 |
| From a recent RSC production of As You Like It |
Answer TWO of the following in a short response, at least a
few sentences so I can see you thinking through the questions. Please avoid
one-sentence responses and try to be specific—quote a passage if necessary.
It’s okay if you don’t really know what to say; by writing, you’ll work your
way through to a potential response. My goal is that you engage with the ideas
rather than passively skimming the text.
Q1: Though we like to assume that love is universal and
unchanging, why do we know that to some extent, love is a social construction?
Not the emotions, perhaps, but the rules we give ourselves—and others—regarding
how, where, when, and with whom is it conducted? Is one form of love truly more natural than another?
Q2: In Chapter 1, de Sousa called love a “condition” and a
“syndrome.” In Chapter 2 he goes on to call it a “pathology.” What does he mean
by this, and how does Shakespeare’s Sonnet 147 help explain this?
Q3: Despite many differences in culture, the ancient Greeks
always believed that “In the pursuit of his love…the custom of mankind allows
him to do many strange things, which philosophy would bitterly censure if they
were done from any motive of interest, or wish for office or power” (31). Why
does love get a pass when other types of behavior and conditions don’t? What
might this say about our understanding of what love is, and what it has to do
with logic and reason?
Q4: At the end of the chapter, he argues that if love is
based on reason (or reasons), it would be logical that we would fall in love
with anyone who satisfies the same reasons. Yet we know this isn’t true;
you’re in love with one person, not anyone who makes you laugh, or is
smart, or knows all your 80’s TV references. So what does this say about the
nature of choice in love? Is it simply a matter of random chance? Or do we
still get to choose?
Q.(1) I think that love is seen as a social construction because of the way our culture sees love. There are so many romantic movies and romance novels and this seems to make people, mainly women, think that love has to be a certain way for it to work. If a relationship doesn't contain all these elements, that are not really realistic at all, then they think it cannot work.
ReplyDeleteQ.(3) I think it may be that love is considered a higher emotion, one not shared with animals as related in the text in chapter two. Sex is considered a lower emotion, as we also have bodily love as animals do. So, this may mean that it is considered excusable because it is seen as more divine and sex is seen as more a bodily function. On page 18, it is mentioned that Pausanias says there are not two types of love, even though there is good and bad intentions in love, but true love , and just lust. Lust would be sex an animal instinct, and true love would be considered love even if it involves sex, but not just sex.
Dana Welch
Q1) This is my third time typing this because I keep messing everything up BUT I would say love is a social construct. Some people don't marry for love, but because sex is wonderful or the money is good. I feel as a society we put too many rules on how love should be instead of focusing on how we feel overall. We are too worried of what everyone else is saying about our relationships that we lose our emotions.
ReplyDeleteQ4) I feel we can choose people we love. I mean to an extent we may run into people we are attracted to, but I mean we a taste and we are attracted to what we like.