sum of all parts

Love is much like religion in that it is an indefinable (though natural) construct that helps us feel comfortable and addresses our fears in the face of the facts of life – that we are alone, as we live and die. While religion and god make us feel better about the uncertainties after death, love makes us feel better about the uncertainties of life. Love gives us a purpose that satisfies our need for such far more than any 9 to 5 job ever could. Perhaps the only purpose more rewarding is that of creative output, which may help to explain why we see in history so many artists that swear off of love (and even sex, perhaps conscious of being too weak of mind to enter into sexual relationships without ultimately clutching at the straws of love), yet so few non-creatives who do the same. Fewer notorious creatives resort to marriage, while so many traditional 9 to 5ers fight to perpetuate brutal, even detremental, marriages.
Love, and the codependence that defines it, gives us the illusion of being needed, not just for being able to complete a mundane task, but for being the individuals that we are…very similar to the reward of creative output. As such, perhaps finding love is our selfish way of proving that we are individuals and are (as an individual) special. The more truly individual the output of our lives are, the less we need to rely on love (or another person in any way) to reward us by acknowledging our individuality.
Is, then, our purpose (not the mysterious grander purpose but rather our individual, needy internal purpose) to stand out and define our individuality? Is that why celebrity is so highly regarded? Is that why our ‘legacies’ are so important to us, whether they be our children, our assets or our bodies of work? Is love what soothes (or perhaps distracts) those of us who are dissatisfied with other aspects of our lives? Does this begin to explain why the further ‘up the ladder’ an individual progresses, the more readily they discard/exchange/ignore partners. Are those partners/lovers becoming less necessary because the individual has defined their import and individuality elsewhere?
Do people who enter into ‘loving’ relationships before establishing careers run the risk of dooming themselves to professional mediocrity by allowing themselves to believe that they have attained the ‘worth’ through the individuality that we are all searching for in that love? Do they then fail to try to define their individuality further (whether by persuing a rewarding career or expressively creating) because they no longer feel that need to self define, having done so via their partner? Is this even truly a shortcoming? I would venture to say ‘yes,’ not because of a self-import relating to the values I place on creative output; nor even because of the fact that so many of these self-defining ‘love’ relationships fail, but rather because defining oneself based, almost exclusively, on externals, makes little sense.
Every one of us experiences life in our own way, as an interpretation of electronic impulses, object densities, vibration…ultimately as an interpretation of molecular, even atomic, motion. Because it is our interpretation that defines our world, and because there is no way to truly see or even understand another’s world, we can only truly define ourselves as a function of ourselves. I suppose this means that we can define ourselves by the love that we give, but that is a one sided thing that would never demand an ongoing relationship; there would be no pain in infidelity or separation because that pain can only come from the loss of the love that we are dependent on. Were it only a matter of us giving love, the loss would be inconsequential; there is always someone within reach to whom we can offer non-reciprocated love. Unforunately ‘love’ doesn’t work that way. We seem to offer it only to demand it in return, hence the cliche pain of unrequited love. Were love to be as honest and pure as we profess, no reciprocation would ever be necessary to make us feel good about ourselves.
Defining one’s individuality with a ‘love’ relationship makes no sense because your individuality is being recognized by your partner and the value is placed on it not by the love you give them, but by the love that they give you. You are using their approval to falsely boost your own ego and to define who you are when, realistically, there is little that is less individualistic than counting on another to validate you.
This individuality that is being chased in life, in the hopes of establishing a legacy in death, ties back into religion, in that both help to give us hope that death is not finality. Religion lets us believe that we will actually go on living after death, while our legacy lets us believe that we won’t disappear from earth after death; that we will somehow live on in the minds of those still living after we are gone. Is love now a reaction to our fear of death?
When someone tells you they they love you, aren’t they really telling you that they will sacrifice their own wants and desires in order to satisfy yours? That’s not real emotion being put forth; just reassurance of your own importance.