I've been thinking about yin and yang, the complementary actors in relationships. I suppose we live in a culture that values yang above yin, the assertive above the receptive, but I am coming to understand the value, indeed the necessity of both yin and yang to form something complete.
So what are yin and yang? They are, by definition relational -- we don't talk about yin and yang as balancing parts of an individual, but rather as the dynamics of different entities relating to each other.
Yin is to yang as flesh and blood is to bones.
Yin is to yang as poetry is to haiku.
The latter I learned from Wendell Berry in an essay defending the value of forms and structures. Essentially, he said that there is something to be said for the forms of poetry such as sonnets or haikus that give shape and boundaries to the art of the poem.
I would suggest that we could say the same about relationships between people: often, one partner supplies the forms, the structures, the parameters of shared living while the other partner supplies a more intangible element that I will call art. Art without structure is as vital as flesh and blood without a skeleton to give it shape; structure without art is as useful as a skeleton without flesh and blood.
Yin is to yang as water is to rock -- river.
These are thoughts off the top of my head, coming out without being completely formed (ironic, eh?). Let me know what you think.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Here's a thought on relational dualities:
I am both Man and a particular man.
God made "both" aspects, but the particular person that I am is very much rooted in the degree to which I express God's design for perfect Manhood. To be whole I must fulfill both my particualr person (as God intended ME to be), and my general manhood (as God intended it to be).
Post a Comment