tbc0's posterous

Human relationships are in a very troubled state as a result of human brokenness. This brokenness rose to a crescendo in the social revolutions of the 60's. Marriage is especially troubled. That's one reason I decided to sign the Manhattan Declaration. But I want to be civil, so I'm going to try not to ruffle any feathers about this fleeting frame (1:06 into the video) in the clever work of art (hat tip @googledoodles) by Michael Lipman. Overall, the story he tells without words is unarguably heartwarming and has universal appeal. I hope the video remains available on YouTube to the end of time. However, it raised a question I'm pondering: What do we mean by "love" at Valentine's Day? If we ever encounter an intelligent extraterrestrial species, what would it mean for us to be valentines with it? What does it mean for cookies and milk to be valentines?

Before anyone accuses me of ignoring the same-sex images, I will merely say that I have chosen to leave them out of consideration because the politics are so volatile that discussing them would overshadow everyting else I want to say. I can't say they're perfectly normal because that would offend some of my friends. I can't say the opposite because that would offend the rest of my friends. (I'd love to receive a letter on this topic from any of my friends, though.)

For that matter, we wish dogs and cats would stop fighting. (There's power asymmetry between the aggressive, offensive canine and the docile, passive feline. The dog is in a dominant position reinforced by its physical superiority, but let's not dig any deeper today.) But what would it mean for those two species to be valentines?

Finally, consider the princess and the frog. This is a classic image from the fairy tale that teaches a moral lesson: One should look beyond physical appearance to find one's mate. (Note how Shrek tries to turn this lesson on its head, but eventually the film obediently concludes by settling back into the social container the mass media audience inhabits.) The whole point of the fairy tale relies on the frog not remaining a frog. The frog is an enchanted human prince. To live happily ever after as a couple, the princess must kiss the frog so he can return to his original unenchanted form. Does Lippman expect us to accept the possibility of valentine love between a human and an amphibian? What would that mean?

Valentine's Day is a secular holiday that celebrates love. Love is one of the most complicated words in the English language. The ancient Greeks used four different words:

1. Agápē (ἀγάπη) is the highest form of love. Christians have come to refer to "agápē love" to express the unconditional love God has for humanity. And it is likewise used to challenge Christians to reciprocate that love for God and to love one another with agápē love.
2. Érōs (ἔρως) is passionate, sensual love. We get our word "erotic" from this Greek root, but the Greeks didn't require a sexual relationship to express érōs.
3. Philia (φιλία) still means friendship or affectionate love in modern Greek. It was also used by the ancient philosopher Aristotle to describe dispassionate, virtuous love. You might have plain philia for friends and community. We get the word philanthropy (love for humanity) from philia. And philosophy, by the way, means a love for wisdom. I do not believe Michael Lipman is expressing a coherent philosophy in this paricular segment of the animation.
4. Storgē (στοργή) has meant "affection" in Greek since ancient times, but we have less evidence of its use in ancient writing. When used, it described relationships within the family. Modern Greeks use it for that same purpose. It can also be used to express putting up with a bad situation. I, for example, can easily say I have storgē love for President Obama.

Let's ignore the cat-dog romance. That is often offered as a metaphor for different types of people ("cat people" and "dog people") in a working but unlikely relationship. And let's ignore the ambiguity of the princess and the frog, because it's either completely understandable and benign, or it's just as bizarre as the astronaut-alien relationship and the carbohydrate-dairy product relationship.

[Major rewrite from original draft. And I'm still thinking about it. But this will do for now.]