Engagement

Language has a funny way of annexing.
This word or that word takes meaning
and bring it into itself. Then, for god-knows-what-reason
that meaning is emblazoned on that word for perpetuity.

God, Jesus
communism, anarchy
philosophy, truth
death, life

Imagine the baggage all these tidbits of language
are carrying. Imagine all the nuances and slight
differences of meaning they carry in every heart.
Imagine for a minute what they all mean to you.

Hobbes said that all words are simply names
which have been given to objects: whether it
be chair or djembe or book or pan or pocket
or Thurston or Mikhail or Evanston or parka.

I’d like to propose an engagement.
Is it possible to annex the meaning conflict
to the word engage?
By no means is this meant disparagingly.
Only think of the contexts in which it is used—
engage the enemy.
To become engaged is to enter into a particular
kind of conflict that will involve at least two people in
an attempt to come
to some kind of agreement about whatever it is they
have decided to become engaged about—note the italics.

Love is an engagement. You engage in love.
War is an engagement. You engage in war.
A conversation is an engagement. You engage in conversation.
Reading is an engagement. You engage in reading.
Writing is an engagement. You engage in writing.
Playing is an engagement. You engage in playing.
Music is an engagement. You engage in music.

In all of this there is an element of combat
between yourself and some seen or unseen
combatant.
Engaging Webster to think about it.