The Demise of Friendship?

Someone posted an article on Facebook (ironically enough) about the change in or decline of friendship as a cultural phenomenon, particularly as it relates to trends perpetuated (or reflected?) by such social networking sites as Facebook and MySpace. I think everyone interested in "real" relationships but wondering why they can't seem to really connect with others should read it:

Faux Friendship

I agree with so much of what the author is saying about the nature of friendship and how real intimacy seems to be on the decline, and how the loss of classical, or romantic, friendship, the kind about which poets used to write, is tragic and a reflection of an increasingly impersonal society full of people seemingly phobic of true intimacy while clawing at it in futile ways.

I particularly agree with the argument that friendship used to be a relationship meant for mutual improvement, a true, hard-won intimacy strong enough to be truly honest and open in helping bring out each other's best and grow together. Friendship was a dedication and investment, not a mere affinity. Friendship was personal and intuitive, not a manipulative checklist of dirt one has on the other. It was a support for weathering storms, not a relationship which loses its usefulness when the "fun" wears off. True friendship was considered a lasting, committed, mutually beneficial, intimate relationship, not the fluffy playmateship on which so many seem fixated today. With the classical kind of friendships, who could be truly lonely?

On the other hand, maybe that is a romantic or exaggerated notion, that friendship "used to be" something it's not today. Maybe the form of finding such friendships has simply changed. Maybe people in the romantic past also struggled to find true connection but for an entirely different set of reasons, such as having to hide socially unacceptable parts of themselves from even their closest friends. Maybe friendship has made strides in some ways even while declining in others. Maybe it's not that different, fundamentally, from how it's always been. But I'm inclined to agree that it seems like friendship is cheaper today, hollower, and tinny like most of what comes out of Hollywood. I strive for better. I prefer friends who will not tell me I'm perfect while watching me march into a pit of snakes or desecrate my integrity in violation of my own values and principles. That's not to say I want preachy friends or friends who think their values and principles should be mine, in the same priority they hold them. I just don't think anyone who always says, "You're perfect the way you are, and anyone who doesn't see that is stupid," can be trusted, and I have to trust my friends.

What I disagree with in this article is that Facebook is, in and of itself, some kind of friendship destroyer, a monster hacking away at the roots of intimacy. Facebook is a tool. It is admittedly a tool many use for self-flattery, false celebrity, professional and social networking, self-marketing, divulgence of information nobody needs or wants to hear (I don't care what genitalia you would be if your personality were made into a body part, for example), or amassing a collection of "friends" which should more accurately be called "people with whom I have some kind of connection." But blaming Facebook for the way people use it is a bit like blaming higher education for snobbery and elitism, or religion for genocide and hatred. It may make sense on a social level, depending on your perspective, but the thing isn't the cause or the problem: it's how it's interpreted and used.

I, for one, only add people on Facebook whom I've met and connected with on some level. I occasionally have approved requests from people I only met once and don't necessarily expect to get to know better (and I adjust their access to my profile accordingly), and I have approved a very small number of people I hadn't yet met, usually spouses of friends or some similar level of incidental connection, but whom I later meet. Have there been hotties or interesting people I'd like to add and become incidentally familiar with by window shopping their Facebook profile before deciding whether to meet in person? Yeah, definitely. But I've refused to do it on principle. I've just never really wanted to meet people that way, for the most part.

But what of people who do meet that way? Does the use of a tool in initial acquaintance preclude the development of intimacy? Does having 500 Facebook friends automatically rule out the possibility of selectively becoming close with a few of them? Do the benefits of maintaining many connections and acquaintances outweigh the loss of time with a few close friends? Is there a balance to be struck? Can I maintain incidental contact through the efficiency of sites like Facebook even while investing time in my more intimate friendships sufficient to develop rich and meaningful relationships with them? I think so. Have I found that balance? Probably not. But I'm working on it. Live life deliberately, right? Nobody's perfectly balanced. It seems the cultural scale is tilted heavily towards hollow relationships, but I'm trying to keep my scale where I want it: leaning towards the intimacy even while maintaining a useful and productive number of casual friendships and acquaintances, some of which may someday become more intimate friendships.

Yes, friendships may wax and wane. And with the mobility of our society, people moving around from place to place in search of education and work, that's bound to happen. If we all stayed put more often, as I think old-timers did, we'd have more opportunity for lasting, life-long friendships, which I think is a beautiful thing. But with mobility comes more contact and more opportunities to learn from more people with more perspectives. Fortunately, tools like Facebook help us remember friends who are distant and more efficiently see what they're up to and share our adventures with them. Yes, it can be painful to see their lives marching on while you start from scratch, but not being aware of it doesn't stop it from happening, and you can control whether these things are shoved in your face or quietly happening out of view if you want to. Learn the tool, use it well. Trade-offs. Balance.

One point made in the article I found particularly interesting is that of memories being sort of whitewashed by the present. It's poignantly stated, but I'm not sure I completely buy it. Having "reconnected" with childhood or otherwise years-past friends, in that electronic, online way, I've discovered we remember some things differently, and we remember different things, and re-evaluating my mental snapshots in that light has expanded and refined my perception of those memories. I would rather see clearly than remember it however I find most comfortable, but there's more to it than that. There may be touchy-feely, emotional motives to remember things how we want to, or comfort in leaving people firmly in the past where they "belong", but I'm fascinated by people and relationships and development, and I find it interesting to hear how they remember things, or to see what they're up to these days and how they seem to have changed or remained the same, even if I only look at their profile once. I see my childhood friends pop up on Facebook, clubbing in New York, or living in a trailer in rural Idaho, or playing with their two or six children, and I consciously know I no longer really "know" them, but I like knowing, at the very least, that they're alive somewhere, carrying memories of me as I carry memories of them. In some way, for better or worse, we've been a part of each other's development and memory, even if only incidentally. It reminds me to make the most of today, to be a positive memory for today's friends and coworkers. And then, when I'm tired of seeing information about them, I hide them from my feed and only go back when, one day, I think, "I wonder whatever happened to So-and-so. Oh yeah, they're on Facebook, let's see." A minute later, I've moved on, but for that minute, a part of my life that contributed to who I am today was brought back into view, sparked by information and pictures that elicited memories the mere incidental thought never would have. Am I a changed man because I spent a minute looking at the profile of a friend I've not spoken with in years? Maybe not. Could I have spent that minute calling a loved one I am close with? Yes. Would I have? Probably not. But the perspective--the little adjustment, the reminder of one's influence, the reminder of who you used to be and how things have changed--can, if you allow it, be useful.

In short, I fully support the caution flags raised by the author, and I share the author's lament for the nature of friendship in our culture, but I think deleting your Facebook account in response would be extreme and silly. While I think the author makes some scapegoating leaps, I really enjoyed the article and recommend it. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have plans with friends to spend time, in person, sharing our stories and updates, seeing what's behind the words in each other's eyes and gestures, sharing energy and sensation, and just being together. I think much of what the author is trying to say is summed up in a quote from one of my favorite movies, Good Will Hunting:

So if I asked you about art, you'd probably give me the skinny on every art book ever written. Michelangelo, you know a lot about him. Life's work, political aspirations, him and the pope, sexual orientation, the whole works, right? But I'll bet you can't tell me what it smells like in the Sistine Chapel.