Probably one of the most written about things in history.
Some swear about its magical effect in their lives, others swear at how it has destroyed theirs. Some insist that the meaning of life and even life itself is nothing but love, others deny its existence. Millions have wondered about it and a million others insist you are not even supposed to think about it, just feel it.
So what is this strange entity? With so many people doubting it, does it even exist? Is it measurable or has to be taken just on faith? Can it be proven?
About whether love exists - it is statistically impossible that billions of humans have passed on their genes to future generations merely out of an animal impulse. You can think of love as something that merely facilitates that drive or as the primary cause behind that drive. Either way, if even one couple has experienced what we conventionally think of as love or what we might disagree about is love, then logically it exists. And we have countless examples of it happening over centuries. People getting attracted to one another and bringing lasting happiness to one another.
Regardless of the statistics or the dry logic, I believe that love exists.
Biologically, chemically (maybe at the neurotransmitter level), psychologically and perhaps even mystically in ways we haven't understood yet, love exists. It can be a very beautiful emotion, elevating you to such highs as you've never felt before. And it can make you feel crushed and depressed when your expectations are not met. Sometimes, even if nothing goes ‘wrong’ per se, love can be full of a strange agony.
(It might be obvious by now that I'm not talking about the love we feel for our parents and siblings and friends. I'm talking about love for someone we might want to spend our lives with, have sex with, and perhaps even give in to the biological impulse to create little versions of ourselves.)
This love I'm talking about might look something like this. (Try telling them what they feel for each other is not real and doesn't exist.)
Or it may be very silent, insidious - not spoken about for years or acknowledged in public (not a very healthy way to be) but felt and noticed in little everyday things.
Now, to talk about something so 'all over the place' (in more ways than one), we need to define it, so we can wrap our heads around the concept. And this is where we hit the first roadblock.
No one knows how to define it, no one has the apt definition.
But then if something is so pervasive and near universal, is it really possible that no one knows how to define it? What if we flip that idea - maybe everyone knows how to define love. Maybe it's a malleable thing, which has something common at its core that everyone recognizes, but outwardly takes on as many forms as there are people out there experiencing it. Given how little we understand of this idea, I tend to agree with the latter viewpoint.
As such, I found the definition provided by Dr. Robert Peck in 'The Road Less Traveled' as a simple one; yet one that captures the very essence of the whole idea.
But before we go there let's look at some assumptions widely prevalent about love and which in my opinion distort the idea and have probably damaged a lot of people.
Romantic love could be a great start to creating actual love and is an experience to die for in itself, but it is definitely not the whole thing, nor is it a mandatory step towards feeling love for someone.
Going back to the analogy of climbing used above, you can fly to the Everest base camp and begin your journey from there (I guess that's what happens with arranged marriages!). The thrill of climbing still lies ahead. Arguably, a more fulfilling experience may be to undertake the journey from sea level to the top. But it isn’t the one true path, because there is no such thing as the one true path of love.
Romantic love isn’t the end all and be all of love (which is exactly the opposite of what most romantic comedies portray). It is the business card or résumé that gets you interested in a person. Making the contents of your résumé very attractive (being very romantic because you want someone to fall in love with you) can get you places and lead to some fun times during the interview and early days of the job. But when things start getting real, what matters is whether you deliver on what you've promised. Much better to have a real, admirable résumé that will increase the likelihood of getting you the kind of opportunities that are fit for you. And let romance be the bonus to that.
Now that we've seen what love isn't, let's try to see what love is -
I admire this interpretation because it is simple and intuitively feels true to me. It acknowledges that you have to work to make this come true, there has to be a will, you have to extend yourself. It describes love in the context of the impulse and force that drives all humans - growth. And it isn't about just giving or receiving alone. Love has to be selfish at times as it is selfless. Dr. Peck clubs together all sorts of things into 'spiritual growth' - but for the purpose of this already too long post I interpret it to mean growth as a person. Spiritual, personal, physical, financial, sexual, psychological and all different kinds of -als count towards making a person whole. The more you and your partner fulfill your respective growth potential in these, the stronger will be your love.
So if you truly love someone, you will help them grow as a person (referred to conventionally as bringing out the best in someone) and expect nothing less from them. That is the part that takes hard work.
Once you sit down to write about love, it's hard to stick to a word limit. But I'll stop here for now. Perhaps more words will come later.
Some swear about its magical effect in their lives, others swear at how it has destroyed theirs. Some insist that the meaning of life and even life itself is nothing but love, others deny its existence. Millions have wondered about it and a million others insist you are not even supposed to think about it, just feel it.
So what is this strange entity? With so many people doubting it, does it even exist? Is it measurable or has to be taken just on faith? Can it be proven?
About whether love exists - it is statistically impossible that billions of humans have passed on their genes to future generations merely out of an animal impulse. You can think of love as something that merely facilitates that drive or as the primary cause behind that drive. Either way, if even one couple has experienced what we conventionally think of as love or what we might disagree about is love, then logically it exists. And we have countless examples of it happening over centuries. People getting attracted to one another and bringing lasting happiness to one another.
Regardless of the statistics or the dry logic, I believe that love exists.
Biologically, chemically (maybe at the neurotransmitter level), psychologically and perhaps even mystically in ways we haven't understood yet, love exists. It can be a very beautiful emotion, elevating you to such highs as you've never felt before. And it can make you feel crushed and depressed when your expectations are not met. Sometimes, even if nothing goes ‘wrong’ per se, love can be full of a strange agony.
(It might be obvious by now that I'm not talking about the love we feel for our parents and siblings and friends. I'm talking about love for someone we might want to spend our lives with, have sex with, and perhaps even give in to the biological impulse to create little versions of ourselves.)
This love I'm talking about might look something like this. (Try telling them what they feel for each other is not real and doesn't exist.)
Or it may be very silent, insidious - not spoken about for years or acknowledged in public (not a very healthy way to be) but felt and noticed in little everyday things.
Now, to talk about something so 'all over the place' (in more ways than one), we need to define it, so we can wrap our heads around the concept. And this is where we hit the first roadblock.
No one knows how to define it, no one has the apt definition.
But then if something is so pervasive and near universal, is it really possible that no one knows how to define it? What if we flip that idea - maybe everyone knows how to define love. Maybe it's a malleable thing, which has something common at its core that everyone recognizes, but outwardly takes on as many forms as there are people out there experiencing it. Given how little we understand of this idea, I tend to agree with the latter viewpoint.
As such, I found the definition provided by Dr. Robert Peck in 'The Road Less Traveled' as a simple one; yet one that captures the very essence of the whole idea.
But before we go there let's look at some assumptions widely prevalent about love and which in my opinion distort the idea and have probably damaged a lot of people.
1)
Romantic love is the real/true love. More on this
later. For now, suffice it to say that this is like saying climbing upto
Everest’s base camp is equal to conquering the mountain.
2)
Love happens in a certain universal
way (conveniently portrayed by most movies and books) and if it doesn’t happen to me, it
doesn't exist. That is an understandably frustrated but nevertheless very
childish (or teenage-ish) view of things. When an adult thinks like this, it's usually from a wave of anger and self-pity. They want to defend themselves against disappointment and hurt. The longer this wave persists, the more you can be sure they will entrench themselves deeper in this sorry mentality. And I'm guessing many people do spend their entire lives thinking like this, being bitter. Feeling love for someone is a very
intimate process and by extension, it can be very different for everyone. We’re
not dealing with a universally true thing like gravity, where it applies
equally to everyone (heck, even gravity acts differently on
different bodies). If someone has a restricted, uncompromising view (a view thoroughly embedded in society's psyche through popular culture) of how they
want love to happen to them then it’s simply their loss when it doesn’t turn out that way. Obviously, they are closing their minds to other possibilities and
opportunities. If you can’t process the disappointments and compromises that
are almost inevitable with love without letting it poison your attitude to
others, then maybe it isn’t for you. Which brings me to …
3)
Everyone falls in love. Maybe. No one knows for sure. But
I doubt it. It is far more likely that everyone gets attracted to someone at least
once in the course of their lifetime. Maybe everyone feels romantic love for
someone. But it is perfectly normal to not feel love or go through the process
of falling in love or living with someone as a result of it. There are
so many singles who live happily and maybe die happily too without going
through that process.
4)
The love portrayed in romantic comedies is fascinating
and can (should) happen to me. Yes, it is fascinating. But as I’ve written previously, it is better to look at these kinds of
movies for what they are – a cleverly marketed product that is designed to be
believable and sell to you a certain warm and reassuring fantasy. For one, they
merely focus on the minor idea of romantic love and imagine it to be the real whole
thing. If you take them any more seriously than you take science fiction
movies, it’s your loss.
Probably the biggest disservice that such movies do to people is they help create an insidious mindset of entitlement in those who believe in their ideas. Suddenly, otherwise normal people start believing in the fantastic idea that some vague force called the universe should conspire and bring to them what is rightly owed to them – true love. This is lame and lazy thinking. I wonder if this ‘universe’ also subsequently conspires to bring about divorces or when someone murders their spouse for whatever reason.
No, it need not happen to you:
No one owes you love. To create and experience it with someone, (much as I hate to use the phrase) ‘you have to sell yourself’ and be wanted by the other person.
If you can offer what the other person wants (or thinks they want), and if they have what you desire then love might happen. The key ideas here are creating and making it happen. Go somewhere everyday and meet/ be social with new people. Or do daily things that make you a fascinating person.
Yes, it can and does happen without trying too (the idea portrayed in movies and books of how two people just fall in love irrationally) and if that is what you want, happy waiting to you. My best wishes; it just might happen.
A much more rewarding experience is to make yourself desirable for yourself, doing things that make you a better person in as many ways as possible in your eyes. (Thinking in a bit detached manner, would you really like to be in a relationship with someone like you?) Understand and evaluate what you are bringing to the table and whether it is something that the other wants. And keep your eyes open for someone you like.The selling part will then happen with less effort, because the product is then pretty good (and trust me, the 'market'/demand is almost always up in this case). When rejection happens as it mostly will, love hasn’t ceased to exist as an entity or idea nor is it that you or the other person has suddenly turned undesirable (assuming of course that either of you did not do something assholey or are jerks by nature). What happened is simply a rejection of what was on offer. Either find a new ‘buyer’ or improve the product (you). Or don't! That's perfectly fine too if you can live peacefully in that manner.
Probably the biggest disservice that such movies do to people is they help create an insidious mindset of entitlement in those who believe in their ideas. Suddenly, otherwise normal people start believing in the fantastic idea that some vague force called the universe should conspire and bring to them what is rightly owed to them – true love. This is lame and lazy thinking. I wonder if this ‘universe’ also subsequently conspires to bring about divorces or when someone murders their spouse for whatever reason.
No, it need not happen to you:
No one owes you love. To create and experience it with someone, (much as I hate to use the phrase) ‘you have to sell yourself’ and be wanted by the other person.
If you can offer what the other person wants (or thinks they want), and if they have what you desire then love might happen. The key ideas here are creating and making it happen. Go somewhere everyday and meet/ be social with new people. Or do daily things that make you a fascinating person.
Yes, it can and does happen without trying too (the idea portrayed in movies and books of how two people just fall in love irrationally) and if that is what you want, happy waiting to you. My best wishes; it just might happen.
A much more rewarding experience is to make yourself desirable for yourself, doing things that make you a better person in as many ways as possible in your eyes. (Thinking in a bit detached manner, would you really like to be in a relationship with someone like you?) Understand and evaluate what you are bringing to the table and whether it is something that the other wants. And keep your eyes open for someone you like.The selling part will then happen with less effort, because the product is then pretty good (and trust me, the 'market'/demand is almost always up in this case). When rejection happens as it mostly will, love hasn’t ceased to exist as an entity or idea nor is it that you or the other person has suddenly turned undesirable (assuming of course that either of you did not do something assholey or are jerks by nature). What happened is simply a rejection of what was on offer. Either find a new ‘buyer’ or improve the product (you). Or don't! That's perfectly fine too if you can live peacefully in that manner.
Romantic love could be a great start to creating actual love and is an experience to die for in itself, but it is definitely not the whole thing, nor is it a mandatory step towards feeling love for someone.
Going back to the analogy of climbing used above, you can fly to the Everest base camp and begin your journey from there (I guess that's what happens with arranged marriages!). The thrill of climbing still lies ahead. Arguably, a more fulfilling experience may be to undertake the journey from sea level to the top. But it isn’t the one true path, because there is no such thing as the one true path of love.
Romantic love isn’t the end all and be all of love (which is exactly the opposite of what most romantic comedies portray). It is the business card or résumé that gets you interested in a person. Making the contents of your résumé very attractive (being very romantic because you want someone to fall in love with you) can get you places and lead to some fun times during the interview and early days of the job. But when things start getting real, what matters is whether you deliver on what you've promised. Much better to have a real, admirable résumé that will increase the likelihood of getting you the kind of opportunities that are fit for you. And let romance be the bonus to that.
Now that we've seen what love isn't, let's try to see what love is -
"The will to extend one's self for the purpose of nurturing one's own or another's spiritual growth."
I admire this interpretation because it is simple and intuitively feels true to me. It acknowledges that you have to work to make this come true, there has to be a will, you have to extend yourself. It describes love in the context of the impulse and force that drives all humans - growth. And it isn't about just giving or receiving alone. Love has to be selfish at times as it is selfless. Dr. Peck clubs together all sorts of things into 'spiritual growth' - but for the purpose of this already too long post I interpret it to mean growth as a person. Spiritual, personal, physical, financial, sexual, psychological and all different kinds of -als count towards making a person whole. The more you and your partner fulfill your respective growth potential in these, the stronger will be your love.
So if you truly love someone, you will help them grow as a person (referred to conventionally as bringing out the best in someone) and expect nothing less from them. That is the part that takes hard work.
Once you sit down to write about love, it's hard to stick to a word limit. But I'll stop here for now. Perhaps more words will come later.
Just stopping by to say that I loved this post, that's so well-written and blah blah blah... Haha! (I'm always repeating myself here). Anyway, don't you stop writing!
ReplyDeleteHaha As long as I can count on at least one reader like you taking the time to read whenever I write, I won't stop. Thanks a lot! What do you think of this whole thing Thayse?
DeleteI don't understand why you don't get more replies... That's why I told not to stop writing, even not getting replies from others. What you write, most often it's like what is on my mind but I can't put into words. Obviously I don't think exactly like you, nor went through the things you did, but it's kind of what it looks like to me, I mean, I can relate, I identify myself with most of things you write, you know? (I fail at explaining myself...Haha!)
ReplyDeleteWell, answering to your question... From what I've seen (and/or experienced) in my life so far, I think that even the romantic love hasn't, necessarily, anything to do with being with the person that we love, I can love someone but that doesn't mean I need to be with them, to be part of their life. It's like that "There are some people that need to be loved from a distance" kind of thing (idea), because - in some cases- it's not a good idea, it's not healthy to be around them. (I'm pretty sure my explanation is rather confusing...) Most of what is written fits with(and explain way better) my vision(s) about love. For instance, what you say about romantic love. I used to believing that it was supposed to be like in the movies (the "and they lived happily ever after", things working out in the end...) But then I realized that it's not that bad these movies with happy ending, because they need to have a conclusion - and what better end could they have anyway? Hehe! But (the real) life - as cliché as it sounds - goes on.
I get you Thayse. Don't worry, you explained what you felt pretty well. In fact if you feel something can be said better in your native language (Portuguese?), I'll welcome it. Translating it will be fun in itself for me.
DeleteAbout readers..I think some people do read the posts and have thoughts too but they don't bother to write them down here. This is a pity because I really enjoy talking and debating about different topics. Which is why I appreciate your comments even more. You actually take the trouble to write. Ah well, maybe things will change in the future.
I agree with your idea of loving someone from a distance. I feel it resembles somewhat the idea of unrequited love - a very romantic concept and the basis of so much literature...the longing, the sadness yet the strange fulfillment of loving someone. And the reason for it being unrequited could be anything...like you say it might not be healthy, to be with that person or the circumstances could be unfavorable. However (maybe I'm a bit cynical), this kind of love has to be very strong or very delusional to survive for long, since it isn't a very practical way to be. I don't know how people work it out.
I do disagree with your take on the movies. They do need to have a conclusion, but it need not be a 'happy' one mostly. Some of the best romantic movies like 'gone with the wind', 'ghost', '500 days of summer don't end on a very conventionally happy note but I'd argue their end is much better, memorable and realistic (except Ghost!) than many of the happy endings in movies.
Life does go on, how the movie ends hardly matters. Still, we must pursue what we see as better quality. :)
When I wrote about happy endings in movies, it was based on something I discussed the other day (too bad I can't write it down to you, because it's not what I was talking about exactly, it's another context. I love (and prefer) movies with ends like 500 days of Summer (one of the best I've watched!) I also think they need a conclusion and the end of a movie hardly matters. I should write in Portuguese indeed. It would save me from lots of miscommunication and everything.
DeleteOh Ghost! Haha!
And by distance, that quote (idea) is more about keeping distance of some people you love because being so close, or next to them isn't always the best for ourselves. Including family members, friends. But I do understand (and agree with) what you say about unrequited love and loving (or believing to be in love with) someone distant from me. I have been there.
I love debating about different topics, too! Hopefully the other readers will write their thoughts...