I DON'T LIKE THE BUSINESS OF LIKE

 

"He is like my brother" is a statement very often I was referred to which I detested. This statement is often made under the presumption that brothers are like Ram and Bharat of Ramayana. The intention could be to express deep intimacy and confidence but it does not reflect whether both parties feel equally cherished by the warmth. Moreover in the present day materialistic worldly relationship such statements look more clothe than real and that makes me detest the statement all the more. It is not that I have my dislike only for the comparison with sibling but with any such relationship. 

Basically I believe relations are imposed and one has no choice over it. One may fall in love with a girl and marry her to capture a relationship but what about the brother and sister in laws or the cousins of the spouse. One has no choice but to accept them as relatives and also invite them for social and cultural occasions of the family as warranted by customs and culture despite personal preferences otherwise.

Coming back to the like business, I was also amused by people getting mum and dad in the 'like' method and also sons and daughters. People have proudly performed marriages for the 'like' children as well by actively participating in the procedural and ceremonial aspects leaving the financial side to be handled by the individual.  It is not my intension to ridicule genuine relationships. People tend to add status by roping in elders under the 'like' category to enhance standing in society and the elders too respond to display wider acceptability and add to their stature. 

In the business of 'like' the most congruous is calling the daughter in law 'daughter' and the dangerous aspect is the one between the brother and sister. While there are genuine cases of relationship, unblemished acceptability is not forthcoming in many cases. There are festivals and rituals that respectfully depict such brother - sister relationships from the historic/cultural and traditional perspective but even a stray case of such relationships turning otherwise tarnish the entire system.

But I wanted to raise a basic question as to why people are keen to designate a relationship? There are innumerable relationships that exist without such designation but full of warmth. A liftman in a multiplex, a watchman in the scooter stand or in a railway parking bay, a canteen boy all have immense personal relationship with different strata of personnel in an office and do take leave with tears when they have to change place of work. Though essentially official in relationship, many of them also owe their growth to personal help from kind hearted clients. This apart there are neighbors, servants and friends who express deep and time tested intimacy unmindful of returns and also been part and parcel of good and bad of people without attempting to designate their relationship.

The failure of 'like' relationships lies in their brittle nature. When emotions soar the tendency to call someone brother/sister/father/son also soars, and when relations sour the emotions force plummeting of interaction level. In original blood relationships notwithstanding sourness the thicker blood ensures continuity of emotions more so when one is in distress. But in the 'like' cases people even walk out of relationships forgetting the exalted position they themselves offered to the association from whom they choose to break away.  Hence relationships need not be designated as they do not get sanctified and also there is lot of sanctity in many associations where people are not keen to project genuineness of their concerns but are truly and faithfully concerned with each other. 

In the end none so far has claimed or projected a 'like' relationship for spouse. To that extent the 'like' relationships though not welcome is tolerable.

                                   *******************************