(no subject)

[vriad_lee]

if i parted with my wife, i wouldn't marry again, probably. for one thing, now i know what it takes to get used to another person. and what common 'property' you amass in marriage, and what you're risking with a break-up. also, i have never met a person i would want to marry, consciously. i wouldn't marry my wife, if i met her today for the first time, and she wouldn't marry me. when we met, we were young enough to ignore common sense, and then undemanding and un-self-centred enough to take the pains of getting used to each other's idiosyncrasies. the fact that we did marry, and have managed to live together for many years, is the most crazy coincidence im my life. it's the most important alien factor, by which we both have gained and lost a lot, and i will never know for sure if we gained more than we lost.

Comments

[shepa.livejournal.com]

Who's talking?

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

my selfish self

[poemtree.livejournal.com]

how long have you been married?

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

10 years!

[poemtree.livejournal.com]

oh my god.

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

shit happens, you know

[abele.livejournal.com]

you haven't experienced middle-aged solitude.

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

no. is it very awful?

[abele.livejournal.com]

just like marriage it's neither awful nor unawful. but if you've had continuous companionship all this time, how do you know you'd rather go without it?

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

i agree, but i didn't say that i prefer being single. it's just that creating a relationship is such a pain in the ass. it gets much easier later, but still there are so many problems and risks. but i don't think i'd prefer to be alone.

[emma-loy.livejournal.com]

>I wouldn't marry my wife, if i met her today for the first time, and she wouldn't marry me.

I think when you try to picture this hypothetical first contact situation you see you as you are today meeting Natasha as she was 10 years ago or Natasha as she is now meeting you as you were 10 years ago - and that is not the case. Be today's you alone and meet her now - are you sure you wouldn't fall for her? I think you would.

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

i'm almost sure i would fall for her, if i met her today for the first time. i don't know if she'd fall for me, though, but i hope she would. but i was talking about marriage, moving together, living together every day. that seems pretty complicated, in retrospective, although she isn't the most difficult person to be with, as you know. on the other hand, what do i know. maybe we'd be more prepared for something like that at this age, i really don't know.

[emma-loy.livejournal.com]

Your marriage and moving in together was the result of too many conditions and petty realities. You both had been living in a highly hostile environment. You had to live in 15th with Anna in full run. She had no place to live. Living together was for you both your only way to live the way you wanted to live and with a person you wanted to live with.

And each one of you was such person for the other. This is the reason and explanation. Highly possible you'd marry and move in together today again.

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

we lived in 15th for a very short while, but yeah, the story is a sad one told many times the story of my life in trying times.

[emma-loy.livejournal.com]

each of you was the other's chance to escape from all that. and you succeeded, by the way.

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

i didn't read your previous comment too carefully, i thought you were saying that we (together) lived in 15th in a hostile environment. yes, i guess you're right, it was the most comfortable and natural way to go anyway, and i do think that i'd recognize her if i met her today for the first time, so i guess all that cannot be called a 'crazy coincidence', although it makes my post duly dramatic. but when you realize what price experience and adjustment is bought at, and, also, that the price hasn't been anything near paid-up yet, - well, it's just stunning

[emma-loy.livejournal.com]

but this is but a wild guess! what do you know about the price you'd have to pay for being alone? for some easy-going relationship? and most of all: how that would have changed you? this is not that simple. being single, expecially when you are close enough with your family, is not just to be free, contrary to being married. it takes adjustments and sacrifices of its own. wanna be free - be a yogi. you'll get free, idiot-looking and slim in no time!

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

you shouldn't have said all that. now i want to be a yogi.

[emma-loy.livejournal.com]

please, be! please, please, please!!!
i rally, really wanna see it!

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

haven't you seen enough of those??

[oycaramba.livejournal.com]

Vriad, this is a wonderfully honest post. I understand: I was married for 10 years (married as a baby, really, and I've been "divorced" (I mean, single) since 1992. I loved being married, but I hated being unhappily married - know what I mean? It's the worst feeling. I'm not saying "unhappy" is your status. But the result of my experience was what you describe: a supreme reluctance to get married again. I've had hugely important relationships, but marriage? I think it hexes perfectly good loves.

Thanks for letting me vent, senor.

[vriad-lee.livejournal.com]

you know, i don't see much difference between an important relationship and a marriage, because, basically, you eather live together or you don't, and that defines it. if you live together, you're married. the price payed for adjustment has to vary from person to person, of course. i have to pay a lot for that - and, mind you, i'm talking about living with someone who is not at all difficult, and whom i love - i don't know, in the broadest possible sense, as you love a kindred soul, a friend.