For al be that I knowe nat love in dede,
Ne wot how that he quyteth folk hir hyre,
Yet happeth me ful ofte in bokes rede
Of his miracles, and his cruel yre [...]
For out of olde feldes, as men seith,
Cometh al this newe corn fro yeer to yere;
And out of olde bokes, in good feith,
Cometh al this newe science that men lere.
—Chaucer, “Parlement of Fowles,” ll. 8-11, 22-25
One of my dear friends is going through a particularly nasty bout of unrequited love. The man has genuine feelings for her, it’s clear even in an outsider’s view, but he has legitimate reasons for not starting a real relationship.
On most aspects of love I am no expert. But on unfulfilled longing for crazy people, I perch on a rocky eminence of insight, atop a gnarly mountain of grim situations grimly past. The men in whom I was seriously interested were (and presumably remain) so odd that I have been spared the sight of them with someone(s) else. “Aha! She chose inaccessible men because she wasn’t prepared for a relationship,” They say. No; I chose weird people because I like weird people.
Hairy is a nice bonus. More than a decade later, I still remember how, even from across the room as his elbows rested genteelly on the shabbos table, the black hair on his arms made me hurt inside. If we had gone to bed together, I might just have expired, in the permanent, not (merely) Elizabethan, sense. “Willing, I warmed to his physical charms/ To his bedhead coiffure and his scholar’s arms,” was the best I could do. Happily, scholar’s arms are what I got eventually. I’m still alive, too.
Before K.O., I loved two men, two friends, deeply and incompletely. Two others, not quite friends, I longed for and would have loved, given the chance. (I couldn’t get too near his arms; had he worn long sleeves…) The second not-quite-friend, the last before K.O., had good reasons for not starting something with me. I suggested that it was perhaps because he didn’t want me. “If you think you’re not attractive physically,” he told me, “it’s just not true, like it’s not true that Kant is an Aristotelian.” Hearing this at twenty-seven was worth a lot of pain. It carried weight, coming from a towering conflagration of hotness such as himself. A broken late-Platonist heart in every port, I’m sure he’s got.
But when I ask what longing taught me, I am not asking about individual lessons learned in one encounter or another. Those are obvious, years after. I mean instead, what did I gain from the experience of love unreturned? Is there anything about that emotional state that prepared me for another, happier, way of thinking, of loving?
Two tentative (and not particularly original) answers. 1. Part of longing, for me, is immovable, irrevocable, more like a rock in the mind than a dispositional state. Maybe, like the bowling ball on the trampoline in all the kids’ relativity books, it creates a disposition like the bowling ball curves the skin of the trampoline. But for me the object of attention is the bowling ball (or boulder!), not the curve. It does things to you, but you don’t do things to it. It is just there and there’s nothing to be done about it. This is a good feature of requited love, even though it’s often just as frustrating to have this new boulder there as it was before, when one loved without hope.
2. Love really is “like a cloud that holds a lot of rain,” as the Everly Brothers inform us. But in the unrequited kind, the rain is the whole focus; the cloud is a trick, just a carrier for the rain. In actual love as I know it, the miracle is that the cloud actually succeeds in holding the rain, when necessary. All that water doesn’t come out of the cloud; it holds together. It holds all sorts of things, even happiness. “We’ll build in sonnets pretty roomes/ As well the well-wrought urn becomes/ The greatest ashes.” Ki azah ka-mavet ahavah.