Better to have loved and lost, or...?

There's the age-old adage: "Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all". Some people agree with it, some people disagree with it. I personally think it all depends on the context.

First, there are a number of ways this "loss of love" could have occurred. Perhaps one partner died. And even then, perhaps he/she died of old age after many years of being together. Or perhaps the surviving spouse is left a young widow(er). Perhaps one was unceremoniously dumped. Perhaps they just grew up, grew apart, and went amicably on their separate ways.

And whether or not I agree with that statement really depends on those factors, on the circumstances of the separation.

Death? Perhaps I would agree. Especially in old age. At some point it is inevitable, and even if it happened unexpectedly at a younger age, it's one of those things that just happens in life (or end of life, as the case may be) that you can't really predict, and that you have to be prepared for. Just as you have to be prepared for the ups and downs that make up a normal marriage. So, as heartbreaking as a partner's death may be, this adage does paint a picture of the brighter times together and the love shared in life.

A bad breakup? I would probably disagree. It sounds so cliche, and if those words were offered to me as comfort, I doubt I'd find much solace in them. I mean, I just got dumped, I really don't need pithy philosophical sayings to heal the hurt. And maybe, just maybe, a bad breakup is indicative of the fact that I'm just better off without him, in which case the adage is false-- it's better to be rid of him, and not having known him at all might have spared me this heartache.

Then there are relationships that dissolve amicably. I'm a pretty firm believer that only in rare cases can a pair of exes remain friends. Unless the breakup was 100% mutual and due largely to *both* partners growing up/apart mutually, one party is always going to have more emotional baggage than the other, and that isn't conduce to a healthy friendship. Maybe one secretly wants more (usually the dumped one) than friendship. Or maybe there's underlying feelings of hostility over the breakup that always linger. In any event, since this separation is less emotionally-charged, the adage becomes something of a practical viewpoint: what have I gained in that relationship? What have I learned, and how have I grown? And if the answer is "nothing", then it evidently made no difference at all if I even knew the other person or not. And if it's something positive, then yes, maybe it was better to have loved and "lost", though I don't really think you could call it a "lost" love, could you?

So yeah. That old saying is one of those that I generally don't agree with, except in certain circumstances. But maybe that's because I'm not an overly emotional person myself, and so I don't really get the whole emotional scene that accompanies relationships and their inevitable roller coasters, or the fallout when they end.

Of course, given how often I try to sell my husband, who knows what tune I'd be singing once I found a serious buyer and the transaction was finalized ;-)