问世间情为何物，直教人生死相许
Contrary to what you might think, i’m not feeling any bit EMO at all. Questions had lingered for sometime ever since Huiyuan recommended me the read and after I had picked up the book in a book store in New York.
The following is an exerpt from The Zahir by Paulo Coelho,
“A husband and wife together for 10 years. They used to make love every day, now they only make love once a week, but that doesn’t really matter because there is also solidarity, mutual support, companionship. He feels sad when he has to have supper alone because she is working late. She hates it when he has to go away, but accepts that it is part of his job.
They feel that some thing is missing, but they are both grown-ups, they are both mature people, and they know how important it is to keep their relationships stable, even if only for the children’s sake. They devote more time to work and to their children, they think less and less about their marriage. Everything appears to be going really well, and there’s certainly no other man or woman in their lives.
Yet, they sense something is wrong, they can’t quite put their finger on the problem. As time passes, they grow more and more dependent on each other; they are getting older and any opportunities to make a new life are vanishing fast. They try to keep busy doing readings, watching television and seeing friends. He is easily irritated and she is more silent than usual. They can see that they are growing further and further apart, but cannot understand why.
They reach the conclusion that this is what marriage is like … … what is important, necessary, essential, is to act as if nothing is happening, because it is too late to change.”
This is an open reference exam and each question is worth 20 marks.
In your response, consider the dynamics of relationships in our contemporary society. Full credit is given for expressing what you feel and think is correct. The definition of love should not be limited to a romantic relationship between a man and women. (e.g. Friendship, God, Family, Animal, Food, Gaia .. etc.)
Question 1) Love is the only way to achieve happiness.
Question 2) The marriage described between the couple above is normal. There is nothing sad about their situation, merely how the author chose to write it in a sombre way. As idealistic as we always hope, no marriages are fairy tales. There is no happy ever afters in our modern society.
Question 3) Which brings us to the last conclusion that: There is nothing “bad” to stay in a relationship because the opportunity cost to find another is too high. In other words, a relationship of convenience is perfectly OK.
** i got a feeling i’ll get NO responses from this. HAHA. Nonetheless … i’ll just keep this here for SOME intellectual discussion.
Filed under dreams, friendship : Comments (2) : Aug 7th, 2008
and nope, not opening there. it's gonna be at the new mall... called tampines one i think.
August 9th, 2008 at 12:29 am
[...] I recently read a post on Weiyi’s blog which challenged its readers to reply and discuss three statements. He predicted that no one would [...]
October 16th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
1) There are nuances (momentary, stability) in the meaning of both the terms, love and happiness. but in all meanings, love leads to happiness. whether it be a sweet gesture that lightens you up for the day or the sense of security felt with someone’s companionship that may wax and wane daily. And with reference to other things in life, the act of love is self fulfilling whilst hatred seeks to achieve ends that may or may not be fulfilled.
2) The marriage illustrated above, indeed, is normal and prevalent. There may not be anything tragic about their situation, however, there is a sad underlying tone to it. Its not sad because of the lack of the spunk/excitement/romance in their relationship but the lack of appraisal of it. and this unattended sadness which may dispel onto the surface with them seeking to appraise it in the wrong places or with the wrong people. Happiness is longitudinal and a reassuring feeling. Its more to do with a state of equilibrium. But because change is inevitable, there’s disequilibrium which may be either sadness or excitement (the adrenaline rush / romance). And mind you, we achieve happiness going through either or both states.
3) a relationship of conveniences is a superficial one. because it doesn’t account for the interest or feelings of the other party like the spouse. it may be not be particularly (or entirely) your benefit and may also be for the sake of another (eg. kids) but that only assures stability to your boat. Here is where desire plays a role. Desire is routinely seen as an evil whilst it is that last missing piece of the puzzle. It alone cannot survive but is complementary to needs. So if this couple were to awaken their desires for each other, they’d reach the optimum level of their relationship.
So, in essence I disagree that a relationship of conveniences is PERFECTLY ok. it may just be ok, but only for a while.