I am a very curious person.

I am also a person with deep feelings.

It is not difficult for a curious and affectionate person to love someone. However, the hardest thing to do in this world is to love a constantly changing person, let "new lovers" keep pouring out, create the history of life with him, and complete the transformation from "me" to "us".

I wonder why I'm not curious about you anymore.

I promised you that I would study all the taboo topics and invite you to discuss them together. This week is the last week of 20 16. I have discussed death and loss with you this year, so I may invite you to discuss sex recently. For research, I asked my good friend to recommend me a Korean erotic film called [Lover] (the reason for watching erotic films is so profound, haha).

At the beginning of the film, the woman was attracted by a stout man in the elevator, and then they had sex. This woman is actually going to marry her fiance of seven years. This sudden "affair" also made her at a loss.

What impressed me the most was a conversation between her and her fiance:

Woman: "Oba, let's get married in the future. Can we get married next year?"

Fiancee: "Why is it late? We have been together for seven years, you know, although we are both each other's hell, no one can live without anyone. Everyone has his own hell, let's get married! "

Woman: "But why should I be your hell?"

In last Friday's article, were we each other's angels or demons? In "Possible You in My Eyes", I invite you to discuss whether we should be each other's angels or demons. Today's article may also be an extension of that topic.

The question of the hostess has been echoing in my mind: but why should I be your hell?

From knowing each other to loving each other, to being close, to knowing everything, will we become each other's hell? Is hell the inevitable trend of love? I think it's obviously not, but how can we avoid becoming each other's hell, avoid being curious about each other, appreciate each other and feel free?

This thing may have started when we are no longer curious about this person.

Of course, if traced back to the source, this matter may be related to the fact that we have long given up our curiosity about ourselves. To borrow a popular saying: Some people die in their twenties and bury themselves in their eighties.

Recently, some of my blind date experiences also let me see some boys. Like me, they are only 30 years old, but every day makes no difference. They will tell me, "I don't like my job, but what can I do? That's it!" " "

I'm not curious about my passion in this world. I'm not curious how different it will be if I pursue what I love. I'm not curious if there is anything more meaningful to me. I'm not curious about how all my talents and talents can make a difference. I'm not curious about how my life will change if I fully enjoy working eight hours a day. Although I am only 30 years old, I am no longer curious. I am waiting for my old age. "

I don't know if you have noticed that for many of us, this curiosity about ourselves is "dying out" a little bit. When we were young, we felt that our life had "infinite possibilities" and we were eager to see ourselves "grow up". But when we really grow up, we find that our life trajectory seems to be narrower and narrower; The road ahead seems to have an end.

Curious about ourselves, we believe that today I am really different from yesterday, and tomorrow I will be different from today; I do the same thing in different situations, which is not the same; I do the same thing with the same people, and it's different every time. I am curious about everything about myself. I am a little different today: what I want, what I like, what is most meaningful and valuable to me, my thoughts and feelings about all this, because everything I experienced today has changed? What makes me happy and what makes me sad? If I had to live today again, what would I do differently? What do I admire most about myself today? What influence do I have on today's world? This curiosity can be endless.

A person who is not curious about himself will eventually lose curiosity about all relationships, no matter how "fresh" this relationship brings at the beginning.

Because the "freshness" that you can feel without any effort is very limited. Just like when I first told you I was a counselor, you might be surprised: "Really, wow, I've never met a real counselor!" " "But when I tell you my occupation for the second time, you may need some curiosity to feel fresh, because you already know that I am a consultant.

When all the "freshness" that is easy to see is seen, when we go from the stage of being unfamiliar with each other and exploring each other to the stage of being familiar with each other later, can we still explore each other with curiosity?

Maybe you have to contradict me, but I really know my partner well. What else can she/he know?

But you know what? This is the most wonderful thing about being born: if you are willing to sit down, live in the present and listen to what the other person wants to say wholeheartedly, you will find that even in a boring life, you can always ask something you didn't know before with curiosity, because exploring a person is endless.

This kind of inexhaustible lies in the fact that, first of all, we are too complicated, and many times we can't understand why we make a certain choice or suddenly feel something. Secondly, we are all constantly developing and changing, including our relationship with each other. The process of this change is slow in most cases and drastic in some cases.

So there is no one we "explored", including ourselves.

But today, in addition to curiosity, I want to invite you to go deeper: in addition to curiosity and appreciation, how can we make each other more free in love in dialogue, instead of being a hell that imprisons each other?

I want to give you a pair of wings so that you can fly against the light.

I think everyone longs for freedom. So is intimacy a "shackle" of freedom?

If not, how can we give each other enough space and let each other have the freest air in our love?

Here I want to tell another short story.

The movie [Road to Revolution] is dubbed by many people as the sequel to [Titanic]. Because Leonardo and Kate got together again after 1 1 years, this time they lived as husband and wife.

When they first met, he was an ambitious young man, talking loudly, and she was a future star eager to become a famous actress. Now, they have changed since they got married. He became a boring office worker, doing a job he didn't like in the company, and she became a bad actress. After a performance, husband Frank and wife April lost their temper, and their feud finally broke out.

April, who was heartbroken, sorted out the photos and found the photos of Frank when he was young. Recalling the "beautiful Paris" he once described, she put forward the plan of "moving her family to Paris" to save the family. However, this seemingly unreachable plan has become a catalyst, pushing the two to a more painful marriage abyss.

Frank didn't want to move to Paris, but April, who was extremely disappointed with her life, unexpectedly found herself pregnant. April doesn't want to have children. Abortion is illegal in the local area. At the end of the movie, April died because of her miscarriage, and Frank moved out of the alley called Revolutionary Road in despair.

April once said to Frank, "You just let me fall into the trap of life and let me feel what you make me feel."

This story can't help but make people sad: how did this couple, who were regarded as golden couples by other neighbors living on the revolutionary road, become each other's prisons or even real graves?

The tragedy of the film is thought-provoking, but the director didn't give us an exit on how to give each other the greatest freedom and respect in the dialogue. I want to try to invite you to do such an exploration with limited words here, and then see where we will go.

1. I don't need any history, use your history to define your present and future.

There is a word in psychology called identity, or we can call it label.

Many times our identity is not entirely determined by us, which is like a butterfly effect: at first, this other people's identity with us comes from the result of our interaction with others, and we also construct our own identity in it, but gradually, this identity is like having life, and it begins to define who we are in turn.

For example, writing is my "passion in the world". At the beginning, I was really known by some friends in writing, and everyone would give me a lot of feedback on writing. But gradually, the identity of "writer" began to have its own life: friends, who are familiar and have never met, often asked me, "Joy, why haven't you written recently?" Or they think that my writing style is a certain style. If one day my writing style is not the same as usual, they will come to me and say, "Joy, I don't like your current style. Can you write more articles with your own original style? "

In other words, we have created our own identity, which in turn will define us in society.

A child who used to be a "thief" may decide not to steal, but others' recognition of him has been formed. So if someone loses something, they will still suspect that he stole it for the first time. The child who made up his mind not to steal again is likely to start stealing again because others have recognized his role as a "thief". This is what I said. Identity will in turn define who we are.

I think that if we want to give each other the greatest freedom in love, we should learn to define the present and the future without any "history" and not put the shackles of our own "labels" on each other.

Here, I am reminded of Ang Lee's latest film [Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk].

Lynn's scene of rescuing his comrades on the battlefield was accidentally captured by the camera on the battlefield. During his vacation, he suddenly became a national hero, although it was obvious that he probably had post-traumatic syndrome (PTSD). Lynn is also afraid of going back to that terrible battlefield. His sister has been hoping that he won't go back after this holiday because she is worried about his physical and mental state.

But in the end, he went back, and a detail before he left was meaningful:

Lynn met a beautiful cheerleader during the holiday. When he left, she came to see him affectionately. He said to her excitedly, "I almost didn't want to go back and want to elope with you."

The beauty looked at him, without giving up or happiness on her face. She just said doubtfully, "Run away?" But aren't you a national hero? "

I don't know how disappointed Lynn was at that time. He just silently said "Yes." Then silently return to the car that sent him back to the battlefield. Perhaps at that moment, the cold reality made him realize that love is just an illusion, and the beauty loves him as a "national hero", not him.

I think the freest and most powerful love is to respect each other and let them define who she/he is now and in the future, instead of defining them by our judgment. And on this basis, help them build their favorite identity.

For example, suppose my boyfriend was late for an appointment several times before, but in fact he doesn't like being late himself, and he doesn't want to be a regular late person. Then what I have to do may not be to judge his lateness, call him "a latecomer" and ask him what I can do to help him be more punctual. And when he is punctual, I admire him and ask him curiously how he is punctual.

From 65438 to 0984, 30-year-old Ang Lee completed his studies at the Film Production Institute of new york University and began a six-year "life of idleness at home". He reads books, watches movies, writes plays and does all the housework, but the identity he wants to establish is an extraordinary director identity. At that time, the family expenses were completely supported by his wife Lin Huijia, who was still studying for a doctorate in biology at the University of Illinois. Lin Huijia didn't define Ang Lee as a "family chef", but helped Ang Lee build his favorite directorship. Six years later, 36-year-old Ang Lee finished the script of Pushing Hands and won a prize of 400,000 yuan, which gave him the opportunity to direct the film independently.

Don't let our past "labels" define our present and future, and don't use the past to define our partners. Let go of the expectation of "what kind of people we want them to be" and then help each other become what we like. Maybe love is a beautiful appearance!

2. Avoid any form of monologue (any form of avoidance).

I don't know if you have ever experienced a time when the dialogue entered a "deadlock" or a "dead end". You are always arguing about the same problem, but it never comes to fruition.

When our conversation enters a "deadlock", it can almost explain one thing: we are not talking at all, but monologues in our respective worlds.

So what exactly is a monologue? Which dialogues seem to be communicating, but in fact they are monologues? Here, I want to list the following possibilities based on my own experience and observation, but the actual situation may not be limited to these possibilities:

Try to get the other person to agree with you, argue, or try to convince him.

Use the vulnerability once exposed by the other party as a weapon to attack her/him.

Use the other person's past to define and interpret her/his behavior at the moment, instead of really curious about the motivation behind the other person's action at the moment.

Vent your emotions and don't give each other a chance to respond.

It's not easy to get caught up in the conversation and lose sight of each other's efforts, which is worth appreciating.

With expectations and presuppositions, there is no curiosity about what kind of judgment the other party "should" have.

After the conversation, my thoughts and feelings have not changed.

I want to emphasize the last point here: when you end a conversation, if your thoughts and feelings have not changed because of the conversation, then you are probably monologuing. Because the essence of dialogue is the exchange of emotions and ideas. If this flow happens, you will certainly influence each other and create something that has never been done before.

Owen Aron once ridiculed a "senior" consultant in his novel, saying that he proudly claimed that he was the only person who had not changed in 10 years. But I feel sorry for him. How can a person have no influence in the group of 10? Really effective communication must change each other.

How can we avoid monologues?

In the whole process of my psychology and consulting study, the most important thing may be reflection and awareness.

We began to ask ourselves curiously: Hey, what was the conversation just now? What is the process? Have my thoughts and feelings changed in this process? If there is no change, what is the motivation and purpose of my monologue just now? How did I get into this monologue? What can I do if I want to avoid this repetitive monologue? Am I curious about each other? Did I just bring my own presupposition and judgment without trying to understand what the other party really wanted to express?

When we stop to reflect and feel, it is the beginning of our monologue stop.

And learn to let go of all presuppositions, judgments, worries, anxieties, fears and "should", or even if we can't let go, at least we can realize them and open our inner presuppositions, judgments, worries, anxieties, fears and "should" to each other. This is the invitation to dialogue.

I have always believed that love is a process of mutual influence and creation. What we call "constantly creating new love" is produced in this creative process. The death of love also begins with our monologue: we are no longer curious about each other, we can no longer put down our presuppositions, judgments and prejudices to listen wholeheartedly, we no longer appreciate and doubt each other's differences, we no longer pay attention to each other's efforts in this process, and we no longer want to expose our true vulnerability. All these make us imprison ourselves in our own universe. Without traffic, there can be no "new love".

3. Expand the dialogue space (enlightenment dialogue space)

Another way to give each other freedom in dialogue is to constantly expand the dialogue space.

So what is a dialogue space? For example, we just talked about the importance of avoiding monologues, and conversely, the importance of making the dialogue smooth. This flow is like a river. The flow of rivers needs space. Similarly, dialogue needs more space to keep flowing.

This space is usually created by our attentive listening, companionship, curiosity and appreciation. In the last article, I have discussed this issue with you one by one, and also discussed the topic of expanding the dialogue space.

But today I want to continue to invite you to discuss how we can give each other more room for dialogue in intimate relationships, especially when the dialogue is very difficult.

Harlem Anderson, the founder of postmodern cooperative dialogue, once suggested that if we want to expand the dialogue space, we should not only pay attention to the dialogue content itself, but also pay attention to the dialogue process.

When we can jump out of the conversation ("Why can't you go home early?" Or "Why can't you have sex with me more than once a week?" ), look at the whole dialogue process: see what kind of intention we have to start a dialogue with each other, whether we are monologues in this process, or whether we allow ourselves to listen and understand each other, whether our thoughts and feelings have changed in this process, whether we truly express our feelings and ideas, whether the results of our dialogue satisfy each other, and so on. When we can see the whole process, we won't be trapped in the "problem" anymore.

Yesterday, a friend of the Institute of Psychology of Chinese Academy of Sciences interviewed me to discuss my successful and failed cases of consultation. In this process, I suddenly realized clearly that all the conversations I found difficult in the past were because the visitor was deeply immersed in "problems" or content, and I didn't help her/him to open the dialogue space well.

I want to give an example. For example, a visitor may keep complaining to me about how bad his wife is during the consultation process, and he is deeply immersed in such grievances, anger, sadness and resentment. If I find that my question doesn't make him start to reflect and perceive himself, then maybe one thing I will do is to interrupt his monologue and ask him, "Have your thoughts and feelings changed during the process you just described?" Why do you want to say this? "

Even if I find that our conversation has not made any progress, I will frankly say to each other, "I found that our conversation just now was a bit difficult." What do you think of this process? " Are these words what you want me to hear most? What else do you want me to hear? What else can I hear that will help you more? Is there anything you want to tell me but haven't? "

I think in love, we are also facing the same dilemma: how to make each other open up more dialogue space in the difficult dialogue and let the dialogue continue?

I want to try to give some responses to this question:

We should not only pay attention to the content of the dialogue itself, but also pay attention to the whole dialogue process and changes. Content is as important as process.

Reflect on and realize every difficult dialogue process, and realize whether you are monologuing or not.

Slow down the dialogue and make room for reflection and inner dialogue. Slow is fast.

When you realize that you have fallen into the content and the so-called "problem", you can go back to the process again and be curious about it.

Try to look at it from a different angle.

I want to explain a little more about the final "transformation" angle. As we all know, many times we can't understand each other because we are too firm in our interpretation and position to interpret the same thing from each other's meaning map.

Then at this time, looking at this matter from a more diverse perspective will create more space and more possibilities for us.

Tell a story from my life.

Before, my good friend told me that he always wanted to resign, but he was afraid to tell his father for fear of his judgment and his incomprehension. So one day I invited him to do a "role play" with me: I played him and he played his father.

After talking for more than ten minutes, he miraculously agreed that my "son" would resign as a father. Later, he told me that in this process, he had two experiences: one was that he learned different ways of communication and expression from me, and the other was that maybe his father was not as unreasonable as he thought.

This is the power to change the perspective. The same thing, if you can exchange perspectives with your partner, what will be the difference? What will our good friend say if she/he sees this? If it was someone I admire very much, such as Helen Anderson, how would she handle it?

From different angles, you will see a completely different process, which is a particularly effective way to open the space, and sometimes the third party can see it more clearly. Is what we call "I don't know the true face of Lushan Mountain, but toward which corner of the mountain".

4. From "I" to "We": Create a logical process to promote generation.

As we said just now, any real dialogue is a process of mutual influence and creation. We call this kind of dialogue a living dialogue.

In love, we always change from "me" to "us". This "we" is the life history created by each other. Decisions in life, big and small, our dreams and worries, hopes and fears, expectations and disappointments, happiness and sadness, all need each other's witness and companionship, and then in this process, * * * will create something beautiful that has never been seen before.

Helen Anderson once said an ordinary and moving sentence, she said: Dialogue is a natural and automatic activity all the time. She also put forward the following interesting features:

You can prepare the dialogue, but you can't plan or set the structure in advance.

Dialogue cannot set steps, and the dialogue process is not linear or repeatable.

Dialogue cannot be implemented, manipulated and managed.

Dialogue is like roots and networks. There is no correct entrance or exit.

Conversation happens randomly, it roams, bringing surprises and turning points in unexpected places.

Conversation doesn't have to last, but it must (it can happen constantly).

The first three items are related to the non-presupposition and non-judgment we mentioned before. Now I want to talk about the latter three.

The philosopher Wittgenstein once said: Language is like a maze, with exits everywhere. Therefore, He Lin will also mention that "dialogue is like roots and networks. There is no correct entrance or exit. " What does it mean for us to realize this?

Since language has no correct entrance and exit, we don't have to care about the "result" of the so-called dialogue, and we don't have to care about whether the way we start the dialogue is "correct" enough. Maybe you have to ask: If you don't care about the result, what is the purpose of my conversation?

As I said just now, dialogue is a process of mutual influence, mutual change and mutual creation. So as long as your thoughts change in this process, the dialogue is already flowing. This flow is a force that continues after our conversation, which is why many visitors can continue to have a lot of reflection and awareness after this consultation and the week before the next consultation. Because although our conversation ended, it broke our original monologue, and our inner dialogue began to flow and had new changes.

Therefore, the purpose of dialogue is to make changes happen in the mutual influence and break the previous inner monologue.

This process may take us to a completely unexpected place. In this process, we can freely "travel in time and space": go back to the past, live in the present, or discuss the future. You will even magically find that we can rewrite the past together and create the present and the future.

I remembered a conversation with my best friend in the past, and found that I have done a lot of valuable explorations in love over the years, although I have never formally talked about love (I have been worried). In these explorations, I found myself brave and kind again and again, and I saw my growth and difference again and again. Together, we rewrote the label that I always felt "emotional blank" and saw how I became mature and wise in these explorations of love, and cultivated the art of love tenderly and firmly. Love is not just one person, but the whole world.

May there be no years to turn back and grow old with affection.

When we get married, our vows to each other may be to share joys and sorrows.

However, in addition to the fulfillment of fate, in addition to the deep affection we began to have, this bald head needs us to experience enough wisdom.

How to create "new love" in "old" relationship?

How can we give each other wings to fly in marriage, rather than a spiritual cage?

This wisdom needs to be cultivated in daily life.

The above discussion is just the beginning of inviting you to explore. It is an answer sheet that I can call out so far. I believe that with my continuous exploration, it will evolve new ideas. So what's your answer sheet? Your constant exploration has inspired you to create "new love" in the dialogue.

The ultimate meaning of love is to blend into life, not to occupy it.

May we all learn the art of love in dialogue!