This blog is closed
Quick question
Can someone here please define “love”? Thanks.
Posted by: Chris Clarke
Note: A database glitch in 2008 ate a bunch of archived comments. Don't be offended if yours isn't here, or confused if the conversation seems disjointed. Thanks!
Never having to say you’re sorry.
Next question?
(I’m sorry…)
By: By Sven DiMilo on 2008 04 22
“love is touching souls.” - joni mitchell
By: By Isabel on 2008 04 22
Nope. But I know it when I see it.
By: By alice on 2008 04 22
I *so* wish that were an easy question.
Love of a person? Unfettered joy in another, even when they piss you off; where their interests are as important as your own, but they don’t destroy you; comfort with a touch, a heartbeat…
Love of a dog? Unconditional delight and mutual reliance; comfort in fur, eyes, and a wolfish grin; protectiveness; sacrificing the outcome…
Love of wild spaces? Feeling the heartbeat of a Place; protecting and conserving; finding comfort…
Why is there a difference?
By: By Lyn on 2008 04 22
(Am I the only one laughing?)
By: By Theriomorph on 2008 04 22
Sorry.
Eros or agape?
By: By Theriomorph on 2008 04 22
Tmorph, love means never having to… oh, never mind.
Eros or agape?
Some of each, thanks. And maybe a little caritas on the side.
By: By Chris Clarke on 2008 04 22
Diotima wrote a nice blog post about this.
By: By Theriomorph on 2008 04 22
Theriomorph quotes: “He will create many fair and noble thoughts and notions in boundless love of wisdom; until on that shore he grows and waxes strong, and at last the vision is revealed to him of a single science, which is the science of beauty everywhere.”
If that isn’t love it’ll have to do ... until the real thing comes along.
By: By Brooklynite on 2008 04 22
Zeke.
By: By Sherwood on 2008 04 22
Oh, Sherwood is right.
By: By Theriomorph on 2008 04 22
Well, then love is NOT Zeke, because he always desperately wanted to eat whatever I was gonna eat, which is a bit of a Zero-Sum arrangement.
And I always desperately wanted time spent with him.
Unless you mean that selflessness that contains the seeds of its own selfishness.
By: By Chris Clarke on 2008 04 22
“Ouch!!!”
.....
“If I had a choice, I’d do it again.”
The definition of stupid is subtly, but profoundly, different.
By: By Rob G on 2008 04 22
Hey, what happened to the “Edit” thingy?
By: By Rob G on 2008 04 22
The definition of stupid is subtly, but profoundly, different.
Damn it.
Why didn’t anyone tell me sooner?
By: By Theriomorph on 2008 04 22
Unless you mean that selflessness that contains the seeds of its own selfishness.
Is this not the dialectic of dogs?
(Maybe cats, too, but that selflessness element is not so easily discerned.)
By: By ALotOfCatsAroundHere on 2008 04 22
Damn it.
Why didn’t anyone tell me sooner?
You need to become a member and log in for that function to be available.
By: By Chris Clarke on 2008 04 22
Oops. That was supposed to answer Rob’s question about the edit thing.
By: By Chris Clarke on 2008 04 22
ha ha ha
By: By Theriomorph on 2008 04 22
I’ve had it wrong all this time. I’ve had to say I was sorry, and I’ve been selfish and dealt with selfishness in love. My joy has occasionally been “fettered”, and I’m sure I’ve had the same effect on those I’ve loved. I’ve brought out the worst in a few loves, and despite my best intentions let them bring out the worst in me.
So if I were to venture a guess on love’s definition, and for the record I usually wouldn’t, but it would start with the ability to roll with and interest in recovering from all of the above.
By: By Tonya on 2008 04 22
OK, I’ll take a shot at it:
Wanting what’s best for another being even more than you want it for yourself.
I suppose that’s selflessness. But I don’t think selflessness quite does it - there needs to be the “what you want for yourself” part of the equation in there too, even if you feel it and let it go to a lower level. We can be selfless with people we don’t really love, I think.
By: By beth on 2008 04 22
(And in my world, he’d damn well better say he’s sorry!)
By: By beth on 2008 04 22
I stand corrected.
Who knew?
By: By Sven DiMilo on 2008 04 22
So, I read my kids a bunch of stories tonight. One was Two Large Stones, by Arnold Lobel:
Two large stones sat on the side of a hill. Grass and flowers grew there. “This side of the hill is nice,” said the first stone. “But I wonder what is on the other side of the hill?” “We do not know. We never will,” said the second stone.
One day, a bird flew down. “Bird, can you tell us what is on the other side of the hill?” asked the stones. The bird flew up into the sky. He flew high over the hill. He came back and said, “I can see towns and castles. I can see mountains and valleys. It is a wonderful sight.”
The first stone said, “All of those things are on the other side of the hill.” “How sad,” said the second stone. “We cannot see them. We never will.” The two stones sat on the side of the hill. They felt sad for one hundred years.
One day, a mouse walked by. “Mouse, can you tell us what is on the other side of the hill?” asked the stones. The mouse climbed up the hill. He put his nose over the top and looked down. He came back and said, “I can see earth and stones. I can see grass and flowers. It is a wonderful sight.”
The first stone said, “The bird told us a lie. That side of the hill looks just the same as this side of the hill.” “Oh good!” said the second stone. We feel happy now. We always will.”
By: By Charles on 2008 04 22
In other words, I have no idea.
By: By Charles on 2008 04 22
bound by the familiar, unconditional, forgiving..
By: By rose on 2008 04 23
Love is remembering your story, and telling it
often.
By: By jeanie on 2008 04 23
Love is also my copy of Walking with Zeke. Thank you so much for taking the time to do this. I knew it
would be good.
By: By jeanie on 2008 04 23
Love is letting go.
By: By nina on 2008 04 24
the thingies jumping across synaptic clefts going “wheeeee”
By: By buck on 2008 04 24
the thingies jumping across synaptic clefts going “wheeeee”
love it.
Sappho said love is the limb-loosener. Agha Shahid Ali called it the cage to cry in. And I always dug Auden’s ‘mortal, guilty, but to me the entirely beautiful.’
By: By Theriomorph on 2008 04 24
Love is the light which illuminates and animates your field of vision. Love is not needing to define that light in any particular way so that it keeps on spilling over and spreading. Love is the beauty of union and the pain of separation at the same time.
By: By Kai on 2008 04 27
Oh, I like that one a lot.
By: By Tom on 2008 04 28
Love is the passion which can change you , passion which can turn you from evil into fair , from bad to good , if anyone remember ( Beauty & the Beast ) will come to know the defination of love
By: By Mahmoud Magdy on 2008 04 28
“Not love, he thought to himself. And then thought, ... maybe they’d had such rotten luck with the love and man’chi aspect of relations because that word in [English] blurred so many things together it just wasn’t safe to deal with. They were lovers. But Ragi said they were sexual partners. They were lovers. But Ragi said they were associated. They’d made love. But Ragi said there they were within the same lord’s man’chi. They’d made love. But Ragi said there were one-candle nights and two-candle nights and there were relationships that didn’t count the candles at all. They’d made love. But a Ragi proverb said one candle didn’t promise breakfast. ... He was quite out of his depth trying to reckon that. But with Jago he certainly wouldn’t count the candles. Whatever they could arrange, as long as it could last from both sides, that was what he’d take.”
From “Inheritor” by CJ Cherryh (p 365 of my paperback edition). This is part of a series set on an alien world where humans are co-existing uneasily with another species, Ragi, who are said not to have emotions in the same way as humans. (There are some obvious parallels to Terran situations too.)
By: By Mez on 2008 04 28
Categories:
Biography
