love ( lŭv ) n. ?
I've questioned love before and recently I thought about it again..precisely around Valentines when I walked around and once again saw all the flowers and toys and etc for sale, so here is Rant about Love part 2- i hold no claims to this post retaining logical consistency...
Does this 'love' thing really exist? And this may seem like an age old question but I don't really think it is..I think it is a modern question i.e 20th century onwards. I googled the origin of the word and the first site Ask Oxford- and of course we trust Oxford- says that 'The Indo-European root is (also behind) Latin lubet 'it is pleasing' and lubido 'desire' " .So there it is, love comes from the same place as the word libido! So why then have I been made to grow up thinking that love was some fuzzy cuddly feeling you feel inside..? But then we come to different kinds of love..AGAPE..'love' of God (the Christian one)...so ok it has given me some warm fuzzies in my time...But then really is that what it is? I think love has been elevated into an abstract concept by people who are interested in benefiting from it in the entrepreneurial aspect...I mean until last century people used to get married because their parents obsessed, assessed and then possessed their child a mate for the benefit of their soceity...None of this buying roses for how much! going to restaurants for a romantic dinner for another obscenity of spending..and etc..And ok maybe there are people who skint it out at the [insert cheap fast food joint of choice]..but don't you think you'd rather be in that five star restaurant eating less food for more money? I don't know, I may be being quite removed in my dissent because in the end I don't really care where I go to eat or whatever..But it just seems like there is something twisted and capitalist about the institute of 'love' these days? And back in the day of course its very close brother institue marriage was straight forward..'yes my daughter will cost these many cows'...But now corporations who have NO vested interest in our well being have people hoodwinked and make believe that it is the size of a bouquet or number of carats that matter in the courtship process. And even without those specific things its probably going to be the car,clothes shoes,hair that you purchased in order to look good for the possibility of acquiring that mate. But then again i dont even care about these things most of the time,but I can see how they can be a factor.
On a side note, I watched this documentary once called The Human Sexes, it captured humans as they would animals-Crocodile Hunter/Attenbrough style- in the mating process- and I always remember their portrayal of dancing as a sort of mating dance...
Anyway,(mini spoiler to follow)If you've read or watched Pride and Prejudice then you'll notice at the end , the only couples that remain are those based on respect and caring. And so 'love' for family, is that 'love' or respect and caring? But then here is where I get more confused because I know that you can feel this 'love' feeling for some family members but not even respect or care for them...Go back to the humans like animals parallel - does a pride of lions stay together because they 'love' each other or for survival? In writing that last comment I see how sad it can be without the possibility of 'love' ,if we were reduced to animal instinct ... its a cold place to be ... But what if that it how it is and 'love' is just an illusion?
Its just semantics, you can say...But my biggest problem with these semantics is the use of them to create a billion dollar industry that preys on suckers who are willing to believe that this apparent feeling 'love' can be bought. And I know this isn't an epiphany or anything, Alicia Keyes sang about it the other day...But I'm just confused and don't know if the existence of this word in its 20th century ambiguity is beneficial to us as a society.
**DISCLAIMER: the writer reserves the right to change her opinion once she hopefully passes from this period of jaded unbliss.
posted by Luna @ 4:29 PM
Comments: 2
