I was watching 'Rent' - a musical.. a couple at their engagement party sing 'Take me as i am or leave me' because one half thought the other half was flirting with a waitress at the engagement party. Basically one half is an ivy league 'control freak' and the other is a musician and a free spirit. The free spirit claimed to just be talking to the waitress and not flirting. Maybe the free spirit just wasn't really ready to settle down. And maybe the control freak was just feeling insecure. Who really knows except the free spirit what her motivation was. In the end, they went their separate ways. I know it's just a show but i thought the issue was interesting.
It brought me back to the question of asking people to take us as we are. But just what are we? Who are we? And what defines us?
Aren't we a constantly changing flux? If we are a free spirit or even it's opposite - a control freak - can we be different? Would that mean compromising our inner being? Our core personality? Is there a core that doesn't change? I used to say I'm not monogamous and i would never change. Well, i've been monogamous for almost four years now... so never say never!
I was discussing with Webby about compromise a few weeks back. She said compromise means that you are giving up something unwillingly and has a negative connotation. Instead, she said, we should think more on whether we complement each other. It was quite eye opening for me as i hadn't realised that the word compromise does have very negative implications. She said that if we think we compromise more than we complement each other in a relationship, that means there is something wrong with the relationship. Or rather, that there is something wrong with the way one views that relationship. A bit like the glass is half full or half empty thing. Everything is perspective.
Ajahn Nyana said a few weeks ago that we should just look at what we have and say - it's good enough. I just wonder though - if we accept what we have as 'it's good enough', does that mean we would simply stay with the first person we dated (arggh!) although it would also mean my husband wouldn't have left me...
Interesting.
2 years ago
2 comments:
There is no such thing as a complete package. Least of all, no money-back-guarantee. Somewhere along the lines, we weigh how much we are willing to endure and how much we do love. It's more like, learn to take it and like it, or else, find a totally new common interest/hobby. We humans have a tendency to gravitate to people who share our values and beliefs - as if we are looking for better and prettier versions of ourselves. Now, aren't we a narcissitic generation? Do we look for people who actually complement us or just justify us?
Webby makes sense too... but isnt compromise sometimes necessary? It is a willing sacrifice for one whom we love.
I think the purest form of Love is wanting our beloved to be Happier than we are... but most people fear that for the reason " What if the other person doesnt love me back?" - in a case like this... where there is a "what if" then the love was never pure in the first place, but more of an investment into the Stock Market of Love.... a Gamble with expectations of rewards. Like I put in RM10 I expect RM 12 or more to come back haha...
Post a Comment