I thought about this and I debated. To comment on a definition of love or not? First, I have to say I won't be speaking in clichés. It is not my intention to mock or attack those that define love through the paradox or typical cliché, but I do feel that so long as one relies on the cliché as opposed to seeking their own definition--howsoever that definition is found and created--true understanding is lacking.

That being said there is one particular line from the comment on the previous post that I absolutely feel as if I must address:

"To truly love a person must be *willing* to give up everything they own and believe in if it will improve the soul of their partner. This is almost never needed in practice but a person in love would make such a sacrifice if the situation called for it."

I have disagree in the strongest terms I know how. I disagree for a multiplicity of reasons, but first and foremost among them is that I've felt this love, I've been a part of this love, and I've seen others engage in this type of love. It's love; it's a type of love like many, many other things are a type of love but it is not healthy love. When someone loves you in a non-destructive way when you say I'm going to give up everything I AM for you, they look at you and say no. It's one thing to require sacrifice and compromise, but everything you own and believe in? Everything you are? That's not love, that's membership in a cult.

This isn't the same as giving up one's life to save another. This isn't the same as hurting so much when someone dies or leaves you that you aren't sure you can get out of bed; this is losing your identity in someone else. In none of the cases I've witnessed or been a part of (and there have been more than a few) has this resulted in anything remotely approaching a happy ending. Oh sure, maybe the couple puts on a happy face sometimes; maybe they really, really miss each other when the other one is gone. But love isn't always healthy, nor does addiction or need of someone else for sustenance make for a solid or happy relationship.

Finally, anyone that would demand you not be yourself, or give up yourself, so that they can love you doesn't love you. Not really. At least, not the love I was discussing in the previous post or the love Shakespeare is commenting on in Romeo and Juliet. That's a whole other ball park and yes, every couple's relationship is intensely personal and no one knows what goes on or why they stay together sometimes, but every time I've witnessed a love of the type described above neither half of the couple was particularly happy. Perhaps they can't imagine being different, often when stuck in a relationship where loss of identity is prevalent people can't imagine life without the relationship--in part because they would have life without definition, but always, always I've seen people that were tinged with bitterness even while laughing the hardest. People that are excessive in their use of physical affection as if extra kisses and hugs and really long goodbyes mean the other person will come back and things will be better.

What's been described here I would agree is love. But I would agree this love, like many, many other forms of love, destroys those who have it instead of invigorating them; it breaks them instead of pleases them. What little joy people have in these situations seem short and intense as if an addict just got a hit. In my experience that's certainly what kept me coming back for more.

As to one partner not having a full life without the other...I don't know. After you've made a life with someone for ten, twenty, thirty years I might buy it. Maybe. I know my grandma missed my grandpa for some forty odd years until the day she died. But I also know she didn't lose half of herself when he died, and that doesn't mean her love was less. I would take serious issues with anyone that said otherwise. For Romeo and Juliet the problems are twofold. 1) They are simply so young--13 and 14. Never in your life are you going to feel like you could die from love like you can at 13 and 14. Later in your life it's more likely you'll die from love, see above, but when you're first "true love" breaks up with you it's a pain never felt before. But you grow up. And, more importantly, after you grow up you realize that some day, it won't hurt so much. You're perception of time, yourself, and the world changes to a point that you know while the pain might not disappear, you're existence and you're happiness are not one and the same with the person you loved and miss. Teenagers deal in absolutes--adults (should) know better. 2) While loss of a partner is something I am deathly afraid of, hell, I'd pay good money to be able to avoid any more serious heartbreak, I think in Romeo and Juliet's case (as in many real life examples) there is serious and viable evidence that either would have eventually overcome the death of the other. It's romantic to imagine yourself unable to go on without someone. Especially when confounded with the guilt that lurks which says, if you aren't broken forever maybe you never really loved them to begin with. But the human psyche is made to endure. It takes all manner of steps to protect itself and people do heal. And healing doesn't deny the reality of the wound or the memory of the pain. But to wallow in the pain and intentionally keep the wound open (or open wounds up in the case of sacrificing your very being for someone else) is more than melodramatic, it's Byronic and unnecessary.

I can't speak for someone else's life or love. I don't know all the ins and outs for why people do what they do. But I do know that other people can't make you happy. Emotion can be shared, but it always originates from within. That's why identity and self are important; people who give up their identity in order to make others happy in some attempt to find happiness themselves are always just a little off. Their never quite content or calm or fully in love.

And I know, at least in the case of Shakespeare's famous romance, that there's something rotten in the state of Verona. Romeo and Juliet have attractive love, but I'll never be convinced it's solid or long lasting love. They, like so many other couples across time, are addicted to each other; they define each other, ceasing to hold any identity individually. And that's why when one dies the other has to follow.

Others may choose it, but it's so completely and totally not for me.