06 May 2007

On Love

Love (part 1)

- the question we seek an answer for.

In general we grow up with a family, showing us affection and love, trying to teach us the world is held together by the inter-human connections and relations. Now this is from the point of view, where the family teaching us these values, have had years of experience and time. Time to think through the experiences of the past, the interactions with people and the emotions connected. Both our own and the effect we have on the people in our close vicinity.

The parents have a tendency to neglect the difficulties of love, the consequences of the choices that are made along the way. They do not want us to grow up thinking love is an impossibility beforehand. Even if they end up not being able to maintain the appearance themselves, they still tell us the same story. Perhaps in the hope of giving us the chance to live out the dream and succeeding where they failed.

Then we get older, and start to find our own in this world. We try the first teenage-crush, we get burned for the first time. We make our own conclusions and form our own view of the world of love. In the process, we grow up. The experiences we make in the early years, form the view of how we see the world. Even if we do not acknowledge the fact, we still judge people by how they act, based on what we feel.

In the same way, we make choices based on our feelings. These are bound to our emotions, even if we try to distance ourselves from them, and pretend to make judgments and choices based on what we see and hear. We pretend to be objective, but a complete distance is not possible. Deceiving ourselves however, is.

Love (part 2)

- Habit vs. Love vs. Security

No matter what we have been through regarding relationships, one-sided or two-sided emotions, every relationship we have will start out with strong emotions. These may be based on physical attraction, friendship or, to some extent, both.

Regardless the starting point of the relationship, for it to be long lasting (this on a relative scale) both friendship, trust, physical attraction and mental attraction must be present. These factors grow in the relationship and are the basis, when the initial attraction fades. In the beginning the flaws of the other are ignored and later these are to be seen as charms and speciallities of the individual. We come to love each other.

In time, two people get to know one another, and if trust and honesty is present they become each others trustee. But what about doubt? At some point, be that after 6 years or 6 months, doubt will appear. This may be nothing, but as we are dealing with humans and their emotions it all comes down to how the handling is done. Doubt comes in many forms; insecurity regarding yourself, insecurity regarding your partner, fears about the future, loss of freedom, jealousy (substantiated or not) or maybe just the change in individuals over time. The only way to deal with doubt is in coorporation with you partner. If the relationship is truly based on trust and friendship, this will solve the issues if love is still there. If the love between the two has dissipated over time, the friendship will still have a chance.

The biggest issue comes if people stop asking themselves; "Why am I here, do I still love?".

Do the two people in a relationship notice the change from "decisive choice" to "habit"? Given enough time each relationship develops its own habits and routines, based on the interactions of the people involved. This also enables the relationship to change away from each choosing to be with the other, but making it more "the easy thing" to do. This is not something that is noticed, but merely a thing happening over time. It may not be a bad thing, as all individuals function better with a certain set of routines, but in these the love may fade into the shadows. It is important to question one self about the feelings that are the basis of the relationship, and whether or not they are there or if they have changed for better or worse.

The aspect of security is a large part of relationships. This, in itself, is not bad, as people feel more secure based on having the trust and support from their partner. But given enough time it becomes the main basis for the two persons involved. Then it poses a threat to the individual, as there is no longer substantial belief in one self to be alone. One side of the relationship may be in doubt as to the basis of the two, but lacking belief in one self makes the choice to end it and move on even harder.

In this there is also the responsibility to the people close, be that the partner or possible children. The choice to leave a relationship or to stay in one, has an impact on others, no matter which way the decision goes. If no children are in the picture, then the decision should be personal and thereby favor ones own happiness. If children are present, then the welfare of these should be considered also, but to what degree? Are the children better off having a set of parents living together but not enjoying it, or the other way around?

Only the two people in a given relationship can make the decisions, and they need to have the courage to do so. But it also takes two people to have a relationship, whereas it only takes one to end it. The important lesson is to have the courage to make a reality-check once in a while. And let the other one know the outcome – a “good” one will help the relationship grow, a “bad” one will help the individuals grow.

20 comments:

Mother said...

Yea! The first Smurfy post!

I'm giving your ideas some thought and considering my responses. Give me some time.

White Smurf said...

Uhh.....that does not sound good :(

Mother said...

Sure it does! It means you've given me something to ponder.

White Smurf said...

Or it means you just need time to take it apart....brick by brick by brick...


Which is ok, as it is here for the same reason.

Mother said...

Not at all! I think the subject effects everyone and how we see the world. Therefore, it's entitled to a little thought before responding.

Anonymous said...

I shouldn't really be commenting because I don't know what to say (this is a good thing because it means that you are basically making sense in what you say, and it is hard to argue with someone who is making sense), but since i've started typing I feel I should make some sort of comment, I can't guarantee that I'll make any sense though, in any case your topic is love, so it should be expected that all sense will go out of the window.
I don't like relationships - being bound to one person, being answerable to that person and doing couple type things together makes me feel all vomitty. I think people put too much stock into love and really need to spend time alone understanding themselves.If you're satisfied with your own company and you know yourself inside out then you'll be able to tell the difference between having a relationship that is based on being afraid of being alone/security and having a relationship that is actually based on you really wanting to be with that person because they push all the buttons that you need pushed.
When I say you I don't mean you as in you. Obviously.

White Smurf said...

I think that the experience collected alone is the important one when it comes to knowing one self. It is important to be aware that you can handle yourself, and stand your own company...mentally. This is the hard part. Being alone and not feeling alone.
The point where you can do this also helps you to maintain yourself in a relationship. The saddest thing I have seen are two people getting together and completely loosing the individual persons in it. I think it is ok for people to adapt and change, but should not be and on/off-switch.

Silence said...

I doubt love is something we are taught in the usual sense of the word. We learn about it from how our parents treat us and each other and how people around us appear. This is what defines love from then on.

Although you try to deal with the subject somewhat objectively it's coloured by you own experience. This post is about what love is to you, as it should be, but it can only tell others what love is to them if they feel like you. I relate to nothing in your post, and disagree from the first line.

If you don't love yourself then you can't love others. That's my view of it all. Everything aside from that I know nothing about.

Anonymous said...

"If you don't love yourself then you can't love others."

That seems a little suspect to me.
I don't feel the need to love myself, I know myself and accept myself for who I am.
I think the idea of loving yourself often gets mixed up with the idea of knowing yourself. People usually are not very self aware and what they perceive themselves to be is usually based on how they think people assess/react to them. (kinda like how we think we sound and come across but then when we see a video clip or a hear a recording of our voice it comes as a huge surprise)
In my experience, so far I've found that people who feel they need to love themselves are usually the ones who really need someone to love them and not just love them but to demonstrate by actions that love. Somewhere along the way someone who was vital to them in someway has made them feel unloved/unimportant and that has given seed to the idea that love is this really important thing when it isn't or at least shouldn't be.

White Smurf said...

" I doubt love is something we are taught in the usual sense of the word."

This I agree with you, but I do think that we are the result of the process we have been through, and this includes the upbringing. We can then change it or accept it. But it will always be with us, and be a part of what defines us as individuals.

"If you don't love yourself then you can't love others."

I hope you do not mean that the way it is written. I think we will have a harder time loving others, and showing it, if we do not accept ourselves as separate persons. I don't think you have to love yourself before you can start loving others. But I think you have to be comfortable with yourself and the better you know yourself the better the basis you have for a relationship.

@gem....I think we agree

Silence said...

Well Gem I can't say I disagree since I more meant knowing yourself and accepting it, than truly loving yourself.
However I don't think there are ever anyone who needs love, it's just a poor way to find acceptance of yourself. But yes, in such a relationship it would be necessary to have constant prof of that love, or the unsure party would be constantly jealous and miserable. It's not a basis for a lasting relationship.

White Smurf said...

"However I don't think there are ever anyone who needs love, it's just a poor way to find acceptance of yourself."

I do believe you are missing the part of a relationship/love where you get support and you learn about yourself. I am not saying you can "need" love, but I think it can help you in many situations. Yes, love can also be a pain, but nothing comes without a price.

It is difficult to weigh the value of being alone to the value of being in a relationshio. Both have their advantages, but I think it is risky to denounce the relationship, based on not being willing to open up, and thereby making one self more vulnerable.

Silence said...

I don't doubt that you learn about yourself when you are in a relationship, and if you don't like what you learn about yourself, then that relationship won't work. It's the same if you try to go into a relationship without accepting the things you know about yourself.
The last part of you argument I don't follow. There are other reasons for not wanting to be in a relationship. I don't think there is anything risky about denouncing relationships. Personally I won't go looking for one, but I won't try to avoid it either.

Just to deal with something related to it. I noticed again, that the word love doesn't mean the same to me as the Danish word for it (elsker). The Danish word seem more loaded with emotions and is something I've never felt comfortable saying to anyone. The English word doesn't have the same weight to it and I have no problem using it. I find this rather interesting.

Anonymous said...

"Both have their advantages, but I think it is risky to denounce the relationship, based on not being willing to open up, and thereby making one self more vulnerable. "

Why is it risky?
I ask because I go out of my way to avoid relationships - and it's only recently that I've realised that I actually sabotage relationships that seem like they may be heading somewhere long term. While a dislike for vulnerability and an unwillingness
to open up aren't everybodies reasons they are mine, at least to a large extent.
Is it really so important to open up, is it not possible to have a relationship without having to do that - er I don't mean that in the nudge nudge wink wink way.

"I noticed again, that the word love doesn't mean the same to me as the Danish word for it (elsker). "
Love is an all encompassing word - and very generic in its uses, hence why it's so easily used. In Hindi there are several words for love - pyaar, ishq, mohabbat, are the few that come to mind. But all three examples that I've given are used for love as in passionate love - you wouldn't use them for your family or friends, so they seem a little weightier than saying love.

White Smurf said...

I use the term "risky", as I think we (humans) may function well under normal circumstances when we are alone. But I think that the support to be found in a healthy relationship, is what makes the hard times a bit easier. This support may also be found through friends, family and such, but in a relationship I assume deep trust and thereby also a willingness to open and accept help when it is offered.
I am not saying that it may not for some people be the right choice to stay out of relationships, but in general I think the positive sides outweigh the negative ones.

"Love"

@Hay. I think in Danish there is the clear distinction between "Kærlighed" (Love) and "Forelskelse" (in love), where I see the first as the one that is important in a relationship, where the second is the part you feel when you have a crush on someone. This one may turn/grow into love itself, but it may also dissipate into nothingness.
I think it is important to separate the two, as the belief that when people are in love, think they truly love someone, and does not question themselves and the choices the do.

I think it is possible to love your family, your friends and you partner, but where the feeling for the partner might be based on being in love, the others are based on other ties and/or friendship.

Silence said...

@ Smurf

I know that distinction between the words, but I think the word Elsker is too limited, to me at least. I wouldn't tell that to family or friends because I see that kind of love as something extremely different from romantic love.

@ Gem

What do you think it means that there are so many words for love in Hindi but only one in English?

Anonymous said...

I don't think there is any significant meaning behind it. It's just the way languages develop - and india is huge and has been ruled by so many different people that the development of its languages is quite fascinating. Generally speaking i think hindi words tend to have more synonyms than their english counterparts.
And um back to the topic of love..

ell said...

Smurf, a very interesting and insightful post for such a young guy.

Sorry it took me so long to comment, but I wrote more of a response (sort of) to this on the pomegranate tiger.

White Smurf said...

Thank you Ell.

Not sure where/what that is?

ell said...

It's my personal blog:

http://pomegranate-tiger.blogspot.com/