Monday, July 03, 2006
Dear Esmond,
I believe you have misunderstood what I meant by the analogy I've said to Song.
To be able to grasp this thought I am trying to convey one has to step away from his circle of comfort and view it from the outside.
I agree it takes time and effort to form long, lasting friendships. I did not say the small tribunals that friends go through over a length of time are of little importance. They are essential to building a friendship in the first place.
I'm saying that it is insufficient reason alone if one were to convince himself that a friend is worth keeping just because one knows that the friend would be there for him in times of need.
If I needed salt, do I really need to go to the beach to get the seawater to distill, or would it have been wiser to borrow from my next-door neighbour?
Is no one irreplaceable? Surely that is not true. So I've always believed friendship comes at a price, as with any choice we make in our lives. The farmer does not say he expects a harvest for twenty seasons if he has only toiled ten. It could be easier on him for the seasons after the first ten because he has worked hard and the soil has become rich and fertile, but the work, you must agree, can never be replaced.
Past history must be remembered, and fervertly at that. But to take it blindly as an indication for the future is a move that is both irrational and irrelevant. History only serves to enrich the present or to marr it, never to actually change it.
This may at first sound like a very calculative and unfeeling way of viewing particularly close-knitted friendships, but I say this precisely because I know in the long-run if the work is not continually done it can only lead to distancing and separation, because we are all humans.
There's also affinity that you talked about, something which I hold very true to my heart. Still, I also know there's only so much that affinity and love can do to keep people together.
Ultimately, it really boils down to what one looks out for when one considers who his bosom buddies are. Some cliques meet up 4 times a year and other than that lead separate lives and can be very happy about it. Others have their lives intertwining and forming a tightly woven web. So I do not say mine is the benchmark for general expectations on what a clique should be like. Rather, I would say that is my personal benchmark of what a clique should be like. That is all.
Hopefully you are more clear about my little take on friendship.
Disclaimer: This post is not directed at anyone. It's just my views on how my closest circle of friends should be like. I still love all of you guys. :)
I believe you have misunderstood what I meant by the analogy I've said to Song.
To be able to grasp this thought I am trying to convey one has to step away from his circle of comfort and view it from the outside.
I agree it takes time and effort to form long, lasting friendships. I did not say the small tribunals that friends go through over a length of time are of little importance. They are essential to building a friendship in the first place.
I'm saying that it is insufficient reason alone if one were to convince himself that a friend is worth keeping just because one knows that the friend would be there for him in times of need.
If I needed salt, do I really need to go to the beach to get the seawater to distill, or would it have been wiser to borrow from my next-door neighbour?
Is no one irreplaceable? Surely that is not true. So I've always believed friendship comes at a price, as with any choice we make in our lives. The farmer does not say he expects a harvest for twenty seasons if he has only toiled ten. It could be easier on him for the seasons after the first ten because he has worked hard and the soil has become rich and fertile, but the work, you must agree, can never be replaced.
Past history must be remembered, and fervertly at that. But to take it blindly as an indication for the future is a move that is both irrational and irrelevant. History only serves to enrich the present or to marr it, never to actually change it.
This may at first sound like a very calculative and unfeeling way of viewing particularly close-knitted friendships, but I say this precisely because I know in the long-run if the work is not continually done it can only lead to distancing and separation, because we are all humans.
There's also affinity that you talked about, something which I hold very true to my heart. Still, I also know there's only so much that affinity and love can do to keep people together.
Ultimately, it really boils down to what one looks out for when one considers who his bosom buddies are. Some cliques meet up 4 times a year and other than that lead separate lives and can be very happy about it. Others have their lives intertwining and forming a tightly woven web. So I do not say mine is the benchmark for general expectations on what a clique should be like. Rather, I would say that is my personal benchmark of what a clique should be like. That is all.
Hopefully you are more clear about my little take on friendship.
Disclaimer: This post is not directed at anyone. It's just my views on how my closest circle of friends should be like. I still love all of you guys. :)
# posted by eastsidebackstreet : 2:08 am
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]