Skip to main content

Love's Idolatry


For the sleek black cat


"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return."
The Song "Nature Boy"


What does it mean to truly love someone?

Can love even be talked about or learned or known to begin with?

For 'to love' easily means to be loved. Hoping to be and being loved in return is just about tantamount to loving the Other -- the other side of love's token or coin. For what kind of love is this if it passess through a 'one-way street;' when it sacrifices its self to an idol on a pedestal which does not gaze back (it never can), does not see the lover (it never could) and refuses to receive the gifts or offerings the lover bestows on its feet (it never will)?

The idolatry of love: looking at and loving that which does not receive one's gaze and love; or more so, being unable to re-flect light (like a mirror) for the lover to at least experience being seen as well as to finally be loved as well.

Yet is the idolatry of love -- the inability of the idol to not see and love in return -- the fault of the beautiful yet hollow idol? Can one blame the frozen statue for not being able to see with its eyes cast in stone, to walk by the side of the lover with its long legs and feet cemented together and planted to the ground?

Love's idol can only reflect the lover's self-love; it can only give back what the lover bestowed upon it; it can only mean something, anything as much as the meaning that was imparted to it. Its eyes could not see for they are not eyes, its legs could not move for they are not legs. True, they seemed to me true eyes and legs; yet the idol never presented itself to be true, never willed to be alive for it never could will at all. I thought it could see me and walk by my side because I willed it or wished that it could do something that it never could to begin with.

I thought it could love in return because I willed that it could. But stones and wood remain the stones and wood that they are. They are but they can never be; love is but it could never love, that is, love in return.

Thus the idolatry of love does not begin with the idol who does not see; love's foolishness begins with the I who thought and wished that the stone love me, that the wood embrace me. Love's idol is the terminus, love's final and crucial end point; but it begins with the lover who may perhaps have loved the idol -- giving it sight, wishing that it could walk with him, bestowing upon it the free gift of the self -- for the simple but self-ish reason that it, the lover, be also loved in return.

The origin of the idolatry of love: self-love's idolatry of its self.

(This perhaps why Pinochio was made.)

I loved my self in wishing that the idol love me as well; and when it could not love back (how could it?), the idol finally shows what 'all that loving' was all about: like a shattered mirror, it reflects the pieces of the self that was given because it could never carry as to buttress the weight of a freely given and whole self even when it was a piece of stone to begin with.

The shattered self: shattered because given whole to an idol which could not even open its arms to receive.

Why did I not see?

This is why "the greatest thing you'll ever know is just to love" not the idol (the cat, the statue, the tree) nor the I but the wholly Other upon whose arrival and return finally sees me.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Fields of Amorsolo

The first National Artist in Philippine history, referred to warmly as the “Grand Old Man of Philippine Art,” Fernando Amorsolo (1892–1972) still stands today as a looming figure in Philippine art responsible for being one of the artists who helped define what we up to now visually imagine as essentially Filipino. The images of rural life, of golden fields below clear blue, blue skies; the smiles of farmers which diminish their weariness as they plant, harvest, and winnow rice;most especially the iconic figure of the Filipina maiden working in the fields—the beloved dalagang bukid--; these, I believe, even after generations of Filipino painters since Amorsolo, have remained in our hearts and memory. Amorsolo did what great masters do for their country: bestow upon it its own icons, represent its native beauty, that is, to give its people and lands an identity and a face. There are, however, as many intentions for art as there are works of art. And these intentions will always remain in…

[Payapang Daigdig]

Written by Pat Nogoy, S.J.

Payapang Daigdig Felipe de Leon, Sr. 
Ang gabi'y payapa Lahat ay tahimik  Pati mga tala      Sa bughaw na langit 

Kay hinhin ng hangin Waring umiibig          Sa kapayapaan          Ng buong daigdig     
Payapang panahon    Ay diwa ng buhay Biyaya ng Diyos       Sa sangkatauhan
Ang gabi'y payapa Lahat ay tahimik Pati mga tala Sa bughaw na langit  
Pati mga tala           Sa bughaw na langit


The gift delivers Being/being Jean Luc Marion

There is something about the night.
The blanket of darkness hovering the other half of the day sparks ambivalence. Everything is the same in darkness—fear, joy, pain, triumph, doubt, glory, sorrow. Identities recede unto the vast anonymity. There is a pervading anxiety where existence slips into nothingness. One is never certain what to make out of darkness; maybe that is why the night shakes us because we never know. One cannot avoid imagining a something that is greater, higher, mightier, (even sinister) that lurks (hence the power of ghos…

Without Why (The Rose) II

Lifetime is a child at play; moving pieces in a game.
Kingship belongs to the child.

Heraclitus, Fragment 52


The child at play never asks itself why it plays. The child just plays; and if it could, it will play as long as possible, it will play throughout its life. See its delight and witness its smile.

If it would never go hungry or if the sun would never set it too will never leave its playmates and playthings. Time flies at play because it stops or suspends time. Time -- as we grownups only know too well -- is the culprit for order, schedules and priorities; yet for the child, there is no time, there is only bottomless play. It is we who impose that this or that should be done at this or that time. We stop the absurd and supposedly endless play ("He does nothing but play") because we insist that discipline, order and priorities be instilled in the child at an early age ("He needs to learn other things beside playing"). So that the child will become like us one da…