The marriage of true minds

Sally asked for context for my August 7 post, and I received several other emails as well on the subject. The post was inspired by real events, but not in a direct way. Rather, I was following a chain of internal thoughts, based on contemplation of the responsibilities we each take on when we make a serious emotional commitment.

I was reflecting in my mind that this is a very solemn kind of promise, and that to honor such a promise is not a trivial task. Paradoxically, it requires a certain amount of self-protection – a responsibility to never lose sight of our own core principles and necessary boundaries – in order to guarantee that we have the strength to fulfil the commitment.

I realize I didn’t explain any of this on August 7. Sorry about that – I was focusing on the thought itself, and was also a bit distracted on that day. I am reminded of Sonnet 116, in which our old friend Mr. Shakespeare reminds us to love the other for who they really are, come what may:

Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth’s unknown, although his height be taken.
Love’s not Time’s fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle’s compass come:
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
      If this be error and upon me proved,
      I never writ, nor no man ever loved.

We are not permitted to define the person we love, and they are not permitted to define us. We can only try to love them for who they are, and insist, as firmly as necessary, that they do the same for us.