Faithful Today, Free Tomorrow: Maugham’s Paradox
Created at: August 29, 2025
Be loyal to what you love, you may be through with it tomorrow. — W. Somerset Maugham
Wholeheartedness Without Permanence
At the outset, Maugham joins two tensions: offer unwavering loyalty to what you love, yet accept that your bond may end. This is not cynicism but integrity—a pledge to be fully present while refusing pretense when the season changes. Maugham’s fiction often dramatizes this double stance: in Of Human Bondage (1915), Philip’s fierce commitments both form and deform him until he learns to release what no longer gives life. Similarly, Maugham the traveler and dramatist embraced many worlds without claiming any forever. The ethic is simple, if demanding: love with depth now, and when truth says “enough,” let go cleanly.
Philosophies of Impermanence
From there, the line echoes older wisdoms. Buddhism’s anicca—the doctrine that all conditioned things are impermanent—urges complete engagement without clinging (The Dhammapada, c. 3rd century BCE). Heraclitus’s fragment—no one steps in the same river twice—likewise frames fidelity as responsive, not rigid (fr. B12). Even Stoicism counsels a supple devotion: Marcus Aurelius advises loving fate’s unfolding rather than insisting on fixed outcomes (Meditations, 4.3). Read together, these sources sanction Maugham’s paradox: loyalty is measured by the quality of attention now, not by indefinite duration.
Artistic Seasons and Changing Devotions
In creative life, commitment thrives by moving. Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch’s admonition to “murder your darlings” (On the Art of Writing, 1914) invites artists to abandon yesterday’s best for today’s necessary. Consider Picasso’s Blue, Rose, and Cubist periods—each demanded total fidelity, then graceful departure. Maugham’s The Moon and Sixpence (1919), loosely inspired by Paul Gauguin, shows art as a consuming allegiance that may compel radical shifts. The lesson is continuous: pour yourself into the work as if it were forever, and then, when the work is truly finished, withdraw without regret so the next devotion can begin.
Love, Attachment, and Ethical Exits
Turning to human bonds, loyalty does not require clinging. Secure attachments can end with honesty and care, a point anticipated in John Bowlby’s Attachment and Loss (1969), which distinguishes security from possessiveness. Psychology also warns against the sunk cost fallacy—persisting merely because we’ve invested (Arkes & Blumer, 1985). Maugham’s maxim counters this trap: stay because you love, not because you once loved. Ethical loyalty includes timely endings—conversations, boundaries, and farewells that honor what was without distorting what is.
Work, Strategy, and the Courage to Pivot
Likewise in work, teams must commit deeply while remaining ready to change course. The Agile Manifesto (2001) prizes responding to change over following a plan, and Eric Ries’s The Lean Startup (2011) frames the pivot as a disciplined shift, not a betrayal. Even Jeff Bezos’s “disagree and commit” (2016 shareholder letter) models wholehearted execution after a decision—with openness to revise when evidence demands. Maugham’s principle helps organizations avoid loyal stagnation: fidelity to mission and values, flexibility about methods and timing.
Practices for Loving Fully, Leaving Well
Finally, the paradox becomes livable through ritual. Time-box commitments (e.g., a season or milestone), define exit criteria in advance, and schedule regular truth-checks. When a chapter ends, perform a closure: express gratitude, document lessons, and bid a clear farewell. Such practices prevent drift, reduce sunk-cost pressure, and preserve dignity. In this way, loyalty turns from possession into presence—intense while it lasts, generous when it must end, and ready, tomorrow, to love again.