SOURCE - https://brightwanderer.tumblr.com/post/681806049845608448

Alt-text:
I think a lot about how we as a culture have turned “forever” into the only acceptable definition of success.

Like… if you open a coffee shop and run it for a while and it makes you happy but then stuff gets too expensive and stressful and you want to do something else so you close it, it’s a “failed” business. If you write a book or two, then decide that you don’t actually want to keep doing that, you’re a “failed” writer. If you marry someone, and that marriage is good for a while, and then stops working and you get divorced, it’s a “failed” marriage.

The only acceptable “win condition” is “you keep doing that thing forever”. A friendship that lasts for a few years but then its time is done and you move on is considered less valuable or not a “real” friendship. A hobby that you do for a while and then are done with is a “phase” - or, alternatively, a “pity” that you don’t do that thing any more. A fandom is “dying” because people have had a lot of fun with it but are now moving on to other things.

| just think that something can be good, and also end, and that thing was still good. And it’s okay to be sad that it ended, too. But the idea that anything that ends is automatically less than this hypothetical eternal state of success… I don’t think that’s doing us any good at all.

  • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    17 days ago

    Agree with most of these I guess, but marriage specifically is the one thing that’s intended to be forever. Til death do us part and all that jazz.

    • RadicalEagle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      17 days ago

      There’s nothing wrong with forever, but it shouldn’t be some sort of “standard” we hold everything to.

    • minnow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      17 days ago

      The “death do us part” thing is a tradition, but marriage is a legal status. Not everyone is going to follow that tradition, and surely you wouldn’t argue this ought to bar them from the legal status

    • TheBluePillock@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      17 days ago

      I think it definitely applies to relationships. It does you and any of your partners a disservice to say your relationship was only a success if one of you died.

      A person isn’t a thing you possess. They have needs that grow and change with them. If those needs ever stop being compatible with the relationship, then the relationship should end. That’s not failure. It’s wanting the person you love to be happy.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        17 days ago

        Then I guess you, like me, dislike the concept of marriage. Because the whole point is forever. The forever part is not even what I hold against it though. Some people can and want to be together forever. Feeling forced to be by culture is a bad thing though.

        • TheBluePillock@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 days ago

          I see it mostly as a legal contract and legal status, but with a lot of extra baggage heaped on top. It’s an overloaded concept that tries to cover too many things at once, making them all suffer. Separate out the legal business and you’d lose the need for an explicit declaration that this union is to exist in perpetuity until cancelled by either party. Sure sounds full of romance when stated that way, doesn’t it?

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 days ago

            And regardless of how you look at it, the idea is that it’s for life, from the ground up. I could go into how it’s rooted in other horrible things but yeah, the romance is retrofitted to get people to accept it. And it’s worked.

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          Then I guess you, like me, dislike the concept of marriage. Because the whole point is forever.

          As you get older, you may realize “forever” isn’t actually forever. Its just for the few decades you have left on this planet in this existence. If you find someone that you like being around, they like being around you, and you’re both willing to put up with each other’s faults and shortcomings, then marriage can be a really good path forward.

          When we age, our looks go, our health, and many times our minds too. Having someone that cares about you and has your back through all of that, is a wonderful thing as you will have their back too. You still see them as beautiful as you did when they were younger, and they see you the same way. You look past each other’s graying (or missing) hair, to lack of physique, the lines in your faces, the extra weight you carry in strange places, and eventually the loss of mobility you’ll have and they still want to be around you. You still want to be around them.

          Old age frequently brings loneliness too. When you’re not forced to work a job with people anymore, it takes effort to maintain social relationships with other people. When you have your mate, you always have that company irrespective of other social connections (or lack of).

          Finally if your partner dies before you, I think it will give you something to look forward to in your own eventual death. You know you’ll be at the same place as your mate, wherever or whatever that is. If there is something after, they’ll be there waiting for you. If there is nothing, you get to be nothing together. Life is really tough if you’re going it alone. A mate can shave off those sharp corners and make even the most unpleasant times bearable.

          If you find someone like this, I encourage you to grab on and hold them tight. If you don’t, life will move them along and you’ll be left with just yourself against a cold and uncaring world.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            17 days ago

            That’s all well and good, but you absolutely don’t need marriage to stay together forever.

            The point was that the concept shames you into it. Another option is just to stay together because you want to. Seems more meaningful to me that way anyhow.

            • TheBluePillock@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              16 days ago

              That’s what I strive for in any relationship: staying together purely because we choose to. I don’t want someone to stay with me for any other reason, and I want my partner to know that I choose them. Not out of obligation or necessity, but because I truly want them close to me. It’s simple but meaningful.

    • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      17 days ago

      My wife just moved out after 30 years of marriage, and it sure feels like a failure to me. Maybe some people get to the point where it’s not working, and they aren’t invested in the marriage so much that walking away is painful. I think most people would say they shouldn’t have been married if they weren’t that invested in making it work though.

      A lot of people have suggested that we should have marriage contracts that have a renewable time limit. Like, “Hey, let’s get married for ten years and see how that goes.” I could see that being a good thing, but I also think it’s fundamentally a different mindset than the traditional expectation of forever.

      • adr1an@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        17 days ago

        Thanks for sharing your story. Similarly, I’ve been with my partner for 10 years. We planned on having kids, never materialized because of reasons. Now… We are distancing. It certainly feel like failure. I just moved to a new apartment last week.

        So far, I haven’t ‘duel’ the loss, except for some occasional irruption of either sadness (~95%) or rage (~5%). We keep talking daily, trying to part ways softly, we are both migrants in a new country, medium sized city, which adds some peculiarities.

        I think we try to avoid the sentiment of failure by keeping an open mind, and a friendship. I even fantasize this is only temporary. But honestly, we have been on this for a while. Like after the pandemic.

        Anyway, some comments in this thread really help me. I do want her to be happy. We both deserve the best, and frankly we may not be the best fit today. But we were powerful. We went through a lot, and we did good.

        PS. Feel free to write privately of you wanted to share more.

        • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 days ago

          Sorry you’re going through that. I’m going to make the assumption that, with it being a ten year relationship, you’re not super young, but much younger than me (I’m 62). I hope you and your partner are both able to move on in a way you can be at peace with it, and once you’ve grieved the relationship are able to find someone who works better.

          Goes both ways, I’m happy to chat if you’d like.

      • Broadfern@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        The game Outer Worlds touches upon this concept a bit, although it’s set in a space-capitalist dystopia.

        Like a more administrative declaration of vow renewal, in a sense. Can feel a bit cold and could cause a lot of bureaucratic headache however.

        I’m sorry for your loss/pain though, on a more serious note.

    • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 days ago

      I tend to agree with you there. There are a lot of things intended to be temporary, and a lot of things intended to be permanent.

  • moakley@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    17 days ago

    Reminds me of last week when everyone was talking about how Bluesky is worthless because it’s just going to go the way of Twitter. And I’m like, Twitter was a good thing for like 15 years.

    If Bluesky follows that same pattern, great.

    • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      Twitter was never a good thing, AND I was never a Twitter user so i can actually say that.

      like it actually did permanent damage to our culture

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      And I’m like, Twitter was a good thing for like 15 years.

      See, I was going to say that Twitter was a bad thing for 15 years.

  • Whelks_chance@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    17 days ago

    Isn’t this more about things falling apart when the person wanted to continue doing it? If I want to run a shop but it doesn’t work financially, then my plan has failed.

    • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      17 days ago

      Yeah, I think you’re right here: it’s all about intent. If someone starts a business, it does well, but then they end it because they want to do something else, is not a failure. If they wanted the business to keep going, but people weren’t buying enough of their product to keep the doors open, that’s a failure.

      You could do the same with any of the examples. It’s not a failure if the people are happy to stop or it lasted as long as could reasonably be expected, but if it ends before the people wanted it to, that’s a failure. The rocket that lifts its payload to orbit, then shuts off and falls back to earth is a success. But no one says “Well, the rocket ran great halfway to the planned orbit, so even though it and the payload fell back to earth, it was successful.”

    • blarghly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      17 days ago

      Yeah, the OOP is a serious cope. They are basically saying “nothing is ever a failure in the world of unicorn sprinkles, weeeeee!” They are invalidating people’s negative emotions about failure by trying to reframe it - but this is the behavior of narcissists who never want to admit they have failed at anything.

      It’s okay to fail. It sucks. It hurts. It happens. That’s life. Accept it, learn from it, and move on.

    • I Cast Fist@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 days ago

      If they end up starting again the same business, then I guess it could be seen that way. But if they just decide to move on without feeling like it was wasted time and try new things, “how long it lasted” shouldn’t be the only metric of whether it was a success

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 days ago

      Yes, that. And also the point of marriage is to be forever. Like that’s the idea of it to begin with.

  • exasperation@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    17 days ago

    we as a culture have turned “forever” into the only acceptable definition of success.

    I really don’t agree with the premise, and would encourage others to reject that worldview if it starts creeping into how they think about things.

    In the sports world, everything is always changing, and careers are very short. But what people do will be recorded forever, so those snapshots in time are part of one’s legacy after they’re done with their careers. We can look back fondly at certain athletes or coaches or specific games or plays, even if (or especially if) that was just a particular moment in time that the sport has since moved on from. Longevity is regarded as valuable, and maybe relevant to greatness in the sport, but it is by no means necessary or even expected. Michael Jordan isn’t a failed basketball player just because he wasn’t able to stay in the league, or even that his last few years in the league weren’t as legendary as his prime years. Barry Sanders isn’t a failed American football player just because he retired young, either.

    Same with entertainment. Nobody really treats past stars as “failed” artists.

    If you write a book or two, then decide that you don’t actually want to keep doing that, you’re a “failed” writer.

    That is a foreign concept to me, and I question the extent to which this happens. I don’t know anyone who treats these authors (or actors or directors or musicians) as failures, just because they’ve moved onto something else. Take, for example, young actors who just don’t continue in the career. Jack Gleeson, famous for playing Joffrey in the Game of Thrones series, is an actor who took a hiatus, might not come back to full time acting. And that’s fine, and it doesn’t take away from his amazing performance in that role.

    The circumstances of how things end matter. Sometimes the ending actually does indicate failure. But ending, in itself, doesn’t change the value of that thing’s run when it was going on.

    | just think that something can be good, and also end, and that thing was still good.

    Exactly. I would think that most people agree, and question the extent to which people feel that the culture values permanence. If anything, I’d argue that modern culture values the opposite, that we tend to want new things always changing, with new fresh faces and trends taking over for the old guard.

    • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      you raise an interesting discussion, but isn’t being remembered as a legend just another form of permanence? every example you provided is of someone viewed as a “success” in their field, someone remembered.

      I would discourage you from discouraging others from examining the way our culture relates to mortality, because that’s what all of this is about: death anxiety.

      • exasperation@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 days ago

        I’m basically saying two things.

        1. Permanence isn’t required or expected, although in some instances permanence is valued, in defining success.
        2. Permanence itself does not require continuing effort. One can leave a permanent mark on something without active maintenance.

        Taken together, success doesn’t require permanence, and permanence doesn’t require continued effort. The screenshot text is wrong to presume that our culture only values permanence, and is wrong in its implicit argument that permanence requires continued effort.

  • JohnnyFlapHoleSeed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    17 days ago

    Yup. And god forbid you start a small business that’s successful and decide to pay your employees a good wage and set aside a fair amount of profit for yourself. That’s loser talk. You need to go public or sell the business for a giant payout at the expense of your employees, and then you have to keep making more money every year for shareholders, or else they’ll consider you a failure and jump ship

  • jcs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    16 days ago

    Don’t be afraid to enter the water knowing that you are not going to swim forever.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      I think the fear isn’t simply exiting the pool, its drowning.

      The “coffee shop” analogy breaks down when you look at the before - assuming debt, developing skills, building business relationships - and after - owing more than you earn, filling for bankruptcy, hemorrhaging staff, going back to being a wage earner rather than an owner-operator.

      Same with marriage. You get older and slower and tireder, you have this shared history that doesn’t exist between anyone else, you have shared assets that can’t easily be divided up, you have a shared family.

      These aren’t just whims, they’re economic events and deeply psychological ones, too. Bad ones. They are describing a material decline in your quality of life.

      Yeah, the fixation on nostalgia and fandoms is bad for us as a society. No, you shouldn’t feel leashed to your hobbies… or your job or your relationships. But there’s also feelings of stability and reliability and security that comes with an enduring institution in your life. Knowing you can substitute experience for raw energy and you don’t have to relearn a trade or another person or rules to a new game from scratch has value. It pays dividends.

      You don’t want to get into the water and find out you need to relearn how to swim. Especially when you’ve so far from shore.

  • SecretSauces@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    17 days ago

    I think in some cases it’s driven by capitalism. Your business didn’t make you money forever? Failed. Your books stopped selling and you didn’t make millions from what you published? Failed. Your show was good for a couple of seasons, but outlived it’s hype? Failed

    There are other scenarios line you mentioned, marriage or hobbies, that AREN’T about money. But the ones that involve profit follow that.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    17 days ago

    I totally disagree with your characterization. I can come up with dozens of examples of how people don’t think that the goal is “forever”. That’s not to say that you’re lying, if you feel it then no doubt your feelings are genuine, but I don’t think your feelings are a good reflection of contemporary society at large.

  • Toldry@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    17 days ago

    Dan Savage (of the sex and relationship advice podcast “Savage Lovecast”) says this frequently.

    A short term relationship can also be successful. It doesn’t have to end with one of the partners dying in order to be considered good and worthwhile.

  • Ironfist79@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    16 days ago

    Very good perspective and this is actually similar to some of the ideas of Buddhism. Everything in this life is temporary, enjoy it while it lasts.

  • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    16 days ago

    This translates to tv shows too to prove the point.

    Tv shows that only have a few seasons that are high quality start to finish are so much better than tv shows that go on and on and on and on.

    For example, the simpsons, whilst an excellent show, should have ended many seasons ago. It’s 30 odd seasons in, and it’s stale. It’s a little funnier recently, but i dont think it will ever be as big as it was.

    I would consider it a failed show now but a successful show back when it was popular.

    So it’s pretty much proof of the point that forever is not the definition of success.

    • derpgon@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      16 days ago

      Open ended and no another season planned? Fuck em.

      Great TV show that ended well? Sign me up.

      This post wasn’t sponsored by Good Place (seriously, go watch it, and watch The Selection right after).

      • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 days ago

        Whats The Selection about? The Good Place was amazing and it was a shame they cancelled it. Could have done with just 1 more season.

          • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 days ago

            Wow! I must have dreamt that. I felt sure it was cut short so it all got wrapped up quick in season 4. But googling it now is giving mixed messages, some showing michael schur intended to or decided to make the 4th season the last and others saying people were mad it was cancelled.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    17 days ago

    Such a good way to put it. And I have focused on something similar for myself. Literally everything is temporary.

    I tend to be a planner, a saver, the person who never uses consumable items in games, and the person who will avoid using an item they like so that it will last longer.

    It’s helped me allow myself to enjoy today more, and spend more of my time doing things I want to be doing.

  • t_chalco@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    17 days ago

    Some things do celebrate the ephemeral, so perhaps there’s a cultural need to wrangle these into joy. We beat illness, graduate from school, solve problems, and complete tasks. Adopting such language might help? They’ve finshed their dream of owning a bakery, lived their goal of being a writer, proudly escaped the clutches of their successful career etc…