Before You read this – Feel free to listen to this song I wrote on this subject –
Today, I write about something which is so innately human.
While I was talking to an Instagram acquaintance of mine in length about the inadequacy within human beings, I found a lot of insights. It is to be acknowledged that no two people can think the same completely. Instead, we all agree & disagree or agree to disagree or fight (or show sarcasm which hurts our ego).
Anyways, the discussion found itself jumping from one topic to the other. There was a consensus on human beings having inadequacy, but a lack of consensus on the ‘need’ for having this inadequacy. The person I was talking to came from a practical place and said it is impossible for human beings to be satisfied completely, they mentioned that sometimes, this inadequacy prompts us to find ways to ‘live better’ (sounded like the inadequacy that I had been talking about). The fact that we post something on Instagram and expect people to reciprocate by likes or comments in itself points out to the inadequacy within people.
On the contrary, I have been struggling to truly ask myself or others if there is a way we can find adequacy not at the behest of outside exigencies but within us. I would be the first person to admit, that I myself am not practicing, what I am not preaching, but trying to mitigate. But let me somehow rationalize this dissonance by saying that communication, the urge to learn, the urge to coexist seems like one of the facets or reasons why we all are on Instagram, without which we cannot explore new possibilities. Perhaps, Instagram makes us feel like we are part of a group where we both want reciprocation and not want it. The ‘us’ which wants reciprocation and the ‘us’ which does not are both us. and it is a constant fight between the both within us. The maintaining of balance seems to be a necessary contingency.
Similar to this dilemma, is the physical manifestation of the words ‘companionship’ & ‘love’ as i see it. For generations movies, story books, plays, TV has portrayed to us that unrequited love, one-sided love to be incomplete, painful and is a process towards fulfilling what leads to a ‘happy’ ending – uniting two different people who decide to compromise. This, based on the person I was talking to was love. The fact that two people come together is Love, and one sided love is not. That seems to make sense too. However, when a person does fall in love, especially if that love is one sided – he has two things in mind, the first being the desire to come together, and the second being, even if they do not manage to come together, there is nothing but care, well wishes, the desire for this other person to be healthy and loved even if it is not them having the ability to love them.
The first sounds like the urge for companionship which many people including me a few months back would have called love. According to me, it seems we are quite mistaken when we assume compromise to be love. The unselfishness in compromise itself is a selfish act. When we expect others to practically compromise, we are selfish. When the other compromises for the other, they are selfish because ‘they’ value the ‘us’ above the other, because they wish to feel adequate. This in itself, for me, feels like companionship and not love, the urge to belong for the feeling of adequacy.
On the contrary, the second feeling, that of unselfish, one sided love, the fact that we want the other to be happy, loved, in good health, and nothing wrong to happen to them, not being hurt, is love. Love can never be selfish. It seems people need to fall out of a ‘companionship’ to realize what love is. The constant battle between the desire (companionship, reciprocity) and the one sided affection for the other (without reciprocity) is to be a daily battle. I see no reciprocity in the second.
What do you feel?