February 25, 2002

February 25, 2002

Love is Love

While at a coffee shop today, I overheard two young ladies talking. They appeared to be college-aged. In the midst of a conversation that wallowed in negativity, one of them paused to quote, of all people, Ja Rule. She stated matter of factly, "'Love is Pain, Pain is Love' when you think of all the shit that goes along with [love]"?. As much as I am dismayed by the fact that this young lady was looking to a gangster rapper, (whose pre-loverman rants about the joys of murder leave a lot to be desired philosophically speaking) I have to admit that she latched onto a rather thought provoking concept.

I have never been in love in my opinion. I have loved many and, maybe, for very brief stints, been quite enamored with one young lady or another, but I cannot say that I have ever been in love. And the more I think about it, the more I wonder if it's a good thing or a thing to be desired at all. To be in love appears to be a place where, one gives up oneself to a collective. Call it emotional Marxism. And just like Marxism relies on strength in numbers and the greater good of the collective, so does being in love. I have often heard people describe being in love when you become "one". But my immediate question is: which "one" do you become?

Perhaps that is why I have never been in love, because I have never found one who made me that much stronger. Relationships always seems like work to me (and that is because of how I approach them and my own perspective) and I am usually made emotionally weaker. I get no sense of security from the fact that someone is there to love me. Perhaps I already have an adequate amount of love from my family and my friends. Perhaps the love of one person threatens the love of others since being in love requires me to give myself to another (which implies that I am taking myself away from others). I can't call it, but the more I think about it, the more I think that I am just not capable of being in love. And even if I am, its well within my control (and not this irresistible force) and due to the lack of rewards vs. risk, it just isn't the kind of choice I am going to make.

I guess I am thinking about this all too much, but ceasing my debate about it would mean that I was not bringing myself any closer to falling in love. I believe the only reason that I do think about it at all is all of the propaganda that love gets. I have listened to the love songs on the radio and heard the poets at the coffee houses my entire life. They have all painted the state of being "in love" as this huge paradox that creates the greatest sense of elation with this inevitable suffering always lurking in the future somewhere. "One has never lived if they have never been in love," appears to be the consensus of the general populace.

So I have been forced to look at my lack of love analytically in hopes of finding the culprit which has caused it to elude me. The only thing I have been able to come up with is that I agree with Ja Rule (to a certain degree): what most people call being "in love" is eventually a painful experience. The whole process of falling in love is born out a reaction to pain and suffering in the first place. The pain of being alone...we are not falling in love, so much as we are falling from aloneness. But the feeling always returns eventually because we eventually realize that this other individual has not fused with us, but is still as separate from us as they ever were. Hmmm...maybe being in love is just a momentary reprieve from being alone...kind of like how being drunk or high is a momentary reprieve from reality.

The peculiar part of all this is that I still believe the most important part of the human experience is the way we relate to each other. I do not believe that man was meant to be alone, but that we must strive to feel as connected as we possible can to our fellow man. I believe in love and its power, but I just don't believe in being in love...they don't seem that closely related to me at all when I really think about it. Love is a far cry from being in love...they are almost night and day... in love" is a shrinking, contracting action as we fold ourselves into one entity, but love is an expansion (albeit, with its own risks) where we maintain our individuality but still manage to give ourselves to one another. Two completely different motivations, two completely different results...I am reminded of the words of Khalil Gilbran' "The Prophet":

THEN Almitra spoke again and said, And what of Marriage master?

And he answered saying: You were born together, and together you shall be for evermore. You shall be together when the white wings of death scatter your days. Aye, you shall be together even in the silent memory of God. But let there be spaces in your togetherness. And let the winds of the heavens dance between you.

Love one another, but make not a bond of love: Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls. Fill each other's cup but drink not from one cup.

Give one another of your bread but eat not from the same loaf. Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone, Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music.

Give your hearts, but not into each other's keeping. For only the hand of Life can contain your hearts.

And stand together yet not too near together: For the pillars of the temple stand apart, And the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other's shadow.


-dred