• Misery loves company.
    But company with happiness?
    Little enough is common,
    but one completes the other.
    Would not, though, happiness be
    better served with its own ilk?
    Should misery stand to keep
    happiness from happiness?
    Or should it itself strive to
    become happiness in full?
    Is it selfish then, for it
    to seek an end to the void
    and to risk losing its all?
    It cannot be so.
    And what about happiness?
    To remain happy without
    bringing the misery its
    own joy, is it possible?
    Misery shirks company,
    but through this company is
    happiness made happiness.
    Without, happiness would
    be simply more misery.
    Happiness could not stand to
    see misery remain as
    it has been, no, it cannot.
    Misery needs company.
    But can it be so?