, when someone asks for my help and is sweet about it, I do feel sincerely flattered. I have found myself forced to accept that this exchange needs to happen, and that it is the way our social fabric is constructed.
Pragmatism for me has always been both a foreign, and often a slightly unsavoury concept, particularly as it plays out in a social context. Relationships of convenience - whether mail-order brides, green card marriages, friendships between colleagues, truces between competitors - have a particular sense of hollowness for me. At some points in my past I daresay I would rather shun my needs than have them met by hollow relationships.
Yet needs must be met, and pragmatism is a survival instinct, as ingrained as someone being extra-nice when they want something from you. I still find that when I want something, I operate in exactly that way. I do make an extra effort to be nice to my superiors, or when I need a favour, or even as viscerally as when I am physically attracted to someone. In reverse, when someone asks for my help and is sweet about it, I do feel sincerely flattered. I have found myself forced to accept that this exchange needs to happen, and that it is the way our social fabric is constructed.
'At this time of your life, people are transitory. You aren't going to stay friends for ever. After this, you may never see them again.'
'People are people. Everyone is good for something. You just have to take them for what they are and learn how to work with them.'
The cold harshness of those words strikes me. As much as it alarms me that people think like that, I've come to realise that these are not uncommon ways of thinking about relationships. Many people are going to think pragmatically, seeing relationships as functional rather than personal, and in do are going to make it their reality. As much as I dislike being thought of in that utilitarian way, I know that if I reject this perspective, I essentially reject their relationship. So, at least with that person, I must accept that that is how they feel about the relationship. It is not untrue that much fun, laughter, camaraderie and joy has been forged out of situations of necessity. I also recognise that the belief is powerful in its ability to minimise the pain of the believer when it comes to dealing with rejection, abandonment or conflict.
I have aimed to build my relationships on empathy of another's situation, respect of their admirable traits and differences, love and sincerity, rather than out of necessity, if at all possible. I believe that people are like me, and that I am like people. There is depth to people. There is that beautiful transformative moment when you see someone in their element, when you watch how someone has grown over time or when someone allows themselves the luxury of trust, of being vulnerable. These moments are only granted to you when your eyes are open to them. It is true that you can recognise that someone has matured without being close to them, or without believing in them, and it is true that photographs can capture beautiful moments. But it is not the same as that moment in a relationship when you recognise it for the first time, after you have invested your belief, your empathy, your love in that person. And although you can reduce empathy, respect or love to things that people need, the reason they are given is not because the other person needs them, but rather they are given the way a breath is released at the sight of a beautiful view. Conversely, the edge to this perspective is that when a relationship turns sour, the bitter truth is that you will be the one self-destructing.
Our reality is shaped by our beliefs. Although other people's beliefs and actions may influence our world, it is our personal belief that shapes our actions. If I accept this as a truth for me, if I don't fight for the belief that friendships and relationships can be more than just the products of necessity, that aspiration will die with me. And I don't want that. So I shall fight for what I believe in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
