Its the journey--not the destination

Growing up, I was often confounded with the idea whether or not the grass was greener on the other side.

As youth, we do not have enough skills to understand things beyond face value. We grow mostly with inner reflection and a selfish right to not look beyond what we feel. And it presents a facade--something that we are not willing to dissect until many, many years later.

I would not trade my formulative years for anything; it was a journey I had to take to reach a semi-destination today. Ultimately, what is the true destination? Is it a goal we make in life? Does it continue beyond that goal onto another? Or does it end with death? Or go beyond this inevitable state, to a place that the mind cannot even imagine?

The cliched remark, "Hindsight is 20/20" does allude to the fact that in everyone's case a journey must be embarked on to learn the truths today.

And as with the Romantic Elliptical, I will take you along another journey....back to my childhood.

Does romance=heart?

For those of you who were following all seventy chapters of my last saga, "The Romantic Elliptical" the discovery that I was not a romantic shook a few of my readers and I wanted to share some interesting feedback.

The one comment that stood out was based on my experience. The question posed was: "Had you not had an arranged marriage and did the dating scene, you would learn to be romantic when thrown into rituals of courtship." I had to think about this one.

My experience in dating was close to nil. However, does it entail a physical element? With my first fiancee, we communicated without physical dating through letter-writing where we were sharing our innermost thoughts, ambitions, opinions and emotions. I felt this to be a deep relationship although it lacked the physical relationship. Juxtapose this will any physical relationship I "may or may not" have had--minus the emotions. Is romance at play in either situation?

Ironically, in either situation, there was no romance on my part. Even if the other party felt that he was romancing me.

Squeeze me?

Yes, I know the above sounds convuluded. So let me break it down:

Emotional relationships on a mental and spiritual level does not need romance to substantiate it.

A purely physical relationship that is not contingent on a emotional attachment does not need romance to warrant it either.

Therefore, I can emphatically say, even if my marriage was not arranged, I do not think I would be the romantic others think I should be!

The other comment was about my romantic influences. I read 18th century novels, Victorian novels and many other works from the Romantic period. I watch chick flicks that are romantic, I include romantic quotes in my blog posts...OK... I get the point! However, just because I have romantic tendencies, does not mean I am a true romantic.

Is not being a romantic allude to the fact that I am missing a sensitivity chip? Can one just be practical and have a normal relationship? Or am I abnormal due to the lack of romance right from the beginning?

Does romance=heart?

We are our own worst critics but I do think I am:

empathetic
kind
giving
warm
sympathetic
helpful

The above comes from the 'heart' but romance is missing from the list. Is my heart any less significant?

Does no romance=mind?