I read The Agony of Eros by Byung-Chul Han last week. And I understood maybe half of it. I had to Google words and do a bit of research after. But this is my goal lately. To read shorter books that are dense in information. Then process the book, go nuts researching, and put on my toddler hat to question it and see how the pieces can fit into my life. This type of deep thinking feels like the most luxurious of things. Not to rush into the next subject but to wade deep into the waters of the thing. So with The Agony of Eros, I am knee-deep in the subject of LOVE. Perhaps I should read more on the subject because have a million questions after reading this. Here's the gist of the book's message:
- We have collectively put ourselves in a sort of hedonic adaptation to love and sex by sexualizing media and watching porn. There is no true eroticism in the pornification of everything
- This oversharing negates our Otherness. We cannot be alluring and enigmatic if someone can see you binge-eating hot dogs on your FB stream or whining drunk at 2 AM at how you SHALL NEVER REVEAL what hurts you but dammit you HURT BAD and everyone around you is EVIL
- We commodify love by giving too much importance to our wishlist of desired traits
- Our culture of toxic positivity erodes us of intellectual depth, authenticity, and wisdom.
- We cannot evolve as a society or as individuals, or even fully experience emotions (such as love) if we skim the surface of things and skirt nuance and complexity Our current era of Neoliberalism has us emphasizing productivity so much that even our love lives are not sacred. We inject a need to be productive and to have a productive partner
I agree with his points but with caveats. Now, a disclaimer. I know VERY little about philosophy. I want to learn more. The point is I might have missed some nuance and context in the work and that my disagreements are in line with the work. Disclaimer out of the way, here are my thoughts!
- Love has been transactional for eons for a few reasons. Arranged marriages have been leveraged to enhance social station. And even outside of that, we evolved to be attracted to certain traits. It's wiring so that we can choose the healthiest mate to give us robust children. The point is, that we cannot claim that transactional love is a purely modern invention
- Eros is the love of sexuality and carnal love. I think that scope, even though expanded for this book, is too limited of an archetype to properly encompass the complexity of love
- It's a lot of fucking pressure to remain exotic and "Other" to a long-term partner. I mean I've been with my husband for 15 years. Much love but he's not like a mysterious alluring figure haha
I suggest to check it out, and come up with your opinions! Even watching a video summary (which does a MUCH better service explaining things than I can) of the work on YouTube is a good thing because the ideas are awesome and it's such a blast to THINK about this stuff. The book is only 50 pages and is dense but challenges are fun!
P.S. I'm not an academic so sorry, but no sources, just my ruminations.
Otherness is not consumable difference. Capitalism is eliminating otherness wholesale in order to subordinate everything to consumption. Eros, however, represents an asymmetrical relationship to the Other. As such, it interrupts the exchange rate. Otherness admits no bookkeeping. It does not appear in the balance of debt and credit.
Buyn-Chul Han (The Agony of Eros)