Who is the other, after so much time? We receive words of enquiry
from across oceans, from across decades, across years, or even beyond
remembrance. Some old contacts may ask some or all of those 5 x W's: How are
you? What do you do? Who are you seeing? Where do you live? When can I see you
again? If you're like me, the initial instinct is to be concise. I'm fine. I
teach. I'm married. I live in a paradise of my own making. We may see each
other again; when in town meet me at my local. In the meantime, tell me about
you. (Shall we share Webs?)
End of transcription? Yet some persons write back great
expositions: "I'm now a graduate of Local High, did some European
traveling with friends, went to Provincial University, got my Vocation Degree,
added (or am doing) My Masters, My PhD, and work now at Satisfactions
Occupation, and am currently in Parentis Practice too. We (or I) live in
Faraway City. And I (or we) often think of you. So, how are you?”....
And just how much 'should' I in turn reveal? We speak predominantly about things, people, or ideas. The focus?
No matter how full the other's life, my first reaction is to
hesitate before divulging. It seems the past is the past. Does it matter that I
went to Wonderland, unless they've been too? Does it matter that I met this or
that person, unless they know them? Does it signify that I've attained this or
that credential, unless they can relate to my semantics and are commensurate
with my interests? After all, there is a great deal of head scratching to be
wrought twixt epistemology and homeostasis. Should either of us not be on the
same page we may devolve tangentially into circumlocution of the essence of who
we really are, a symbiosis of all that was and is. Twixt religion and
spirituality is a vast argument. Who’s read, “So long, and thank you for all the
fish!"?
Thing is, how does one revive a realistic emotion for a
long-forgotten cousin? How does one really relate to a past-person who indeed
appreciates, indeed has made of their lives a paragon of praiseworthiness, yet
who may essentially be at a different space of taste in life? "You like
Bob Dylan? Really? I prefer Bizet," the other may say. And soon
thereafter, one hears no more. Things have been had. People are past. And ideas?
I recall being so very judgemental when I was younger. I was
affected by cleanliness, by dress, by hairstyles, by vocations, by music
choices, by the sense of another's friends and their family, by vehicle
choices, by whether or not one smoked. And through it all I was looking for (albeit
subconsciously) the one thing I myself did not readily feel, unconditional
acceptance. Thing is, when younger I did not know my boundaries; I feared being
breached. When younger, I feared birds of a different feather. When younger, I
felt instinctually non-commensurate with some of 'the others' essentially because I was
looking for something I felt they could not give me, an interest in ME. My
interest in 'them' was curtailed to my sense of their intensity of reciprocity.
It took energy to love, let alone to like the other when there was no concise
sense of camaraderie, little by way of companionship, or hint of collusion. To
like another just as they are, exactly as you find them, takes some doing. It
takes an integration of all that was and is, and perhaps even more scary, it
takes integrating 'the perhaps' of what is yet to be. Corinthians 13 is indeed
most challenging.
Boundaries are significant in relationships. They are the
differentiators. To have sufficient sense of the self not to be threatened by
the other, "whether one is a bird or a fish" (in Fiddler on The Roof
terminology) is to be self-actualized not only in a way that allows for care,
consideration, and compassion; but also provides for exercising circumspection.
It allows for one to evaluate the time and the effort and the energy and the
flow of a moment, and when the other knocks too often at one's door for their
sustenance that better might be got without dependency, or intrudes too often
on time that needs focus on larger issues than that poor soul's churning
repetition of childhood insufficiencies, it's time to curtail the
correspondence. Or do we drop all barricades?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your contribution, by way of comment toward The Health of the Whole, always!