Promise to Commit?

What is the difference between that that you can touch and that that you cannot? The tangible and the intangible; that which is physically elusive?

The fact that you can touch one and not the other?

Yes.

Such is a promise, and such is commitment.

Have I ever touched a promise, you ask? I have felt it. Lingering. I have had to check its existence and validity with each passing moment that questions me if I can take the next step. Like a nervous pat on the wallet pocket. I have no control over a promise. Yours or mine; once given, it no more remains our own. For those that are promised, they look to the promise-giver for its fulfilment. It’s nature, because of the transaction, is tangible. It becomes physical, the moment it is transacted. The moment that it is physical, it is easy to break. And, because it is physical it becomes a burden, often to the giver. The moment it is transacted, it becomes a shove-it-in-your-face tool, held in the hand, waved in the face.

Commitment is as ethereal as can be. Lacking any physical form, it isn’t ever transacted. It is never given: it is taken (without giving anything in return). Taken up. It cannot be asked for. If you ask, then you are asking for a promise – you are asking for something lesser, something that you want to feel. Most people have seen commitment. They even make a show of it, they say – look how committed he is, or she is. I have never seen it. I have never felt it like I would feel the clasp of a promise. I have experienced commitment, however. I have known it.

A promise can break with time, circumstances, environments and geography. In the end it doesn’t matter whether it was intended or not. A commitment doesn’t die with the death of the committed person. Like blogs, like memories, it lives on.

I think of commercial software and I think of open-source software. I think of a promise and I think of commitment.

Commitment shines through by its own nature, its own personality and characteristics. Promises are slaves to change. Changes in society, in personal lives, in geography, in shifting loyalties, in money – more or less – and in the lack of a belief system. Promises always carry an inherent burden of imposition within, somehow. They aren’t free of necessity.

I think of a mercenary and I think of a freedom-fighter (a real one, not the self-styled we see in the contemporary world). I think of a promise and I think of commitment.

It isn’t, however, always easy to distinguish between the two. Some promises have the ability to disguise themselves as commitment. They have the ability to fool you into believing, yet, if you ask a single question of it, you will know. Assurances, aren’t a Commitment characteristic. Commitment just is. It answers to no one except the self.

I often think of Frodo. Was it his commitment to end all that was evil in this world, or was it his promise to Gandalf?

Commitment is as subtle and inconspicuous as promises are obtrusive and lacerating, because promises need constant attention and audit (are you there? won’t leave me will you?) to ensure their existence. Uttering the word of commitment is the opposite of being.

Like hope and belief.

Promises have a shelf-life. The expiry date isn’t generally printed, but know that they will expire after a while. Commitment however doesn’t have a shelf-life. In fact, it isn’t found on the shelf. Don’t look for it in a store; don’t ask for commitment.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Promise to Commit?

  1. ==TSC:
    I don’t know, really.

    We create our own contradictions. I don’t know who wins. If a promise is kept, who wins? the one who promised or the one who was promised? Both? None? What happens if a promise isn’t kept?

    Either of what you say is a promise – to me it has a shelf life (or the lack of it, for you say you wouldn’t do either of it). What does a win matter, when nothing exists?

    Like

  2. Quite true. There are somethings that will always have a shelf life. There are times when even commitment changes. Then it would mean that the shelf life for commitment is not known and when it changes, it indicates the shelf life.
    For any transaction, there has to be at least 1 winner or else that transaction is not worth doing.

    Like

  3. Perfect. But why does this bend towards commitment as the positive thing and promise turning out to be manipulative and forced…? Or is it how it is…?
    However, liked the way you wrote the whole thing. Thanks.

    Like

  4. I don’t make promises and never have that I can remember. Very early in my life I realized that things change and there are things we just cannot control – therefore how can we promise when we might not be able to keep our promises?

    I can commit, I have committed many times and kept my commitments. I am committed to my marriage but again, I have not promised – at least not in my own eyes I haven’t.

    I disagree with our friend threestrongcoffees in that “For any transaction, there has to be at least 1 winner or else that transaction is not worth doing.”

    Does one have to “win”? What is winning anyway and why did it enter into this discussion?

    Wishing all peace and love today and every day.

    ~ RS ~

    Like

  5. ==TSC:
    If i had replied before RS, I would said the nearly the same thing (without the softness, perhaps). 🙂

    Not all transactions are about winning. I’d think that commitments and promises aren’t related “transactions”, so the concept of winning/losing doesn’t arise. In a way that you might relate to, some transactions are one-sided. There is just a give or a take or a a reversal.

    There isn’t (always) a balancing item.

    When you say that commitment changes, perhaps you want to say that “what was committed to” ceases to exist – that is possible. The commitment therefore has no raison d’être, perhaps, but does it change/die?

    ==Anumita:
    I confess, the post does sound, as if badgering promises. Pardon it as a writer’s over-enthusiasm, more so because promises do seem to have got a raw deal (in the post). However, the core remains – as far as i am concerned – the transient nature of one and the permanent nature of the other.

    (Perhaps far too many experiences with promises).

    Not positive or negative, but transient and permanent. 🙂

    ==RS:
    I believe TSC was talking of the “win” between promises and commitments. I’ll wait for his response, if i have misunderstood. Loved the first part of your response!

    not just peace, wishing you a lot of strength the day you see this and all the days hence!
    🙂

    Like

Use your Twitter, Facebook or your WordPress account to comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s