A Conversation with Elizabeth
2017
RE: Marriage vs. Single

From:           Elizabeth 
To:             Larry
Sent:           Sunday, May 14, 2017 11:53 PM
Subject:        Re: Just Curious What Your Thoughts Are
 
Larry,
 
I know some few people personally who do definitely state, "I met the love of my life."  In society, of course, media often push those stories, and those are the stories people tend to write about and want to hear about.  Nicholas Sparks novels and movies come to mind!  "Nights in Rodanthe" was one I saw, and rewatched! Today I looked at a panorama of Instagram pictures about the Big Bang star finally marrying the 15 year love of his life.
 
I used to feel at times, in retrospect, that I somewhat broke your heart, but then you went on to marry and have a life and daughter, and that was best perhaps, but then that came apart, although of course you still have a daughter.  How does she feel about you moving, by the way?  Did you not somewhat for X number of years in your marriage have a "love of your life," at least more so than I ever have had? 
 
Occasionally, very occasionally (!) I try to imagine just simply seeing (not meeting or even talking with) "the love of my life" and I can't even form a physical picture!  When I go out of town alone to concerts or plays where there are large audiences, I sometimes like to physically "study" all the people coming and going to see if I register in myself a "spark" of interest just on physical sight alone (in this imaginary game it doesn't even matter if the people I'm looking at are married or not!).  I can't recall ever feeling any interest.
 
You should read a bit, if you haven't, about the new President of France (Macron) and the love of his life, who he is now married to. She is 24 years older than him, and they met when he was like 15 or so!  She was his teacher in school.  His family separated him from her, but allegedly they continued to talk for hours on the phone.  Quite a romance!
 
I recall Gainesville as a place of abundant possible relationships, in a negative sense "loose relationships," in a positive sense maybe a place to discover or find a rich relationship, but a risky place to trust relationships. Certainly there was a tremendous amount of relationship turnover, relationship disruptions, relationship experimentation, etc.  The steady influx of attractive new bodies and new minds in the form of students and even new young faculty was quite heady.  Many people were on the make.

  Abundant opportunities existed to connect with people, and connecting could often be easy, although maybe just transitory. I could say that maybe that was the 60s or early 70's, but I doubt Gainesville has become more staid.  I could also say that this was campus life and maybe there was a more conservative lifestyle going on elsewhere in town, which I knew nothing about. 
 
I did live in Gainesville for awhile as technically a "non-student," but still the way I lived was always somewhat connected to "campus life" or living a young, somewhat carefree life, i.e. apartment dwelling etc., or house sharing.  If I try to think of living in Gainesville (even before you mentioned going back there I sometimes gave thought to it myself)--if I try to think of living there as a 65+ year old person, my imagination fails somewhat.  I think only of the things I enjoyed as a student or later townsperson attached to students--biking, sliding down Millhopper, tubing the rivers, swimming at the campus lake, the film festivals, concerts, and lectures.  That is why I call my attachment "nostalgic."  I think I told you I've been having some email exchanges with a former professor of mine in G'ville, who is now in his mid 80's.  Although he has lived and taught there since the 60's, he does not speak favorably of the town.  He talks of the congestion and the increasing commercialization, i.e. chain restaurants. Of course you go back regularly, so you have your own picture.  He tells me I'd be "shocked" if I haven't been back, which I haven't, since about 1982 ??
 
What you commented about my questions is interesting.  Some years back I read a statement which I think was made by the existential philosopher Kierkegaard.  He said, "A single person becomes a slave to himself."  I think he meant that a single person, while thinking he is free from being bound (enslaved) in a marriage, then becomes bound (enslaved) to his or her own desires and wants.  Given the time when he wrote though, I imagine he was only considering the perspective of males.
 
I've thought about that quite a bit.  It seems close to your comments as well in respect to the possible conflict between the freedom to do what you want or like and having to sometimes forgo that to do what another person wants, when in a relationship. 
 
Apart from when I had constraints involving work (which I always experienced as constraints even if I liked the job), I've become very used to pretty much doing what I want, when and how I want, with very little consideration of anyone else necessary.  I'm not saying I lead a disorderly existence or lifestyle, but the order makes sense only to me.  I have totally lazy days when I stay in pajama pants all day binge watching Netflix or reading, versus days when at 7:00 a.m. I'm out in the yard clearing brush.
 
I wonder though if there is a difference between dating or infrequent relationships and long term ones.  When I actually used to date (a long time ago now!), I recall that those relationships often gave me experiences or adventures I might never have undertaken or chosen on my own.  For example, once in Gainesville I actually went caving--still a one time only thing for me.  Once, more recently, but still years ago, I went to a live ice hockey match--still a one time only thing for me.  And there are lots of other examples.
 
But looking back, even though those dates I mentioned and others like them were interesting or fun at the time, I wonder at times now if they were "truly really me" or was I simple going along with the interests or wishes of whoever my date was.   On the other hand though, I recall sometimes suggesting to a date something I wanted to do, and we did it, for example trying a particular restaurant or going to a play or particular movie. I can remember a few times when I said a clear "no" to something a date suggested we do, because I simply was NOT interested, for example a particular movie, BUT I can also remember that this was often prelude to a breakup.  Just the past year or so I was in contact with someone long distance who wanted to date or do things together, but one of his invitations was for us to go to the Gatornationals for a weekend.  I had absolutely ZERO interest in doing that, so I said "no thanks."
 
In longer term relationships in general, at least historically, women have often sacrificed their interests or desires to those of their husband and even children.  Men though in general also sometimes sacrificed their interests or desires to the necessities laid on them by a family.
 
I really don't have as much experience in  an ongoing long term relationship as you do or did.  I don't know how a psychologically healthy couple would work out how to spend time or do things together or apart.  At first thought, maybe the best situation would be for persons to pair bond who share some definite over-lapping interests, that is if they go into a relationship expecting that they will have someone to do things together with.  I have known a fair number of couples who appeared to function almost independently in their marriage, but it made me wonder what they ever actually shared together.  Maybe they talked about what they did independently, so they always had alot to talk about!
 
The thing about Gainesville and you, is that from my outside perspective, you're returning to the proximity and nest of family.  In that regard, anyone who went with you would be taking on or entering  into your family nest, i.e. you'd be asking them to take on quite a bit of built in baggage or structure.  All the holidays would be with your family for example, not spending Christmas at Yellowstone watching wolf packs!  Of course, I imagine that to some degree people in long term relationships do that very thing, take on each other's families as part of the relationship package.  For me now though, I'm in a modestly large group of folks some have labeled "elder orphans," i.e. people growing older without a surrounding family or with a family they are totally alienated from.  All sorts of creative social arrangements are thus being considered (Roomates for Boomers, for example, or Co-operative Housing arrangements). 
 
I think what I would NOT like about living with someone now would be what I label as being under constant scrutiny--my appearance, how I dress, when I sleep, eat, drink, do nothing or work for hours on end, i.e. always feeling that I would have to account for myself to someone else!   Sometimes if I wake up at night or very early in the a.m. I might get up, make hot chocolate and read for an hour or two, then go back to sleep and sleep in late. The only solution  I've come up with is one which two married professors I knew in Tuscaloosa used.  They architecturally designed their own home with TWO wings, literally, a his and hers wing, with some shared common areas like a small pool, kitchen, living room, but each wing was also pretty self contained with private bathroom, maybe even like an efficiency apartment in some regards.  I wish I could see the house again!
 
I think I'd like someone to travel with.  I've thought at times about asking you if you were interested in a particular  place that I'm also interested in (ones you haven't been to yet!), but I remember how you weren't enthused about your brother's desire to travel with you.  I'd like to go to Amsterdam, for example, and possibly also Scandinavia.  Also, sometimes at meal times, or when I'm cooking, I think about what it might be like to be sharing more of that with someone.  I have really negative feelings though about someone who would be glommed (?) onto me every minute of every day, and I don't need to have someone I could do that to either.
 
Well, its late--
 
Elizabeth

next