Relationships are reciprocal, not transactional. Wait, didn't I just contradict myself? Let me explain.
Say, you walk into a bank, you got a check for $100 dollars that you need to deposit, you walk up to the teller, have a little idle chit-chat, "Hi, How are you? Crazy weather we are having, what can I do for you?". You, then extend the check endorsed with your signature, the teller presses some buttons on the computer, slides the check through the machine, hands you a receipt, and off you go. Simple as that.
Or perhaps, you walk into the grocery store, choose a few tasty items, approach the checkout girl, who scans in your items, the computer tallies up your whole amount, you hand over your payment method, groceries bagged, and off you go. Simple as that.
In both of these circumstances, the rules of interaction are simple and transactional. One person needing something and the other fulfilling that role. If the positions were reversed, the transaction would be the same. The interchange is friendly, but not close. There is not a deep, internal connection of knowing between the parties. This isn't a Charlotte Bronte or Jane Austin novel in modern day wherein a chance encounter leads to true and lasting love. It's just the day to day adulting life.
What if you applied the same interaction base to a someone whose relation is a bit more dear to you, whether platonic, familial, or romantic. Let's say, you choose to do something for someone, such as, come see a play that they are in, for example, does that give you the right to decree that they do the like for you or even that you have the right to choose what they do for you in return? Nay, we cannot read the innermost thoughts of the other, but by presuming that they will do for us what we want, I believe, takes the mystery out of the gift to be given freely. Moreover, it removes the freedom of giving and receiving love. To be blunt, it makes interpersonal relations a mere transaction.
A quick search on google find the meaning of transaction is given as "an instance of buying or selling something; a business deal" and "an exchange or interaction between people". Even deeper again, a transactional relationship is "refers to a business-like approach to a relationship, where each person in that relationship has clear responsibilities and rewards".
However, the definition of reciprocate as: "respond to (a gesture or action) by making a corresponding one" and "to give and take mutually". Diving deeper, we discover that the meaning of reciprocated love is "given and received, or equally engaged in, by both parties; mutual".
One could make the case that this is an argument of semantics and rather the two mean the same thing. But, personally, I choose to clarify the two as different, so as, to truly be able to clearly define the mark of a pure, healthy relationship and that of a transactional interpersonal interaction where one chooses to take and not freely give. I've had more than enough of my share of transactional relations wherein I end up having more taken from than received as well nothing I shall attempt to give is good enough in the eyes of the taker.
However, in recent years, as I mine the depths of years of pain and heartbreak through the journey of recovery evolving, I have been able to weed out the poorer interactions, those connections that are merely around for their own gain or to inflict, and find myself increasingly around those that uplift. Through those interactions, I am starting to realize the true power of reciprocation and pure, healthy friendship. A gift given is not a guarantee of one to be received, nor can the giver decree what, when, how shall a gift be given. True reciprocation is based on an honest and heartfelt connection.
No comments:
Post a Comment