Kankan

A female, American, Modern-Orthodox Jewish Humanist's thoughts on the world.

Friday, December 08, 2006

Finding Identity Alone

I paid a shiva call a few weeks ago to a middle aged woman whose sister passed away from cancer. She was a true blue New Yorker- the woman who i was visiting was sitting in her sister's apartment-- a hip studio with a loft near the village. She spoke about her sister with enthusiasm as though she were still around, remembering good times together with her. She passed around pictures, and told how her sister was an energetic, intelligent woman who had a dedicated boyfriend who stayed with her until the last. Her sister designed kitchens, and she said that quite a few people had visited during the shiva saying that they loved the job that she did. She was well loved by her nieces and nephews-- they all called her their "cool aunt."
One story stuck out in the woman (whom I was visiting)'s mind. She said that one of her sons got into a car accident, and when she called her sister while she was working, she answered the phone, "what do you want?" which, she explained, was how they answered each other's calls. After she told her how her son got into an accident, her sister responded immediately, "take all the time you need." She said she was so much there for her when she needed her to be.
Her sister showed me a copy of what her daughter said about her aunt at the funeral. It bespoke genuine love, admiration, awe and respect for this aunt's entire life. The way she could finish the crossword puzzle in an hour, the passion she had for art, the energy she put into her work and attention and compassion she gave to her friends and family.
And the cancer took her, and the nurses all loved her, and she would still look after her boyfriend, getting him a physical trainer.
She reminded me of my grandmother-- single for a large part of her life, loved by all, a serious, ambitious woman. She reminded me of my writing and music professors, liberal, non-conventional artists in New York who never marry and settle down with a family, even if they do have life-partners.
I thought of other experiences I'd had in shiva houses, where I felt that the niftar's spouse and children didn't have that much to say about the person they were mourning. They felt a sadness, and they missed having a parent/spouse. They spoke of how the person was a good person; a good employee; a good parent. I haven't always heard of how the person inspired those who are living, how they changed their lives.
Obviously, this description is not comprehensive or accurate, and there are exceptions in both directions, but this experience made me think that one chooses between one's self and one's family. I imagined that women (in particular-- this might be true for men, too) who do not marry can spend their lives finding themselves, and pursuing dreams. Women who marry, on the other hand, and stay married until the end, give up their dreams of personal fulfilment for the satisfaction of having safety and security in a stable marriage and with the preoccupation of raising children.
As I noted before, of course, this is not a true observation, but was highlighted by comparing a very small number of instances, and viewing them with a very particular lens. My question is why? What makes me view these experiences from this end? I know of many men and women personally, who have been able to maintain a personal sense of identity while at the same time participating in effective family life. Of course, it is ideal that the family should enhance one's individuality and vice-versa, but for some reason, I imagined this necessary sacrifice of one for the other. In fact, a part of me is still saying that one does, to a certain extent, necessarily give up on individuality when she joins in this heteronomous partnership, and that these experiences were classic examples of this.
I think that perhaps my life experience points me in this direction based on the fact that we spend much of our lives as youth growing and developing into the people we will become on our own. Especially since I gave up being friends with boys while I was in high school in an effort to focus on personal growth. I associate single-hood with a personal development. Relationships, for some reason or another, seem like finished-person territory. I think that this worked as a perception before I reached a stage of life where marriage was a real possibility, and now that I'm here, it's no longer plausible. Don't get me wrong-- some people are finished the minute they start. They have basically the same personality, the same values, often the same thoughts, when they're thirty as they had when they were in high school. But I can't be that person. I'm going to be changing for a good long time, and this is a difficulty for a few reasons:
1. It seems to join up together with another person, certain decisions have to be made about values and beliefs. This forces you to freeze a dynamic, fluid life at a given moment, and say, "this is me!"
2. Practically, much of one's time and many of one's resources are dedicated to one's personal fulfilment, and this cannot be maintained in adulthood. The thoughtful, introspective college student will wake up one morning buried under bills and house chores, with carpools and doctors appointments, and wonder why she hasn't read (or written) a good piece of thoughtful literature in a while. The transition from one stage of life to another begins with the relationship that will become a marriage, where we loose our autonomy to a degree.
In the end of the day, though, I think it is important for us to know ourselves, and to look for people with whom we'll be able to thrive as partners-- but also, as individuals. We cannot only be concerned with our personal goals anymore, because we have another person (and then people) in the picture to consider, but we cannot give up on them entirely.
I suppose this post is starting to sound cliche, but it's not an easy thing to implement into one's life. Once we are confronted with the relationship, we realize that so much of our identities are formed alone, and that this relationship is going to challenge that autonomy. But, we hope that that will lead to personal growth, and that it will all be worthwhile.

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

there are so many articles running around these days with this theme, urging people not to hook up too quickly, before they're fully individuated. they have a place, say, in our society, countering the pressure to marry too young. they serve the opposite purpose in the secular world, identifying with those who break up because they find they and their significant others are co-dependent and they need (constant) "me time".

we are supposed to share our lives with another person, and unify with them into one flesh. but look at your attached acquaintances- in a healthy attachment, the consituents maintain very much, even most of their own character. do your married friends change appreciably aside from a different set of logistic concerns (which may include some changes of personality ensuing from the change of lifestyle)? the ones with whom you remain friendly probably didn't- observable by the fact that they still wish to maintain your friendship, and do so. such are my experiences, anyhow. i mean, extreme changes on the part of an attached person are rare, because after all they do have an immediate reaction, and are less likely, as they may induce stress on the bond. also, it's really not just about him/her anymore. but people should stay themselves for the most part, and self-refinement should continue. maybe (and this is conjecture) it improves, because one can think aloud and receive responses from someone to whom this process is significant as well.

such are my sentiments. and now it's back to work.

10:59 PM  
Blogger Ellie said...

I'm not 100% sure what it means to be "fully individuated." I remember seeing a movie a while back-- Runaway Bride, where the protagonist didn't know what kind of eggs she liked, since she'd always deferred to her partner's choice. Is that what it takes to be an individual?
Do we need to know our career choice? How we want to raise children? How we will respond to the stresses of loosing a close relative? I don't think that it is a simple thing to determine-- when someone is "fully individuated." I find it is especially difficult when you talk about people who are forever changing. I don't think that it's a bad thing, but I used to think that some couples who I know, after 20 some years of marraige, were made up of people who were still too unstable to get married. But there-- they did it! Maybe that's where I get the sense that there's no way to know if one is ready.
Judging after someone is married whether or not it was something that they were ready for is not helpful, since that cannot really help us to determine for ourselves where we stand. Also, I don't think that this is a truly efficient way of gauging, since it reflects more on personality types than on readiness. Some people will, I imagine, always become fully absorbed in a relationship, while others will never allow that to happen. Instead of taking a selfish perspective as a friend of the person who is feeling betrayed by married friends, I find it more helpful to consider what the person is going through, and understand that friends come and go.
I still don't know what to make of this, but I'm not actually convinced that waiting a long time before getting married is the answer to this question. I know people who would never have families, if they took such advice. Some would say that the world would be better off that way. But I disagree.

1:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i emphatically agree with all of your points. sometimes i tend to think of this self-development process as following a rate law similar to most reactions, or anything at all for that matter- as an equilibrium process. the universe is constantly striving to reach equilibrium. the farther one is from this point (which can change at different conditions, for example, temperature alters chemical equilibrium), the faster the driving force to reach it. once one is closer, progress slows. actual equilibrium is not static- things are always moving, only the average of all the movement is zero; it takes place in both directions. i think this equilibrium can be attained(though it could also change), and it takes different lengths of time for different individuals. altering the composition of the system requires finding a new equilibrium, and no one need wait for the prior equilibrium to be attained for the new one to be reached- it's all a function of the constituents of the reaction.

"fully individuated" is an inaccurate term, forgive me. secular literature seems to require something to that effect, as it's usually all about oneself. but i do think people settle into a certain pattern after a good period of introspection; there is a less frenetic pace to one's self-discovery as one finds him/herself, at least for the time being.

the bottom line, IMHO, i do believe that the universe, ourselves included, is tending towards equilibrium.

8:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

perhaps one of the values that you "freeze" with your lifelong partner is the dedication to constantly re-evaluate your values....

3:02 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home