when I was growing up as a childhood immigrant, my grandparents often gave me shit about my rather cavalier usage of the word; I found this tedious and would respond by doubling down. eventually, upon thinking hard about why they might be doing this, I realized they were right.
---
RT @mechanical_monk
americans throw the word "friend" around like a bean bag
they'll spend one evening at some meetup and be like "i made 3 new friends"
https://twitter.com/mechanical_monk/status/1429906072286998530
most of the people I'd describe as "friends" were, in fact something much closer to companions of convenience at best, and distance acquaintances at worst. thinking about what my grandparents said, I realized I probably couldn't actually rely on most of these people in a pinch
w/o that assurance of being able to rely on someone, what kind of friendship can you really have? a shallow one composed of only positives, contingent on never being too tedious? not much of a friendship, is it? it's a tough lesson, forcing us to reckon w/ how alone we really are
I used to chalk this difference up to one of language, but thats not the case, as English has parallels to each of the Russian words for types of companions; дгуг (droog) being a real friend, товарищ (tovarish) being comrade or colleague, знакомый (znakomiy) being an acquaintance
eventually I came to the realization that the difference, ultimately, stemmed from the fundamentally different models of economic organization; in an atomized society where needs are mediated by money, it's not often necessary to really be aware of who you can expect help from
when you feel sure in your ability to procure whatever you need w/o a mediating personal relationship, it becomes less pressing to strictly modulate which relationships you invest in, who gets to hear what; mistakes are much lower stakes, as "friends" are ultimately fungible.
in a society defined by the ineptitude of the system, the senseless cruelty of its whims, a keen awareness of who you can lean on is not just desirable, but necessary for survival; a poor investment of jovial sentiment can have dire consequences, should your trust be misplaced.
all in all, a bit of atomization is probably much preferable to the alternative; being able to not pay much attention to the integrity of your social bonds is a luxury, one which speaks to the reliability of the economic system.
personally, I'd rather be lonely than starving.
I've found that all I can do here is pay close attention to who treats their friends well, who notices efforts & reciprocates, rather than taking them for granted. thru this I've made some v close friends, but also some huge mistakes. perhaps this is a skill worth investing in.
but even then, I do often find myself disconcerted by the ease with which some Americans declare someone they've just met, a friend; and vice versa, how quickly they seem able to drop someone that has helped them out for years, due to superficial differences. makes one feel alone