You are right when you talk about seeing something “yours” in another: falling in love is prompted by that instant recognition, familiarity, connection, click…
Of course you recognise it ... it's you.
All we see in another's eyes is our own reflection but very few of us have the courage to admit that to ourselves, because to do so would be to admit that a) we are so utterly alone and b) utterly self-absorbed, irredeemably narcissistic.
It's not that there's anything inherently wrong with being self-focussed to a degree … after all, without a healthy sense of the self we'd have no sense of self-preservation … but when we are in Love we do not truly love the other person, we are infatuated with them ... desire them (more than simply sexually) ... the very thought of them flooding our body and mind with a cocktail of hormones and neurotransmitters that cloud our vision and hinder our judgement — we see them through rose-tinted, mirrored sunglasses that reflect our own idealised perfect self back to us.
And that is inimical to the clarity that comes with true Love ... without which there can be no "if you love something, let it go", for we are selfish when in Love and do not wish to let it go.
In fact, the concept of "if it doesn't come back to you, it was never yours to begin with" tells you all you need to know about being in Love ... because, even if it does come back to you, it still never was and never will be yours — nor should your desire that it be ... not if you truly love it (if you truly love it, you want it to be free and all it can be, with or without you).
No, to be in Love is to be blind ... wilfully or otherwise, it makes no difference ... to the fact that we are playing a dressing-up game with someone in our head, cladding them in our own garb, putting words in their mouths, thoughts in their heads … playing 'twins'.
It's not Love, it's self-infatuation.
True Love is a different matter altogether ... there is no desire for the self there, only for the other's wellbeing.
But the quote is about their presence in your mind, how it pervades every little thought and action.
Quite. It's infatuation, obsession ... unhealthy in fact.
When you are in love you feel you’re not alone in your mind; there’s that person you want to melt with and you’re constantly bringing them close with your thoughts and with your desire. Love gives you purpose.
As I said ... it's all in your head.
And maybe that’s why it’s so difficult to renounce to that love when eventually it is unrequited or unviable… because you fear to lose that intimate company and impose yourself the punishment of roaming forever alone.
That's because it's not Love but desire.
If you love them, the fact that they are happy alone, with someone else ... or simply just not with you ... makes you happy — their happiness is all you care about.
When a child leaves the home, makes their own life, finds a partner, does the parent feel bad about it?
Only if they are psychologically damaged and narcissistic ¹ … otherwise they are overjoyed that their child is happy without them.
Being in Love is not loving, it's coveting.
I know the kind of stuff Kris Gage writes about isn’t necessarily your preferred reading material, but, do read this one — you don’t have to like the message, never mind the messenger, to appreciate its value …
How was life before falling in love? You can’t even remember how it is not to make someone the first and the last thought of your day.
Yup ... unless it's someone you love and they are experiencing difficult times which, naturally, means you are concerned for their wellbeing and think of them often for that very reason ... it's infatuation ... desire ... the need to feel validated by another's infatuation with us.
and yes… I’m a hopeless romantic… never denied that :p
Romantics are like the Lorelei: pretty to look at and the World would be a duller place without them but, for God's sake, don't listen to them — they'll lead you to your doom!
—
¹ If you love someone, let them go. If they come back, they’re yours. If not, then maybe that Stockholm Syndrome didn’t take after all.
