Caveboy and I have been talking a lot about happiness lately--perhaps partly the effect of discoveringThe Happiness Project blog. He even wrote a blog entry about it as a guest blogger, but then refused to let me post it. So I decided to write my own, albeit slightly different one.
The idealistic notion of happiness is that the more you give, the more you get. If you give love and kindness and caring, you get it all back, many-fold. In other words, as Luke 6:38 puts it: "Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."
This doesn't always hold true in the world we live in today--the more you give, the more you put yourself out there, the more you risk unhappiness--because you leave yourself vulnerable to being hurt, rejected, scoffed at, an open shot for those who are not willing to give as much. And you let your happiness be determined by others. But those who don't give, or choose carefully how much of themselves they do give, tend to be happier. They don't face as much hurt and rejection, because they protect themselves from it. Maybe they are less passionate, their loving a little less intense, but they are generally shielded from the hurt that comes from getting nothing or very little in return.
Take Dr. Izzy Stevens on the show Grey's Anatomy, for instance. She's actually my favourite character, because she gives abundantly but also expects much from those she gives to. But because she loves and cares so much, she also gets hurt the most. "But she was incredibly loved by Denny," Caveboy responded when I brought up the example. "Yes, and she lost him," I told him. "Well, um. . . he died," came the reply. But what was the guarantee? Maybe if Denny had gotten better and left the hospital and gone out into the world, he'd have fallen in love with someone else. And Izzy, for having loved him to the extent she did, would have been left to pick up the pieces.
Caveboy contends that those who are shallow, who hold back, are not really happy. Yes, they give less, so they get less. But they are also satisfied and content with less. Happiness is greater than contentment, Caveboy argued. Contentment beats heartbreak and misery, I shot back.
Ultimately, I don't think I am the pessimist I come across as. But I see, over and over, those who choose to go above and beyond in giving and loving get hurt and broken while those who hold back sail through, for the most part, intact. It happened 2000 years ago with Christ*, and not much has changed today. And in my own life, in every instance in which I've given completely, it's come back to bite me. Impulsive and hard-headed as I am, I have not learned from these experiences--much as I wish I had. I know that I will, in some instances, continue to care blindly, but the more it ends up backfiring, the more I wonder how much it is worth.
*I'm talking about the world's response to Him, not His coming into glory after His earthly death and the implications of that).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I read this post, and then put my mind frantically to work as I cooked and cleaned over the last two hours.
I think:
(1) We need to define the terms. We're throwing about concepts here, like "contentment" and "happy," and I'm not entirely sure that we are all on the same page. I think contentment implies a long-term general sense of well-being, enjoying the status quo. Being happy sounds more fleeting, more in the moment. It implies that something is happening that makes you feel a certain way, namely, happy.
(2) We are talking about risks and rewards. You are right: The more you put yourself out there, the more likely you are to love deeply and involve yourself meaningfully in the lives of others. At the same time, you are increasing the likelihood of also getting hurt, of being betrayed, or being misunderstood. The more you isolate yourself, the less involved you are. Thus, the less likely you are to be hurt deeply, and the less likely you are to love deeply. So, ultimately, it comes down to an equation: (Benefits from giving - hurts from giving) >? general flat-line of isolation? I would wager, over the long run, over the course of a full, long, lived life, yes, giving will be more rewarding.
(3) Finally, I know you. I can't imagine you locked up in a castle somewhere living without people. I'm not saying you need people. I'm not saying you are an extrovert. I'm just saying that you're a naturally giving person - whether you like that or not - and trying to deny yourself who you are will be difficult. That is not to say you have to give unconditionally: guard your heart wisely, question and think over why and when and how you got hurt in your past, was there something you could do to change that. IN short, maximize your personality, and minimize the damage your personality might engender.
You wouldn't have a spare $10 would you? or $5 will do, I need it to buy a walking stick for my budgie.
I liked your blog post and it has made me think (which hurts my head)
Byeeeeeeee
I've found that the more you give, the more people expect you to give, and consequently, the more they take advantage. And what's really great about this equation is that when you finally get fed up enough to say something about it, they tend to act hurt, as though you've done something to them! Then again, maybe it's the level of individuals that I've known, LOL!
Post a Comment