Eros (concept)

  (Redirected from Eros (love))
The Love of Helen and Paris by Jacques-Louis David (1788)

Eros (/ˈɪərɒs/ or /ˈɛrɒs/; Ancient Greek: ἔρως érōs "love" or "desire") is one of the four ancient Greek terms that can be rendered in English as "love". The other three are storge, philia, and agape. Eros refers to "passionate love" or romance.[1] The term erotic is derived from eros. Eros has also been used in philosophy and psychology in a much wider sense, almost as an equivalent to "life energy".[2]

In literatureEdit

The classical Greek traditionEdit

In the classical world, erotic love was generally referred to as a kind of madness or theia mania ("madness from the gods").[3] This love passion was described through an elaborate metaphoric and mythological schema involving "love's arrows" or "love darts", the source of which was often the personified figure of Eros (or his Latin counterpart, Cupid),[4] or another deity (such as Rumor).[5] At times the source of the arrows was said to be the image of the beautiful love object itself. If these arrows were to arrive at the lover's eyes, they would then travel to and 'pierce' or 'wound' his or her heart and overwhelm him/her with desire and longing (lovesickness). The image of the "arrow's wound" was sometimes used to create oxymorons and rhetorical antithesis concerning its pleasure and pain.

"Love at first sight" was explained as a sudden and immediate beguiling of the lover through the action of these processes, but this was not the only mode of entering into passionate love in classical texts. At times the passion could occur after the initial meeting; for example, in Phaedra's letter to Hippolytus in Ovid's Heroides: "That time I went to Eleusis... it was then most of all (though you had pleased me before) that piercing love lodged in my deepest bones."[6] At times, the passion could even precede the first glimpse, as in Paris' letter to Helen of Troy in the same work, where Paris says that his love for Helen came upon him before he had set eyes on her: "...you were my heart's desire before you were known to me. I beheld your features with my soul ere I saw them with my eyes; rumour, that told me of you, was the first to deal my wound."[7]

Whether by "first sight" or by other routes, passionate love often had disastrous results according to the classical authors. In the event that the loved one was cruel or uninterested, this desire was shown to drive the lover into a state of depression, causing lamentation and illness. Occasionally, the loved one was depicted as an unwitting ensnarer of the lover, because of her sublime beauty—a "divine curse" which inspires men to kidnap her or try to rape her.[8] Stories in which unwitting men catch sight of the naked body of Artemis the huntress (and sometimes Aphrodite) lead to similar ravages (as in the tale of Actaeon).

There are few written records of women's lives and loves in ancient Greece. Nevertheless, some historians have suggested that women may have been the objects of love more often than was previously believed and that men's love for women may have been an ideal, although not one realized much in fact.[9] In ancient Athens the dominance of man in the marital relationship is expressed by figures such as the prominent Greek statesman and general Alcibiades.[10] Another famous relationship between a man and a woman in ancient Athens was the romantic involvement of Aspasia with the statesman Pericles.[11][12] In Sparta, the social status of women was stronger and the marital rituals were solemnized. There was an elaborate preparation for the first night after the marriage, while the man in a symbolic rite had to abduct his future wife before the official ceremony, while she had her hair cut short and dressed in boy's clothes.[13] The ideal outcome of marital eros in Sparta was the birth of a healthy boy.[14]

In The Symposium by Plato, Aristophanes relays a myth of the origin of both heterosexual and homosexual love.[15] Originally, each human being had two heads, four arms, and four legs, before Zeus decided to split every person in two. After everyone was split, each half searched for their other half, to make themselves whole again. Some people were originally half-male and half-female, and when Zeus split them they became men and women who sought opposite-sex partners. Some people were originally all-female, and they split into females who sought female partners. Some were all-male, and they split into males who sought other males.[16]

 
The Rape of Ganymede, by Rubens

According to modern studies, pedagogic pederasty (Eros paidikos, παιδικός ἔρως) is thought to have been introduced around 630 BC. By the end of the 5th century BC, after the middle of the Archaic period, myths about love relationships between male gods and male heroes become more and more frequent, while poets had assigned at least one eromenos to every important god except Ares and to many legendary figures (Previously existing myths, such as that of Achilles and Patroclus, were also cast in a pederastic light).[17] The institution has its roots among the Dorian Greeks, where it was a recognized institution.[18] According to Plato the Dorians were the first who even gave a pederastic meaning to the myth of Ganymede.[19]

In Sparta, the relation between the erastes (εισπνήλας was the Spartan word) and the eromenos (αΐτας) was not only legal but required by law, and the erastes was regarded as a guardian of the eromenos and was held responsible for any wrongdoings of the latter.[20] Crete is regarded as the birthplace of eros paidikos.[20] Researchers of the Spartan civilization, such as Paul Cartledge, remain uncertain about the sexual aspect of the institution. Cartledge underscores that the terms "εισπνήλας" and "αΐτας" have a moralistic and pedagogic content, indicating a relationship with a paternalistic character, but argues that sexual relations were possible in some or most cases. The nature of these possible sexual relations remains, however, disputed and lost to history.[21]

According to the Greek classicist Ioannis Sykoutris, paidikos eros was interconnected with the notion of education (αγωγή) and usually resulted in long-lasting friendly relationships.[22] The role of pedagogic pederasty in ancient Greek society degrades after the 4th century BC, when the organization of polis becomes more loose and the "citizens" become "subjects" and, therefore, do not cultivate the virtues eros offers to a Greek.[23]

European literatureEdit

 
The Old, Old Story, John William Godward, 1903

The classical conception of love's arrows was developed further by the troubadour poets of Provence during the medieval period, and became part of the European courtly love tradition. The role of a woman's eyes in eliciting erotic desire was particularly emphasized by the Provençal poets, as N. E. Griffin states:

According to this description, love originates upon the eyes of the lady when encountered by those of her future lover. The love thus generated is conveyed on bright beams of light from her eyes to his, through which it passes to take up its abode in his heart.[24]

In some medieval texts, the gaze of a beautiful woman is compared to the sight of a basilisk—a legendary reptile said to have the power to cause death with a single glance.

These images continued to be circulated and elaborated upon in the literature and iconography of the Renaissance and Baroque periods.[25] Boccaccio for example, in his Il Filostrato, mixes the tradition of Cupid's arrow with the Provençal emphasis on the eyes as the birthplace of love: "Nor did he (Troilus) who was so wise shortly before... perceive that Love with his darts dwelt within the rays of those lovely eyes... nor notice the arrow that sped to his heart."[26]

The rhetorical antithesis between the pleasure and pain from love's dart continued through the 17th century, as for example, in these classically inspired images from The Fairy-Queen:

If Love's a Sweet Passion, why does it torment?
If a Bitter, oh tell me whence comes my content?
Since I suffer with pleasure, why should I complain,
Or grieve at my Fate, when I know 'tis in vain?
Yet so pleasing the Pain is, so soft is the Dart,
That at once it both wounds me, and Tickles my Heart.[27]

In philosophy and psychologyEdit

PlatoEdit

The ancient philosopher Plato developed an idealistic concept of eros which would prove to be very influential in modern times. In general, Plato did not consider physical attraction to be a necessary part of eros. According to Plato, eros could be diverted to philosophy (inclusive of mathematical, ethical and ascetical training), rather that dissipated in sexuality, for the purpose of using erotic energy as a vehicle for the transformation of consciousness, and union with the Divine.[28] In Symposium, eros is described as a universal force that moves all things towards peace, perfection and divinity.[29] Eros himself is a "daimon", namely a creature between divinity and mortality.[30]

"Platonic love" in this original sense can be attained by the intellectual purification of eros from carnal into ideal form. Plato argues there that eros is initially felt for a person, but with contemplation it can become an appreciation for the beauty within that person, or even an appreciation for beauty itself in an ideal sense. As Plato expresses it, eros can help the soul to "remember" beauty in its pure form. It follows from this, for Plato, that eros can contribute to an understanding of truth.

Eros, understood in this sense, differed considerably from the common meaning of the word in the Greek language of Plato's time. It also differed from the meaning of the word in contemporary literature and poetry. For Plato, eros is neither purely human nor purely divine: it is something intermediate which he calls a daimon.

Its main characteristic is permanent aspiration and desire. Even when it seems to give, eros continues to be a "desire to possess", but nevertheless it is different from a purely sensual love in being the love that tends towards the sublime. According to Plato, the gods do not love, because they do not experience desires, inasmuch as their desires are all satisfied. They can thus only be an object, not a subject of love (Symposium 200-1). For this reason they do not have a direct relationship with man; it is only the mediation of eros that allows the connecting of a relationship (Symposium 203). Eros is thus the way that leads man to divinity, but not vice versa.

[...] Nevertheless, eros remains always, for Plato, an egocentric love: it tends toward conquering and possessing the object that represents a value for man. To love the good signifies to desire to possess it forever. Love is therefore always a desire for immortality.[31]

Paradoxically, for Plato, the object of eros does not have to be physically beautiful. This is because the object of eros is beauty, and the greatest beauty is eternal, whereas physical beauty is in no way eternal. However, if the lover achieves possession of the beloved's inner (i.e., ideal) beauty, his need for happiness will be fulfilled, because happiness is the experience of knowing that you are participating in the ideal.[32]

FreudEdit

In Freudian psychology, eros, not to be confused with libido, is not exclusively the sex drive, but our life force, the will to live. It is the desire to create life, and favors productivity and construction. In early psychoanalytic writings, instincts from the eros were opposed by forces from the ego. But in later psychoanalytic theory, eros is opposed by the destructive death instinct of Thanatos (death instinct or death drive).

In his 1925 paper "The Resistances to Psycho-Analysis",[33] Freud explains that the psychoanalytic concept of sexual energy is more in line with the Platonic view of eros, as expressed in the Symposium, than with the common use of the word "sex" as related primarily to genital activity. He also mentions the philosopher Schopenhauer as an influence. He then goes on to confront his adversaries for ignoring such great precursors and for tainting his whole theory of eros with a pansexual tendency. He finally writes that his theory naturally explains this collective misunderstanding as a predictable resistance to the acknowledgement of sexual activity in childhood.

However, F. M. Cornford finds the standpoints of Plato and of Freud to be "diametrically opposed" with regard to eros. In Plato, eros is a spiritual energy initially, which then "falls" downward; whereas in Freud eros is a physical energy which is "sublimated" upward.[34]

The philosopher and sociologist Herbert Marcuse appropriated the Freudian concept of eros for his highly influential 1955 work Eros and Civilization.

JungEdit

In Carl Jung's analytical psychology, the counterpart to eros is logos, a Greek term for the principle of rationality. Jung considers logos to be a masculine principle, while eros is a feminine principle. According to Jung:

Woman's psychology is founded on the principle of Eros, the great binder and loosener, whereas from ancient times the ruling principle ascribed to man is Logos. The concept of Eros could be expressed in modern terms as psychic relatedness, and that of Logos as objective interest.[35]

This gendering of eros and logos is a consequence of Jung's theory of the anima/animus syzygy of the human psyche. Syzygy refers to the split between male and female. According to Jung, this split is recapitulated in the unconscious mind by means of "contrasexual" (opposite-gendered) elements called the anima (in men) and the animus (in women). Thus men have an unconscious feminine principle, the "anima", which is characterized by feminine eros. The work of individuation for men involves becoming conscious of the anima and learning to accept it as one's own, which entails accepting eros. This is necessary in order to see beyond the projections that initially blind the conscious ego. "Taking back the projections" is a major task in the work of individuation, which involves owning and subjectivizing unconscious forces which are initially regarded as alien.[36]

In essence, Jung's concept of eros is not dissimilar to the Platonic one. Eros is ultimately the desire for wholeness, and although it may initially take the form of passionate love, it is more truly a desire for "psychic relatedness", a desire for interconnection and interaction with other sentient beings. However, Jung was inconsistent, and he did sometimes use the word "eros" as a shorthand to designate sexuality.[37]

See alsoEdit

ReferencesEdit

  1. ^ C.S. Lewis, The Four Loves
  2. ^ Peterson, Eugene H (2006). The Message Remix: The Bible in Contemporary Language. Colorado Springs, Colorado: NavPress. p. 948. ISBN 1600060021.
  3. ^ Tallis, Frank (February 2005). "Crazy for You". The Psychologist. 18 (2).
  4. ^ See, for example, the Amores and the Heroides of Ovid which frequently refer to the overwhelming passion caused by Cupid's darts.
  5. ^ See Paris's letter to Helen of Troy, in Ovid, Heroides and Amores, XVI, 36-38.
  6. ^ Ovid, Heroides and Amores, translated by Grant Showerman. Second edition revised by G.P. Goold. Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986), IV, 67-70, p 49. ISBN 0-674-99045-5
  7. ^ Ovid, Heroides and Amores, translated by Grant Showerman, second edition revised by G.P. Goold (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986), XVI, 36-38, pp. 199-201.
  8. ^ For more on these tropes in the Ancient Greek novel, see Françoise Létoublon, Les Lieux communs du roman: Stéréotypes grecs d'aventure et d'amour, Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1993. ISBN 90-04-09724-4.
  9. ^ R.J. Sternberg, Cupid's Arrow, 63
  10. ^ Plutarch, Alcibiades, 8
  11. ^ S. Monoson, Plato's Democratic Entanglements, 195
  12. ^ M. Ostwald, Athens as a Cultural Center, 310
  13. ^ P. Cartledge, The Spartans, 234
  14. ^ P. Cartledge, The Spartans, 235
  15. ^ Halperin, David M. (1990). One Hundred Years of Homosexuality: And Other Essays on Greek Love. New York: Routledge. pp. 19. ISBN 0415900964. OCLC 19740359.
  16. ^ Plato (2006-05-30). The Symposium. Translated by Gill, Christopher; Lee, Desmond. New York. pp. 22–26. ISBN 9781101651490. OCLC 859326008.
  17. ^ W.A. Percy, Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece, 54
  18. ^ I. Sykoutris, Introduction to Symposium, 41
  19. ^ Plato, The Laws, 636c
  20. ^ a b I. Sykoutris, Introduction to Symposium, 43
  21. ^ P. Cartledge, The Spartans, 272-274
  22. ^ I. Sykoutris, Introduction to Symposium, 61
  23. ^ I. Sykoutris, Introduction to Symposium, 63
  24. ^ See the introduction by Nathaniel Edward Griffin to The Filostrato of Giovanni Boccaccio (New York: Bilbo and Tannen, no date. ISBN 0-8196-0187-X), p.76, note 2.
  25. ^ For a full discussion of the scene of "love at first sight" in fiction, see Jean Rousset, "Leurs yeux se rencontrèrent" : la scène de première vue dans le roman, Paris: José Corti, 1981.
  26. ^ Giovanni Boccaccio, Il Filostrato, canto 1, strophe 29; translation by Nathaniel Edward Griffin and Arthur Beckwith Myrick, p. 147. According to Griffin: "In the description of the enamorment of Troilus is a singular blending of the Provençal conception of the eyes as the birthplace of love with the classical idea of the God of Love with his bows and quiver..." (ibid., p.77, note 2).
  27. ^ Anonymous, "If Love's a Sweet Passion", from the libretto of Henry Purcell's The Fairy-Queen, act 3.
  28. ^ M.B. Mineo, Diotima of Mantineia, 102
  29. ^ M.B. Mineo, Diotima of Mantineia, 134
  30. ^ Plato, Symposium, 202b-203a
  31. ^ John Paul II, Man and Woman He Created Them: a theology of the body, translated by Michael Waldstein (Boston: Pauline Books and Media), 47:1 (p.315), footnote 56. See also Anders Nygren, Agape and eros, translated by Philip S. Watson (University of Chicago Press).
  32. ^ Plato. Symposium. 199c5-212c
  33. ^ Freud, S. (1925). "The Resistances to Psycho-Analysis", in The Collected Papers of Sigmund Freud, Vol. 5, p.163-74. (Tr. James Strachey.)
  34. ^ Cornford, F.M. (1950), "The Doctrine of Eros in Plato's Symposium", in The Unwritten Philosophy.
  35. ^ Carl Jung, “Woman in Europe” (1927), in Collected Works vol. 10, paragraph 255; reprinted in Aspects of the Feminine, Princeton University Press, 1982, p. 65, ISBN 0-7100-9522-8.
  36. ^ For a critical perspective on this viewpoint, which also summarizes the Jungian position well, see James Hillman, The Dream and The Underworld (1979), p.100.
  37. ^ Robert H. Hopcke, A Guided Tour of the Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Shambhala Books, 1999, p.45ff.