The Phenomenology of Love
When I think of the word love, and when I think of how best to write an
article based on such a thing, I'm left here just staring at my keyboard in a
state of melancholy. I begin to reminisce on many painful memories and events
that have, hitherto, taken place within my experience of twenty-first century
love and life. I no longer feel the immediate joy of what 'love' may have meant
to me ten years ago, but instead I now relate to an entire new meaning of what
the word love actually both means and implies.
We often see a pretty painted house from the outside and assume that
only beautiful things can exist within. Often do we also see two people in-love
emerging from the beautiful house; pecking one another on the cheek as they
make their way to work. As they do so, we may even think to ourselves that they
must share a happy matrimonial home. Unfortunately, we have no real access to
formally declare such a thing as truth, even though we frequently display the
tendency to do so we are often mistaken as inside the house exists a reality of
its own.
As a divorcee that was once married for four years, as well as someone
who has experienced the feeling of being "in-love" throughout
numerous relationships, I have come to realise that love is not what it says it
is or what it first presents itself to be. Love can be all the bad in the world,
the same way that it can be all the good in the world. I guess, to understand
why I have chosen to begin this article by placing love in such a negative
light, is because I ask the reader to question, why not? Why must we always
hold an immediate denotation for such a word that is painted out to be so
beautiful when it also has the potential of producing negative connotations. It
is this denotation that strangely asks of us to immediately believe that love
can only exist within its very own extreme.
We are presented with the fallacy that love is a garden abundant with
beautiful insects and flowers; where all people are at one with each other and
that this is the absolute truth of what love actually is, however. When you are
enabled to not only read a word but can also become the word, it is only then
can you grasp the meaning of such concept; a concept that was at first observed
as a mere object but has soon-after become even more-so tangible.
Is it possible that love, just as with anything else, has a secret method
of working that we fail to see due to the fact that we are always happy to
accept the first appearance? The more I look back at all of my experiences as
well as all the pain I have experienced, in the name of love, the more it draws
me closer to the works of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel who posited that things
worked dialectically, and opposing forces were essential to reaching the
absolute (synthesis). It reminds me of when my son entered the world for the
very first time. The moment I first encountered a visual of my son, I loved him
very much and pretty much more than words could describe. However, what reason
could be applied to such an instant and on the spot love? What I loved of my
son I'm not so sure of, as I knew nothing more of the baby I held in my arms
than I knew how to explain what it was about him that I loved. In fact, nearly
six years on, I still have not reached a full understanding of this love!
Although, we sometimes arrive at discord with one another, the love only seems
to grow harmonious from this and the word love then becomes enabled to be
defined to a greater extent.
It is exactly the same should our relationships with one another
dissolve, as we enter the experience of hurt and pain due to the fact we are
experiencing loss and so we find ourselves confining ourselves quite frequently
to our memories. We take a look back as we stand on the dark lonesome road and
all we see is a corner; never knowing what is around the corner as most times
we tend to dwell on our losses rather than make way for time so that it can
take us around the corner and into happiness again.
Love cannot be a form of utopia or heaven, as I believe that love is an
equal balance of both love and hate as it continues to move forward and grow
just as we do. There is an equilibrium to where both love (Thesis) and hate
(Anti-Thesis) clash together thus creating the absolute attachment (Synthesis).
To try to imagine the perfect relationship between two people or between
Nations as something being 'bliss' would be to ignore the truths that actually
bind all together. It has taken many wars to show people how to love. For
example, post-Second World War in the UK, minorities have faced racism and
violence while here in this country. Even though this country fought against
the likes of Hitler and fascism, we started off by (the thesis) a noble cause
by standing up and fighting against such vile hatred. Soon after, when
minorities first came to the UK to take up much lower paid work, we then
alienated them (the anti-thesis). In 2012, we now embrace them as our own and
are mostly proud to call them British, just as they are to identify themselves
as British. It could also be argued on a supra-level that Hitler's 'hate' could
have been the original thesis or the anti-thesis to a single human race. Maybe
his movement worked for the good of humanity as many of us now, despite our
differences, like to see one another as equals.
Therefore, the synthesis can only mean equality, and such equality can
never be balanced without understanding both sides. Love was never meant to be
easy as if it were easy, who would truly want it? As something that is earned
produces more value than something that is simply given away for nothing. Love
and hate are all to thank for the struggle towards equality on a national level
right the way down to the relationship level between two people.
by Sean Ash
