Friendship: Shouldn't exist as a word
I don't think this word 'friendship' should be in the dictionary. The actual formation of this word brings with it much calculation and logic. Which should not be the case.
Friendships to me should be spontaneous, and not so complicated. I think God intended relationships to be something simple, halcyon, free. With the added factors of hatred, envy, jealousy and all, it becomes something so manipulative and twisted.
Of course, I'm not condemning anyone here, because I know I myself am guilty of judging people and making friendship out to be something so technical, even hierarchial. And in the process it loses the spontaneity that should be there, and becomes something that people use to their advantage.
Friendship + Manipulation = Bitchiness
Honestly. I think spontaneity is something so very important in friendship. Like, I don't talk to you because I think there's a possibility that we might be good friends, I talk to you because. I enjoy your company and you enjoy mine, and slowly we just get closer and closer. That simple. I don't see the point of having cold wars, playing ignoring games, backstabbing just to get one up over the other guy. What's the point?
Another - some would argue about this - inevitable thing about this is that people use other people as substitute friends. And I detest that word. It speaks of something so horrible, so second-rated, so unwanted, that a person would only talk to another person because there's no one else to talk to. Or worse, to make someone else feel jealous. That is just plain manipulation at work, and it utterly disgusts me. Honestly, though. This is not to say I don't treat people as substitutes. I know I do. But I try not to. Still, I find that aspect of me detestable.
I think I've mentioned before that I'm hard on myself.
Sometimes, I really wonder if there are two people who can be soulmates (in a best-friend way and not a romantic way). What would contribute to that? Mere spending time with one another? A complementing of characters / personalities / tastes / wit / mind? [I know Jane Austen agrees with this - she elevates it in Pride and Prejudice] But people can argue that some people have very conflicting personalities that would make for a good relationship as it would never be boring. What is it then? Opposites attract, or that Birds of a feather flock together?
And then I wonder. Perhaps my being able to move on so quickly just shows that there never can be two people who are soulmates. Since I can just step away from a best-friendship and not really care. Perhaps this ability to move on shows that it is just (in my case) a simple matter of spending time with one another that makes us close. And if you don't spend time with one another, then you won't be that close.
Of course, there's all that rubbish about reciprocation - which is another issue. How do you know that the person you consider 'best friend' considers you a best friend too? That's how people get hurt, I guess - seen it countless times.
I'm a hypocrite, I see. I just criticized the technicalities of something which should be spontaneous and I go on about the very technicalities I'm criticizing.
But really. I really, really wonder how many of the people I know now, are close to now would be close to me in the future. 10 years down the road. Would they mean anything? Or is the Cynicism Of Our Generation too strong for that?
But I see the spiritual aspect of it too. Perhaps God makes it so. That at the end of the day, He'll be the only one constant. Maybe, maybe not. But I always have a very temporal feeling whenever I think about the future. Because I don't know if where I am right now is where I'll be ten years later.
Of course, I'm talking geographically here.
I don't think that much. Not at 12.06 in the morning, anyway.
Friendships to me should be spontaneous, and not so complicated. I think God intended relationships to be something simple, halcyon, free. With the added factors of hatred, envy, jealousy and all, it becomes something so manipulative and twisted.
Of course, I'm not condemning anyone here, because I know I myself am guilty of judging people and making friendship out to be something so technical, even hierarchial. And in the process it loses the spontaneity that should be there, and becomes something that people use to their advantage.
Friendship + Manipulation = Bitchiness
Honestly. I think spontaneity is something so very important in friendship. Like, I don't talk to you because I think there's a possibility that we might be good friends, I talk to you because. I enjoy your company and you enjoy mine, and slowly we just get closer and closer. That simple. I don't see the point of having cold wars, playing ignoring games, backstabbing just to get one up over the other guy. What's the point?
Another - some would argue about this - inevitable thing about this is that people use other people as substitute friends. And I detest that word. It speaks of something so horrible, so second-rated, so unwanted, that a person would only talk to another person because there's no one else to talk to. Or worse, to make someone else feel jealous. That is just plain manipulation at work, and it utterly disgusts me. Honestly, though. This is not to say I don't treat people as substitutes. I know I do. But I try not to. Still, I find that aspect of me detestable.
I think I've mentioned before that I'm hard on myself.
Sometimes, I really wonder if there are two people who can be soulmates (in a best-friend way and not a romantic way). What would contribute to that? Mere spending time with one another? A complementing of characters / personalities / tastes / wit / mind? [I know Jane Austen agrees with this - she elevates it in Pride and Prejudice] But people can argue that some people have very conflicting personalities that would make for a good relationship as it would never be boring. What is it then? Opposites attract, or that Birds of a feather flock together?
And then I wonder. Perhaps my being able to move on so quickly just shows that there never can be two people who are soulmates. Since I can just step away from a best-friendship and not really care. Perhaps this ability to move on shows that it is just (in my case) a simple matter of spending time with one another that makes us close. And if you don't spend time with one another, then you won't be that close.
Of course, there's all that rubbish about reciprocation - which is another issue. How do you know that the person you consider 'best friend' considers you a best friend too? That's how people get hurt, I guess - seen it countless times.
I'm a hypocrite, I see. I just criticized the technicalities of something which should be spontaneous and I go on about the very technicalities I'm criticizing.
But really. I really, really wonder how many of the people I know now, are close to now would be close to me in the future. 10 years down the road. Would they mean anything? Or is the Cynicism Of Our Generation too strong for that?
But I see the spiritual aspect of it too. Perhaps God makes it so. That at the end of the day, He'll be the only one constant. Maybe, maybe not. But I always have a very temporal feeling whenever I think about the future. Because I don't know if where I am right now is where I'll be ten years later.
Of course, I'm talking geographically here.
I don't think that much. Not at 12.06 in the morning, anyway.
posted by Matheus at
7:46 AM
0 Comments
