Will love change your life? Should love change your life? At least one young woman thinks the proper answer to these questions is “No”.
On her blog “Ill Seen, Ill Said” http://seenandsaid.blogspot.ca/, writer Jane Flanagan laments the tendency she observes in herself to
carry ideas of myself emerging in a wholly different (and, needless to say, better) manifestation.
She goes on to point out that love stories have always majored in the idea that finding love will bring transformation for both the lover and the beloved.
She then poses a profound question,
when you’ve worked hard at letting go of those ideas of transformation, of there being some “after” version of yourself waiting to emerge, what do your love stories look like? Can we tell a good story without change?
What happens if we abandon our romantic vision of the transformational impact of love? What happens if we accept that a person might live without a specifically romantic relationship and that this does not need to change? Is it possible that a person living without a romantic relationship may be just as fully realized, integrated, well-adjusted, and happy as any of the rest of us who just happen to have fallen into a romantic relationship that has resulted in life-long commitment and partnership?
As a married person I need to be constantly mindful of the fact that my loving relationship with my wife is not the fulfillment of my life. I and she need to be absolutely as whole and complete human beings in the absence of the other person as we are together. If I do not bring an adequate measure of wholeness to the table in our relationship, it will never be a healthy relationship.
To enter into a relationship assuming that this relationship will satisfy the deepest longing of your heart is a dangerous illusion. To form an attachment in the hopes that this attachment will fulfill your dream for your life or cause you to become the person you long to be, is a recipe for disaster.
Being in a romantic relationship or a lifelong partnership is no more a guarantee of happiness, contentment, or spiritual/psychological health than being single is necessarily an impediment to the fulfillment of such goals.
The path towards wholeness is the same for all of us, no matter what our relational status may be. We must all find our way to the glad art of surrender. We must all struggle to the place where we are willing to give up our demand that the circumstances of our lives be different. We need to learn to live in the present moment, finding meaning and purpose in the beauty of our lives just as they are.
The journey of life requires courage, honesty, and openness. There are married people whose relationship with their partner has become a vehicle for death and violence. It is all too common for a relationship to be used as a means of escape, denial, and avoidance. Too often people choose, or feel compelled, to hide behind a partner.
There are single people who are making the journey of life with luminous beauty. There is nothing in the relational circumstances of a single person that necessarily needs to change. Every avenue for moving into the light is as open to a single person as a partnered person.
The questions for all of us are the same. Are we dealing with the realities of our own lives? Are we living in open, honest, authentic relationship with someone whether life-long partner, family member, or friend? Do we take responsibility for our inner life? Are we willing to acknowledge our own shortcomings, failures, and struggles?
If you are willing to live the life that has been entrusted to you in all its fullness with gratitude and grace, your life will be a vehicle for beauty. Nothing more is required for a true and fulfilling life.
You can read Jane’s full “Transformation” post at http://www.seenandsaid.blogspot.ca/2012/06/transformation.html
In A Spacious Place 
12 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 21, 2012 at 3:00 pm
Tress
I cannot speak about the variations of(Union)only knowing marriage, But i was married to the same man for 54 years and five years after hid death he is still in my heart
.Was this a perfect blending of mind? Absolutely not!
We both had our idee Fixe , which did mellow in time!
There were differences of out look , and times when , i cannot speak for himbut I guess with insight , we both were not very happy , but it never lasted .
We had a an enduring sense of oneness, which came to fruition in our children. We struggled with no family support, because they were an ocean away, and lean financial times, but we grew together,and were sure that things would be better , which they were.
These days , it seems , that people get together for the same old reasons of attraction. and then if there are glitches , on to the next one!
I do think there is a more realistic approach than some people had, that the partnership was lopsided , the one with the salary had the say! or there was substance abuse, usually from some sense of lack of self respect in a man. if those problems cannot be addressed, I think it is good to end the relationship.
Sometimes counselling might help to make both partners see where it is all going” pie shaped ” as we used to say.
I sometimes think , that there is too much choice , within the confines of acceptable social behavior , but on reflection, perhaps that it is necessary to add responsibility and reflection before making those choices.
June 21, 2012 at 3:06 pm
Tress
I never actually answered the Question!
yes love did change me , and i grew.
June 21, 2012 at 6:53 pm
jaqueline
the biggest thing to realise, I think is that we ARE loved. We are already loved by friends, by family, by God, by life itself. Romantic love is only one variation of how love might be manifest in your life. It is a very important manifestation but not the only one.
You hear it all the time:
“If only she could find love, Have you found love yet?” What a terrible demand to put on your potential partner that they be proof that you have finally found love and that you are therefore loveable!
What if in our ‘search for love’ we miss the love that is in our lives and miss it’s ability to nourish us?
It was the greatest freedom to realise this.. to understand that my search for love is over and to receive the love that is here now and rich and apparent. It meant that should God see fit to allow me to live with someone it is about practicing love together.not about that person being my source, or proof, or perfection of love. Understanding that leaves another human being free to be a human being and it is humans after all that we need to learn to love.
June 22, 2012 at 6:38 am
Christopher Page
thank you Jaqueline. This is beautiful and wise. I hope you will not mind if I put it up as a separate post tomorrow.
June 21, 2012 at 8:50 pm
Tress
perhaps i used the wrong word again Jacqueline. I agree totally that that we are loved by and love many in our lives.
What i should have said was that marriage changed me.because of a unifying love.
This is the trouble with the English language . love is a word that means so many types of relationships.perhaps the modern age has forgotten the possibility of that interdependence., accepting the best and the worst of another human being as your own ,
The marriage ceremony said it all.
June 21, 2012 at 9:08 pm
jaqueline
perfect Tress! you see love does transform us…the practice of it…and the lack of it transforms us too…marriage is a container which will not work unless love is practiced.
we are not supposed to find love, we are supposed to form it.
June 22, 2012 at 6:46 am
jaqueline
I am assuming that lack of love transforms us for the worse….
June 23, 2012 at 9:57 am
jaqueline
as if to highlight this idea that we only think of love in terms of couples … I was talking to a friend about the 5 love Languages, so I decided to see if what there was online….it is all about couples..the tests are geared to those in a spousal relationship and there are no questions that might apply generally, even for example ” if your mum does this for you how do you feel?”
June 23, 2012 at 9:58 am
jaqueline
and in Macleans this week :
http://www2.macleans.ca/tag/relationships/
June 24, 2012 at 6:30 am
Don’t Search for Love « In A Spacious Place
[…] There are times when a comment on a blog post unfolds a whole new direction of wisdom and insight. This happened on Thursday in response to the “Will Love Change You?” post. https://inaspaciousplace.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/will-love-change-you/ […]
June 24, 2012 at 2:08 pm
lindsay
Looking at Canada Revenue’s Agency’s tax return form for 2011, these are the options for Marital Status:
1. Married
2. Living Common-law
3. Widowed
4. Divorced
5. Separated
6. Single
See, even according to CRA “single’ comes in last at 6th place.
I have it on highest authority from CRA itself that I am “separated”, coming in at 5th place. Officially, according to CRA, I can never call myself “single” … ever again, no matter how cool “single” sounds to me. Officially I am “separated” and can’t pretend to be single … that would never do. The only way I can change my status is to get hitched with someone and then I move up to 1st or 2nd place. There is no other way.
“Separated” is not so much an awesome sounding relationship status to have. “Separated” doesn’t sound whole … it sounds like something we do to an egg … except CRA doesn’t specify exactly what part of the egg it means … is it the yellow part or the white part? Or does CRA perhaps intend it to mean both parts … in two separate containers perhaps?
I wonder what CRA would do if I added another box … #7 …
7. Whole
… or
8. Cooked (maybe)
9. Scrambled (possibly more accurate)
10. Lightly fried with sunny side up (yup, sounds about right)
If it is REALLY that important to the CRA, that I specify my relationship status only in terms of my relationships to other people, how about …
11. Family’d
(Well let’s see … there’s Mom, Dad passed away, 4 brothers, a brother I recetnly adopted, several sister-in-laws, a bunch of nieces and nephews, 2 wonderful sons, and my son’s dog …which technically makes her my grand-dog …)
12. “Seeing Someone”
(um, … I think … not really sure about the correct terminology… it’s an off-and-on kind of thing … been this way for years. Nice man. Good friend. Mows the grass occasionally and buys lunch … oh, … and CRA, if you happen to catch him when he smiles … lovely!!! … I’m telling you, CRA, it would blow your socks clean off!)
13. Befriended
(Now CRA, you don’t seriously expect me to list all my friends, do you? A number of my friends live abroad … they don’t even have Social Insurance Numbers)
Oh dear, this marital status thing is apparently an important and serious business … a rather strange obsession come to think of it … but since CRA seems to take it rather seriously, then perhaps, so too must I … hmmm …
July 3, 2012 at 7:04 pm
Jane Flanagan
Thank you for linking to my post and continuing this discussion. It’s been endlessly interesting to read reactions to this post – which are laden with rich perspectives in many different directions. I love seeing your readers’ take on it here. Thank you.