Skip to main content

Love Song


"It is when he thinks he's past love
It is then he meets his last love"

I once knew a man who went through relationships like they were going out of style When yet another connection with someone had broken down, he'd say something along the lines of how he was really too busy to be with someone, anyway, so it was probably for the best they were splitting-up. And, yes, he was a very busy man, of that there was no doubt.

What I always asked myself -- but never the friend directly -- was, "Why do you keep entering new relationships, then? If you know you're too busy for them, then why do you engage in these Sisyphean undertakings? You're not only hurting yourself." Alas, that friend was not unique. There are plenty of people who sometimes seem to be on emotional auto-pilot, never thinking much about what it is they want or need when it comes to romantic involvement.

Of course, there are the opposite folk, the people who will sometimes proudly proclaim how they don't need anyone (romantically), how they can do bad all by themselves. Social media is rife with these sorts of pronouncements, though I always detect some hurt and wounded feelings underneath the supposed exterior comfort of emotional strength in isolation. It is that old adage that they doth protest too much.

We are also, I think, looking at a denial of what many human beings probably need, but don't want to admit to needing. It's why the 'too busy for a relationship' guy is always starting new relationships, or why the people who claim they don't need someone romantically are always proclaiming how they don't need someone romantically, until someone (not us) is convinced of it.

It really is odd, when you think about it, this outlier of one type of relationship we try and convince ourselves we don't need. In our everyday lives, from the time we are forming in the womb, to our birth, throughout all of the events of our lives until the very end, we need other people. We have romanticized the notion of independence and self-sufficiency. And, to be true, there is something to be said for being able to accomplish certain things on one's own. The facts, however, are that we need others in our everyday lives, for a variety of matters.

In our modern world, we rely on so much. The sidewalks we walk on? Built by other people. The cars we sometimes drive? Manufactured by others. The grocery stores we purchase our food from? The food comes from farmers, sent to stores by folks driving trucks, stocked on shelves by store employees. Many of the jobs that we do? Try doing them -- in their totality -- without our co-workers. Heck, if there were no other people around, there wouldn't be a need for a lot of the jobs that exist. The utilities that run to our homes? Monitored by other people. Injured yourself? Have an illness? Appendix about to burst? Medical professionals are required. The list goes on. We are not fully independent people. We rely on others on a near-constant basis.

If someone truly wishes to remain romantically unattached, that is, of course, their prerogative. And, if someone wants to be polyamorous, then more power to them. The question is one of being honest with oneself. And, one might argue, not to tout being single as some sort of virtue. We live in a co-dependent world. To need people in pretty much every facet of our existence, only to shun the avenue of love as though it were some righteous hill on which to die upon is perplexing.

It's okay to admit we may need someone when it comes to love. We certainly need them for everything else.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Yesterday's Restaurants

The local newspaper has a feature from one of Champaign-Urbana's most legendary restaurateur's, John Katsinas, on what his favorite area restaurants were that have now since closed (or will soon be closing).  It's a nice little read, and has made me stop and think about the restaurants that have come and gone that have left an indelible (and edible) impression on me throughout the years. Here we go....

Watching The Hours

A Twitter friend named Paula has asked for folks to submit ideas for a blog-a-thon about what we think will be the classic films of the future. In other words, what relatively recent movies (namely, from the 21st century), do we think will be considered classics in the decades to come, possibly airing on such venerable stations as Turner Classic Movies ? While a number of films come to mind for such a category, one in particular stood out from the rest, and thus is my entry for Paula's blog-a-thon.

She's Madonna

Today we're going to talk about something very important. We're going to talk about Madonna. "Madge," as she's affectionately known around the gay scene, has been making music for over thirty years. I grew up with her songs, many of them pop classics. In recent years, it can be arguably said that her popularity has waned a bit. During the past decade, Madonna has put out seventeen singles. Of those, three have charted in the US Top 40. Ten Failed to chart at all on the Billboard Hot 100. We now have at least one possibility offered as to why Madge's chart power is waning: Ageism. At least, that's what Diplo (just, Diplo), a producer of some of the tracks off her latest album, thinks . I know it's difficult to be objective about something you've worked on -- whether you were the producer or the artist -- but, as a listener/fan, I have to say that Madonna's most recent work has simply not been that good. Still, we'll hear what ...