February 03, 2006

Love and Lust

To start with, there is a quote from Georges Simenon

Passion is a malady. It is possession, something dark. You are jealous of everything. There is no lightness, no harmony. Love, that's completely different. It is beautiful. Love is being two in one. It is being so close that when one opens his mouth to speak, the other says exactly what you want to say. Love is a quiet understanding and a fusion.

I agree and disagree. The vision of love he describes, is the ideal of love. When someone could say something exactly what I want to say, or even more than that, better than what I can say, I would feel instantly madly in love, that's true. But that's more likely to happen between close friends than lovers, so that I call that love 'friendly love', it's sexless. (It can even be described with Confucious saying: 君子之交,淡如水。- the relationship between wise people is light as water.)Romantic love, on the other hand, comes with sexual passions, in my opinion, inevitably. Nevertheless I believe there is a bridge which you can build up to shift from the initiality of sexual passion to the idealistic vision of love. And the key word must be comitment. The closeness of sexual encounters is sometimes said to be mere pleasure, but I believe there's more than that – you carry it with other memories of you and your partner, and it is that whole makes you love.

(I'm hungry… I will come back to this topic later)

Now that I'm back, having some more opinions in my mind

– about sex without wiling to make comitment: it is not love, but it is possible that strong desire to reserve the moments of pleasure may push people to make comitment in consequence. What so terrifying is actually the lightness people bear in their attitudes towars these sort of encounters: the sex anarchy.

– I think it's scary to draw a line between sex and love as if they are distinctive sentiments. As we discussed in the lecture yesterday, the notion of love hadn't gotten well spreaded till the 18th century in Europe. Before that, there was sex, which was a taboo topic in the medevil time; and there was marriage, which was being institutionalised for survival. Love is a modern notion. I guess, therefore, what we call love today, might have been deprived from the intoxication of the aftermath of sexual desire and sexual behaviour. To distinguish the two, is to stigmatise sex, and mislead the understanding of love.

– That's probably one reason to cause the situation of sex anarchy. Because love is pure and untouchable, people discard it in their mind when they have sex, aiming only gaining physical pleasures, leaving themselves emptiness and melancholy afterwards, whereas all they desire for, might be just to be tied up with somebody, mentally, and physically.

– So it is neccessary to avoid sex anarchy. Learn to control the body, is saving it for better communication and better fun.

– Love is not light, and sex is not heavy.

- 7 comments by 1 or more people Not publicly viewable

[Skip to the latest comment]
  1. I've always believed that love is something which has to be mutual otherwise it's simply not real love. You might care deeply for that person and say that you love them, but how can it be love without that feeling of reciprocation?

    In relationships where this form of love doesn't exist, there is always disproportion in emotion: no real parity of feeling or desire. So one partner, although perhaps caring for the other, does not feel as deeply as the other. I think this describes the majority of modern relationships formed and lost on a daily basis in this country.

    If that strong feeling were reciprocated then it would immediately become love. But until then (lust is probably not the appropriate word) passion is a good choice.

    03 Feb 2006, 13:22

  2. Guohui Zhang

    Love is the feeling of loving to love, no matter what it is 'target'. Haha… It's simple, isn't it? :)

    04 Feb 2006, 09:38

  3. As a scientist, I'm proud to announce that love is just the work of chemicals. I've been feeling hyper for the last couple of days, smiling like a maniac, launching like a rocket, and no, I'm far from in love. However, I've recommenced having three sugars in my tea, and love had nothing to do with it. In my plain, flat, scientific mind Love is nothing but a perfect match of chemically balanced people. Oh, and in modern world, circumstances have to favour the union, otherwise it's a crippled love, i.e. 门当户对,不然就驴唇不对马嘴. However, I think it necessary and yet mean to disagree with or criticise an opinion, because it's always harder to come up with one myself. But now that I've acknowledged I'm intentionally being mean, I can go ahead and say that only drama queens would call Love a Malady.

    I like the idea of commodifying love. How many books has it sold, how many films has it sponsored, condoms consumed, pregnancy tests advertised, abortions done, wedding companies set up, and etc, etc, etc. Love certainly is a bestseller.

    Russian writers believed that love was a tragedy. They didn't say anything about sex. Maybe they reckoned sex was a comdey, and didn't want to share the goodie-bag.

    04 Feb 2006, 19:09

  4. PenguinA

    'Love is a perfect match of chemically balanced people'

    I love this expression, it's got all the elements for a good relationship: perfect – which means just the exact amount of all sorts of things; chemical, as Lu already explained, and balanced.


    Do you think Satre and Beauvior shared this sort of 'love'? link Their relationship is always a good sample to testify the notion of love.

    05 Feb 2006, 03:28

  5. I don't think I know enough about them to judge if they had the so called love. But it seems like their love was no 'malady' and was certainly constructive. Maybe love is there to help us get over the fear of death? Kinda leave a trace on Earth, a memory. And to make us believe that our lives meant something if we loved at least once in our life.

    05 Feb 2006, 20:05

  6. What happens when a philosopher, a scientist, an artist, a banker and a lawyer talk about love?

    A translator has to be called in.

    12 Feb 2006, 17:44

  7. Hahahaha… how wonderfully apt!

    12 Feb 2006, 19:19

Add a comment

You are not allowed to comment on this entry as it has restricted commenting permissions.

February 2006

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Jan |  Today  | Mar
      1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28               

Search this blog


Most recent comments

  • Democracy is not going well, maybe we should switch back to socialism… by baia azzurra on this entry
  • testing here.. by cloudy on this entry
  • I dont think wedding venues has anything to do with this! :) by Gambling on this entry
  • I dont know if you are but for an ectomorph like me this sounds like great weight gaining advice by kigokare on this entry
  • Good luck with your new blog! by Frucomerci on this entry

Blog archive

Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder