[QUOTE=Dottygumdrop]
I was listening to the radio yesterday, when a song by Yes came on – Owner of a Lonely Heart. Normally no biggie, but for some reason it got me thinking, is the owner of a lonely heart much better than the owner of a broken heart? Or was Alfred Lord Tennyson on the money when he said:
Having loved and lost, and fortunately loved again, my money’s with Lord Tennyson.
What say you all?
[/QUOTE]
I believe you’ve drawn a false dichotomy. Tennyson says nothing about having a broken heart, only about having “loved and lost.” The distinction he draws is between having experienced love, with all its restrictions and risks, and not having experienced love and that whatever the outcome of that love, it is better to have experienced it.
from “In Memoriam A.H.H.”
XXVII
I envy not in any moods
The captive void of noble rage,
The linnet born within the cage,
That never knew the summer woods:
I envy not the beast that takes
His license in the field of time,
Unfetter’d by the sense of crime,
To whom a conscience never wakes;
Nor, what may count itself as blest,
The heart that never plighted troth
But stagnates in the weeds of sloth;
Nor any want-begotten rest.
I hold it true, whate’er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.