This is the subtitle to the book ENTANGLED. I’m going to expand on the title here a little because, as it is currently with an editor I am allowed some time to think about this book without rereading it while it is being edited. It is meant to clarify not only the title of the book but also to edify the content in part to help folks to decide if they want to read such a book.
Of course, as anyone who writes or reads will tell you, you can’t know if you like a book unless you read it. However, I will tell you this much, I could’ve added a few more words to the subtitle, but I didn’t. (Four seems to be a goodish limit, doesn’t it?) The one word I got stuck on but decided Love was a better choice for the subtitle, was the word Compassion. Compassion is a more accurate word for the overall intention of the book expressing the theme that runs through all the years Janis and I were and still are together (together-apart). But, Love won out in the specificity of the narrower meaning. (Love-narrower? Really?) Love is less complicated. Not because love is not complicated, but it is a more popular term and generally understood. And it’s shorter. I’m going to give you something I read recently that gave me pause. I read it a few times and each time it set off more bells and whistles for me. I have often struggled to grasp why I would not accept the term codependency, as the book surely smacks of that. I’m not saying it isn’t real. But, in defense of those who discover that they live life compassionately: It is not weakness, it is, in fact, a strength. I think compassion gets a bad rap. After all, as a minimum defense for a somewhat complex idea, if all folks who love from a place of compassion were to be labeled as codependent, where does that leave the teachings of the profound spiritual leaders of our species? Jesus, Buddha, the Dali Lama, for starters. Don’t misunderstand this, I have worked in the helping professions all my adult life and I’ve met people who are clearly codependent, and I’ve met those I observed as sincerely compassionate. And there is a third category, of stupid-compassion. So…what do we do? These three different categories deserve respect equally as real phenomena. But, how to distinguish between them?
Here is a starting point:
“Compassion is a threat to the ego. We might think it is warm and soothing, but actually, it is very raw. (Italics, mine.) When we set out to support others, when we go so far as to stand in their shoes, when we aspire to never close down on them, we quickly find ourselves in the uncomfortable territory of “Life not on my terms”. ~Pema Chodron*
I am not going to portray myself as a compassionate person in all circumstances. but, I do aspire to be compassionate, life is hard enough and we need more compassion and I will add, more commitment, in our relationships. But the theme of this book is about those two ‘c’-words–compassion and commitment. And maybe a few others that didn’t make it.
Even setting aside the current political divide and racial issues (don’t get me started), just the general overview of life can’t help providing us with hurt and harm in the course of our days. We can think of hundreds of painful examples. But, that’s another topic altogether. Life is full of suffering at every level from a toothache, death of a beloved goldfish, fear (for example of various creatures, you know, spiders, snakes, bluebirds, or thoughts of losing someone we love, or other people-scary people, think Ted Bundy or Hannibal Lecter) and so on. . . . The extremes are the really scary ones like racism, or prejudice in other varieties, severe health issues, etc. And the bogey man of them all–death.
So compassion is the answer. ‘”All you need is compassion”, somehow doesn’t capture the imagination as Lennon and McCartney probably decided. Compassion means “Life not on my terms.” Sacrifice, patience, (Robert Louis Stevenson said, “Patience is the only true heroism.”), tolerance, commitment, compromise, sacrifice.
Marriage is a contract; love is not. when things are getting tough in any relationship, and maybe especially in marriage–certainly a long term commitment– it’s up to the one with the advantage to step up. Understanding is paramount, and taking a moment to consider what the other is maybe dealing with or any disadvantages they are carrying around in their life, requires compassion, even if it is a little risky. Or raw.
Whether we realize it or not, every choice we make in the course of our day involves some degree of risk, making a choice about which auto mechanic to trust, trying a new recipe–or more serious risks, allowing our child to walk to school alone, letting your child go out on a date (a biggy for those of us with daughters), or whether to disconnect life support for a loved one, flying cross country, or staying with an assaultive partner. (That last one is intended to cover stupid-compassion. Right?) You get it. Choices in all degrees include some risk. Stupid-compassion involves ignoring danger or loss because of fear. That’s a book, folks. But stupid compassion is, well, stupid.
Codependency is about fear or about stupid-compassion. Take your pick. Pure compassion is neither of these two positions. It is about a bond and a friendship. Respect for the other’s condition in this life. A commitment, for better or worse. And it is about love and compassion.
*Pema Chodron, fm Living Beautifully, Shambhala publications.
Mother, Night, and Water, Robert W. Chapman, available at Amazon.com/books
robertchapmanblog 