1 is the loneliest number

Jan 19, 2006 00:47

I've had some really good conversations lately with a couple of different genres of people; each conversation had the same basic thread. Those of you out there that know what a creative outlet means understand what I'm about to say...as I was laying in bed tonight, I had an question rolling around in my head that wouldn't let my eyes close.

When was it decided as we travel this road of life we must to go at it alone?

This generation of people, meaning mine, is searching constantly for something. We are the most successful, the most educated, the most politically correct, the healthiest generation yet. Then why must we turn to pills to help us sleep and smile and pay professionals to listen as we spill our problems on a fake leather couch? We search and look, turn over respective stones only to look with wide eyes at the sky to ask, "What now?" Our parents have raised us to be strong, independent and self-assured. I fear that with that independence we lack the simpleness of where much of our true happiness lies: companionship.
In the beginning it was said that God made the earth and the sky and all the creatures there within, and then he formed a man in his image. But even then, in the perfectness before sin, Adam was lonely. And so the Lord gave him a companion. After the sin went down, Adam and Eve stuck together, and then there was a family. Even if you don't subscribe to the idea of the Christian creation story, it is said that humans in ancient times lived in groups, tribes if you will, and survived with each other. In Greek mythology, Ghea, the "earth mother" of sorts, was lonely and gave birth to a husband. Even Dorothy had companions on her journey down the yellow brick road. When was it that this way of thinking was discarded?
My grandmother has friends that have been there for her through thick and thin for over 40 years of her life. These people have laughed, cried, rejoiced, praised, fought and made up, but one thing remained steady: they were there for each other. They were a group, a tribe. In this generation we have been taught that we give up nothing for anyone, that we have to first make a life for ourselves before we can share it with others, that we have to be happy living by ourselves because it is weak or needy to be happy with someone else. God forbid that someone from the opposite sex comes along and even slightly alters the course that your life is taking. Even children are seen as somewhat of an "inconvenience;" the term working mother has become synonymous with not the harried mother kissing the skinned knee while keeping house with the other hand, but with the woman who, if I can quote myself, "gives up nothing for no one." (Please don't take any offense to this those of you out there. I mean none, I just find the point interesting. Working mother means you have a job, not the work that is done for the family.) And we wonder why fifty percent of marriages fail, why children "divorce" their parents, why disfunctional describes most of the famlies in today's world. We do not interract with one another because we've been taught that we don't need it. So we don't. Correction, we don't LET ourselves feel need it. Its been drilled into our heads that someone else's support is not necessary.

I think that it is. I also think that there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

It is important and necessary to love, need, and want. It doesn't make us needy or weak, it makes us human. I sit tonight thinking about an article in "Vogue" that I read about Gwenyth Paltrow. The reporter had nothing but good things to say about this strong, confident, self-assured woman who is polite, and even regal in her dealing with people. She is successful and beautiful, but the thing that struck me is this:

"Watching her with [her daughter] makes me think of something John Madden, the director of "Shakespear in Love" and "Proof," told me" 'The family is the key thing for her. I've always said that you don't understand who she is until you see her with her family. There is some sort of sense in which she exists through them, and that part of her is switched off when they're not around.'"

What an amazing concept. Someone who actually relies on her family? Honestly, incredibly insightful. We are told that our families/husbands/wives/friends are "important," but my goodness, to actually find happiness in them? Novel. Please don't misread, non of this is said with any cattiness or acidic flavor...I truly feel that it is something that we've lost sight of. When Dorothy was lost and alone, she walked slowly, looking around with fear and sadness at the challeges that awaited her. As she acquired her traveling buddies, she began to smile, to sing, and not just journey down the road, but to skip down the yellow bricks. I think about a situation that I'm in, a situation where feelings are fighting against feelings and there is guilt and fear about incorporating someone into the grand scheme of things. I berate myself for feeling the same things that generations upon generations of people have felt before me. I can't help it, it's what the world has taught me.
So maybe, to my way of thinking, we do need to take a hint from good old Dorothy. Honey, we're not in Kansas anymore, but maybe it doesn't hurt to link arms with the person next to us so they don't get away, so we can catch each other when we fall, and so we can have a smile on our face, a song in our heart, and just a little more spring in our step.
Previous post Next post
Up