I once accused you of never "getting" me and so we went our separate ways.
When I found myself laying in your warm arms again, an embrace that even the thought of never ceases to bring great comfort and protection to me, you whispered that I was a hard person to "get," me and my clouds. We both laughed and you hugged me tighter, my heart expanded.
You referred to me and my myriad of thoughts, moods, feelings, attitudes...as "clouds." And in that word and the embrace to follow, I realized that you do "get" me. Perfectly. So, we let go again, and I find that I love and appreciate you so much more.
There is a love that does not exist in confinement, but flourishes in the freedom of two hearts. I was warmly reminded today of a quote that has always been dear to me: "If you love someone, set them free. If they return, they were always yours. If they don't, they never were." And while our hearts long for that return, long to feel a validation of such a return, the existence of that love can never be denied. We do not need to own that person to enjoy that love, nor do we need them to return to know that love was true...we only need to fully give ourselves to that love, even if the object of that love is no longer present. And when the person we love doesn't return, it should bring a quiet smile, knowing they are free and carrying our love in their heart always, as we shall carry their love in ours.
May my clouds forever remain in his heart but never pose a dismal, overcast shadow. Rather, let them be a welcome place in which he may find solace and reminded of how loved he is, despite the brief absence of a bright summer sun.
*Image from here.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Clouds
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Beautiful.
???? oh darn it, i'm not good at figuring these things out ;) hehe just teasing:) I love the pictures you have been finding...and the pieces you have been writing:) you seem at peace:)
Richard...thank you.
Kim...thank you for the comment. i do feel an incredible peace. and i am once again slipping into that ruminative place, so you can likely expect more of these posts! haha...lucky you, huh? :)
It's very true, and also somewhat of a problem in monogamous relationships (the idea that the past doesn't begin and end with that one person).
Some people force you to close off a whole section of your past while, at the same time, demanding everything.
mattbg...you know, i think i love that fact the most (that the past doesn't begin and end with one person) about relationships. it is an apt reminder that a relationship does not bring ultimate happiness. only we can do that for ourselves. i am very accepting of that fact but when you love someone, there is that compulsion to do something with that love, you know? you feel that you need to profess and fight for that love or completely squash it and forget about that person.
but really, having loved is a wonderful feeling. i am getting better at the acceptance part...the reality that love alone does not sustain a relationship. but despite feeling wiser and more accepting, a large part of me still wants to run to that love with all my might! :)
b, that's an interesting point-of-view about the cues toward a relationship not bringing happiness. And, I agree. I've had that whole approach treated with suspicion before, though.. the idea that if I don't want to control what that other person does, then I must not care enough. The idea that you have to have your own interests and own life and make yourself happy outside of the relationship in order for a relationship to work seems lost on a lot of people. But, I think all successful marriages have that component. There's a deep and genuine respect for the individualism of the other person. Love is subservient to that type of respect, I think.
I think there's a rational component to love, too. You decide to love someone, in some way. Because, really, there are lots of people you could end up loving. Once you've committed, though, you choose not to follow those alternate paths that will probably continue to present themselves.
If that last part isn't true, then you're really not in control and that must be worrying considering the risks involved and the potential to be hurt so much.
mattbg...it does seem precarious, doesn't it? that notion that love must allow for independence but also maintian some kind of bond beyond friendship? i think successful relationships truly do thrive on mutual respect for the other person's identity and interests, separate from that of the relationship. but for me, it is so much more.
I don't tend to believe that love is a decision. for me, love comes naturally and easily but yes, i do think we decide on some level to pursue a certain love more fully (i.e., give of ourselves more fully and decide to make that love a relationsip).
and as far as control...i think that is the great irony of love. we really are not in control of love. we can take rational steps and such, but love is so irrational and should be. that potential to be hurt is a great part of the potential to feel truly alive as a result of having loved. anyone who says that their love is absolutely secure and without risk, must have a terribly satisfactory relationship. i'm not saying that one should always feel vulnerable and insecure in a relationship. but one should never feel "in control" of that love. as soon as that seems to happen, i think the love loses much of its significance to us.
thanks for the thought provoking comments!
Post a Comment