What is Love?

Google states that defining love is “one of the most difficult questions for mankind.” But most of us don’t need a search engine to tell us that. What makes the situation so complex is:

1. We rarely define love before attempting  to  discuss the vast and variegated topic.

2. We fail to distinguish among the different types of love.

3. We have to struggle with the inherent challenge of understanding and empathizing with another person through the parameters of our own (limited) psyche.

Most of us assume love is similar to what we experienced in our early years with our parents or caretakers. When we select a partner we often gravitate toward a person who “loves” us as our parents did. Freud described this tendency to reproduce patterns of behavior as repetition compulsion. If we’ve been raised by parents who “love” in a controlling way, we often find a mate who “loves” us in a controlling way.

But positive parallels can be drawn between healthy models of parenting and fulfilling romantic relationships. For instance, D. W.Winnicott (1896-1971), the pediatrician, turned innovative child psychoanalyst, coined the term “good enough” mothering.

A “good enough” mother adapts to her baby, granting him a sense of control over his environment as well as the comfort of connection with her. This “good enough” situation he referred to as the “holding environment”. Creating security in a relationship allows freedom to explore his world.

The concept ‘good enough’ is useful in defining other love relationships too. The  anthropologist and human behavior researcher, Dr. Helen Fisher (Why We Love: The Nature and Chemistry of Romantic Love, 2007) divides love into 1. lust  2. romance and 3. attachment.

For the long haul, Dr. Fisher doesn’t recommend romantic love. Heightened by obstacles, it distracts lovers, causing them to become forgetful and neglect their health.  Instead she advocates a realistic, practical love with attachment based on common interests and goals.

Love includes:

1. Wanting the best for the loved one.

2. Listening and caring about their feelings and willingness to compromise.

Loving our pets is easier because they don’t argue but affirm our agendas. (Please see p. 6 of The Cabala of the Animals.)

3. Learning from mistakes and apologizing.

Research suggests that to maintain a successful relationship you should say five positive things to your partner for each negative statement about them. I disagree with the idea of negative statements; a partner can learn to reframe a criticism and express it in a positive, constructive way.

Before becoming president, Barack Obama expressed his "love" for Michelle and an appreciation of her “mystery”. He realizes he continues to be open, curious and delighted to learn about her.

“The tension between familiarity and mystery meshes something strong between us. Even if one builds a life together based on trust, attentiveness and mutual support, I think that it’s important that a partner continues to surprise.”  (NYT, April 2007)

Conversely, some people feel threatened by the “otherness” in their partner, fearing what they can’t control. These people attempt to stifle changes in their mate.

In his new movie To Rome with Love, Woody Allen portrays the adventures of four different couples who have stable relationships somewhat similar to the “holding environment” described by Winnicott in which taking chances is possible without threatening their bond. The characters are willing and able to take risks in relationships and in the world.

Shakespeare’s wisdom resonates through generations with enduring validity. “Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved.”

Conclusion: The meaning and experience of “love” is a complex complement of needs, desires, hopes, aspirations, existing in a moment and/or enduring for a lifetime. Openness to other people and our world ultimately gratifies.

Dear Reader: I welcome your comments. (jsimon145@gmail.com)