Changing definitions

I don't want to blame my high school formation for giving me these lofty definitions, but I do remember once defining a friend as someone for whom I would lay my life for.

Oh God, seriously?

If that were the case, then I pretty much only have a handful of friends- you know, one or two or five. If that were the case, facebook, multiply, etc. etc. would all be full of faux pas "friends" for whom I merely want to share an online connection with, but am nowhere near willing to offer the very essence of my mortality for.

Yup. I won't die for so many of those people. It's not a selfish, nor is it conceited and weak to say that. When it all comes down to it, I value my life a lot, and something, whatever that something or someone may be, has to be pretty meaningful for me to give it up. I'm not afraid to say it, then. I'm changing my definition of a friend.

So many of us let our definition of a friend revolve around our perspective, or our actions. You know what I mean: who would we give our life for? With whom have we spent our energies? With whom have we gone out of the way to help? Rarely do we ever want to define a friend through the other side. A friend is someone who would give their life for me; a friend is someone who has spent so much energy for my sake. A friend is someone who has gone out of their way to be of help to me (maybe when I was lost or alone or just so far away).

Even more further than that, however (and yes, I did just use a double comparative), I have changed my definition of a friend to those who have un/willingly taken a part of me captive, and wouldn't give it back to me.

A friend is someone who's stolen my limbs, my eyes, my heart (if I had one), my hopes and my dreams. A friend is someone who's so effectively held my soul captive to the point that they have the power to break me, but don't.


For all purposes serving the metaphor, at least.