Some friends have come down from Athens for the weekend to enjoy the Parathalasso – and possibly my company – and we began the weekend last night with a big, long catch-up on what we had been doing since we last saw each other (some seven or eight years have gone by).
They are newly married (6 weeks ago), while part of my recounting my tales of the last seven years includes me being happily divorced, so of course the topic of marriage became a major part of our discussion…
Or to put it more broadly, the topic of how to sustain a long-term relationship (LTR).
My contribution was more focused on what NOT to do, while theirs was a little more positive.
After discussing matters such as character, values, background, interests, maturity and so on, we all centered on “compromise” as perhaps one of the key requirements of a successful LTR (or marriage).
So what does compromise entail? What does compromise require? What is the nature of compromise?
Looking at how compromise is defined is a good place to start:
com·pro·mise noun \ˈkäm-prə-ˌmīz\
1. A settlement of differences by mutual concessions; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc., by reciprocal modification of demands.
2. The result of such a settlement.
3. Something intermediate between different things - the middle ground.
4. A concession to something derogatory or prejudicial: a compromise of principles
In broader terms compromise is described thus:
To compromise is to make a deal where one person gives up part of his or her demand. In arguments, compromise is a concept of finding agreement through communication, through a mutual acceptance of terms—often involving variations from an original goal or desire.
Extremism is often considered as antonym to compromise, which, depending on context, may be associated with concepts of balance, tolerance.
In the negative connotation, compromise may be referred to as capitulation, referring to a "surrender" of objectives, principles, or material, in the process of negotiating an agreement. In human relationships "compromise" is frequently said to be an agreement that no party is happy with, this is because the parties involved often feel that they either gave away too much or that they received too little.
While we are prepared, and indeed usually keen, to find compromise in our business lives we seem to find it more difficult to achieve this in our personal lives.
In business, compromise is described – somewhat euphemistically perhaps– as “win-win”. It is desirable – indeed, it is a goal.
However, compromise in our personal affairs seems all too often to be characterized as “lose-lose”. Why is this?
I think in our personal relationships we tend to see compromise as concession or capitulation more than we see it as “winning agreement” or finding an acceptable solution. But it shouldn’t be this way and it needn’t be this way.
In Freudian terms, we can probably make the safe assumption that compromise is ultimately delivered by the “SuperEgo”.
While the Id is our pure, unconscious nature based on the pleasure principle – by definition selfish and potentially destructive - the “Ego” is our reality principle, mediating between the needs of the “Id” and reality to avoid conflict or disaster. Meanwhile the “SuperEgo” is the corrective principle that works against the Id and counterbalances. It is the “conscience” that we all have.
The enlightened awareness of the implications of our “self” and its actions.
In philosophical terms the Ego is our “self”. So the corrective influence of a higher principle (the SuperEgo – or, more simply put, appropriate ideals) by definition means thinking beyond one’s self. This is perhaps the most basic driver of compromise – to think beyond one’s self and one’s own needs. The motivation for which is defined by the desired results the compromise – harmony, peace, progress, reconciliation etc.
In business we do this because we recognize that any deal has to make sense to both sides, but I would argue that in our personal affairs not only the same principle applies, BUT that there is an additional dimension . . .
By this I mean that in our personal relationships, preparedness to compromise is in itself an act of love. Beyond the pragmatic requirements of a relationship, which lead to the road of compromise, there is also the statement that compromise makes. “I love you enough to put myself second and to find a middle ground”. Assuming the affection and emotion is mutual then the reciprocation of the act of compromise will always ensure that there is balance and no-one feels it is a “lose-lose” situation.
So we can conclude here that compromise in a LTR is not only a requirement for sustainability and continuity, but it is a desired and desirable component to fully express our love and affection for the other person. However, there is the caveat of mutuality and reciprocation. If both parties are not equally committed to each other – and therefore both motivated to put the other first as an act of love and compromise to not only find a solution but also to express their love, then there will be an imbalance and someone will lose . . . and ultimately, if this balance does not self correct, the relationship is doomed to unhappiness or failure.
So how does this work in practice?
As I am in Greece it seems fitting to have a go at using dialogue to develop the theme a little . . .
Dave: “As newly-weds, what do you think is the key to a successful and happy marriage?”
Iris: “I think it is a number of things. Certainly it’s a matter of personality and character. Not that you have to be the same, but you have to have some harmony. Enough things in common, and enough differences to provide interest.”
Giannis: “A common “culture” or way of living together is important. It takes time and effort to find this, but it is key.”
Iris: “I think there needs to be some maturity also. It is easier to be happy and successful in a marriage when you have lived a little.”
Dave: “But maturity isn’t about age only. I know people who are happily married from the age of 25 or younger – they obviously had some kind of maturity to manage their marriage successfully, no?”
Giannis: “Maybe, or maybe not – they could have just had a very harmonious connection, a good balance and have therefore matured together over time.”
Dave: “I think values are very important. Shared and common basic values are crucial. Our values are truly embedded in us from our childhood, our parents, our surroundings. If these are not broadly shared between two people it will be very difficult to accommodate the difference as our values are perhaps the hardest thing for us to change.”
Iris: “You’re right. Values are very important – and they are a part of your personality and character. To this end it is important that the two personalities are compatible. It’s not about whether he likes motorcycles and I like shopping, its about the value system we share as people. But there will always be differences between people no matter how much they love each other.”
Giannis: “Yes, but this is where we have to find compromises. It’s always a question of compromise.”
Dave: “You are right. Compromise is perhaps the greatest challenge to and the greatest requirement for a successful marriage or relationship. Failure to find appropriate compromise was a major factor in the failure of my first marriage.”
Iris: “As we grow older it is easier to compromise - our maturity helps us in this regard. We are less selfish, less in a hurry, more patient, more tolerant because we have lived more.”
Giannis: “I disagree. I think as we grow older we become less flexible, less prepared to compromise because we are set in our ways. We are used to doing things the way we want. It’s difficult to change that or accommodate others as you grow older.”
Iris: “But if you are older, more mature, don’t you become less rigidly attached to your ways? After all, you have had it “your way” for a long time, so isn’t it easier to let go of that for the sake of the other?”
Dave: “I think you are both right. As we grow older we are more certain in who we are and of course that means we are more rigidly defined as people and more clear on what we want and don’t want, but I also agree with Iris that as we grow older we also attach much less importance to our habits and preferences, because we don’t feel threatened by change or submission, or compromise. We are used to it, and indeed embrace it.”
Iris: “Yes, that is true. We do feel less frightened of compromise – both because we understand the benefits it can bring and because it is more comfortable for us to give up some things for the sake of compromise then when we are younger and less certain of ourselves.”
Giannis: “True. While I know what I want, I also know that I can from time to time give it up for the sake of someone else, or meet in the middle. It is easier now then when I was younger.”
Dave: “So compromise is easier as we mature and grow older because we are more sensitive, although the need for compromise perhaps becomes greater because we are more set in our ways and clearer about what we want and need. Interesting.”
And so we concluded our discussion fuelled by much local wine.
Compromise is more necessary as your needs and priorities are clearer, but easier to reach with time and experience aiding you in the giving up of certain things. And in LTRs and personal relationships the art of reaching compromise is also the act of showing selfless love for someone else. Achieving this balance will create a happy and sustainable co-existence - provided it is reciprocal and achieved through mutuality.
When I was young and foolish (i.e. more foolish than now), I used to find compromise compromising. I have matured over the years and now see it not as an enemy to harmonious and happy existence but as a necessary precursor to it.
Compromise is not weakness. It is love.
Plato might be proud.
