In our personal relationships seminar yesterday we discussed the relationship development perspective. Most models are linear and go from the first time two people meet to marriage. Then they end. I guess because there are so many different paths people take after that and it gets too confusing. We mayhave similar experiences when intimacy and committment are increasing, but not when it is decreasing and not when relationships end.
First, I'm not sure if I think relationships are linear. I mean, you can't stop time so in some ways relationships are "progressing" in the sense that they are accummulating more relationship history and people have more experiences with each other. But I doubt this means that relationships are always progressing in the sense that they are moving forward in some way. What would they be moving forward to? Especially after some milestone like marriage. Once you get to that level of committment are you just THERE? Like, you've arrived and you've reached some coveted state where you don't have to work at your relationship? Obviously this can't be true. But what would a model of that look like?
Some scholars have relationship development models that aren't linear but look more like charts. There are stages. But they still imply categories and movement. The social penetration theory (i know, weird name) conceptualizes relationships as onions that have many layers. People may have a large breadth of things they discuss with another but don't have much depth. Others may have depth of discussion about very narrow issues. I guess the most developed relationships have depth and breadth (two words that comm scholars LOVE).
Anyway, I just think its interesting to see how values are embedded into our scholarship and just in the way we think everyday about relationships. Increased intimacy is considered to be a positive thing while decreased intimacy is considered negative. But we can all think of times when increased intimacy may be exactly what we don't want.
I don't have some alternative suggestion for this, but it makes me think of Christianity and in general, just putting people into categories. I remember when I was telling my youth group leader in high school about the new guy I was dating. His first question: "Well, is he a Christian?" Of course I understand the importance of this question and why he was asking me. But to me, it really does no good to try to squish someone's spiritual journey into a yes or no question. Asking if someone is "in" or "out" of the christianity circle doesn't seem too helpful.
In the same way, it's interesting to hear how people give their narrative of their spiritual journey. Is it linear? Is there some "THERE" that people are trying to work towards? Do you ever really get there? Is that really the point?
I don't really know how these things all connect. I just think that sometimes in our attempts to make things neat and tidy and fit into theories and models and yes or no questions that we lose some of the real stuff. The real reason we were interested in asking those questions in the first place. And sometimes we need some other alternatives. Believing in models that paint some picture of life as moving in one direction that makes sense and shows some state that we are aiming to achieve just sets us up for disappointment and disaster, I think.
That's why narratives are so important. Unless it's a fairy tale you're reading that ends with "happily ever after," people's personal narratives are ever-changing. Our histories are constantly being re-written. We have to keep up with each other's narratives - make sure we know how our friends and family are telling the story of their lives and how we fit into it. This whole thing facinates me. Our pasts and our memories are so malleable, but yet they are so important because they impact things and affect things in the here and now. Finding out that your spouse doesn't think it was love at first sight and you do -- this difference in stories can be cause for conflict.
And one event can change the whole way in which we tell our story. It can change the things we highlight and the things we downplay. A person becomes a Christian and their whole narrative changes to before and after. To all the bad things you did before you found Christ to all the good things you do now. You finally come out, and you tell the story of how you've always been attracted to people of the same sex, but never felt able to talk about it.
This is all so tied into our identity. Our histories, our stories - they have to make sense with our current identity and the place we current occupy. Perhaps our identities shift and move and certain parts of us become more salient at different times and as we tell different stories about ourselves.
We try to make sense of things, but when our experiences are so malleable and can be seen from so many perspectives, what is the REAL story? Does it really matter? Perhaps there are a million ways to tell your own story. And each story has different implications for how you're going to live your life from this day forward.
So, in the midst of muddling through each day, I guess I have to ask myself where I am in the story I tell of my life? How will I look back on this period and re-tell it?
I guess we'll have to wait and see. And if you ask me tomorrow, it might be a different story than I tell next week.
