Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site peora.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!petsd!peora!jer From: jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: _Cheers_ and relationships Message-ID: <1610@peora.UUCP> Date: Tue, 10-Sep-85 09:09:27 EDT Article-I.D.: peora.1610 Posted: Tue Sep 10 09:09:27 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 11-Sep-85 06:43:36 EDT References: <162@ssc-vax.UUCP> <1567@peora.UUCP> <175@ssc-vax.UUCP> Distribution: na Organization: Perkin-Elmer SDC, Orlando, Fl. Lines: 55 > The intention of my posting was to point out the apparent incongruity > involved in Sam and Diane's relationship and to ask the rhetorical > question, "Why?". That is, why and how can a relationship like this go on? > (and not just on _Cheers_ but in real life, too) It's puzzling to me and > that's why I wanted to know what it is that people actually seek in their > prospective SO's-to-be. I agree with what you said in your followup. I think Sam and Diane are typical in a sense; indeed, I used to have a very good friend in college who had a relationship exactly like theirs. I've always thought that Sam and Diane's relationship exists as a result of the basic inertia in the evolution of people's relationships. People who you know well, you often feel close to, even if you have basic disagreements with them. It takes a substantial amount of hostility to overcome the feeling of familiarity; I suspect this serves a fundamental, biologically necessary function, in helping to promote monogamous relationships. [Now while I am gone some people can argue the popular issues of whether this is culturally derived or not, all the while avoiding the suggestion that cultural and biological differences might coexist due to genetic drift... a bleak flaw in that line of reasoning.] I think Sam and Diane (or the people who they are archetypes for) stay together because they have enough in common to make them feel significantly attracted to one another; eventhough these things in common are things they could, having had a different past experience, have had with most other individuals. But on a higher level (the level that makes human beings transcend the purely "biological" (in the sense I used the term above)) they do not have enough in common for anything really to survive beyond a sort of creature-comfort. Maybe only in our contemporary society has this become sufficient grounds for deeming the relationship unsuccessful, though. As for what people look for... well, people look for different things, so different that you can't even generalize. Personally, I look for intelligence and a belief in certain principles having to do with the nature of the universe which some people describe as being antithetical to cynicism. Obviously, your results may differ. Certainly, Sam and Diane's do. > By the way, I vaguely recall seeing _Duck_Factory, (wasn't Jack Guilford > the guy in those Cracker Jack commercials in that show?) but not enough > to comment on it. I'll leave you with this analogy. Duck Factory is to other shows of its genre [I'm not sure what genre it is, even] as wooden field cameras are to the 35mm variety. -- Shyy-Anzr: J. Eric Roskos UUCP: Ofc: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer Home: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jerpc!jer US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC; 2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642 "Nalgvzr gbzbeebj, gur cubar'yy evat, naq lbh'yy or ba lbhe jnl. Onpx ubzr va Buvb, gurl jba'g oryvrir lbh..."