I came across an article in Today’s Pentecostal Evangel about isolation in the United States. I first experienced this isolation theme in American Lit, which seemed a logical step when social evolution moved toward urbanization during the industrial revolution. Family became less central. If someone would leave for “the city,” they left family in order to do so, and means of communication remained skim.
This article presented the idea that despite our growth in networking media such as Myspace and Facebook, face-to-face relationships ironically suffer. Of the 29% of Americans who experience loneliness according to HarrisInteractive, Homosexuals are the most lonely group (46%) ; the lowest amount of loneliness is experienced by those earning less than $25K (34%). Longer work hours, long commutes to work, divorce rate, etc. contribute to this epidemic. I would add that “post-modernism,” while deconstructing post-colonial unifying myths and bolstering disenfranchised groups, belonging actually becomes harder as group parameters become less fixed. Belonging ends up meaning nothing as it costs nothing. No grand narrative drives anyone so that nihilism and existentialism rules the day.
As I write this, I do not even expect readership. However, my spiritual journey requires me to initiate and maintain relationships. Loneliness will still exist at times, but I would rather experience that in my unventured interaction with comrades than by myself.
Well put, my friend. Loneliness is most painful, as the Three Dog Night song expressed, “One, is the saddest experience you’ll ever know.” Being a believer does not give one immunity, which seems ironic. Jesus himself in his darkest hour wanted so much the companionship of his disciples who couldn’t seem to stay awake. You discussed a “top down” version of loneliness from the aspect of U.S. history. You could also observe this from “bottom up,” i.e. the effect of the individual as opposed to the effect of society, just a difference in the viewing angle really. As more people become “lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful,” etc. (II Timothy), the good people needing affection, time, and just plain somebody to talk to are not going to have that.
Changing the subject, maybe, is to look at the word, ironic, that I used. I’d like to propose that there is no such thing as irony except in literature. What we consider irony is normal. What we consider normal is just a story half-told.
Hey Monte, just wanted to stop by, say hi, and let you know I was reading. I’ll be interested in discussing some of these things with you as you explore.
Your friend-
Travis
Your post reminds me of another song, this time by System of a Down: “Loneliest Day.” While urbanization and modernization have led to some separation, I believe the root caused is one of my soapboxes: individualism. A society that honors the individual drives the individual to become more of an individual. The very system fights against connectedness. A worker is driven to perform better and longer without outside support. Loneliness is a critique of society.
I am uncomfortable with the connection made to financial status. Loneliness is not the best descriptor of the plight of the poor. While they may experience a greater degree of connectedness, I would venture that the connections are made with a smaller group of people, a people who are equally disenfranchised and unable to improve themselves. The social environment places greater restraints on the interactions of the poor. Social experiences may be inwardly rewarding, but outwardly impotent. And is a lonely, unhappy middle class individual any better than a connected, oppressed poor person?