I have just returned from a long vacation visiting with family. During this time, it came to my attention that I am a great aunt. How, you might wonder, could I have only just realized this? Well, suffice it to say that the modern family can be complicated. While I had considered my great nephew a member of my family from the time he entered it, I hadn’t fully processed the knotty branches of the family tree. And so, as it turns out, at a relatively young age, I am a great aunt – and have actually been one for the last three years or so!
Coming to this realization caused my eyes to well with tears, which reappear when I recall the specific moment. They are a reflection of heartfelt gratitude at being attributed a title of importance in a family so complex. They recognize, and fall to the ground weighted with, the full understanding of the love and inclusion the title conveys.
Family is an important foundation of our culture. As evidenced by the rush to clarify the definition of marriage in California, the specific nature of family is important to a large portion of our population. Having been born into a large and closely knit family from the sparsely populated state of Montana, I appreciate the significance of family relationships in our lives. In fact, if you visit Montana, and conduct an in-depth interview with virtually any citizen there, it will almost always turn out they are acquainted with some member of my family. I could guess that a statistician could look at the sheer numbers of my family and the meager population of the state and tell you that mathematically, it is quite probable nearly everyone in Montana knows my family.
Each year members of this large family gather for a reunion/golf tournament. As I become better acquainted with cousins I grew up with, and extended family members I didn’t even know existed, I am nearly awestruck at the idea that all of these people are a part of the same whole to which I belong.
In fact, this year our family proved to be a particular benefit, as the group I traveled with had to leave behind a disabled car at the reunion location. Given the nature of the vast state of Montana, and the more remote location of the reunion, retrieval of the car should have been a clear logistical problem. Yet in a large family, it was not. One cousin lent a car for our return trip home, and a different one drove through and picked up the newly repaired car for return to us. This is not the first time the large family has benefited us. In fact, it’s not even the first car retrieval we owe to a family member.
Our families are very treasured, and maybe it is our desire to protect this valuable asset which leads us to try and restrict the definition of family. Whether it’s the exclusion of gays from the institution of marriage, or the in-law being treated as an outsider, it seems it is almost part of our nature to cling to our family as an exclusive club, to which no new members are welcome.
Given the extent of my family, you might think I would ascribe to this mentality. (When you consider that I don’t even know the names of half the people I’m related to, it seems clear I don’t need any more relations.) Yet, when you truly belong to and have benefited as a member of this vast network of ties, you come to realize that “the more the merrier” doesn’t equal a crowd, but a caring community. As my husband and I raise our children, we have even expanded our “community” by including long term friends as extra Aunts and Uncles, and we take comfort in knowing that the circle of people who will watch out for our children is larger than those related to us by blood.
And yet, philosophically, I’m all for eliminating the restrictive concept of family altogether. Does blood really make a difference? What about marriage? In some way, each definition of family, while broader than the one before, still serves as a restriction – a border letting us know for whom we will go the extra mile, and who is still on the outside. Wouldn’t it actually be better if we looked at every member of society as our family member? What would that do for differences of race, creed, class and sexuality? What if we were equally responsible for the homeless man downtown, or the immigrant child, as we are for the beloved grandparent?
I can imagine some readers cringing at the thought of accepting certain people as members of their family. Yet, being a member of a family does not have to equal approval. There are members of my family who take actions on a daily basis that I disapprove of, who vote for things I cannot stomach. All the same, should one of these family members need their car retrieved within a semi-reasonable distance of my town, I would be happy to assist. What if we each felt the same responsibility to every member of humanity? While I wouldn’t want to minimize what are legitimate differences of opinion as to what works best for society, I have to think there would be a little more compassion injected into the debate on nationalized healthcare, spending on education, immigration, and the minimum wage.
So, when I think of my aforementioned, newly named relation – I can tell you, he’s related to me by virtue of two different marriages, so he’s decidedly not my blood. Yet he’s my great-nephew, and that’s pretty spectacular. It’s enough to bring tears to my eyes. And you know what? As much as I love it, I think I’d give up the title for an entirely new definition of family… no titles necessary, everyone welcome.
Think of all the places I could leave my car.
