BitterSweetLife

What’s spontaneous cannot be deliberate. What’s organic cannot be orchestrated or planned for. You can’t be regimented and real at the same time.

These are often the operating assumptions in our culture, which imply, overwhelmingly, SPONTANEOUS, ORGANIC, “NATURAL” _____________ (you fill in the blank; i.e. “friendships,” “reactions,” “lifestyles”) ARE THE ONLY WAY TO AUTHENTICITY AND RELEVANCE.

Which is nice, as far as it goes.

Unfortunately, the antithesis (as most would see it) to this axiom is equally true.

The analogy of friendship—or community—is one I like.* We all know the dreariness of those acquaintances that “ought to” deepen into friendships but never do. You know, the one-cubicle-over/brother-in-law/rediscovered-high-school-bud relationships that have all the force of social law and probability behind them. We’re supposed to have great rapport and love for these people. But (sickly grin) that doesn’t always mean we do, does it…?

Seems like the ancient** saying is true: “You can’t choose your best friends.” Which, if we stack it on the side of the SPONTANEOUS-ORGANIC-“NATURAL” crowd, leaves another question entirely unanswered. What about your good friends? Can you choose them?

To which I would reply, Uh, yeah. As ridiculous as it would be to assume that we’ll automatically adore the corporate/familial connections we’re crammed into, it would be equally ludicrous to believe that unless we’re “naturally drawn” to someone, we’ll never have a decent friendship. Shoot, for several years most of us aren’t “naturally drawn” to our parents.***

So, to summarize: Authentic, satisfying friendships (which, on a larger scale, result in community) come about through a combination of “organic” meetings and camaraderie followed by deliberate (often painful & awkward) growth and development.

Balance would probably involve avoiding both:
A) Countless glossy, “stylish” friendships with all the tensile strength of bubble-gum (see Proverbs 18:24).
B) Only one (or, uh, fewer) genuine friendships “because she’s the only one who understands me and no one else could or would ever want to, etc.”

To complete my SPONTANEITY vs. DELIBERATION analogy: Give me a handful of authentic, deepening friendships, and I’m happy. Add on a few more, and I’m happier still. (The circle will never become huge, because a person can only have so many close relationships.) But to achieve this model of perfection would require both side of the coin, thesis and antithesis, "natural" enjoyment and thoughtful follow-through.

It took a while to get here, but what I’m trying to say is: Pure spontaneity is overrated these days. (As far as I know, the only places it really works are Cranium,™ Taboo,™ Charades, all of which are games. If you get me.) If we’re really after authenticity, in community or any other arena, we’ll have to pull off the gloves and start planting those "organic" carrots-er-friendships.

We need more premeditated realness. How about some deliberate spontaneity? Organic intentionality, anyone?

* And also one where imbalanced “spontaneity” exacts a high price.

** Relatively speaking, that is. Relative to this week. I think someone said it within the last couple decades, before which it wouldn't have been considered profound enough to be a recognizable "saying." Plato: "And as it is said, 'You can't choose your best friends.'" Student: "Well duh, sir."

*** And from most of the rest of society, incidentally. For some, often known as social recluses or MU hoops fans, this becomes a continuing way of existence. And yeah, I know these asterisks get old. It's time for Blogger to start supporting footnotes.