Microblog Memes

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.

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.

This reminds me of a friend who opened a bakery. The business was successful, and the food was good, but she decided to give it up after a few years when she and her husband started a family.

I don’t consider that a “failure” by any definition. For her, it was a great experience that had run its course.

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.

Working in medicine, especially emergency medicine, I have to hold on to this kind of mindset very tightly. I see death frequently. I have had infants die in my care, and there is nothing I could have done to save them. I have had frail, miserable, elderly people in my care that have been kept alive through titanic and terrible measures, and their lives would have been so much better overall if they had been allowed to pass peacefully a few years earlier.

I saw another post yesterday about the old and infirm lying in nursing homes, staring at the ceiling, coding, then being dragged back to life by the heroic efforts of the staff and the ER....just to go back to staring at the ceiling for another year.

It seems counterintuitive as a physician (in training), particularly in emergency medicine where our whole job is to steal from the reaper, to advocate for sooner, more peaceful, more autonomous deaths. I have always been a proponent of physician-assisted suicide because I have seen too many people whose lives would have been better if they had been shorter.

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.

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

Idk, being sad about and grappling with the impermanent nature of things is kinda a fundamental part of being human.

Happily Ever After only exists if you happen to die at the happiest moment of your life.

Seems to me a logical extension from our capitalist (line must go up) and Christian (stay in line or go to hell) cultural shit pile of a country.

The best definition of success I heard was from Earl Nightingale -

Success is the progressive realization of a worthwhile goal.

Doing something because you want to do it--and it betters yourself, your family, or your community--makes you successful.

About marriage: the whole concept reside in the mutual promise of a "forever after". If that's not your thing, totally fine. But then you wouldn't engage in it in the first place? In that sense, the marriage would indeed have failed (to deliver on its core premise).

This reminds me of Sand Mandala

Once complete, the sand mandala's ritualistic dismantling is accompanied by ceremonies and viewing to symbolize Buddhist doctrinal belief in the transitory nature of material life.

A core Buddhist concept is impermanence, the idea of constant change in our world, and letting go of fixed ideas and outcomes.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

At the hill's foot foot Frodo found Aragorn, standing still and silent as a tree; but in his hand was a small golden bloom of elanor, and a light was in his eyes. He was wrapped in some fair memory: and as Frodo looked at him he knew that he beheld things as they once had been in this same place. For the grim years were removed from the face of Aragorn, and he seemed clothed in white, a young lord tall and fair; and he spoke words in the Elvish tongue to one whom Frodo would not see. Arwen vanimelda, namarië! he said, and then he drew a breath, and returning out of his thought he looked at Frodo and smiled.

'Here is the heart of Elvendom on earth,' he said, 'and here my heart dwells ever, unless there be a light beyond the dark roads that we still must tread, you and I. Come with me!' And taking Frodo's hand in his, he left the hill of Cerin Amroth and came there never again as living man.

J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of The Rings, The Fellowship of the Ring, Book 2, last paragraph of Chapter VI: Lothlórien. I bolded the last 8 words.

Aragorn knows to let go, while deeply, profoundly, cherishing what was. Be like Aragorn.

On Wikipedia, an article for a deceased person reads, “[The deceased] was,” while an article for a TV show that has ended reads, “The Office is”

Feels kinda related in some way

I think you are looking into things in a non healthy way.

You are right that success and failure are not binary. Furthermore, every system, be it physical, living, or social, fails sooner or later.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to not fail for as long as possible, for if something brings joy or safety it's continued success is important. It follows that if something that's important to someone fails it's healthy to morn it and to try to learn from it to not repeat the same failure.

I do think it betrays society's lack of present-focused mindfulness. I've had a handful of friendships that I thought would go on to be quite strong and longlasting, but they fizzled out after a while. That's not to say they were bad or failed friendships. I'm grateful for the time I experienced with them.