relationships

February 16, 2025

Is Your Relationship OK?

Lasting relationships have become a “maybe/maybe not” roll of two slippery dice.

MAY 30, 2024 — The U.S. Census Bureau today released estimates showing that married-couple households made up 47% of all households in 2022, down from 71% in 1970.*

Before I discuss how to evaluate your relationship’s stability, let’s examine some reasons for the decline noted above.

  • The sexual revolution of the 1960s removed the shame attached to premarital intercourse, especially for young women. To the extent that sex is an incentive to marry, one needn’t commit to marriage anymore for this kind of togetherness.
  • The change in standards just described captures what Oscar Wilde said in the late 19th century:

“I have no objection to anyone’s sex life as long as they don’t practice it in the street and frighten the horses.”

  • Divorce is also more frequent than it used to be, making marriage a more obvious gamble. While the annual rate of divorce has declined in recent years, it remains far higher than it was before the ’60s:

Figure 1. Women’s Divorce Rate, 1900-2018

orange line chart showing Figure 1. Women’s Divorce Rate, 1900-2018

  • Many more women have lives outside the home and in the workplace. Historically, women left their residence only with their mate or a chaperone. Now, both partners have more freedom to meet other attractive people. 
  • The church doesn’t have the hold on individuals and their lives to the extent it once did. Oral contraceptives have reduced the number of “accidents,” which used to cause the parents and clergymen of a young couple to encourage or insist on their marriage.
  • Many women have discovered they can have fulfilling lives without a significant other and prefer to enjoy that freedom. Society’s historical expectations to produce children have diminished, and the birth rate has declined, leaving females less encumbered.
  • The Internet provides endless opportunities to meet new people. Pornography offers a substitute erotic charge.
  • Our disposable world encourages us to get rid of objects and obtain new ones. This objectification extends to lovers. Those who depart often miss the learned experience of repairing relationships, an essential skill for a relationship to endure.
  • We live in a world that changes at an accelerating pace, demanding more of us and requiring adaptation that is not our choice. If persuaded to “Be all you can be,” there is less encouragement to attend to the needs of others, including a partner and children. The Me generation is not the We generation.
  • Women are less inclined to put their interests second or submit to men. The once-accepted dominance of men has been put in its place to some degree, but there is significant resistance. The cliche of “moving on” often wins over those who would otherwise view the one they love as worth fighting for or adapting to.
  • Many believe the partner should complete him or her, producing a whole and blissful existence. If we are to feel complete and happy, that circumstance is more the work of each of us than anyone else.

Solutions? Whether you wish marriage or a less formal relationship, here’s one piece of advice. Do not assume that your significant other can read your mind. He or she cannot, even if he is a therapist. Speak up!

From time to time, it is wise to do a relationship check-up. In effect, you might call it an effort to determine the State of the Union. 

Cover at least the following areas:

  • Understanding. Does the partner see you as you wish to be seen?
  • Non-sexual displays of affection.
  • Sex.
  • Do you enjoy your time together, and is there enough?
  • Do you want more time apart?
  • Do you want your partner to take initiative in any area, from sex to planning events?
  • Would you like to engage in more activities, such as concerts, plays, spectator sports, workouts, seeing your family, dining out with others, taking courses together, watching movies, reading to each other or sharing the same book, etc.?
  • Showing appreciation and kindness.
  • Are chores and responsibilities fairly distributed at home and with children?
  • Money.
  • Conflict and Apology.
  • Future Plans.

One could go on. Love continues for those who pursue it. It remains the thing that poets praise, and, for a great many, make the complications of a life together worth all the trouble.

Sigmund Freud reminded us that love and work are essential to our humanity. But perhaps he should have added that work on love is required to sustain love.

Why bother?

Because nothing else takes us over the moon.

===========

*The National Center for Family & Marriage Research (NCFMR) at Bowling Green State University notes.

**Sources: NCFMR analyses of data from the National Vital Statistics, CDC/NCHS, 1900-2000; U.S. Census Bureau 2000 Decennial Census; U.S. Census Bureau (IPUMS), American Community Survey, 2010 and 2018 (IPUMS). Note: Data for Alaska begin in 1959. Data for Hawaii began in 1960.

The Maiden is the work of Gustav Klimt, 2013. The second painting is Paul Klee’s Architecture of the Plain, 1923. Both of these are sourced from Wikiart.org.

January 12, 2025

What Is Possible After Rejection?

In discussing his 1993 movie The Age of Innocence, famous filmmaker Martin Scorsese said it depicted people not unlike ourselves: “We have the same problems of wanting things that we can’t have and having things that we don’t want.”

Among the acknowledgments we want is recognition for our best efforts, not professional rejection. That’s where Jimmy Carter’s life comes in—the deceased 39th President of the United States.

In the 1980 presidential election, approximately 50 million voters told Carter to get out—four years was enough. He won only 41% of the vote.

It is a painful thing to realize your mate wants no part of you, but the scale of humiliation Carter endured was off the charts. He was left with a monster-sized campaign debt, to boot.

Carter described the emotion of it all some years later at a meeting of prominent U.S. CEOs. The audience included Bernie Marcus, the co-founder of Home Depot. Marcus had just told of his own awful experience of being dismissed from a job.

Bernie, that is how I felt, except, I wasn’t fired by a board manipulated by an activist, I was fired by the American people—in the spotlight and left with no purpose and my dream shattered and no financier to back me. But I am dedicated to waging peace.

Scorcese’s movie, based on Edith Wharton’s novel of the same name, depicts late 19th-century New York high society. Despite status and wealth, they were a gossiping, competitive, and unhappy group. Carter had reason to be crushed by his loss, but he didn’t submit to the pettiness Wharton depicted.

Lavish dinners, foreign trips, and bespoke clothing—all they possessed—did not put them at ease, allow them to be themselves, or generate any sense of gratitude.

Jimmy Carter lived differently past the pomp and circumstance of his time as Chief Executive.

—

Humankind, never satisfied it owns enough of everything, including time, now puts time on bullet-speed roller skates. The 21st-century life unknown to Wharton left horses, buggies, and messengers behind. Taking their place are jet travel, computerized phones in everyone’s pocket, and an urgency to display personal uniqueness.

In our smaller world, the ambition to become famous grows larger.

Few would complain if the top of the mountain of renown made us happier. Scorsese, however, said we remain unsatisfied. Given the level of daily animus and finger-pointing, including some who seek revenge—it is hard to disagree with him.

Yet James Earl Carter, Jr. left a different model of living.

Active almost until his death at 100, his achievements in his long life stagger the imagination. Unlike most past presidents, he chose not to retire. The former commander-in-chief promoted world peace, resolved diplomatic stalemates, and worked to build homes for the homeless. He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1992. His marriage of 77 years remains a model of why love matters. His work demonstrated the gift of offering love to one’s neighbors.

Neither wanting to return to the White House nor “getting and spending” propelled Carter’s good works. This former Navy Lieutenant taught Sunday School until his health began to fail. His religious faith motivated the desire to serve.

In this undated photo, Jimmy Carter gets his bars pinned on by his wife, Rosalynn, left, and his mother, Mrs. Lillian Carter, at the U.S. Naval Academy. (AP Photo)

An ancient Greek adage reminds us, “A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in.”

President James Earl Carter, Jr. spent his life growing those trees.

Americorps offers a tribute here.

December 22, 2024

Half the Way Home to Changing Your Life

You might be halfway to changing yourself but haven’t realized it. Sometimes, entering the darkness is the way to find the light. The sunrise waits for you and returns tomorrow to offer another chance to meet it.

Have you thought …

  1. I do not want to be this person.
  2. I don’t want to keep pretending.
  3. I know I’m scared, but I must stop avoiding those situations I fear.
  4. I need to be able to speak or present in front of a group.
  5. I’m afraid I will lose my friends if I change.
  6. Not all of my friends are worth keeping.
  7. I worry about being rejected.
  8. What must I do to become more confident?
  9. Will a therapist think I’m not worth treating? I will fail at counseling.
  10. I hear that counselors don’t give out grades.
  11. I need more friends.
  12. I make excuses not to go where I think I will be uncomfortable.
  13. I can’t eat alone in fine restaurants.
  14. I prefer talking on Zoom or on the telephone. I feel safer. Texts and emails are even better.
  15. I never know what to say but want to find the words.
  16. My parents and siblings are disappointed in me.
  17. My pet is my only real friend.
  18. I am easy to take advantage of. I feel used, but what would happen if I stopped?
  19. I avoid leadership opportunities if I can.
  20. I am not seen — not known by some people I’m closest to.
  21. I have made poor choices of friends.
  22. I read self-help books instead of changing what I do in the world.
  23. I need to go out more to places where I can meet people
  24. I compare how unhappy I feel with how joyous everyone else appears. Are they faking it?
  25. No more excuses. It is time!

If you have several of these thoughts, you are already more honest about yourself than many, including some you admire.

Half the work of psychotherapy is done.

The future holds risks for all of us, but we can also make ourselves over. An old expression reminds us that “every knock is a boost.” Learning and resilience can come from taking on challenges and enduring the defeats fate delivers. A therapist will remind you that you are not alone.

Perhaps you will gain a new perspective on the world and your place in it. Yes, the end of summer grows darker, but Camus wrote, “Autumn is a second spring when every leaf’s a flower.”

The sculptor’s clay stretches before you, waiting for your hands to reshape it. Listen to its quiet voice.

==========

The first image is The Great Wave off Kanagawa by Hokusai. It is followed by a view of San Francisco in Fog with Rays, posted by Brocken Inaglory. Both of these were sourced from Wikimedia Commons.

Finally, an Arizona Sunset on a Train Trestle, photographed in late July 2020, near Tucson by the superb photographic artist Laura Hedien, with her permission: Laura Hedien Official Website.

November 17, 2024

My Conversational Life: Of Love and Time

A busy street is an exciting place to walk. Couples chat while many singles listen to music or podcasts on earbuds or headphones. Others talk to friends on portable devices, oblivious to the flesh and blood crowd.

I usually look at faces, perhaps because of my career as a clinical psychologist. When I go into grocery stores, I often say a few words to one or more employees. I also search for name tags to voice their names instead of shrouding them in namelessness.

My friend Keith and I went to lunch on Thursday. The front desk hostess seated us at the quiet table we requested. The miss recognized that the table needed to be moved to allow us more room.

The diligent employee was perhaps 25, slightly built, and pretty, but I mostly attended to her strength and thoughtfulness in gripping and pulling the table.

“My goodness, you are strong … and lovely, too.”

“Thank you.”

She was both, though I didn’t gaze closely at her since my buddy and I were in the middle of a conversation upon entry.

When we left 90 minutes later, we passed by the front desk again. I looked at her with purpose this time. The youthful woman possessed a pastel beauty, understated in her delicate appearance and unforced gift of enchantment. I could only say, “You are even more beautiful now.”

It was true. I viewed her in a way I hadn’t before—looking into her eyes as I do with many people, as if all others have vanished, and the world consists of only the two of us.

In a second, before I turned away to catch up to my friend, I saw the beginning of a tear in one of her eyes. She couldn’t speak, but her expression and the tear said everything.

Such moments come to me without effort. My friends know me as a serious man with an excellent sense of humor. When I look at them, they recognize they are being seen.

My life is complete, and I seek no lovers who are a third of my age, no matter their attractiveness—even assuming they are interested.

Between the seconds that opened and closed our lunch, Keith and I talked about the recent death of his oldest brother and other consequential matters. My conversations are spiced with more humor, as a rule. At the end of our meeting, I did something I now do with such friends.

I told him what he meant to me.

I do not say what others offer more casually. I am specific. My words tell these fellow travelers what I find interesting, important, or remarkable about them. If one observes the other in-depth, this is not difficult.

It is essential.

One might ask why I have begun doing these things—to compliment the young woman or to tell my friends what fine qualities I recognize in them and why I value them as I do. 

In the past two years, I have lost six friends, acquaintances, or relatives: Cliff Levy, Don Osborn III, Lincoln Ramirez, Neil Rosen, Cheryl Huston, and Don Byrd. Three suffered long illnesses before their passing. I had not been in recent touch with them all before they died. Only with my cousin Cheryl did I speak of her importance to me and the reasons why.

Life is sometimes rather like a 40-minute Zoom meeting. It is free, an invention some of us use to catch up with others. Toward the end of our time, we might hear someone in the middle of their sentence, and the next word is suddenly cut off. Such is life.

Yes, I can buy more time on Zoom, but with all the people I mentioned, no amount of money would have achieved that end—stretching their lives and their loves, the stuff that made them special.

So goes a lesson I’ve learned about conversation, love, and time.

I do not seek your condolences and am not looking for a date. Nor should you think I am signaling some future tragic end.

This is about something else entirely.

=========

The 1929 photo is of the 14-year-old Swedish actress Ingrid Bergman. It is sourced from Wikimedia Commons.

September 8, 2024

More Than Beautiful: A Story about Love

The most eloquent writers make me marvel at how their art disguises their effort. They trigger a rethinking of old ideas and offer new ones.

But the new words below are those of a woman who wants no part of the admiration and applause that might be produced by writing a memoir. She offers enough of her experience to warn women like her about the nature of love and leaves it at that.

This gifted and accomplished lady (who calls herself H.) tells us who she is and who she was. Even though H. reveals few details of a headline trauma, she persuaded me to understand why she calls her life a tragedy—a tragedy about the absence of love and how that can happen.

Her comment came only recently in response to my 2009 post Beautiful and Smart, But Unlucky in Love: The Reasons Why:

When this article was originally published, I was 47. I was in the midst of the worst year of my life until then, even starving for months on end, and alone, alone, alone in my grief. And yet, I was still so beautiful, still in that girlish sort of way, that 20- and 25-year-old men (literally) sighed when I passed; and I saw their dreamy, bashfully eager eyes. Even in 2016, very young men that had been eyeing me with romantic interest were SHOCKED (again, literally) when they heard my age. (It wasn’t pleasant to experience, I can tell you that: the shock in their eyes, as if I had done something appalling, perhaps as if I were a freak out to get them.)

In the past few years, but especially in the past eleven months, I have lost almost every remnant of my beauty. While I still have my beautiful skin and gorgeous legs – funnily, nobody notices them anymore after they’ve seen my jowls and slightly sagging neck – I suspect I’ve become even slightly grotesque to see. (This is often the lot of beautiful people, strangely enough – but probably not a coincidence.) It matters to me, but not because I were “after” some man. It is too late for that because have no love left to give. (And also, let’s be frank, I have no interest in being a nurse to some old man, not do I wish to be a mother figure – or worse, a fetish – to some youngster.)

Anyway …since this exceptionally fine article (No. 1), especially, is priceless advice,** certainly applicable in my case) is precisely about women who have – or are perceived as having – an overabundance of desirable qualities, it should not be too immodest to mention that I am an extremely thoughtful and kind person, at the very top of my (creative) profession, with many (sadly untapped) talents, speak many languages (English is my fourth), and an IQ the measurements of which have varied throughout my life (for obvious reasons), but the lowest score was cca 170. I used to be great fun, too, witty, adventurous, with stars in my eyes… I was EXPECTING love – great, all-consuming love – to find me (how and why on earth would it give me a miss, right?) – so I never tried to “find” it; I still don’t believe in that approach, anyway.

Well, for some reason, “Love” either lost track of me (yes, we did move a lot when I was a child, but that wasn’t the problem) or just decided that I was, I don’t know… too good for any mortal man? OF COURSE I am joking. But let me tell you something: more than once I’ve heard men – some, not all, drunk (always listen to drunk men) – tell me literally: “You are too good to be true.” Others – not many (I don’t live in a “romantic” society) – have approached me to tell me how 20 years ago they were madly in love with me… (With all due respect: WTF?! You are telling me this NOW – why? Because I am no longer a threat to you, right?)

If a (wo)man tells you you are too good for him/her, or just “too good to be true”- believe them. It means they would always feel inferior to you. (*I* certainly wouldn’t want to be with someone who would feel – let alone BE – inferior to me.)

Anyway, I had ONE “relationship” (and he was married when we met) in my early twenties. He was a physically gorgeous man, but physically and verbally abusive. After that, I only had a few short affairs – and I loved (or even liked) none of them, but wanted to at least experience sex (that happened to be laughable in almost all cases, except the first one). It was as if, deep down, I’d always known – literally from early childhood – that I was never to experience LOVE.

I could go on and on and on… in fact, my life would make quite a puzzling page-turner, but I am not going to write it. Nobody else will, either, because nobody really knows the tragedy that is my life; and “older” women cease to be interesting to those who are still living the high summer of life, anyway.

BOTTOM-LINE: In some cases, there may not only be nothing much wrong with you – it may be that you are perceived as TOO good… at least by men who are afraid to approach (and rightly so, because who wants a wimp?). Who we meet – as friends, as lovers – really is down to dumb luck. You can help your “luck” by moving to a milieu that is at least vast and varied enough for you to offer enough choice. Because there are many, many good, excellent men out there… but in the wrong milieu you may never meet a single one.

==========

**1. This is the portion of Beautiful and Smart, But Unlucky in Love: The Reasons Why that was referred to by H. in the third paragraph of the quoted text above:

If you came from a home where you were neglected, criticized, or abused, your self-worth is likely to be less than what it should be. Recall Marilyn Monroe: famous, beautiful, and talented, but insecure and unlucky in love. A woman with the background I’ve described often looks for approval from someone who unconsciously reminds her of someone who failed to love her as a child. It is as if the unconscious mind is still looking for the thing never achieved before (love or approval), and it only has value if it comes from a similar person. Since the parent in question was neglectful or critical, the chosen substitute will likely be that way, providing the woman another chance to win loving attention. Given her poor choice of a partner, the sought-after affection and approval are no more likely than they were in childhood.

My response to H.‘s 2024 comment to the 2009 post can be found here: Beautiful and Smart, But Unlucky in Love: The Reasons Why.

It is currently at the bottom of the long list of comments.

===========

The first photo is called Attractive Beautiful Red-Haired Girl by Jerzy Gorecki. The second is Hedy Lamarr by A.L. Whitey Schaefer. Both are sourced from Wikimedia Commons.

August 18, 2024

Sex With Your Therapist: The Ethical Issues

Erotic transference always involves the patient’s desire for the therapist. The complexity jumps when the counselor reciprocates the craving.

It is in the client’s interest to guide the patient in resolving her feelings while the therapist contains his own. When he cannot accomplish the latter, even after consultation and supervision from another professional, the danger of malpractice becomes enormous.

The first principle governing all helping professionals is to “Do no harm,” which includes prohibitions against physical intimacy with clients, present and past.

Today, I will present relevant sections of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct of the American Psychological Association. I’ve added a few comments along the way:*

**10.05 Sexual Intimacies with Current Therapy Clients/Patients

Psychologists do not engage in sexual intimacies with current therapy clients/patients.

Comment: Patients often feel gratitude toward the person helping them through a difficult patch. Sometimes, their psychologist might have been the first to “see” and understand their essence, carry their secrets, and not betray them. Whether accurate or not, these observations and emotions in the client can give the counselor unequal influence in the dyad and the power of one who stands on a pedestal.

**10.06 Sexual Intimacies with Relatives or Significant Others of Current Therapy Clients/Patients.

Psychologists do not engage in sexual intimacies with individuals they know to be close relatives, guardians, or significant others of current clients/patients. Psychologists do not terminate therapy to circumvent this standard.

Comment: The reasoning is simple. Involvement with other family members can disrupt and injure the client. 

For example, imagine the client’s sister becomes the lover of her sibling’s psychoanalyst. Fear of the counselor sharing details of conversations with the relative might occur. Jealousy and friction between the sisters can’t be ruled out. Anger at the doctor and feelings of betrayal in more than one direction might also erupt.

**10.07 Therapy with Former Sexual Partners

Psychologists do not accept as therapy clients/patients with whom they have engaged in sexual intimacies.

Comment: Ex-lovers, where one wants to become the healer’s client, involve two people who might carry a torch for the other. Office counseling sessions can reignite the flame. Everyone knows how many complications occur in the ordinary course of a relationship. In the dual role of lover/therapist, the counselor unintentionally invites harm to the person his profession tells him he must protect.

**10.08 Sexual Intimacies with Former Therapy Clients/Patients.

(a) Psychologists do not engage in sexual intimacies with former clients/patients for at least two years after cessation or termination of therapy.

(b) Psychologists do not engage in sexual intimacies with former clients/patients even after a two-year interval except in the most unusual circumstances. Psychologists who engage in such activity after the two years following cessation or termination of therapy and of having no sexual contact with the former client/patient bear the burden of demonstrating that there has been no exploitation in light of all relevant factors, including (1) the amount of time that has passed since therapy terminated; (2) the nature, duration, and intensity of the therapy; (3) the circumstances of termination; (4) the client’s/patient’s personal history; (5) the client’s/patient’s current mental status; (6) the likelihood of adverse impact on the client/patient; and (7) any statements or actions made by the therapist during therapy suggesting or inviting the possibility of a post-termination sexual or romantic relationship with the client/patient. (See also Standard 3.05, Multiple Relationships .)

Comment: The essential point here is more than the time-designated prohibition of an affair. Even when the two-year post-treatment “ban” has elapsed, the ethical guidelines suggest the counselor and client should still not have a carnal liaison.

Imagine an ardor-filled mutual attraction that is unresolved during professional contact.

Perhaps one party suggests waiting for the other until the two-year prohibition has expired. If they agree to start the clock, they might terminate the psychotherapeutic element of their connection and count the days.

The ethical guidelines focus on the professional’s responsibility because of the power imbalance in the relationship and the possibility of harming the now previous patient. They put “the burden of demonstrating that there has been no exploitation” entirely on the psychologist.

Some years ago, I heard the answer to a crucial question in a required educational seminar on professional ethics. The question was obvious but necessary:

Is there ever an adequate legal defense against a malpractice claim due to sexual intimacy occuring after the termination of treatment?

The wise presenter offered an imaginary defensible scenario similar to this:

The doctor and patient, both married to others, concluded a substantial period of psychotherapy. About five years later, they recognized each other on the same flight across the Pacific Ocean. They each traveled alone.

The plane crashes, and the pair find themselves the only survivors on a deserted island. Of course, they both hoped to be rescued and had no sexual contact during this time. After two more years, they gave up the hope of rescue. 

Then they began to have sex.

More time went by, and they were rescued and returned to their waiting spouses. 

In this hypothetical example, the woman eventually sued for malpractice, and the psychoanalyst had a reasonable chance of acquittal—or so the presenter believed would happen if the story were real.

As you can understand, the seminar leader was saying that only under extreme and unusual conditions might there be an adequate defense for a sexual relationship between the counselor and his previous patient. 

Translate that into this implicit guidance within the code of conduct: Never, never, never do it.

================

*Therapists who are not psychologists typically follow other, not necessarily identical, guidelines.

The four paintings in order: Man and Woman, Embrace by Egon Schiele, 1917, sourced from Wikimedia Commons. The Lovers by Rene Magritte, 1928. Blue Lovers by Marc Chagall, 1914. Green Lovers, also by Chagall, 1915. The final three images are sourced from Wikiart.org/

August 11, 2024

Have You Met “The One”? Questions before You Say “Yes”

Attraction is powerful, but dating someone is also a matter of discovery. Before you choose a permanent partner, you might want to find out about the person behind the dazzle.

Ponder this:

“A majority of dog owners say they would consider ending the relationship if the pet disapproved of the partner,” according to Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times on August 4, 2024. Some suitors would try to finesse this by bringing a morsel for the animal, but I suspect the fellow’s attitude toward man’s best friend would come out in the long run.

What follows are a few more areas you might want to investigate as you get to know each other.

Does your possible future mate have children? Then it is best that you like kids.

One cannot stop there. You have an Ex to deal with and find out about.

How did the relationship with that person begin, what was the problem, and why did the connection collapse? What part of this was your new honey’s responsibility? Is there a pattern to her history of heartbreak?

If the children are older, do they do well in school? Are they kind? Do they hold any prejudices? Where have those attitudes come from?

What about your lover’s parents? You may want to find out about their background. The family a child marries into has been the most frequently used parental measuring stick in the history of betrothal. Old-fashioned? Many parents believe it is an essential element of suitability.  

More about potential in-laws. Did either of the parents survive a trauma? It is not unusual for there to be second-generation effects of that misfortune. Parents who lived through poverty, serious illness, the loss of loved ones, or wartime can pass on their opinions, anxieties, and other forms of unhappiness to their offspring without even knowing it.

Who are your sweetheart’s friends? What are they like? What does he like about them? Can he hold onto buddies? Does he give you enough time?

Are you comfortable with your friend’s diet and lifestyle? Can you live with his preoccupation with his phone? Are your politics and religion (or its absence) compatible? 

We live in a time of marriages between people of different ethnic groups, races, religions, and national origins. LBGT, too. Unfortunately, it is also a moment in which white supremacists and Christian nationalists are threatened by those who they believe are inferior or wrongheaded.

Individuals who marry outside conventional boundaries can encounter various forms of resentment and prejudice, both within and outside of families. These complications and how to handle them are appropriate topics for conversations. Reaching out to a couple who have encountered judgmental disdain and unkindness might be helpful.

Values and preferences are worth uncovering. I treated a man who worked as a music teacher. His new wife taught English.

It wasn’t long after their marriage that they came to an impasse. He wanted to attend concerts, while she favored theater. The lady did agree to hear live music but never enjoyed it. The man appreciated theater and never complained unless the play was poorly done.

The fellow told me this:

What am I supposed to do, Doc? If I ask her to join me, she wants to know if she will like it. If I say ‘yes,’ then she complains after. If I say ‘no,’ she replies, ‘Then why are we going?’

There are infinite questions, and I’ve touched on only a few of them. Many go with their gut instead, but remember you can be swept away in love’s early stages. Later, in a more sober period of your twosome, you realize who you are attached to.

Perhaps the biggest question is whether the one you care for knows you and if he sees you. Can you look past the honeymoon phase to his essence, just as he recognizes your own?

If there is a mutual understanding between souls who care for each other, much happiness is possible.

May you have every good wish.

==========

The two paintings above share the same name: The Happy Lovers. The first is by Jean-Honore Fragonard, while the second is the work of Gustav Courbet, 1844. Both are sourced from Wikart.org/

 

August 4, 2024

Face-to-face with Willem van Otterloo

It would be hard to call it a meeting. I wasn’t introduced to him, and he didn’t know my name. Still, there was an emotional connection between us. I irritated him, and a couple of thousand people watched it.

It was December 1964. I was on break from my first college semester and a newly hired usher at Orchestra Hall, the home of the Chicago Symphony.

The guest conductor was Willem van Otterloo, a Dutchman soon to be 57. He was serving as music director of the Residentie Orchestra in The Hague, and making a guest appearance in the Windy City. The program included the first Symphony of Brahms, a stupendous work I looked forward to.

My new colleagues were black and white, mostly music students, an amiable bunch in love with classical music.

The job was easy to learn. I already knew the auditorium seating locations, and handing out the program booklets required no well-trained skill. We wore mufti to the concerts, including required dark trousers. Once in our section of the basement location, we picked out a fitting uniform jacket from the rack.

Small tears in the cloth were common. We were paid little but didn’t care much about that or the outfit. We came for the music.

One of the instructions we received was not to seat anyone after the signal to close the doors that led inside. If a patron came to the first half late, he had to wait for a break in the music to be seated. Even less opportunity to enter existed if he missed the beginning of the second half.

On the evening in question, the interval was ending, and the doors for the second half had already been closed. I was stationed in front of the entrance to the center aisle of the main floor.

The audience was quiet, anticipating Maestro van Otterloo and the magnificent Brahms, full of big tunes and towering climaxes. The composer had waited until he was 43 to create this masterpiece.

Suddenly, a man appeared before me, asking if he could be directed to his seat and pushing his ticket toward me. I assumed I could find the location quickly and return to the lobby before the music began.

I opened the door, stepped in, and only then looked at the ticket. “Oh, geez,” I said to myself and sped up. The fellow’s place was the first seat of the first row, right of the aisle. That was not good news.

Halfway down the path, the audience began to applaud, indicating that the conductor had started his walk to the podium from backstage. I was still on a bullet train to the end of the line. Skidding to a stop along with me, the gentleman was seated.

Then I made my mistake.

I looked up at the baton-smith, maybe 10 feet away.

He looked down at me, which can be understood in two ways, both true: I was beneath him and a lowly usher in a crappy uniform who intruded on his art, to boot.

Willem’s expression was the equivalent of a slap in the face while simultaneously sticking out your tongue. It was the dirtiest look I have ever received.

To call it a sneer sounds too mild. A momentary fit of disgust. His visage displayed contempt as if he were uttering, “What in God’s name are you doing here? Do you know who I am”

I spun around, completed my return trip to the lobby, and the music began.

Like you, I have had more than a few subsequent embarrassments since my first year at a university. Never, however, in front of a filled auditorium.

Wikipedia states that Willem van Otterloo lived until he was 70 in 1978. In the Netherlands, he was married and divorced four times (including one remarriage and divorce). A fifth marriage occurred in Australia.

All of this suggests that he had much more trouble than I caused him.

I guess I got the last laugh.

July 14, 2024

About Friendship

What is friendship? There are a lot of moving parts.

Joseph Epstein offers a worthy definition in his wonderful book Friendship: An Expose:

Friendship is affection, variously based on common interests, a common past, common values, and, alas, sometimes common enemies, in each case leading to delight and contentment in one another’s company.

What else should we add? One cannot have an abundance of very close friends because the growth of intimacy takes time and effort, excluding the possibility of — say — 100 such intimates.

The philosopher Plutarch thought seven was the correct number. Aristotle believed it would be hard to find many upright people worthy of closeness, therefore limiting the number of excellent friendships one could have even further.

Here are a few qualities found in friendship, as derived from the likes of Epstein, Aristotle (in his Nichomachean Ethics), and myself. Ask yourself whether these characteristics are present in those you are closest to:

  • Friends are constant. They aren’t interchangeable. We like to think of them as people who will remain dear for quite some time, perhaps forever.
  • You can be yourself around these individuals. You don’t have to put on a show or try to win approval. If you are close in this way, you enjoy considerable acceptance and a lack of pretense.
  • A best friend is similar to a brother or a sister, perhaps even closer. Almost like “another self,” according to Aristotle.
  • You share interests with friends, and you have a compatible sense of humor and view of the world. If you don’t, that may place your friendship at risk.
  • Friendships are more easily maintained when you and the other have equal status and prosperity. Significant differences in these areas can strain the relationship.
  • Attachments of the highest value involve people who are open with each other (though this is not required at every moment).
  • Friendship usually necessitates some regularity of meeting and/or communicating with one another, although electronic means of contact have changed any face-to-face requirement between old friends.
  • Over time, a history of shared memories will deepen the connection.

Before I get to other qualities present in close friendships, let’s turn back to Aristotle, who described three different categories of friendship. You might want to try to sort your friends into these:

  1. Friendship based on usefulness. Think of those you are friendly with because of what they can do for you. Many business relationships fit this category.
  2. Friendship dependent on pleasure. This classification would include individuals with whom you keep company because they are fun to be with or perhaps for the sexual thrill provided by your interaction. But, as with the first category, when the benefit ends, so does the one-dimensional companionship.
  3. Friendship grounded in excellence or virtue. Aristotle considered this the highest form of friendship. The two people are both virtuous and wish all the best for each other. It is, therefore, different from the purely self-interested categories above. This kind of companionship will include the qualities of usefulness and pleasure present in those two types of pairings but lasts as long as the parties are good, not entirely dependent on the other’s utility or entertainment value. Considerable time spent together is required to form such relationships. With enough experience of the other, they begin to trust.

Here are some additional characteristics found in the best friendships:

  • Friends provide consolation in times of trouble and take joy in the happiness of the other.
  • Closeness is easier to create when you spend time alone with the other. The establishment of a significant level of intimacy is more challenging in groups or when you spend time with the potential friend only in the presence of his spouse (or girlfriend) and your own mate. Individuals surrounded by others tend to keep the talk “small,” light, and unrevealing.
  • Epstein again: “One might begin by saying that one’s friends must be honorable, fair, decent, good-humored, generous, and kind.” Sounds like Aristotle’s highest form of this category, doesn’t it?
  • Friendships are never ideal, but Aristotle stated it is your responsibility to set the friend straight when he goes off the righteous path. Only if time proves he has gone wrong permanently should you abandon him.
  • As you and your buddy age, both of you will change. The alterations will have to be compatible to maintain the relationship at the same level of importance and closeness.
  • Cicero, another ancient philosopher, suggested no one is as admirable a friend as the kind of soul he seeks as a friend. Tolerance and acceptance of imperfection are required in any such duo.
  • Reciprocity is a key to a well-functioning companionship. If one person always initiates the calling, texting, organizing get-togethers, driving, giving gifts, and picking up the dinner checks, the strain of imbalance and inequity can break the relationship.
  • Friends should be reliable and dependable. They do not often forget their promises and the meetings they’ve scheduled with you. They won’t blow you off when a better offer comes along, at least not with regularity.

Aristotle devoted about 20% of the Nichomachean Ethics to the issue of friendship, showing just how important he thought it was to achieve a satisfying life. The philosopher wasn’t talking about Facebook “friends,” who might have been called “acquaintances” in the old days.

Psychologists believe friendship is essential to life satisfaction, especially as one ages. It is often thought to be more productive of happiness than contact with a spouse or children. Clearly, this part of life should not be ignored.

Tired of quotes from great philosophers and writers? Here is a last word from an unlikely source: a boxer. The famous man offered as wise a comment as any from the ancient Greeks:

“Friendship… is not something you learn in school. But, if you haven’t learned the meaning of friendship, you haven’t learned anything.” (Muhammad Ali).

=============

If you found the above essay interesting, here is another to consider: When Friendships Go Bad and How to Fix Them.

The second image is Just Between Friends. It is the work of Jack Held and appeared in Puck Magazine in 1914. The cartoon below it is described as Two Cartoon Female Coworkers Taking a Selfie Video. Both were sourced from Wikimedia Commons.

June 16, 2024

The Purest Way of Paying Attention to Another

“Attention is the rarest and purest form of generosity,” wrote the French philosopher and activist Simone Weil.

It is elusive, like a ball that rolls away from us. Though we talk about the importance of friends and those we love, in their presence, we are preoccupied and distracted much of the time.

There is a way to change this.

Weil, who died at age 34 in 1943, approached the task by emptying herself, surrendering the space that would otherwise be devoted to her ideas, emotions, judgments, anticipations, and memories. She would then possess the openness and the opening in her life to listen and absorb the other, including whatever pain she might be carrying.

Rather than tension-filled, intense focusing of her mind, the young woman set aside a personal agenda: looking outward rather than drawn to the internal mirror of her self-preoccupation. 

This amounted to a subtraction of her person to devote herself to the companion. She welcomed the conversation partner’s voice, expression, emotion, and ideas — receptive to her whole being.

The journey with the other mattered, but the destination or goal of the interaction didn’t. Gently pairing her presence with another was not an intellectual task but a practice of waiting for that figure to unveil herself.

She neither searched, problem-solved, or held her breath but accepted what was revealed by the counterpart.

Think of how your mind works when you drive, assuming you are alone and not listening to a podcast, music, or talking on the phone.

Your attention is diffused, open to all the moving objects on the highway, not just one. Since anything can happen, you absorb everything as the vehicles proceed, enter or depart the road, change lanes, adjust speed, turn on lights, and signal what they intend to do.

You are prepared to accept all possible incoming stimuli and efface thoughts of yourself that might interfere with that readiness. If another car creates danger, the center of interest narrows, and you respond to ensure no harm occurs.

What happens when you leave the car, sitting across the table from another soul?

The background is often distracting: strangers walking in and out, music, and overlapping conversations. Perhaps you keep track of elapsing time, mindful of errands and future appointments. 

Ideas about what your friend is saying and who you think she is are at the top of your mind. However, that agenda might be set aside to speak rather than listen, cut her off in urgency to comment, disagree, persuade, take offense, or impress her.

Phone calls and text messages further intervene. You wonder what the other thinks about you, including whether you are attractive, wearing fine clothes, showing interest in her, or boring her stiff.

The mind shifts back and forth. 

If you are in a meeting on Zoom, you look at others, and you look at yourself.

God help you if you take endless solo selfies to admire or study. There is no room for the other in this.

When engaged in friendly human interaction, you are at your empathic best if you dispense with any agenda other than surrendering your focus to who is at hand. Your concern is your acquaintance’s presence and life. 

You fashion this unique latitude not in the hope of being changed or afraid of losing control or altering her. You permit the development of what happens almost on its own in the time you spend together.

Time becomes your friend if you do not fix on the clock.

You wait to discover what occurs and what she says, thinks, and feels. If she is in pain, your obligation becomes a moral one. 

The concerned response is to witness her suffering and abide with her. You are not in control and don’t take charge. Let the river of life and your interlocutor take you where they take you.

The Weil scholar Peter Winch described this approach to a person who is dealing with a painful episode in her life:

I cannot understand the other’s affliction from the point of view of my own privileged position; I have rather to understand myself from the standpoint of the other’s affliction, to understand that my privileged position is not part of my essential nature, but an accident of fate.

Patience is necessary. Reflect on your conversation later to evaluate what happened and what you learned. You did justice to the counterparty by absorbing her presence and all that came with it. 

You experience only what she allows you to see and hear and only if you give her enough room to inform you of what is essential.

This kind of attention is neither customary nor easy. Mindfulness meditation may be a pathway to it.

Consider trying it on occasion. Stripping away what diverts your attention allows you to change how you relate to others. Doing so might cause them to seek you for social interactions that are more pleasing, supportive, and different from what they are used to.

You can also discover that your understanding of others enlarges and that any social anxiety you experience during your time together is reduced.

Life is too fraught to let the busy world sweep you into its endlessly buzzing machine of unsatisfying contact with the most important people in your life. Weil offers an alternative.

================

Each of the photos of Simone Weil (pronounced Vey) was taken in 1921 and sourced from Wikimedia Commons.