Monday 19 October 2009

Necessarily sentimental

A response to Telf's response to my 25 things list.

"...was my correction hideously unromantic, as has been suggested to me?"

Yes it was. That isn't necessarily a problem, and doesn't necessarily mean I don't understand where you're coming from in the change you suggested. But it was definitely unromantic (maybe not hideously, as that's a very subjective adjective to use).

"Is it dreadful to... [allow] for the potential temporality of [a relationship], or is it acceptably practical, given the possibility of any particular relationship breaking down?"

Again, "dreadful" is a very personal choice of wording, but I would say that not referring to someone as "the person you are in love with", instead opting for the indefinite rather than the definite article ("a" rather than "the") simply because you want what you are saying to be accurate, is to potentially come across as jaded towards the person you are with and their feelings. Is it worth seriously offending someone you care about for the sake of technical accuracy?

In reference to "the possibility of any particular relationship breaking down": would you also argue that you should never say "see you tomorrow" to somebody because of the possibility of them dying in many different ways before you see them next?

"Perhaps it is bad form to specifically draw attention to the fact that nothing is certain, and everything must end"

I don't know about bad form, but I would say it's a fairly nihilistic approach to life. If you're applying it to relationships, why not everything else, and if everything is ultimately fragile and temporary, then why bother with anything?

"... is it a good idea to pretend that the current situation (however good it is) is necessarily the situation that will persist for as long as all involved live?"

I would say that this is attributing a greater scope to the human mind than is actually realistic. I have trouble thinking about what I'll be doing in a few months, let alone for the rest of my life. Therefore I would say that to live life in manageable pieces of time, rather than considering whether the current state of affairs will last until the end of your life, is a fairly reasonable choice. I would also say that to change the way you think of your life due to the fact that from one day to the next you can't predict what will happen, what will change, what will begin and what will end, is a fairly weighty burden to carry. I don't consider this to be pretending; I consider it to be pragmatism and, ultimately, a human way of thinking.

"the phrase... [seems]... to assign a uniqueness to the subject, implying (in my mind) that there will only be one such person, and that the author will not fall in love with anyone else."

Again, if we are approaching the subject of love entirely technically, then I can understand where you are coming from. But I would take issue with approaching love with any technicality. To me, stating that I have found "the person I fall in love with" is the same as saying "the person I want to continually be in love with", as there's nobody else that I want to be in love with and I don't see that changing. It's not about there only being one person or not, but about the fact that I don't want there to be another person.

This may be slightly disparate as a cohesive entry, but I felt that Telf's response to my original point warranted from me a lengthier response than just a comment. Essentially, whilst I can empathise with the point of view from which Telf was writing, I still stand by my original wording because of the way I feel, and I suppose because ultimately I am a romantic person, and a person in love.

3 comments:

TheTelf said...

Thanks for the response. :)

Sorry if I jump around a bit here, I'm just doing it off the top of my head really. If you reckon I've nor responded properly to one of your points, then say so and I'll give it another whack. Cheers :D

I think the difference between references to seeing someone tomorrow and references to love is that the former are both more common and given far less weight societally than the latter. Crying out "But you said you loved me!" in anguish sounds a lot more likely than "But you said you'd see me tomorrow!". But yes, point taken.

"if everything is ultimately fragile and temporary, then why bother with anything?"
Because "fragile and temporary" does not mean worthless. I'd say that an acceptance that everything ends is a long way from nihilism.

"To me, stating that I have found "the person I fall in love with" is the same as saying "the person I want to continually be in love with", as there's nobody else that I want to be in love with and I don't see that changing. It's not about there only being one person or not, but about the fact that I don't want there to be another person."

In that case we differ in our interpretation of the phrase "the person who you fall in love with", which explains my reluctance to use it in this context.

I think my view in general is that however special something feels, there can be no guarentees, and treating it as something incredible and unique and forever would (to me) feel misleading when I have neither the foresight nor the experience to judge it so. As such I would shy away from anything I felt portrayed a permanence I didn't feel I could back up, regardless of the hope involved.

Perhaps I'm being too analytical about it, but it seems like many people have fallen in love before, and had it fail, and that there is no reason to assume that one is immune to that. Having that viewpoint does not, I think, detract from what I can feel about someone, or the fact that I can hope that a good relationship stays good for as long as possible. I would stand by that viewpoint probably because I'm an unromantic person, but I would argue that that doesn't preclude me from also being in love. :)

Hanspan said...

So just to pin Telf down here, was that an admission you're in love? Does your girlfriend know? :P

Bambi, I have to admit that I too made the mental correction in my head from "the person you fall in love with" to "a person... etc." though perhaps not for the same reasons.

I was (and still am really, unfortunately) very much in love with my last partner and could quite happily have spent the rest of my life with him. Forget taking him back if he asked me to tomorrow, I'd probably marry the guy. I may be rash saying that and I can't claim oodles of definitive experience to say that he is The One, but I was happier with him than I've ever been with anyone else. It wasn't always perfect and we had our flaws, but we always got along, it was always good, and passionate, when it needed to be. I was completely at ease with him and much more confident and relaxed than I'd been in any previous relationship.

And I have to tell myself that there is more than one person that I can fall in love with. Because if there isn't, then there really is no point to things and I may as well give up on life now. Though to detract from the melodrama somewhat, I have always believed that. It's just now life is really proving it to me.

TheTelf said...

"Does your girlfriend know?"

Luckily she's picked up on the fact that my posts on here are boring and badly-written, so she just skims over them and moves onto people who can rite good.

Hence, I think my secret's safe for now ;)