Author Erich Fromm (1900-1980) published this remarkable book in 1956, he was a German-American psychoanalyst. He endorsed psychoanalysis as an instrument for addressing humanistic psychological problems and aimed to raise awareness about mental illness. He was born in Frankfurt and received his education in Heidelberg and Munich before starting a private psychotherapy practice in 1925. His early work followed the teachings of Sigmund Freud. Additionally, he combined Freudian theories with Karl Marx’s ideas to present a social principle. As Fuchs (2020) stated, “To understand the social principle, one must understand communicative capitalism.”
Is love a crucial question in this contemporary
world? Is it required to have mastery of it?
Erich Fromm, a psychoanalyst and social philosopher, presented one of the best works on The Art of Loving in 1956. Observing the capitalistic, imperialistic, and hegemonic life, many believe that love is simple to understand if you watch movies, listen to stories, or read novels. Furthermore, they assume it does not require mastery. However, love is not merely a sentiment in which anyone can easily indulge;
rather, it blossoms with the level of maturity
Is Love an Art?
Fromm (1965) raised a crucial query about one of humanity’s vital relations, i.e., Love. Does it require
mastery? By conducting psychoanalysis on perceptions, attitudes, and behavior, people believe that love is sufficiently understood through social media, though they do not pause to explore the true essence of love. As Sayers (1985) prescribed two methods of acquiring information—primary and secondary learning— these concepts were explored through the ideological perspectives of Locke and Berkeley.
Locke condemned the idea that whatever you watch in movies is believable; he argued that reality is something else entirely. On the other hand, Berkeley stated that whatever you experience is the actual world. Likewise, in the context of love, people believe it is not crucial to learn from the works of authors who have continuously studied human feelings and psychology. It is hard to wear the glasses of sychoanalysis, which exist to expose pseudorelationships, especially concerning true love (Zizek, 2006).
Fromm (1965) has elaborated on the sense of love through the following themes: Being Loved: Attraction (dressing, style): Masses get attracted through fashion; such gazing objects are condemned to have a lovable feeling. Pleasant Feelings (developing a constructive conversation): Love is not window shopping,
but it is an approach to touch someone’s neural network. However, through scientific means, we cannot touch someone because our atoms cannot meet each other. But, being a linguist, I believe we can touch
someone through language, lexical items, and emotions, if a person has capacity to understand and value the language.
Market and Love:
As people chase the best product in the market, likewise, abstract and valuable relations and feelings are badly influenced by marketization. In the market, attraction is high, but the sense of ‘pleasant’ is far too little—oh! Sorry, it is not even welcomed here; relations give a tough time to those who provide linguistic, neural medicines to inculcate rationalism. Further, the market is a place to exchange commodities; the same pattern has been followed for human relations, generating the sense of falling in love rather than standing in love. The choice of language and lexicography really impacts what you sow and what you will get. We are habitually using the term ‘falling’ in poetry, rhymes, and narratives, and then we confidently say, ‘I am badly ditched by my beloved.’ Step back, observe the scenario. If you use an incorrect term, then how can you expect something natural in this post-modernist era? It is hard to keep your feelings safe from the macromarket’s pitch.
In this era, especially the place where I am composing my draft, love is not an essential question for the irrational mind; however, it is compulsory to talk about, understand, and implement it. It has intimacy with our lives; it is there to make you sane enough to think and work for your people, your identity, your ignity, and your literature by developing a sense of theory and practice.
Orgiastic States:
Historically, people have participated in rituals in which they forget themselves, dissolving their self-consciousness in the crowd. In this book, Fromm describes the orgiastic state as an “auto-induced trance, often supplemented with drugs.” Then, what do such states accomplish? The orgiastic state is meant to overcome loneliness, which is the solution to the greatest problem of existence.
Dictatorial System: As Kent (1985) stated, ‘man must be the means for the ends for another man,’ it suggests the loss of true human feelings as well, where things are judged based on equality rather than equity. As Magee (2001) discussed the terms equity and equality, I would like to prefer equity rather than equality. We have to figure out who needs how much to gain insight into the Western renaissances. In this capitalistic society, the meaning of equality and equity has changed as well. It means ‘sameness’ rather than ‘oneness.’ Further, one must apply skepticism to the same achievements usually praised as signs of progress, such as the equality of women. The term ‘equality’ is bought at a great price. Women are equal because they are no longer considered different to have a proposition in Western philosophy. So, what does a person give to another person?
The Sense of Giving: “He gives himself, the most precious thing he has; he gives his life. This does not necessarily mean that he sacrifices his life for the other.” The readers must analyze this so as understand
the sense of ‘giving’; we have misunderstood the term ‘giving’ in the feeling of ‘falling in.’ We believe that giving means giving wealth to provide more fundamental window-shopping opportunities with the sense of beauty, but losing everything is insulting to the existence of love. In market terms, we always assign the
value of love as well, which results in the pinching of life.The Sense of Giving: “He gives himself, the most precious thing he has; he gives his life. This does not necessarily mean that he sacrifices his life for the other.” The readers must analyze this so as understand
the sense of ‘giving’; we have misunderstood the term ‘giving’ in the feeling of ‘falling in.’ We believe that giving means giving wealth to provide more fundamental window-shopping opportunities with the sense of beauty, but losing everything is insulting to the existence of love. In market terms, we always assign the
value of love as well, which results in the pinching of life.According to Fromm, giving means “to give all
the joys of life and happiness, which are the major components to survive.”
Do we exchange love for love? As Marx assumes, “man as man, and his relations to the world a human one, and you can exchange love only for love, confidence for confidence, etc. If you want to enjoy art, you
must be an artistically trained person who has a stimulating and furthering influence on other people.” But in the marketization era, we do not get the actual sense of love. In a French song, “love is the child of freedom, never that of domination.” It is not for domination; it is letting the bird fly, which rejects the concept of private property and ownership. A human being is not there to control; his/her actual feelings are there —it is the bird that embodies beauty and flight.
Do we exchange love for love? As Marx assumes, “man as man, and his relations to the world a human one, and you can exchange love only for love, confidence for confidence, etc. If you want to enjoy art, you
must be an artistically trained person who has a stimulating and furthering influence on other people.” But in the marketization era, we do not get the actual sense of love. In a French song, “love is the child of freedom, never that of domination.” It is not for domination; it is letting the bird fly, which rejects the concept of private property and ownership. A human being is not there to control; his/her actual feelings are there —it is the bird that embodies beauty and flight.
Physiological Materialism: Freud goes much deeper into the sexual instinct, defining it as the result of chemically produced tension in the body, which is painful and sought for relief. Freud ignores the psychological aspects of sexuality. This curious error was probably facilitated by Freud’s extreme
patriarchal views, which led him to the assumption that the pursuit of sexuality is masculine and thus made him ignore specific aspects of female sexuality. Ultimately, mature love says, “I need you because I love you,” while immature love says, “I love you because I need you.” Understanding this is important.
If you are aware of your prison, Try to escape it, If you do not try even, You don’t have right to complain, Because you have chosen unhealthy vocabulary for yourself! And abstractly admitted ‘No to Reason’
Syed Sanober Rizvi
Lecturer at SZABUL
rizvi.sanober@szabul.edu.pk
