Friendship is Hard

"Friendship with oneself is all-important, because without it

one cannot be friends with anyone else in the world."

-Eleanor Roosevelt

I'm not going to lie, I had major problems with this "experiment." It was incredibly difficult for me to be an Emersonian friend.

The difficulty came for me in the conceptualization of the experiment. The whole point of Emerson's essay, I believe, is that before a person should even conceive of being a friend, they must work on being an individual. If one is unsure of what they believe and what they hold dear, how can they expect to understand another person?

I'm not at a point in my life where I'm completely sure of everything I do and say and believe. It's as simple as that. If someone was to ask me to define myself, I wouldn't have a clue. In my own terms of friendship, a definition of myself isn't necessary, but on Emerson's, a lack of such a defini

tion makes things decidedly more difficult.

So, forgoing the most important (in my opinion) aspect of Emersonian friendship, I focused in on the more concrete ideas. Particularly the idea that it is better to be "a nettle in the side of your friend than his echo."

I've always cherished this idea. People that merely back down whenever faced with an opposing opinion have a

lways been more bothersome than friends should be in my opinion. What is the point of a conversation if within it you are not confronted with and challenged by views that differ from your own? Without them it is hard to grow as a person.

It was a small gesture, but I attempted to put this idea into action during a conversation. My friend (whether or not our relationship is exactly Emersonian in nature, I still consider it a friendship) and I were discussing the movie Twilight, and she was going on about how much she hated it. Normally, I may have agreed with her or just nodded my head and said nothing. But remembering Emerson, I interjected my own differing opinion into the conversation. The result was an interesting (if frivolous) conversation about the series. 

When confronted with the idea of saying exactly what I was thinking though, I couldn't bring myself to take up the challenge. Honesty can be easy or it can be hard, depending on what honesty is at that moment.

A friend (not in our class) asked me to read a piece of her writing and tell her what I thought and how she should change it. I read it over and, well, I thought it was awful. I looked up at her face, so proud of the finished product, and I just couldn't bring myself to tell her what I honestly thought. I failed Emerson when I looked her in the eye and said "It's a great start!"

Yes, it was probably more detrimental than helpful to give her a false sense of accomplishment, but I don't regret not having been honest. Who's to say that what I think is good writing is the end all and be all? What if in someone else's opinion what she wrote is a masterpiece? I don't think it's my place to define her work as either "good" or "bad," so I didn't.

In my opinion, Emerson's Self Reliance and Friendship essays are companions. In order for one to understand how to be and rely on a friend, they must first understand how to rely on themselves. Imagine if everyone knew themselves before attempting to know others. I believe that then, friendship would be much easier to attain.

Overall, I have to say that I think I'll have to work on being an Emersonian friend by first working on myself as an individual.