主题：往事，随想 -- letitbe

想起1、2个月前跟小z电话聊天，本来是虚心讨教追mm技巧，结果被当头泼一盆冷水——说我这人太理想化太认死理，然后举出我以前的种种丑事来把我羞辱了第一百遍啊一百遍（md一定是小w告的密！）。回想起来，我自己都感觉不可思议：当时我给喜欢的mm写骚扰信，内容经常是自我反省啊，哲学思考啊，立志啊什么的-_-这个没办法，曾经有早恋的机会摆在我面前我没有珍惜，导致在感情方面比较弱智，所谓人土不能怪政府。最nb的是我在明确表示好感的时候，写了封巨长的信，结合诸多事例，对她的性格和举止进行了全方面的解剖和批评@@

我怎么就土的这么有创意呢？？非要发掘出个原因，只能怪自己大学里追错星了，从鲁迅而下走的一直是愤青路线崇尚解剖和自我解剖（我当时怎么就没想到去看《两地书》呢？？！还是学艺不精啊），又被萨特跟波伏娃所谓心灵交通的八卦轶事搞的走火入魔，以至于提出天才的假设：我写出这个东西，既显示了我一直对她的重视（所以才有种种事例可以列举），又显示了我对她的关心（所以才会长篇大论的企图“帮助”她），还能够让她从中受益（比花呀巧克力呀什么的有意义多了～），相信一定能够打动她！并激励她对我也大加鞭策，我们共同进步，成为四有新人，革命情侣～（过了。打住！）至于说她看了信气得直哭，以至于朋友劝解时说让她当我放P，那只能说是时也命也，天亡我也，前不见古人后不见来者，我散发弄扁舟去也～

当我在小z的追问之下说出我的上述逻辑推演之后，电话那头出现了片刻沉默，我想她的嘴巴从正常状态换成O型然后再回复确实需要一点时间吧。于是很体贴的转移了话题。其实何必问我怎么想的呢，你把罪状搬出来，我积极配合检讨，不就完了吗？要说以前我的忏悔还有点“不知我者谓我何求”的清高劲儿，现在是真心忏悔，我对人的了解又能有多少，凭什么就能很确凿的宣布别人这里不对那里不好？更何况，话是要分场合、对象的，我是哪根葱啊，哪里轮到我去声色俱厉的“帮助”人。Judge not, that ye be not judged。我其实不太同意这句话的动机。不过我现在完全可以同意下面这句：这个世界上，愿意被judge，我也愿意花时间去judge，彼此的关系又铁到可以互相judge的，太少了。

出国后受了些教训，经了些世情冷暖，发了狠，对自己说二十五岁之后单纯、理想化之类就是骂人的标签了。光阴荏苒，转眼我小已芳龄二六，啊不，是廿六。算是从半吊子文青、愤青成功转型成了志青吧。当然，到现在为止也还是no money no woman，没什么混出头的迹象，还是很有些紧迫感的。自从明白了对人太好可能造成（对别人的心态，以及自己的心态）的负面影响之后，我对绝大部分人都坚持投桃报李的原则。打笔仗，给网友发信说我特理解你，当面对别人进行大批判，这些事情更是很久没做了。现在也不会再很nave的扼腕叹息，想如果大家都能很open的互相批评积极改进，这个世界将变成怎样的better place。过去三年几乎一直在批评某人，开始我还在愤青阶段，结果搞到大家针尖对麦芒，到后来我决定歇了，人家ms转过弯了，态度居然变好了，于是太久没批评人憋的难受的时候还是会说几句。效果呢？改进是有的，但还是会做出让我气的牙痒痒的事来。大概人生就是这样吧，性格决定命运，内因起主要作用。我不费那么大劲，人家多吃几次亏也会学到能学的东西，也会在差不多的程度止步不前。然而我这人就是比较贱，看到别人的问题，总还是有种不告诉别人，就在某种程度上对他不住的感觉。

Anyway，现在虽然还是会为很多莫名其妙的事情烦恼，好在我自问从不欠人太多（小心眼的正面特征啊呵呵），有更重要的事要focus时，我抛开所有这些，也不用感到歉疚。Again，这个世上，值得hold on to的人和事，原本是不多的。

so I'm thinking about this crazy little thing called love.

1st of all, when ppl as old as me talk about love, we actually mean happily living together with someone, no drama no Z turn. So, little P kids who still have the luxury of going crazy about someone just for the heck of it, turn around and run as far as you can:)

They say the best kind of relationship is complementary. That is, if one person is hot-tempered in nature, it'd be better-off if the other party is mild in nature; if one person is introvert, the other had better be outgoing. This theory makes a lot of sense, and chances are you've already heard about more than enough about the justification-- so everybody's personality can be represented by a unique shape, with sharp edges here and there. If two ppl have their shapes perfectly fit into each other, with one's sharp edges accomodated by the other's blunt ones, then everybody gets to keep his/her character intact. Of coz there is no such thing as perfect fit (aka soul mate), but the general idea is there: if you find someone who have sharp edges overlapping with yours everywhere, then in order to be together, one or both ppl need to constantly make concessions to avoid clashes. Soon enough they will get worn out from their own compromises and yet fail to get much pleasure form each other's compromises--basically, a lose-lose situation.

Besides being able to live together without losing too much self identity, a complementary relationship is also a great way to enrich oneself. I believe in that every human interaction should at least benefit one side, either physically or spiritually. A complementary relationship is like a team with well-balanced members. One may be the driving force, while the other offers level-headed advice. One brings home the bacon, the other clean home and delicious meals. They can easily admire and learn from each other, and therefore not only helping each other dealing with blind spots in life but also broaden each other's horizon.

Now let's try and go beyond the aforementioned common sense. Complementation is no elixir to all relationships. For starters, the "sharp/blunt edge" metaphor gives the implication that they are neutral characteristics. In reality, while many aspects of a personality are neutral or have both pros and cons (for example, being introvert or extrovert is perfectly neutral; impatience usually accompanies high-efficiency while mildness could suggest indecision or weak will), some are just plain bad traits, such as being self-centered, intolerant, manipulative, etc. Those bad traits can be considered as extra share edges one carries, which would certainly diminish the chance of fitting with anyone. Even for those seemingly neutral traits, when taking to extreme they could still cause trouble. We know those ppl all too well. They are depicted everywhere in television-one is a good guy, one is a good girl, they couldn't work out simply coz either one is so righteous that they (I use they here for he/she for simplicity) fights the windmills, or so kind that they sacrifices their life for others, or so spiritual that they can't be satisfied emotionally, blablabla.

In order to get the whole picture, we should also get a bit more quantitative. The distinction of "neutral" or "good/bad" traits is certainly over-simplification. Both being outgoing, one person could be passionate, energic, and helpful, while another could be pompous, self-glorifying, and demanding. For the purpose of this discussion, one could roughly define the "goodness" of a trait based on one criterion: how pleasant it is to the other party. It may seem redundant to the complementation theory, but not exactly. Everyone can be drawn to a passionate guy who radiates life and ideals. Similarly everyone may feel the affinity to a sensitive girl who cares about ppl's feelings and treasures the earthly beauties that so many take for granted. On the other hand, a self-righteous control freak is rarely favored, and a nv wenqing who totally ignores the hardship of life and constantly gets obsessed with the tiniest detail can be a royal pain in anybody's buttock (OK I admit, I harbor certain level of potentially unwarranted prejudice against this population:P). It's not about your style, it's how well you play. Now things get easier (or maybe not...).

Yes, I'm advocating change here. I don't see what all the fuss of "accept who you are" is about. 10 years before I was still an ignorant and spoiled kid, 5 years ago I was still among the herd of pretentious wenqing and self-righteous fenqing (or so I imagined). I like changes and enjoy changes. In fact, if life doesn’t change after one reaches 30s or even 20s, what’s the point of living through the rest in repetition?

Maybe I should replace the word "change" to "learn" or "improve". If all happy families are the same, then I bet they are same in that both sides would make a point to "improve" themselves to accomodate each other. Nobody is born to be the perfect other half of anybody. So when you say "please accept who I am", the implication is simply that you'd rather keep all your edges intact and let the other party fit into your shape. Maybe that’s why they say it’s better to have a relationship where one party loves the other more. An easy way out of the conundrum, I must say. But an expedient one. News flash: love fades.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m a big believer of complementation in many ways. I just don’t think it should be seen as a substitute for mutual-respect, for willingness to support and please each other, for constant learning and improving. Improving your style, even changing it when necessary (who said we have to be single faceted?), should be an enjoyable experience in its own right.

Finally, I just wanna say being smart is really important. Smart people would easily understand each other, learn from past, respect the absolutes, and solve problems creatively. So if your reaction after reading this essay is to demand changes, I’m afraid you have totally missed the point. Nobody is smart in everything. But at least you should be smart enough to have a healthy dose of self-awareness and humility and do the following: 1. always try to put yourself in others’ shoes; 2. always have friends smarter than you by your side. That’s what I do anyway.

On that note, I rest my case.

她太幸运了，羡慕她呵，我比较喜欢能够收到别人对自己的意见，人常常会看不清自己，如果有理性的朋友帮忙说一下，总会有益处的，可能一时里态度不好，但并不代表不细细思索的哈

就会在别的场合冒出来。