A Conclusion in Three Parts

I never could be so happy as you.  Till I have your disposition, your goodness, I never can have your happiness.  

Elizabeth to Jane in Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice

With today's post, we arrive at the conclusion of our discussion.  Up to this point, we have examined the two independent clauses about happy and unhappy families individually to determine their veracity.  There are four possible conclusions:  #1  that both statements are true, #2  that both statements are false, #3  that the first is false and the second true or #4  that the first is true and the second false--my choice.  Regardless of where you stand on this right now, when we put the two clauses together, we will see that something additional is implied that may change the picture entirely.

Because this post is rather long, I have divided it into three parts.  The first will try to answer the question  what is happiness?, the second will deal with the meaning of the quote in its entirety and the third will wrap things up.  As always, feel free to dispute anything I say here.  My only qualification to write this kind of post is that I am a good reader.  I hope you are too.

PART I:  What is happiness?

Some of the people who responded to my original question raised the point that the answer depends on how one defines happiness.  Almost everyone's answer implied that the individual is the most qualified person to comment on his or her own state of happiness.  There was a question of whether we can ever truly explain our feelings of happiness to another person.

In my fourth of July post, I quoted Thomas Jefferson's famous words from The Declaration of Independence about our right to life, liberty and "the pursuit of happiness".  As far as I know, no caveat was added to explain what he meant by happiness and he was clearly referring to something specific that everyone understood.  What was it?  Jes indicated that "optimism" or a positive outlook is at least a part of happiness.  Both Abby and Tara used the word "contentment" among other things.  I think we can probably all agree that both optimism and contentment are present in the happy people and families we know.  Of course, some optimists are optimists to the point of ignoring reality and contentment, or an attitude of "I'm fine as I am" may be a disguise for laziness--spiritual or otherwise.  There must be a better word, a fundamental word, to get closer to the heart of happiness.

I started this post with Elizabeth's quote which can be found toward the end of Pride and Prejudice.  Her sister Jane has just become engaged to Mr. Bingley and desires that her beloved family, in particular Lizzy, share in her happiness.  Lizzy tells her that, until she has her goodness, she cannot have her happiness.  This link between goodness and happiness is carried throughout the entire novel.  The characters who try to cheat their way to happiness by violating the moral code are the least happy.  Mastery of the will, honesty and genuine goodness are among the tickets to living happily ever after in Austen's world.

And from my experience, so it is in ours.  This makes sense because if you believe as I do that God made us to know, love and serve Him, He alone must know best which behaviors lead to happiness.  It would be a mistake though to conclude that obeying God's laws makes us all the same or unoriginal drones.  In his book Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis begins by proving the existence of a moral code or "Law of Nature" similar to the Law of Gravity in its application to all of us.  The difference of course is that the person who tries to prove himself exempt from the Law of Gravity will find out quickly that he is not whereas as a person who claims exemption from the Natural Law concerning Right and Wrong may be able to deceive himself for a while.  He may even claim that he is happy.  It is this person to whom I referred in my first post when I said I would not always believe a person who claimed to be happy.  Happiness is not just a feeling and is not entirely subjective.

True happiness is also not determined by circumstance.  It is not dislodged by the weather or someone else's mood.  It is much more long lasting and secure.  It involves a life or, in the case of our discussion, a family, built on solid principles.  In fact, the "happy family" to me is one that stretches into the distance, a family line, passing happiness along from one generation to the next.  

I have also noticed that the happiest people and families I've known do not strive for happiness as an end goal.  True happiness seems to be a byproduct.  They are the least selfish, the ones who, like Jane, would renounce everything, even their own happiness for another's good.  Those of us living in families know how essential that attitude is.

Hopefully, I have made a convincing argument for the connection between happiness and goodness and with that in mind, I move on to Part 2.  (Feel free to get up, stretch, get a glass of water...)

PART 2  What's Implied

Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.

True--Happy families are all alike

False--every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way

So what does this mean?  When I was reading the responses, I had to smile at the indignation I detected in some at the implication that unhappy families are somehow more diverse, varied and therefore interesting than happy ones.  I agree with that reading of the sentence.  There is an implied comparison when we put the two independent clauses together and happy families seem to come up short--at least in our culture where individuality is so valued.  How can that be?
First, it is my guess that when people attribute some sort of creativity to unhappiness, they are thinking of the tortured artists we have all heard about, people like Van Gogh whose lives were unhappy, even tragic, but who produced great works of art.  A logical conclusion could be, "I'd rather be creative and unhappy and contribute than be boring and homogenous and happy."  For the purposes of our discussion though, I think we need to throw out the case of the tortured genius because, as Kay Redfield Jamison points out in her book Touched by Fire, a large number of them suffered from mental illness at a time when it was misunderstood and went untreated.  That is a different case.
The important question for us is: given that both happy and unhappy families share traits with other families that fall within their "happiness category", in which category would you find the most diversity, variety, creativity and individuality? 
To answer that question, I'll tell a story.  While we were living in Beaumont, I met with one of our parish priests on a regular basis.  He is what I would call a simple person with simple tastes.  He is quiet and very orthodox and reverent in the way he says the Mass.  He is someone whose opinion I trust.  During one of our meetings, I introduced the topic of God's will and how we can know it.  My best friends in Beaumont shared with me about submitting to God's will at every moment of every day.  This seemed like a good idea to me but I was confused about how to do it and it was causing me some stress.  How could I know what God wanted of me from one moment to the next?  How could I know the "right" decision among several choices of how to spend my time?  Fr. Oakes was quiet for a moment before observing that, "God's will is wide".  It took some time for me to really understand what he meant.  Knowing him as well as I did, I knew that he did not mean that all behaviors and attitudes fit somewhere within God's will.  There are evil choices.  He meant that within the parameters of God's law, there is a lot of room to run.  Meaning freedom and plenty of good creative choices of ways in which to serve God and be happy.  In fact, there are probably as many ways to experience happiness as there are people created.  None of us is exactly the same as another.  In fact, the better and happier we are, the more different and unique we should be though of course, none of us will experience the complete fullness of happiness of which we are capable until we "slip the surly bonds of Earth to touch the face of God".
Is it possible for the unhappy person or family to compete with this?  No way.  True unhappiness is the result of many poor choices of attitudes and behaviors.  Some of these choices may become so ingrained and habitual that change seems impossible.  And perhaps at some point, it is.  Which is why this discussion is so important.  Playing around with the idea that something good can come from sin and unhappiness is dangerous.  As Josh Turner sings so huskily, "Don't go riding on that long black train".  Bad idea.  Stay away lest it land you "in the middle of nowhere".


PART 3  So What?


I mentioned at the outset that Anna Karenina is one of the most read novels in literature and that its first line is widely quoted.  It is quoted as an opinion on families and is often treated as true.  I have just discussed at length why I think it's false.  Worse than that, I think it's a lie.  The difference between a lie and something that is false is that a statement that can easily be proven false has little power.  A lie on the other hand mixes truth in with falsehood and confuses the issue enough to cause doubt.  That is clearly the case here where, even among my own family members, a fairly homogenous group in terms of intelligence, religious beliefs and ideals, there was disagreement about whether the statement was true or false.  Good arguments were made to support both conclusions.  Confusing to say the least.
I hope this has been convincing as to the need to be a critical reader.  Critical readers question whether what they are reading is true.  When it comes to fiction, they question what the story means.  Stories instruct.  If you have doubts about that, I urge you to take a few weeks to carefully watch the movies your children do and read what they read.  Ask them what they learn from them.  Their insights may surprise you.  God Himself used stories to teach.  Stories are powerful and bad stories plant the seeds of bad ideas which lead to bad choices and unhappiness.  
As a mom, one of my jobs is to be a vigilant gatekeeper of my children's minds.  When it comes to their entertainment, I ask myself if the characters in their stories model good behavior and if the resolution of the story rewards good choices or bad ones.  I try to load our girls up on children's classics which are full of good lessons and characters who model the kinds of values we would like them to exhibit.
There truly is no such thing as "just a story".  Stories always teach something.  Ask yourself "what does this mean?" and "is that true?"  Be a critical reader, not a lazy one and if a book or movie offers nothing in the way of edification, kick it to the curb.  With so many really good, fun choices out there, who has time for junk?


OK--bossy big sister voice gone.  I hope you've enjoyed this episode of Decipher the Meaning as much as I have.  Thank you to everyone who contributed.


Coming soon: more of our regularly scheduled program about the adventures of the six Doyle Dames and one Dude!


PS  For any of you interested in reading more about the qualities of happy families and people, here are a few books I recommend:


The Happy Family by: Richard and Linda Eyre
A Joyful Mother of Children by: Linda Eyre
Life Matters by: John and Rebecca Merrill
The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Families and other books by Stephen Covey
The Road Less Travelled by M. Scott Peck