Friendship

Brooding once again, still contemplating human relations – friendship and it's different aspects, effects, implications and correlations ... occupying my mind for weeks now.

I realized that I never really thought about friendship in the past and that despite certainly appreciating my friends I somehow took them for granted for a very long time. I never really cared a lot about friendship. I don't mean to say that I do not care about the people who are my friends – of course I care about them – what I mean is that I never cared much about finding friends. If it happened, it was fine, but if it didn't – well, it didn't bother me too much. Being much of a loner anyway, I never measured my popularity with people by the number of friends I had. When I was younger I often looked at having a lot of friends as being a bit of a burden, a strain. People bugging me, stealing precious time I'd rather spend by myself. Quite selfish maybe, I know, but what can I say – that's the way it was. It's different now. I'm grateful I have my friends and I wouldn't want to miss any of them, however different from one another they may be. I feel they are all genuine in their very own way.

But what exactly does friendship mean, what does it mean to have a friend, to be a friend? Does it mean the same for everyone of us? I found that Europeans use the terms 'friend' and 'friendship' quite different from Americans for example. While in many European countries 'friend' is a status granted to a rather small number of people only, typically describing a very close long-term relationship, clearly distinguished from the more superficial and non-committal 'acquaintanceship', Americans often use the term 'friend' more freely and general. So, just to avoid misunderstanding: when I use the term friendship here, I understand it in the 'traditional' European sense of the word, a relationship based on esteem, trust, loyalty and mutual understanding. It may contain a certain emotional intimacy but not in a sexual context.

Some of us, especially the younger ones, use the term 'friend' rather easily, while others have quite a struggle with that expression. Special friendships – those that stand out of the big pool of different relationships we build up over the years – are very rare. Most of us have a whole variety of interpersonal relations and I want to draw a clear line between mere acquaintanceship and real friendship here, leaving out relatives as well. Parents and siblings may have a lot of influence on us, especially as we grow up, but they are not what I am thinking about at the moment.

Who are the people we call our friends and why do we call them that? What does the expression 'friend' mean to us and in how far do our various 'friendships' differ from one another? Friends, true friends, close friends, best friends – we distinguish between so many different kinds of friends and while most women seem to be quite particular about these distinctions, many men seem to avoid the term 'friend' altogether, prefering to call their friends 'mates', 'buddies' or 'lads' instead. I think the average modern male friendship has little in common with classic or antique concepts of friendship between men. At least in our western world it is often complicated by social manipulation, conditioning and – as a result – subliminal homophobia. I do not want to imply that there is no real friendship between men, I just think it's rare. And the rarest of all seems to be sincere and lasting friendship between male and female, friendship independent of gender, based not on romantic or sexual aspects but on mutual understanding and a deep confidence in each other.
In native Hawaii they have a concept of friendship known as pili hoaloha – a devoted, platonic union between members of the same or opposite sex, a commitment between two friends, reaching it's climax in a ceremonial act not unlike a wedding. Pili hoaloha goes much deeper than our modern understanding of friendship, it's more like a 'cohabitation of soul friends'. The Hawaiians do also have ceremonies for 'normal' sexual marriages of course, but they clearly differ between these.

If I get more particular and start to focus just on what we call our best friends, isn't it surprising how different from one another they still are? What is it that attracts our interest in a certain person, that makes us feel congenial with him or her, raises enough emotion, enough affection and confidence in us to want to be friends with this person? What is it that creates the foundation for a future friendship? Is it shared experience? A person's appearance? Charisma? Or a certain quality in that person? Are we trying to supply a want, an unsatisfied need in ourselves by making friends with somebody, giving in to a subliminal selfish interest? And if we are, are we honest enough to admit to this, trying to understand what's driving us? Maybe it's a blend of all those aspects in different shares. It might vary from person to person and even within one friendship the focus might shift over the years, as friendship grows, developes and changes with us.

Thinking of friendship in the purest sense of the word, the term altruism comes to my mind. How many of our friends do we love unselfishly, without regard to reward or benefit for ourselves? I dare say that most of us are far from a sublime virtue like that: wholeheartedly loving a person not for his or her qualities, skills or attributes, but simply for being a fellow human being. Sometimes we experience a short glimpse of that altruism, feeling some kind of abstract love, of Metta or loving kindness, a sudden concern for the well-being of a person beyond rational understanding or selfish interest. But normally our motives are not quite so unselfish. When we say we miss someone, normally we mean that we miss that person's company. We miss that friend in our life. If we're honest with ourselves we'll recognize it as the selfish wish to be provided with what we lack in ourselves. The more friends we have with a certain quality, the less we will miss any one of them but if a certain interest is shared with only one friend, we will miss him or her very quickly. When we are bored, we miss the entertainment, the diversion or amusement this person offers. Or we miss the safety, the strength this friend provides whenever we feel weak. Many of the people we call our friends we call so simply because we share some kind of interest. It's more like a syndicate than a real friendship. If one of the involved parties starts to change, developes or redirects his or her interests, we may find that we have nothing else in common and often such a friendship will just fizzle out.

All this (and a lot more) went through my head, trying to define the meaning of the word 'friendship' for myself. While all this thinking opened my eyes for some aspects I hadn't really regarded so far, I realized that there will probably be 'friendships' that might not stand up to it in the long run, that will remain mere acquaintanceships despite calling them friendship and I accepted the fact that it just makes no sense to constantly question whether or not some friendship is a true and stable one in the purest sense of the word.

We need friends to master this life. We need people who share our interests, who listen to us, who understand and care for us. And in return, being friends, we fulfill this need in others. Only now have I come to understand that the people from whom we receive these gifts do not necessarily have to be the people to whom we offer them in return. One man's teacher might be another's scholar, every scholar might be another's teacher. Life changes all the time, people and situations change, nothing can ever be final or constant. Also, every friendship consists of at least two people and even if I am sure about my own motifs, I'll never know about the other's. I have to trust. That's part of the concept of friendship I think – confidence and trust.

I might feel a lot of friendly affection for somebody and still this person might not return my feelings, which will hurt me – because of my still too alive ego – but shouldn't change my feelings for that person. Friendship - as love - should be about giving, not receiving, in the first place. I am well aware that it's pretty hard to practice altruism and that I'll probably never manage to be completely altruistic. It's illusory. I am far from reaching the ideal of complete unselfishness but that doesn't mean I stop trying. I'll try not to lessen those of my friendships that seem somewhat 'minor' to others – less intense maybe, less exciting, less intellectual – and I'll try to stop judging by what benefits I gain myself. As long as these friends have an interest in seeing me, I should keep in mind that they might just judge the very same friendship completely different. Looking back on my life so far, I must admit that sometimes my 'best friends' didn't necessarily prove to be 'true friends'. Sometimes the true friends were people I didn't even count among my closer friends. And I might not be my best friend's 'best friend' (ego beware!). So I guess there's not much of a point in all this labelling and classifying after all. A friend can only be a friend if I let him in, if I do not judge in advance, if I accept his or her friendship and do not shut myself off.

And while my mind starts to go even further here, toward a yet different kind of friendship – spiritual friendship – I think I'll grant us a little break. I'm really, really tired now, writing for hours on end, as usual.

I'll be back some time soon, so ... good night!