It's a common phrase: "It's better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all."
I'm sure that anyone who has felt heartbreak would rather have never loved at all. Although, I think how the love was lost makes a difference.
So, say the love was lost to death. Then, MAYBE, it would seem UNDERSTANDABLE to not wish you never loved, but much of the time, this phrase is crap.
But if you broke up, then I'm sure you'd wish you never loved at all.
Why would anyone be happy to wallow in woe and sorrow? If you could go back in time and change falling in love with someone who you were going to eventually split up with anyway, wouldn't you do it (hypothetically)?
It's like going back in time to warn yourself not to do something very fun because you'll end up in a full body cast. It's the logical thing to do! So why would anyone say, "Hey, that minute before the bungee cord snapped was so fun, it was worth the year you're going to have to spend in this cast!" Sitting there in the hospital bed, I'm sure that you'd then find someway to hit whomever said that over the head with a bat, club, or lamp, despite your broken arms.
And it's the same thing with heartbreak!
Do you agree? Do you think it's better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all, or it's better to have never loved at all than to have loved and lost?
*It's a nickname.
P.S. Lots of book reviews coming up!