"Settlers" and "Reachers"

I have found that wisdom comes from many unexpected places. I have a friend that believes there are no life situations the answer to which cannot be found among the dialog within the Godfather trilogy. While I do not hold to that particular version of the reality of wisdom, I do find that it does comes from some pretty strange places. "A man's got to know his limitations" is a great line spoken by the character "Dirty Harry" Callaghan in the series that bore his moniker. It may have come from a fictional character in a movie, but this makes it no less true and good advice.

I was watching a television show a couple of weeks ago and got another flash of genius. It was posited that in every romantic relationship there are two roles; "The Reacher" and "The Settler." The idea is that in a romantic relationship the Reacher is the one that has managed to have established a relationship with someone outside their class, or someone better than they deserve. This half of the pair is therefore always trying to remain worthy of the other. The Settler, on the other hand, is the person that has entered into a relationship with someone that is less than who they could have and they therefore have settled for less than what they could have. The theory goes that the Settler is so profoundly secure in the relationship, knowing that they are so deeply loved by the Reacher, that they never worry about, nor do they have to worry about, their partner fooling around on them. The Reacher, however, always wonders why the Settler is with them and can be prone to bouts of intense jealousy, born of that insecurity.

I initially thought the premise ridiculous, but upon further thought, I found that it does have merit. In fact, I think most of us have a tendency to define ourselves in relationships, albeit unknowingly, within one of these two roles. I think we actually define ourselves long before we have met the individual with whom we establish a relationship. That is, we are Settlers or Reachers looking for our opposite number when we are seeking to establish a relationship, but I think it also depends a lot on where we are in our lives at the time we are seeking the relationship.

I have been at different points in my life a Settler or a Reacher. I have settled, later to find I settled for far too little and actually became quite insufferable. I owe a great apology to those women I "settled" for as I entered into relationships with a certain dishonesty. I knew, at least in the back of my mind, that the relationship would not last, but I entered into it anyway. This was incredibly unfair of me and later became hurtful when my partner and I separated as a result of my dissatisfaction in the relationship. I guess, by virtue of the fact that I recognize it now, I have grown some (better late than never?).

I have also been in relationships where I was the Reacher, but I find that it was interesting that my partner, at least in one case, was trying to fulfill the role of the Reacher as well. While I thought myself to be less worthy of her, she thought herself to be less worthy of me. It made for an interesting situation to say the least. Both of us were working as hard as we could to be worthy of each other. It would have worked out too, but the insecurity part got us in the end. Since neither of us could figure out why the other was in the relationship, one of us ended it pre-emptively to avoid what was obviously going to be a broken heart with all the accompanying pain, anguish and suffering.

I think that relationships involving two Reachers can work because each of them is putting in more than 50%. Thus, there is always a little bit of slack to cover when one partner is not quite up to equal participation, which happens in every relationship from time to time. A Reacher can certainly assuage a Settler's ego. I think that relationships between a Settler and a Reacher can work, but, more often than not, they are time limited. I am not sure, however, if a relationship can ever work out between two Settlers; they just seem to dissolve within the egos of the people involved. Two people who look at each other, just knowing in their heart of hearts that they could have done better does not make for a lasting relationship.

I am not sure about my analysis, but if a function of wisdom is that it makes us consider, analyze and think about something, then I found some pretty good wisdom in a prime-time sitcom.