Love Dismantled...

Sometimes a question leads to quest. And this is exactly what happens to those who question love. Not one human on earth exists who has not dealt in some way or another with this topic. So have I. And this blog is an intentional attempt to arrange my thoughts on the question before I undertake the quest myself. This will include breaking a semi-structured mindset already present in my mind regarding the subject and building a more structured concept which will be clear enough for me to understand and stable enough for my pursuit of happiness. The only big problem is - logic is responsible for construction of structure and love is responsible for destruction of logic :)

But let me give it a try anyway...

Let me start with one thing I am sure about 'love', and that is - its a word, a phonetic. Now the next question which naturally arises is 'what does it mean?' To this I can definitely say for sure that its meaning changes with the context. The 'love' used in 'I love You', 'making love', 'love thy neighbour', etc are all different. I am narrowing down the scope of this blog to 'romantic love' and hereforth all my references to 'love' would denote that unless stated otherwise.

To take one abstract definition of love - 'love usually refers to a deep, affectionate, ineffable feeling of tenderly caring for another person'. The verb here is 'caring'. So when I say that my mom loves my dad, its naturally understood that she cares a lot about him, and in his interests would lie hers. Though this appeals well to our common sense, most of the times we do not use it understand whether a person is truly in love. What we look for are the symptoms - increased heart rate, loss of appetite and sleep, and an intense feeling of excitement. This would fall under the scientific definition of love which treats it like a long process with 3 different phases in order- lust, attraction and attachment.

Lust is what happens at first glances - a sudden desire jumps out within; blame it to the increased release of testosterone and estrogen, so its kinda temporary and can even be sub-conscious. Attraction is the transition from this temporary to the permanent phase usually propelled by repeated stimulation of senses in the person. ie. seeing, hearing & touching will actually increase the chances of attraction manifolds. This is the phase in which the symptoms which I mentioned earlier usually exist and is said to last from 1 to 3 years. Finally comes attachment, a kind of emotionally symbiotic bonding which is long term and permanent.

So, now I have given an abstract as well as a scientific definition, and they sound reasonable enough, so whats the problem? Actually there is no problem in the cases when both the ideas about love are seemingly in agreement. To give an example, a boy and a girl have all the symptoms and deeply care about each other so much so that they put the other's interest and happiness above the self no matter what; then this can be without doubt termed as 'love'. But the confusion which actually adds to the complexity of the subject is what happens when one of the definitions doesn't hold good. For example, if the boy cares a lot about the girl but doesn't feel it and doesn't have any symptoms or the girl has got all the symptoms but doesn't care much about the life, interests, ambitions and emotions of the boy as long these doesn't concern her. Can this case be also termed as 'love'? This is something which requires deep thought. My own answer to the question is - if it is love then given the time, the two different ideas of love will actually merge into one. So the case I mentioned above can be considered as a pre-requisite of true love, a base on which later on with enough commitment, adjustment, understanding and conscience, will lead to a merging of all definitions. But of course it should not be inferred from this that the 'pre-requisite' state will always inevitably lead to the final destination. In fact from my experience I can say that, more often than not it does not! But of course, you can never know until you proceed...

Pretty much related to what I just said is the concept of 'falling in love'. I mentioned that if there a base to build on, then there is a good chance of falling in love. But now the question is what about a case where there is no base? Can then a person still fall in love? Is it actually possible for a person to start feeling something from nothing? There is a theory regarding proper theory regarding 'falling in love' known as Alberoni Theory which states that 'Falling in love is a process of the same nature as religious or political conversion. People fall in love when they are ready to change, or to start a new life. According to Alberoni, falling in love is a rapid process of destructuration-reorganization called the the nascent state, the individual becomes capable of merging with another person and creating a new collectivity with a very high degree of social solidarity. Hence the definition: falling in love is the nascent state of a collective movement formed of two people only.'

Now another thing comes to mind, and that is - how does this destructuration-reorganization work out to love? Even this is answered by Alberoni - 'In order to understand if someone is truly in love, the individual must be put to truth tests and, in order to find out if he or she is loved in return, the beloved is also put to reciprocal tests. The incandescent process of the nascent state through these tests gives way to certainty and produces a stable love relationship. The phenomenology of falling in love is the same for young people and adults, for men and women and for homosexuals and heterosexuals: this is because the structure of the nascent state is always the same.'

So, by all means it is possible to fall in love if the person truly wants to. It is based on this idea that the so called 'Arrange Marriages' have withstood the tests of time for centuries. The 'arrangement' gradually rolls down to 'love' and that's the way it is. Also, even in 'Love Marriages' since it is very rare that both the partners develop affectionate feelings at the same time, so most of the times it happens that one of them shares his/her feelings and starts a chain reaction in the mind of other who if interested even at subconscious level will start falling in love.

Well, writing down all this stuff is giving me a clarity a clear picture of where I stand myself. But all my ideas boil down to one thing..the final question still remains...Is it possible for stoic guys like me who are high on IQ and low on EQ to actually develop deep feelings? Can we make enough room for another person to enter in our personal space? Can we be selfless enough to care put other's interests before us? Can we be compromising enough to correct ourselves and ignore the wrongs of others? In short, can people like us ever be in love? In its answer, I would have to emphatically quote the ever-optimistic Mr. Obama's words 'Yes, We can!!!' :)

Thanks,
Swarnadeep Banerjee (aka Swarno)
NIT Durgapur