I hold that "work" is neutral. It needs other words around it to help identify its meaning to the speaker and is not, of itself, defined sufficiently to explain the object it refers to. It's much like "sky" in that it doesn't say that it's overcast or clear, stary or cloud-filled it's an insufficient description for much else than directing someone's attention upward.
But to imply work in the context of a relationship changes the meaning slightly but, I would argue, not enough. I think the question is not whether or not the parties involved are "working" on their relationship but more likely to be are they working on changing one or the other of them in that relationship. I don't think two people should ever be involved in changing one. I think people changing their inner workings is something only achieved by their own efforts. Which is not to say there aren't some wonderful catalysts out there but in the end, it's never "we" who changes, it's "I changed". "We" can only provide constancy, motivation and security the rest is always "I". And if a relationship keeps coming down to two parties trying to change one (even if they both are believing it's the other one) then there is a problem.
Re: Excerpts from IM, Part 3
I hold that "work" is neutral. It needs other words around it to help identify its meaning to the speaker and is not, of itself, defined sufficiently to explain the object it refers to. It's much like "sky" in that it doesn't say that it's overcast or clear, stary or cloud-filled it's an insufficient description for much else than directing someone's attention upward.
But to imply work in the context of a relationship changes the meaning slightly but, I would argue, not enough. I think the question is not whether or not the parties involved are "working" on their relationship but more likely to be are they working on changing one or the other of them in that relationship. I don't think two people should ever be involved in changing one. I think people changing their inner workings is something only achieved by their own efforts. Which is not to say there aren't some wonderful catalysts out there but in the end, it's never "we" who changes, it's "I changed". "We" can only provide constancy, motivation and security the rest is always "I". And if a relationship keeps coming down to two parties trying to change one (even if they both are believing it's the other one) then there is a problem.