By Edha Singh
In collaboration with Eesha Gorti
Please note- Due to changes in POV's the text is colour coded with black for Edha, blue for Eesha
I(Edha) was talking to Eesha on a lonesome Friday night (as all our Friday nights are nowadays) and we ended up talking about how with certain people you don't know whether you’re a passing friend or you actually matter to them. Graham Allen perfectly captured this notion when he stated that the issue with friendship is that there is a lack of firmly agreed and socially acknowledged criteria for what makes a person a friend. Now you would think this was a random ‘spur of the moment’ conversation, but this had been plaguing me for weeks. Somehow, all of us have connected with more people during lockdown and quarantine than in real life- when you know, there are actually people around us. This brings up the very interesting dilemma of whether the connection is genuine or passing. A major reason for this issue is that our connection with certain people is limited to online texting and perhaps a few video calls, but there hasn't been much physical interaction. Even for some people you’ve met in real life and bonded with, but the lines are not clear enough, they leave you questioning- what are we?
Have you ever randomly in the middle of the day wanted to text someone, but you refrain from it because you’re not sure how many times a day is appropriate to text them? If I text for the third time today do I come off as clingy or do they enjoy my rants? And then let's say you send it to them. You close your phone and get back to whatever you were doing( probably binging youtube) and then ten minutes later feel that itch to open your phone. Now comes the part we’ve all been waiting for- overthinking. You end up judging yourself too hard and just deleting the message, resulting in ‘Huh?’ from them and an embarrassing ‘sorry by mistake’ from you.
If by now you’re relating hard and saying I felt that in my bones, then yes you’re in the right place- welcome to mine and Eesha's late-night pity party!
“I don’t want to be the giver in a relationship where you don’t even think there’s anything to give to.”
While Edha and I(Eesha) were discussing, overthinking antics and the anxiety that comes with dealing with new relationships. It’s a little like this - imagine a bubble you’ve blown out with soap solution. You see it rising, and floating and you see the way it plays with light but while you admire its beauty, you’re scared; you’ve seen similar bubbles land on some surfaces before and just bounce right off, unaffected, creating inexplicable satisfaction, but you’ve also seen it pop as soon as it comes into contact with some other surfaces. How do you know what’s going to pop the bubble and what it’s simply going to bounce right off of? Each new, blooming relationship is its own bubble. And each of these bubbles will have something that makes them pop. And that’s terrifying.
Edha brought up and something that really hit home was the question no one asks - “Do I call or text on your birthday?”. That sounds like such a trivial question when you ask it out loud but it’s a real thing- Do I call you excitedly a little after midnight, or do I drop in a text in the middle of the day telling you how much you mean to me, or how cool I think you are? What are we?
You know Eesha for the birthday thing, my secret is to just drop in voice notes, they're perfect in between. But if you’ve reached the birthday point, we know what comes next.
Am I in that place where if I miss you, or really want your company, I’m allowed to call? For no reason at all? Is that okay with you or do I come off as an overly attached acquaintance who glorifies all her relationships? Nobody wants to be in a position where one person feels differently about the relationship than the other. We’re friendly people, who form deep, meaningful connections fast. So when we drop in an out of the blue, affectionate voice note, or we call, do you just excuse it because that’s our personality or do you actually feel like we’re on a level where we can disregard formalities?
This whole texting thing is a big mess because not only is it how many times a day, voice note or not, but should there be a gap between days also? How many times am I supposed to initiate the conversation? Then there’s the fact that you know that they’re free, online and not replying… Are they already tired of you? Or are they just busy and I'm overthinking? But it's been 2 days and your texts have not been replied to. We both know that panic has started settling in and you tell yourself to grow a pair and detach yourself from the situation. You vow you’re not going to be the one initiating conversation from now on, but we both know pathetically we all will fall for that trap. Oh? What’s that? I have no self-worth left, yes yes that's true.
Communication structures today are a hot mess. With social media ‘friend’ is now a verb and different lines exist for different topics while communicating. You may have discussed all your traumatic experiences and deepest secrets with someone yet they don't know the name of your sibling.
Since quantity matters more than quality, friendship has complexified to a state where experts like Sherry Turkle are worried that our capacity to identify friends in real life has deteriorated.
That is worthy of pondering over because we struggle with the idea of What are We not only with online friends but our own classmates. Perhaps the best way to state this is as by Turkle- technology gives the illusions of companionship without the demands of friendship. Perhaps you are questioning your relationships because you’ve crossed Dunbar’s number. Dunbar's number is a social rule stating that it is not possible to maintain more than 150 friends. And yes he did not mean FB friends, he meant real friends. Though much debated, the number is not of focus here, but the fact that after a substantial amount of people in your life, you cannot have anymore. You’ll start losing some when you acquire more. You’re essentially bartering the people in your life.
Communication structure leads to the issue of shying away from displaying affection. The root of this issue is that people find it okay to be vulnerable to strangers but telling your ‘maybe friend’ how much they mean to you is too scary to fathom. Vulnerability gives them access into your inner workings and it is rational to feel exposed and fear misconduct on their part. After all, if it was irrational to feel something, you wouldn't feel it. Fear of rejection/disapproval and low self-esteem are the forces driving the hesitation to speak up. You might also feel judged or consider the time/place not appropriate. And then there's the most dreaded fear- of feelings being unequal.
Categorization is important too. Your mind is going to sort out the unsaid dynamics you have with a person subconsciously. There are people who you can have an incredible time with in person, but suddenly, if you want to text them, the same feeling that arises when you see a teacher in your social media recommended, washes over you. Then there are the people to whom you’ve said a whole bunch of things that you didn’t think you were capable of sharing with people, but when you meet them in person it’s a simple smile. How do we travel wavelengths so quickly? How did this happen without us talking about it? Is there something here that one person is picking up, that the other one is not? Why not just talk it out? Why is that so difficult?
What are we? Are we twin flames or are we just classmates? Are we a pair of people the other won’t ever forget or are we just fast friends who catch up and hang out occasionally? What are we?
The honest understanding of the aforementioned dilemma is that in a fast-paced world where our lives are deeply rooted in individualism, the morally binding grounds of a communal commitment like friendship is harder to decipher. Fundamentally, when your individualism battles the idea of altruism. Going back in time, Aristotle had said friendship was of three types-for utility, pleasure and for the good. The first two tend to be friendships of accidental nature and most of our relations fall into that category. The last one is the most desirable and is based on mutual appreciation of the virtues the parties hold dear. These are the long-lived relationships that provide depth and intimacy, and beautifully entangle the benefits of the accidental types of friendships. Having understood these categories, it's easy to connect that we already know which people in our life fall into the last category. 'What are we' is questioned when the accidental connection you feel with someone rivals the connection you feel with your long term friends.
The categories of Aristotle don't seem detailed enough when you start thinking of all the people in your life. That's because modern relationships require sub-categorisation of his existing categories. Just take a moment and think about all the types of people there could be- casual friends, close friends, BFFs, FWBs, GF/BF, Ex-GF/BF Mutual friends, Ex friends, Bromance friends(or sisters), Colony friends, situational friends, ex-friend, frenemies, cyber friends, roommates, enemies, courtship, life partners, spiritual companions, classmates, acquaintances, mentor- it doesn't end. No wonder we feel the need to question what we are.
Special mention goes to of course the weird companion/infatuated category that you just don't know what to do with on a long term basis. An apt idea of this is portrayed by stoicism when it claims that love is the attempt to form friendship inspired by beauty.
Like moths drawn to a flame we tend to flock and stick to people we find attractive, helped by the spark of infatuation. That spark complexifies things when it gives the illusion of burning like a bonfire in your heart. Though, I will say that if the heart of that relationship lies in respect and care then it's a sticky situation you can escape. After all, the true pillars of friendship are said to be mutual care, intimacy and shared activity. If your relationship has these threes, you can find peace in knowing that it does, in fact, have a base. Categorised or not, at least it’s worthy of investing in.
When I choose to confide in you, I sort of expect the same. We all do. But oftentimes in relationships where the lines aren't clearly drawn and categories established, it seems like the other person doesn't NEED you. And that ‘need’ element is so important. It determines the length of your friendship, or if whatever it is will actually turn into a full-fledged friendship. You don't want to feel like the more dependent one in the relationship. But you end up inadvertently feeling that way. Like listen, are you invested in this relationship or not? Often, when we start maintaining a lot of relationships, our investments start scattering and we find ourselves saying things like- different people know different parts of me. The same goes for your relations, they also have not completely invested in you, because they are spending energy investing in other places also.
Simple advice here- prioritise. The three key questions when looking to prioritise someone are-‘What do I want to achieve in my life and how can this person help me achieve it? What do I like about this person and what do they like about me?‘How much does this person prioritise me?
The denser your links are the more satisfying the answer to 'what are we' becomes.
Here, we also bring into the picture, the psychological theory of interdependence. This theory communicates the exchange of social components of a relationship. In an interdependent relationship, participants are reliant, and responsible for each other. There are four kinds of interdependence, a cost and reward system, that come into play - emotional, instrumental, opportunity and social.
Emotional costs/reward refer to the positive or negative feelings induced by a relationship. We draw specific focus to emotional interdependence as this includes the impact of questioning the dynamics of a relationship. One person spiralling due to a relationship levies an emotional cost on them, with no proportional reward for either of the people. This one-sided cost can be lifted through proper communication and saves both people a lot of emotional energy. Behavioural changes are very likely caused by the questioning of ‘What Are We’ and internalizing or glorifying a relationship. This brings us to the second cost and reward component that we will highlight - the instrumental cost and reward system.
The instrumental cost and rewards refer to the extra work people have to do due to a relationship. Although calling it ‘work’ may seem arbitrary, as we all understand the give and take dynamics of a relationship and don’t tally or keep count of IOUs in a healthy relationship, the work done by a person may extend to the ‘What Are We’ concept. Due to some insecurities or such caused by this questioning system, people tend to go out of their way to prove their worth in the other’s life.
This includes both materialistic and emotional work - yes, you heard me right, work. This, in fact, is referred to as work because this superficial extra mile that is proving to be taxing on one person in the relationship, can be lifted through proper communication.
There could be counter questioning as to why this said extra mile, is a bad thing. To this, I would request you to call for some introspection. Is that what you want to do? Do you want to be someone who is constantly holding a hand over someone’s heads? Do you want to take advantage of their insecurities and doubts that may have aroused due to past trauma/ experiences? Is that where your faith in humanity and morals lie? Communicate. Create healthy relationships. More than anything, respect the concept of the reward system.
Combine the issue of ‘will you actually be there for me’ and ‘do you need me’ and there you have it, folks- the recipe to waste all your day staring at your screen and nights convincing yourself you’re being illogical.
“Our tastes and aims and views were identical — and that is where the essence of a friendship must always lie,” wrote Cicero. To some extent, perhaps, but then the convergence must be natural, not, as Emerson put it, “a mush of concession. Better be a nettle in the side of your friend than his echo.” And Francis Bacon observed that “the best preservative to keep the mind in health is the faithful admonition of a friend.”
(source:college.columbia.edu)
This paragraph puts across three philosopher’s ideas, that logically flow, to explain the thing we all don't want to accept. Maybe we are questioning ‘What Are We’ because this whole thing has been a farce. Maybe the foundation of your relationships was a forcefully drawn web, that is too weak to uphold the demands of friendship. Yes, similarity is important, but forcing it, grasping on distant relations will be detrimental in the long run. It happens to the best of us when we crave connection and warmth, so we create a fantasy out of reality.
Whatever said and done if you consider yourself a friend of someone( or more, no judgement), even if the lines aren't clearly drawn, know that friendship is considered a symbol of moral excellence. This is because in any good relationship your actions are for the sake of your friend. This carries high social value, so you’re contributing to society’s welfare.
If you know either of us(if you know both of us, then good luck to you, because we wrote a whole article just ranting about you) a humble request is pick your phones, dial us and tell us what we are to you. In fact, for all of you here, we dare you to call and tell all the people who matter to you, what they are to you. Help the world achieve peace and a good night's rest one call at a time. Make their day, gift them a call to remember, so they can also tell you and you finally know the answer to -WHAT ARE WE?!!
Comments