Big Friendship: How We Keep Each Other Close

“We are not sharing our story because we think it’s exceptional. Quite the opposite. We’ve spent so much time examining our friendship because we believe many of its joys and pitfalls are pretty common.”

Here, Sow and Friedman utilize a declarative tone to assert the universality of their experiences. This approach democratizes their narrative, inviting readers to see parts of their own friendships in the book’s exploration of joy and difficulty. By emphasizing their intention to examine rather than to sensationalize, the authors lend their work an analytical quality that encourages readers to engage with their own relationships with a similar lens of introspection.

“Like any great American love story, ours began at prom. OK, actually, it was the prom episode of Gossip Girl.”

This quote playfully subverts the trope of the American love story by grounding the beginning of their friendship in a shared cultural experience rather than a traditional romantic setting. The reference to Gossip Girl, a popular television show known for its exploration of friendship and romance among New York City’s elite youth, serves as a clever narrative device that both locates their friendship within a specific cultural moment and highlights the role of shared media in bonding. The humor and casual tone in this passage draw the reader into their personal narrative, establishing a light-hearted yet deeply connective thematic undercurrent that explores how friendships can be as pivotal and storied as any romantic love story.

“What made our initial bond special is that it felt effortless […] Sure, we were probably trying to impress each other a little—OK, a lot. But mostly it felt like our meet-cute happened to us. Like we didn’t even have a say in the matter.”

In this passage, Sow and Friedman reflect on the seemingly predestined nature of their friendship’s beginning, employing a conversational and reflective tone that invites readers into the intimacy of their initial connection. The use of the term “meet-cute,” commonly associated with romantic films, suggests the authors view their friendship with the same narrative significance as a romantic relationship, challenging conventional hierarchies of relationship importance. This recounting underscores the magical, almost cinematic quality of their meeting.

“We figured that we knew how to hold on to the great friends we had while also making new ones […] and that, with minimal effort, we would keep all of these important people around until our blissful Golden Girls-style group retirement situation.”

This quote captures the authors’ initial optimism and naivety regarding friendship, employing imagery and humor to project a future of enduring camaraderie reminiscent of The Golden Girls, a show celebrated for its portrayal of strong, enduring female friendships. The mention of a “blissful Golden Girls-style group retirement situation” serves as an aspirational metaphor for the ultimate friendship goal, encapsulating a shared vision of lifelong support and companionship. However, this passage foreshadows the thematic exploration of the work necessary to sustain Big Friendships.

“The Gmail trail doesn’t lie: we were keeping up digitally, but always quickly proposing opportunities to spend time together in person. We both instinctively knew that we were still in that fragile, early phase of friendship when ‘out of sight’ quickly becomes ‘out of mind.’”

This quote underscores the importance of consistent, intentional effort in the formative stages of friendship. Sow and Friedman employ the imagery of a “Gmail trail” as concrete evidence of their budding connection. The juxtaposition of digital communication with the desire for in-person interaction highlights a modern dilemma in cultivating relationships, suggesting that while technology facilitates connection, it cannot fully substitute for the depth achieved through physical presence.

“But with the self-knowledge that only hindsight and therapy can bring, we have come to recognize that we are actually very different people—especially on an emotional level. We didn’t notice right away because we were so focused on our story of sameness.”

This quote delves into the revelations brought about by reflection and therapeutic intervention. The use of hindsight and therapy as mechanisms for self-discovery suggests a process of maturation and deepened self-awareness, highlighting the complexity of friendships that evolve over time. The initial focus on “sameness” is presented as a common initial attraction in friendships, which later gives way to the appreciation of diversity and difference as strengths rather than barriers, enriching the relationship.

“Aminatou was already a secure base, but soon she became a safe harbor. When Ann finally asked her boyfriend to move out—which kicked off a messy, drawn-out process involving several tearful relationship discussions in public places—Aminatou was her rock.”

In this quote, the metaphors of a “secure base” and “safe harbor” illustrate the evolving depth of the friendship. The description of the challenging breakup process, with its emotional and public confrontations, underscores the vital role of friendship in providing emotional stability and safety. This passage emphasizes the significance of trust and reliability in friendships, showcasing how they can offer sanctuary and strength during life’s tumultuous periods.

“We want people of every gender to be free to feel the expansive joy of intimate friendships. We want to have a supportive network of friends, fulfilling romantic relationships, and strong family bonds—while still charting our own course in the world.”

This quote articulates a vision for relationships that transcend traditional boundaries and expectations. It reflects a desire for a holistic approach to relationships, in which friendships are seen as equally important as romantic and familial bonds. The phrase “charting our own course” signals an emphasis on individual autonomy within the context of a supportive community, suggesting that true fulfillment comes from balancing personal independence with deep, meaningful connections.

“Even before we used the words ‘Shine Theory,’ it was an operating principle of our friendship. We came to define Shine Theory as an investment, over the long term, in helping a friend be their best—and relying on their help in return. It is a conscious decision to bring our full selves to our friendships and to not let insecurity or envy ravage them.”

By defining Shine Theory as an “investment” and a “conscious decision,” the authors emphasize the active, deliberate choice to nurture each other’s successes as shared victories. This approach counters the competitive dynamics often found in relationships, promoting a model of friendship based on empowerment and transparency, thus highlighting the transformative potential of adopting a cooperative, rather than competitive, mindset in friendships.

“After years of watching our male peers get priority boarding on the professional rocket ship while we were on standby in the gate area, we stopped internalizing this as a personal failure. Together, we became skeptical of gatekeepers and decided we’d get further if we helped each other.”

This quote uses metaphors to describe the authors’ perspectives on systemic gender disparities in professional advancement. The imagery of “priority boarding on the professional rocket ship” juxtaposed with being “on standby in the gate area” conveys the frustration of women grappling with systemic sexism. Sow and Friedman’s decision to reject the notion of personal failure and to support each other illustrates a shift towards mutual empowerment and challenges the competitive dynamics of female friendship often fostered by patriarchal structures.

“Stretching keeps your muscles strong and healthy, and you need that flexibility to maintain a range of motion. Without it, the muscles shorten and become tight. Then, when you call on the muscles for activity (god forbid you decide to actually go jogging), they are weak and unable to extend all the way. That means pain and damage. Stretching immediately before any physical activity won’t magically give you perfect flexibility. You’ll need to do it over time and remain committed to the process.”

By comparing the maintenance of physical health through stretching to the efforts required to sustain a friendship, this analogy underscores the necessity of ongoing, intentional care in relationships. The description of the consequences of neglecting to stretch—resulting in weakness and pain—cautions against complacency in friendships. This passage emphasizes that commitment and regular effort are essential for the health and resilience of both physical bodies and interpersonal connections.

“You could go years with a friendship requiring only a comfortable, familiar set of stretches, and then one of you starts working a night shift, becomes a primary caregiver, or meets their future spouse, and you have to learn a whole new repertoire.”

Here, the authors extend the stretching metaphor to illustrate how life changes necessitate adaptation in friendships. The phrase “comfortable, familiar set of stretches” evokes the ease of maintaining a friendship under static conditions, while the introduction of major life events highlights the dynamic nature of relationships. This quote acknowledges the inevitable evolutions in life and the corresponding need for friendships to adapt, underscoring the theme of flexibility and growth within Big Friendship.

“Rappers were shouting out their squads on hit songs long before it first appeared as a hashtagged goal in a white girl’s Instagram caption. And centuries before that, squads were a military thing: a small, organized group or tactical unit going into battle together. As #SquadGoals became whitewashed and feminized, though, it entered the popular conversation as a shorthand for a group of female friends so uncomplicated and cute it was aspirational. It also helped make marketable the idea that it is important to surround yourself with other women. Capitalism at work.”

This quote critically examines the concept of the “squad,” tracing its origins from military terminology through hip-hop culture to its mainstream, commodified form. The authors critique the simplification and feminization of “squad goals,” highlighting how this trend both dilutes the original meaning and capitalizes on female friendships. Their analysis of the appropriation and marketing of female solidarity within a capitalist framework invites readers to question the depth and authenticity of socially prescribed friendship ideals.

“Like a spiderweb, a friendweb can be quite delicate or exceptionally strong […] depending on who’s weaving, and under what circumstances, it can be unbreakably strong or whisper-thin.”

Comparing friendships to a spiderweb, this metaphor illuminates the intricate and varied nature of social connections. The strength or fragility of the “friendweb” underscores the impact of individual efforts and situational factors on the resilience of relationships, emphasizing the importance of careful, intentional relationship-building.

“With strangers, it feels like bracing for impact while her plane crashes, but when it’s an incident with someone she loves, like a white friend or intimate partner, it doesn’t feel as dramatic. Morris says that in these cases, it’s more like a drop of mustard falling on your pants. You notice and you feel uncomfortable about it, but the person who dropped the mustard does not even register what has happened.”

This quote uses metaphors to differentiate between the impact of racial insensitivities from strangers versus those from loved ones. The comparison of a plane crash to a drop of mustard starkly illustrates the varying degrees of hurt experienced; the former denotes a catastrophic event while the latter suggests a minor, yet nagging discomfort. This subtlety captures the nuanced pain of microaggressions in close relationships, emphasizing how their impact often goes unnoticed by the offender.

“This was so much more than a single unfortunate birthday party. It highlighted an unbridgeable gap between the two of us.”

In this assertion, Sow and Friedman pinpoint a critical moment that reveals deep-seated issues within their friendship, moving beyond a specific event to address underlying racial and cultural divides. The phrase “unbridgeable gap” underscores the profound challenges interracial friendships can face, suggesting that certain experiences and societal contexts create chasms not easily crossed. This moment of clarity in their narrative invites readers to consider the layers of complexity that underpin friendships across different racial identities.

“It was the most compelling version of our friendship, translated to audio.”

This statement reflects on Sow and Friedman’s podcast, Call Your Girlfriend. Using a wry tone, the authors acknowledge that their podcast depicted an idealized version of their friendship. The authors hint at the inherent challenges of rendering intimate relationships into consumable content.

“Suddenly we had two friendships. We still had our private friendship, the real and sometimes messy relationship that we had been in for years. And now we had a much more public friendship too: an idealized version of our relationships constructed in the imaginations of our listeners, most of whom had never met us.”

This reflection captures the dichotomy between the authors’ private and public friendships, acknowledging the complexity of maintaining a genuine connection while managing perceptions from a widespread audience. The contrast between the “real and sometimes messy relationship” and the “idealized version” illuminates the pressures and distortions that public visibility can introduce into personal relationships. This divide invites readers to consider the authenticity of relationships in the age of digital personas and the balancing act between private truths and public representations.

“Our posts about each other were relentlessly positive and seemingly uncomplicated…But that wasn’t the only experience of our friendship. Publicly, we were not going into detail about where we felt strain.”

This quote addresses the curated nature of online portrayals of friendship. By acknowledging that their public representations did not fully capture the nuances and challenges of their friendship, Sow and Friedman highlight the discrepancy between perception and reality in digital spaces. This candid admission serves as a critique of social media’s role in shaping narratives around relationships, emphasizing the importance of recognizing and addressing the complexities and strains that exist beyond the screen.

“The real danger doesn’t lie in telling a public story about your friendship. It lies in losing your ability to tell the private one.”

This quote underscores the distinction between public narratives and private realities within friendships, emphasizing the risk of prioritizing the outward image over the intimate, authentic experience. It cautions against the erosion of genuine connection in favor of a performative portrayal, suggesting that the essence of friendship resides in the personal and often unseen moments rather than the public display.

“We often told each other that we were ‘too big to fail.’ Too big to fail is a theory that some banks are so interconnected with the global economy that their failure would be catastrophic. It was a joke, but we felt it was true […] Here’s the cold, hard truth: ‘too big to fail’ is a lie.”

Through the metaphor of financial institutions deemed “too big to fail,” Sow and Friedman humorously yet poignantly capture their confidence in the durability of their friendship, only to confront the reality that no relationship is immune to failure. This juxtaposition between their initial belief in the invulnerability of their bond and the subsequent acknowledgment of its fragility highlights the dangers of complacency. It serves as a reminder that friendships require constant effort and attention to thrive, challenging the notion that any relationship, regardless of its depth or significance, can sustain itself without active maintenance.

“There’s an expectation that friendship is the easy part of life. All support, no strife. If it gets hard? Well, it wasn’t meant to be.”

This quote critiques the common misconception that friendships are inherently simple and effortless, pointing out the societal tendency to undervalue the complexity and work involved in maintaining these relationships. By contrasting the idealized view of friendship with the reality that challenges and conflicts are natural aspects of any meaningful connection, Sow and Friedman advocate for a more nuanced understanding of friendship as a dynamic and evolving entity. This perspective encourages readers to embrace difficulties as integral to growth and deepening of bonds, rather than signs of incompatibility or failure.

“Friendship is a real-deal insurance policy against the hurricanes of life.”

In this metaphor, Sow and Friedman elevate the value of friendship to that of a vital safeguard, offering protection and stability amidst life’s tumultuous challenges. By characterizing friendship as an “insurance policy,” they convey the idea that such relationships provide not just emotional support but also a form of resilience, helping individuals weather personal storms. This imagery underscores the authors’ belief in the transformative and sustaining power of deep friendships.