living, thinking and writing
|
|
| PRACTICE living, thinking and writing |
|
|
Sunday, March 16, 2003 Love Part I. Love of ordinary people, a dialogue "I love you" "why?" "Because we are together" "So you will love whoever together with you?" "But I'm together with you, which makes other possibility impossible" "I'm disappointed; you don't love me because of my virtue" "No matter what virtue of you attracts me, there is always better one out there, which means the opportunity I might encounter one day." "So you don't believe love based on attraction?" "I believe love built on loyalty." "Hmm, But, I'm still sad that you don't love me for who I am" "Dear, I love you because what we are. Isn't that the most formidable relation?" Part II. Love of extraordinary people, a critique Refer to Diego Rivera and Frida Kahlo, the movie based on their story thrilled me last night. And other famous and tempestuous love stories of extraordinary people include Augustine Rodin and Camille Claudel, Jean Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir, Françoise Gilot AND Pablo Picasso?you name it. Why they are tragedy: they love each other for attraction of talent or virtue, sparkle from the encounter of noble souls, for uncompromising idiosyncrasy; unfortunately, extraordinary people are not very good at being engaged in exclusive relationship.Extraodinary people keep themselves busy on pursuit of perfection or something better to the end of life. Even I have to agree what a waste it is if their biography not filled up with love affairs. For artists, active love affaris keep bringing them artistic inspirations. I was so touched by Frida when she confessed sadly that she loved Diego for who he is, and she has to suffer for the cost of loving philanderer. I admire earthshaking love happened to those extraordinary people, and I admire how they are willing to suffer from the pain of loving wild soul. I wonder if it is coincidental that all these women are dubbed as the pioneers of feminism and their significant half have something to do with Communism (hmm.., interesting) Does it mean only those feminists are strong and liberal enough to deal with those complex but immortal love affairs, or they become so strong because they have to put up with their philanderer partners (Camille Claudel was not strong enough, so she ended up in mental institute)? Sure I understand that an important notion of Feminism means sex liberation, I'm just not sure if it is a revenge or at least a challenge to male philanderers. Then I have to admit that I am not as strong as those extraordinary super-women, and I can not afford the price of being immortal, and I only deserve mediocre love. posted by lmeimei @5:58 PM| permanent link| | |
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
