On the surface, this might look like a relationship in which there is what the behavioral economists call a “market exchange.” However, this rather rigid definition does not accurately capture what is occurring. Genuine affection is shared among the “colleagues” who are working on the project together. There are often memorable dinners, a bottle of wine and some moments of reflection on personal matters (family, career, new loves, etc.) It is much more than economics or even business. It is a deep relationship that is forged about a shared love of a joint project – not unlike two parents who share a love for their child.
Autotelic Relationships
The second kind of relationship is one that might best be called “pure” or “unencumbered.” There is no widely accepted term to describe this relationship. I consider it to be an “autotelic” relationship. I use this term because “autotelic” refers to an activity that is self-rewarding. It contains its own internal goal. This type of relationship prevails in a Gemeinschaft society in which shared welfare is of great importance. There is no such thing as “just business.”
“Autotelic” is often used to label playful activities that seem to have no ulterior motive. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1990) writes about the “flow” experience that is inherent in many autotelic activities. I would propose that autotelic relationships are likely to manifest this “flow.” We are sitting with a dear friend and time seems to fly by (much as it does when we are playing a riveting game of chess or clinging to a mountain wall that one is climbing). The “flow” might also come from the often surprising (and even challenging) comments or actions being taken by one or both friends. Spontaneity might keep the relationship alive and vitally engaging. Flow might also show up in the sometimes “daring” disclosure that takes place. We share something with our friend that we would never share with anyone else.
Most importantly, an experience of Flow seems to be contained and isolated. Nothing else matters or gains our attention. We are in a whole new world when reading a book that enthralls us or when dancing to an intoxicating beat or highly romantic melody. We are dancing to the sounds and rhythms of a sleep band. It is a warm summer evening beside a swimming pool in Bermuda. We are sitting on a bench watching and listening to the thundering fall of water over a cliff of the Columbia River gorge between the state of Washington and Oregon. The Multnomah Falls leaves us spellbound and living for a few moments in a frozen and isolated space and time. This is flow. We are fortunate to be sharing this dance in Bermuda or the Multnomah Falls bench with a dear friend. There is nothing more precious than this “flowing” relationship without external goal or function.
Introversion: The Push Away from Interpersonal Relationships
I shift my reflections on the push and pull of relationships by turning in more depth to Carl Jung’s (1971) wisdom regarding intrapsychic dynamics and preferences. He identifies a personality type called “introversion” which suggests a turning inward and pushing back against interpersonal engagements. Actually, the dynamics of introversion (and extraversion) are much more complex and nuanced than this simple description.
Energy and the General
First, the distinction between introversion and extraversion is based in part on the expenditure of energy. For the Introvert, engagement in interpersonal relationships requires the expenditure of considerable energy. There is shear exhaustion at the end of a day filled with other people (especially those who are not closely related to the Introvert). A good night of sleep or a peaceful period of time reading a book, listening to relaxing music, or enjoying a wonderfully cooked meal with a loved one is restorative.
