Minä en ole sinulle muuta kuin kettu, samanlainen kuin satatuhatta muuta. Mutta jos sinä kesytät minut, me tarvitsemme toinen toisiamme. Sinusta tulee minulle ainoa maailmassa. Ja minusta tulee sinulle ainoa maailmassa...(Antoine de Saint-Exupéry: Pikku Prinssi)
sunnuntaina, elokuuta 20, 2006
37 - A letter to Her
Oh dear! - I seem to keep missing the point. Sorry about that.
You asked me if not all women of any nationality wish for love.
That is a very basic issue; I'll finally try to keep my focus on that: 'Want for love'.
First of all: I do believe that (almost) all people do wish for love. - I think we can agree on that one.
Next let's try to figure out something about love itself: how it can first be awakened and then kept alive, and why it so often is lost though. - I feel that we did awaken our love, but we did not manage to keep it alive.
So what is so important for love?
It seems that many agree on one crucial theory: A relation is happy if both parties get from the relation what they need from it. In such a case it is easy to love.
The opposite quite naturally would make loving difficult and eventually it would make love die out: That being not getting what you need and want from the relation.
Let us then try to figure out our case:
You wanted love, you wanted kisses.
In the beginning it was quite easy for me to love you. And the reason is not hard to understand: you gave me what I needed and what I wanted in a relationship: warmth, kindness, friendship, companionship, comradeship. - And when I love I also love to look in your eyes, walk hand in hand with you, hug you for no reason at all, give you little kisses. And naturally also to give you those long deep kisses - here, there and everywhere. And especially 'there', as you of all people most certainly do know.
As time went on, for reasons still unknown to me, you chose to communicate with me more and more like a child. So I no longer got from you what I needed: especially companionship and comradeship. As a result of loosing the fulfilment of my needs in the relationship, you grew less and less meaningful to me, and I eventually lost my ability and want to look in your eyes, walk hand in hand with you, hug you for no reason, and give you those kisses.
Continually I asked you not to behave like a child because of the outcome of it, but you chose to ignore my wishes and needs. I tried to understand your reasons, but you gave me no replies to my questions leaving me totally unaware why you had to act that way. - If I had understood your reasons, I perhaps could eventually have been able to guide you out of it back to your original trusting self: back to warmth, kindness, friendship, companionship, comradeship. Which in turn would have given you back what you most wanted: me looking in your eyes, walking hand in hand with you, hugging you for no reason, and kissing you when ever and where ever we would have liked to kiss and be kissed.
In the end you no longer got from me what you needed and wanted: in short: love. - In the end I no longer got from you what I needed and wanted. Which also was love.
It all could have been corrected, if we had respected what the other one needed. - I can assure you that I really do want to love: to look in the eyes, to walk hand in hand, to hug with no reason, and to kiss...
I suppose that keeping love alive seldom is easy. It obviously takes both parties to be ready to listen to what the other party needs. When both parties get what they need, they also do want to give love. Because love is what we need.
So: I believe that one gets love only by giving love. But by giving especially such love that the other party needs.
¶ 09:25
You asked me if not all women of any nationality wish for love.
That is a very basic issue; I'll finally try to keep my focus on that: 'Want for love'.
First of all: I do believe that (almost) all people do wish for love. - I think we can agree on that one.Next let's try to figure out something about love itself: how it can first be awakened and then kept alive, and why it so often is lost though. - I feel that we did awaken our love, but we did not manage to keep it alive.So what is so important for love?
It seems that many agree on one crucial theory: A relation is happy if both parties get from the relation what they need from it. In such a case it is easy to love.
The opposite quite naturally would make loving difficult and eventually it would make love die out: That being not getting what you need and want from the relation.
Let us then try to figure out our case:You wanted love, you wanted kisses.
In the beginning it was quite easy for me to love you. And the reason is not hard to understand: you gave me what I needed and what I wanted in a relationship: warmth, kindness, friendship, companionship, comradeship. - And when I love I also love to look in your eyes, walk hand in hand with you, hug you for no reason at all, give you little kisses. And naturally also to give you those long deep kisses - here, there and everywhere. And especially 'there', as you of all people most certainly do know.
As time went on, for reasons still unknown to me, you chose to communicate with me more and more like a child. So I no longer got from you what I needed: especially companionship and comradeship. As a result of loosing the fulfilment of my needs in the relationship, you grew less and less meaningful to me, and I eventually lost my ability and want to look in your eyes, walk hand in hand with you, hug you for no reason, and give you those kisses.
Continually I asked you not to behave like a child because of the outcome of it, but you chose to ignore my wishes and needs. I tried to understand your reasons, but you gave me no replies to my questions leaving me totally unaware why you had to act that way. - If I had understood your reasons, I perhaps could eventually have been able to guide you out of it back to your original trusting self: back to warmth, kindness, friendship, companionship, comradeship. Which in turn would have given you back what you most wanted: me looking in your eyes, walking hand in hand with you, hugging you for no reason, and kissing you when ever and where ever we would have liked to kiss and be kissed.
In the end you no longer got from me what you needed and wanted: in short: love. - In the end I no longer got from you what I needed and wanted. Which also was love.
It all could have been corrected, if we had respected what the other one needed. - I can assure you that I really do want to love: to look in the eyes, to walk hand in hand, to hug with no reason, and to kiss...
I suppose that keeping love alive seldom is easy. It obviously takes both parties to be ready to listen to what the other party needs. When both parties get what they need, they also do want to give love. Because love is what we need.So: I believe that one gets love only by giving love. But by giving especially such love that the other party needs.
¶ 09:25
Comments:
<< Home
wau. this is a touching letter. you capture smthing essential about a relationship, or why it can fail.
What if sometimes the partners in a relationship don't realize what it is that they need from each other.. it requires a lot of self-reflection to find out what one really needs. And then to be able to ask the other person for that.. it takes work, dedication.
Maybe that's what 'living by yourself' means - to be able to identify and fill one's own needs. When one has learned to do that, it is easier to have a satisfying relationship.
am almost amazed relationships exist. :)
Lähetä kommentti
What if sometimes the partners in a relationship don't realize what it is that they need from each other.. it requires a lot of self-reflection to find out what one really needs. And then to be able to ask the other person for that.. it takes work, dedication.
Maybe that's what 'living by yourself' means - to be able to identify and fill one's own needs. When one has learned to do that, it is easier to have a satisfying relationship.
am almost amazed relationships exist. :)
# posted by 
: maanantaina, lokakuuta 16, 2006
: maanantaina, lokakuuta 16, 2006<< Home
FeedBurner SmartFeed
