Originally posted on www.thecandycoating.com, though still written by ME. Check it out!
It’s what we want to hear, what we love to say. What we want to think. But is the way we think about love the same as everyone else? Culturally, aren’t there vast differences between what “love” means? What love are we even talking about? Oh, so many questions.
Enter the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. The Sapir-Whorf hypothes is a linguistic axiom, or self-evident truth, that our friend Wikipedia defines as: “a systematic relationship between the grammatical categories of the language a person speaks and how that person both understands the world and behaves in it.”
In other words: The way we talk affects how we think and behave. Quick example to remove any confusion: anthropologists found an island culture that did not have a single word for “war” or “weapon,” and from this could conclusively say that this culture was entirely peaceful. If they don’t have a word for it, how could they do it?
Along these lines, I want to point out something that my Anthropology professor pointed out to me: English only has one word for love. This may not seem strange in itself, until one factors in the Sapir-whorf hypothesis. What does it say about how we think and behave with love that we only have one word for it?
Even more poignantly, what does it mean that our primary conception of this one word is romantic love? The Greeks had three words for love: Agope – which is basically altruism, Filial – which is brotherly love, and Eros – which is what we would call romantic love.
These observations are significant insofar as they indicate our lack of descriptive language when it comes to love. When I say, “I love you,” it is purely context and interpretation that we must rely on. Or even worse, it is just assumed that I mean love in the romantic sense.
Now, I’m not saying coming up with new words for love will solve everything. But I am saying that coming up with new concepts for love would be a good start. Elevating and recognizing other forms of love as equally valid to and just as important as Eros or romantic love would, I think, go a long way in helping us, as a culture, develop a more mature sense of LOVE. And if you don’t believe such a thing is necessary, perhaps you are unaware of the state of things. This is forgivable, but only to an extent! With a 50% plus divorce rate and a penchant towards separation that is so strong it has led psychologists to label Americans as practitioners of “serial monogamy,” it seems clear to me that we don’t actually know what the crap we are doing here in America.
Romantic love is certainly a form of love. It is even a good form of love. Me and romantic love - we tight. However, it is only one facet on the much larger diamond of love. Expecting relationships, marriages, and our love lives to last on only romantic love is like expecting a tripod to stand with only one leg. There is more to it; there has to be, because, as any who have had even the most cursory experience with romantic love can testify, romantic love is unreliable and generally short-lived. A spark may create the flame, but it cannot sustain a flame once lit. A flame untended is a flame doomed to die out. And a flame doomed to die out is hardly a flame worth having at all.
But hey, I’m just the guy writing these things – what do I know? I’m curious what YOU think. So, what do you think?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I'm studying to be a writer. And thus, I occasionally feel the urge to write. This is YOUR chance to study to be a reader. In conclusion: Power to the people.
4 comments:
Me and romantic love - we tight.
Another dilemma that arises, I think, as a result of this misunderstanding or misuse or misrepresentation of love that we have in this culture: the awkwardness of "saying it back."
"If my friend says he loves me and I say it back right away, will he take it the wrong way?"
Ahh love.
This is very well-written! I like the paragraph with the tripod analogy. Great work.
Good writing Robbie, you made a lot of great points and I agree with everything you said. You asked for a response... Here's my attempt at responding.
The “L” word: Too often used and analyzed.
An attempt to express an emotion… An attempt to put words forward in order to explain the unexplainable…
When it comes to emotions the term I LOVE YOU really holds no substance if not backed with proof and with action... Words are empty if not supporting a truth. They are simply a shell. The word LOVE is a word which people attempt to inject with more meaning than just about any other word in the English dictionary.
Love, in its truest form, (when it’s not being mistaken for other words such as “infatuation”, “attraction,” or “attachment”) is only one kind. It is the same across the line. Love cannot be divided or divvied. There is no limit to the number of people you can love, and it doesn’t vary. What distinguish the differences that people often mistake for different kinds of love, are the actions that follow. In my opinion love is love. It is an emotion, an attachment to the wellbeing of another individual, and the desire to put this other person before yourself that constitutes the definition of love. Love between mother and child, between spouses, and between friends is not formed and developed on different kinds of love. They are all supported by the same love, they are all grounded in the exact same thing. The actions which follow are where people begin to say, “This love is different than that love.” The love is not what is different… the actions and desires associated with the individuals are different… but love, love is love. And love is a spiritual connection. (But what exactly does that even mean!?!?)
The term love is extremely broad and, in my opinion, overly used. It is a word that people dwell upon and try to dissect, but it is a word that is solely based upon emotion, action, and spiritual progress. It is a topic that artists and singers become completely consumed by and one which societies and movies try to tell us we need to define, or worse, they try to define it for us without any spiritual reference. If love was completely replaced by a myriad of other words, and never used again, it would still manifest itself in human interaction and emotion…Which is why I believe that the word “love” is really nothing at all, except an attempt to explain an unexplainable connection between individual souls, and is often used to explain things which actually do not pertain to the word “love” much at all.
I do still see an importance in telling those that you love that you love them. However, not everyone views love in this way, so all the same questions still persist when saying "I love you" to those of the opposite gender who you do not intent to have a romantic relationship with. Oh the complications!
Hm... A friend and I talked about this over a hookah (can you say rose and mint combo?) a few weeks ago. I'll agree with you that when it comes to love, too much emphasis is on "eros," as if it's the only kind that matters. I think that collectively, our concept of romantic love is really skewed right now. (like it even needs to be said... well, maybe it does, some people don't seem to think anything of it). I guess what people seem to be doing is going out in search of romantic love and confusing attraction with love. People attract other people. I'm not talking about seduction or anything, just that people want to be with people. And if our society tells us that the most important thing is to find someone to hold onto and present flowers and share pudding snacks with, then with each person you find yourself drawn to, you might be tempted to pull out a little file and start analyzing whether or not this could be LOVE. But this seems to get people into trouble. I mean, to me, "romance" seems fake. Or at least forced. Maybe I'm just pessimistic or "too young to understand" but I would much rather have a love that is deeper than romance. One that only grows stronger once my womb starts to dry up and my skin gets crinkly. Uh... was that too much?
Post a Comment