I'm not good at “us-ing.” I'm a very strong "me.” A compelling and enthusiastic "you and me." But my "us" skills leave a lot to be desired. I like the idea of "us." Crave the care and closeness of "us." But I enjoy the journey there far more than the destination-- That moment when I actually have to check-in to the "us" hotel.
What if I don't like the room? What if the bed is too soft and the sheets too itchy? I might be able to sleep on them for a night or two, maybe even six months but am I really going to sleep in that bed for years and years? That "us" bed? And what about the view? How long can I look out on that same pool and parking lot? And far more importantly, what am I going to do when things go wonky and the "me" in "us" disappoints the “you” in “us,” or vice-versa? Am I going to stick around or am I going to run to "them?" Because there are always four parties involved: “Me,” “you,” “us,” and “them.” And, of course, "you" are threatened by "them" because “you” think their existence will destroy "us." And "you" are right. “They” can’t help "us" but I think “they” can help "me" or a part of “me.”
It’s not easy this “us-ing.” I'm sure many of you reading this are in an "us," and happy about it in many ways, and not happy about it in others. But hopefully, you are committed to the idea of "us." I do wonder how many of you still have a strong "me" within that "us." That seems like the ultimate goal. For me to be fully "me" and you to be fully "you" within "us." I would call that postgraduate level "us-ing.” Maybe beyond postgraduate, maybe that’s enlightenment.
An interesting thing about "us-ing" is that it can be whatever "we" decide. "We" just have to agree on what "us" is. "I" am curious about such an agreement but also suspicious. ("I" is just "me" after it’s read a little Jung.) “I” love the idea of "us" but with an out. A backdoor. An escape-hatch. I'm not sure I’ll need to use it I just want to know it's there in case of fire. Fires are scary and I'm not like that Vietnam war era Buddhist monk who sat there calmly as he was consumed by the blaze. No, I'm going to run for my life. I'm going to run because I have had some bad past "us" experiences. In fact, my very first attempt at “us” went completely sideways. There was "her” (mom). She was the "you" in my first "us." But she was so voraciously "her" she didn't even see "me." So, my first "you" wanted to play both parts in "us.” That’s where I learned that “us-ing” can be dangerous business. But why does that "us" from then still have to rule this "me" from now? It doesn't. If I can just remember "you" are not “her,” and “I” and not “him” and “this” is not “then.” But none of that is easy when things get messy, and the "we" of "us" devolves into the "ME" of "me" and the "YOU" of "you." That's when the “us-ing” is toughest and "we” need to pause, allowing time for me to go into "me" and you to go into "you" so we can find our way back to "us."
I've been talking a lot about "us," but I think we need to ask ourselves, what is "us" and how is it different from "me & you?" Is "us" bigger than “me & you” in that one plus one makes three way? (But not a three-way, unless that's what "we" want.) Is "us" a place? An energy? A political organization? It is a fiduciary? I think it has to be to function properly. Fiduciaries are persons or organizations that put their client's interests ahead of their own. That means I put "you" ahead of "me" in the name of “us,” which is a beautiful thing as long as both "me" and "you" are doing it. But the second I put "ME" first, "us" is in trouble. “Us” likes “me,” but it does not like "ME." It cannot hold the weight of “ME,” and if I am being “ME” and you are being “YOU,” “we” got problems. In fact, when “you” start being “YOU,” I lose all interest in “us.”
But let me take it back to “me” and my difficulties "us-ing." I think the real question is, if "me" and "you" decide to be an "us," can I bear the momentary discomfort of "us-lessness." Can I sit with the hurt of an angry or disapproving “you” without using the escape hatch and soothing myself with "them.” Can I get to the point where "I" am "them." Where the only "they" I need to feel safe is "me?" Can I cool the flames of that first painful "us-ing" and see the land of "us" without the heavy ache of the past? I'm such a beautiful "me" when I keep "ME" out of it. When I keep "ME" out of it I even have room for "YOU." When I'm the best version of "me," "you" can be "YOU" and I can hold it for you. But it's hard, because we all have an origin story, and an original wound. A place where "us" was broken and longs to be repaired. And that’s where I find myself right now. Out on the splintered limb of “us.” Reaching for you.
So. Damn. Romantic.
Love the poignancy and vulnerability expressed in this, and how, at the end, the “you” you are talking to is no longer cloaked in quotation marks. Brilliant.