Quite a few ironies of late. 3 guys, whom I said carry the same trait. One’s born in 86, one 87, one 88. Their birthdates range from 11-18, with 2 of them having back to back birthdates. They are the march pisceans. The Feb ones, unfortunately are a total different lot.
A nice cool night saw conversations flying around with Keong seemingly trying to catch up and add in here and there when he can. I don’t know how to say this… but I feel his pain. For once though, I could find no solutions. There isn’t one. There has never been one that suits everyone.
I did however say some stuff, and when I flipped over the Trevvy, I found an article written by Ming (another irony, and no it is not me).
Here is an extract from his article -
In director Richard Linklater’s film Before Sunrise, one of the leads – either Ethan Hawke or Julie Delpy, it escapes me now – quotes this unknown writer as the two of them banter on how long their respective relationships hold out.
The writer suggests that “the ideal relationship was two intense years, with clean breaks, fresh starts, friends for life, something like that. It’s like if you knew your relationship had to end in two years, there would be no room for fighting or wasted time. There could be more love and appreciation for one another. … If everyone you met you knew was going to die at midnight, you would be a much more compassionate person.;
Now that’s a thought. Even if the proposition is not viable, because a situation like that exists only in an apocalypse or utopia, a situation where relationships had a definite expiry date like, say, cans of pineapple. Which is an idea Chinese director Wong Kar Wai flirts with in his film Chungking Express.
So what are all these film-makers suggesting?
Perhaps it is that relationships work best if we don’t drag them on unnecessarily; if we step into them with the primary objective of getting the most out of it, emotionally, spiritually, in whichever ways, even if that means letting the relationship be short-lived. Too often we’re more preoccupied with how far and long the relationship will go instead of making every second of it worthwhile and letting things run their natural course.
And even if we have to bid our lovers goodbye when it stops working, can there ever be a real good-bye, anyway, for us to truly mourn? As Humphrey Bogart says to his lover Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca, “We’ll always have Paris”. If you have an experience that is true and meaningful with someone else, however ephemeral it is, he – or she – will forever be with you in a way. We remain a part of each other in ways we will never know.
In gist, he mentioned some of the stuff I mentioned in another way. In a clearer way perhaps. His view however appears to be more suited for the open relationship kinda person. A couple who has no holds barred, enjoying each other’s company for the present. Whatever happens in the future, happens. However I am not too sure if I am the sort who would gel with this concept. Keong got the idea when I mentioned France in the world cup a few years back. I am no soccer (football) fan but even I know about this case. We should really put more effort into the present. An open relationship is somewhat a dangerous game and even when rules are set, there is no guarantee one party will eventually evolve into ‘breaking the rules’. That is not to say, it does not happen in other forms or relationships. In fact, no form of relationships is exempted from this.
I suppose the writer does not imply going into a relationship with a 2 year time bomb. What he may imply, or rather what I feel myself, is that at least even if it lasts 2 years, 5 years, 1 year, one would have made the most out of it.
I have morphed somewhat. Rach knows what I meant when I said I had a bad gut feel bout ‘this other guy’. I sought confirmation, via a question I asked yesterday. No I did not ask for marriage and all duh. I asked a very hypothetical question of sorts, something I have blogged about. I wanted to see if opinions crossed path. Or did he fall under the ‘mainsteam’ group where, barely 5 years ago I would have said the exact same thing he said. The question, was on what he thinks an open relationship is. What is it about, the definition, and his opinions.
First answer was, there was no official definition. Well, you don’t really find it in a dictionary per se, but there is a definition on it. And an open relationship does not mean 2 people being committed have sex with other people. Open isn’t opening legs per se. It is more than sex. Unfortunately, many people I see take open relationships to mean committment, with outside sex. Sex aside, the only committment is being there for one another and the companionship. There is no other committment, which is a fundamental rule in this sort of relationship.
Second answer was, he will never wanna be in one. I suspect that answer is influenced by the first. The perception of it. There is no right or wrong in this area. I just wanted to hear his thoughts. It isn’t bout what the person REALLY thinks, but his thinking process. In case people are not aware, if I have to do scoring, I do not emphasise a lot on the answer itself. This is because over time, people’s thoughts and perceptions will change. Also, one can say ‘no’ now but when faced with it upfront ,we could do a lot of things we said we will not. So the answer itself is not meaningful, but I am after the thinking process and I seek a lot of ‘answers’ purely out of it. You could say, the question itself is a distraction. It could have been any question.
The conclusion was he fell under the mainstream group. I was somewhat disappointed, but it was confirmation for me.
Rach knows it best when I mention bitter sweet. Bitter and sweet, at the same time. It pierces that causes pain yet brings relief all at once.
I think I can phrase everything in my head with one sentence.
I am happy to leave, but sad to go.