I’ll try to be clear for once, to be real, to speak normally. I’m obsessed, with you, you’re always on my mind, and I’m always trying to keep up with you, to grab your attention, to have your gaze fixed upon me.

This book was supposed to be a comfortable read to soothe my brain after months of reading theory. Objectively speaking, it is a simple and easy pop-psychology book destined to lay readers, despite its well cited and researched nature. (The study is based on the findings of a large set of questionnaires and interviews). However, I did not expect that every paragraph and every phrase I read would force me back to my past romantic experiences in order to reflect upon them in light of my newly gained knowledge.

Limerence is, to put it simply, the state of “being in love.” It is distinct from love per se, and it is not sexual desire, although all three can coexist. Poets, philosophers, theologians and all sorts of intellectuals have conceived of such a phenomenon, giving it different labels throughout history, such as "romantic love," "erotic love," "love spark," etc.

Tennov posits that “limerence is, above all else, a mental activity. It is an interpretation of events, rather than the events themselves.” That limerence is a mental activity, see an interpretation of real events, implies the existence of a limerent subject on the one hand, and a limerent object (LO) on the other. An entire emotional revolution could be brewing within the limerent person that may perhaps be fully unknown by LO. For limerence is not so much about LO as much as it is about the feelings and emotions one has for LO.

Limerence creates above all a desire for reciprocation within the limerent person. It is the ultimate goal and achievement of limerence. Reciprocation could be expressed in many different ways: for example, it could be sexual intercourse, a relationship, or even a fruitful confession of love. Once reciprocation is achieved, limerence arrives at its consummation, “in which the bliss of reciprocation is gradually either blended into a lasting love or replaced by less positive feelings.” However, reciprocation is not always achieved, and sometimes it is rendered uncertain or almost impossible due to circumstances: this is what we call unrequited love. Regardless, what fuels limerence is that desire for reciprocation and mutuality, and will continue as long as there is even a slimmer of hope in the mind of the limerent.

Just as all roads once led to Rome, when your limerence for someone has crystallized, all events, associations, stimuli, experience return your thoughts to LO with unnerving consistency. (Ch. 2)

One common symptom of limerence is obsession with LO. Some people dream of their LO while others daydream of them. Everything and anything could be a source of romantic reverie. Though such a phenomenon differs from one person to another depending on the degree of limerence which incessantly fluctuates.

Limerence can have positive effects on its subject and the people around them. It is commonly a motivator for self-improvement and has been throughout history the main inspiration for lots of artistic works of different kinds. However, it is not devoid of negative effects: antisocial behavior, intrusive thoughts, extreme moodiness, severe grief and sorrow following rejection, and so on. This promoted psychoanalysts, according to Tennov, to reduce limerence to a pathological, irrational state of the mind. (This claim was moreso confirmed when I discussed the book with a psychology major). To them, limerence is not “true love.” According to Maslow, for instance, “B-lovers [true lovers] are not unreasonably jealous and they are not blind. It is the other, damaging D-love [limerence] which blinds you. In true love (B-love) you are able to perceive your lover clearly and penetratingly.” Sociologist Paul Bohannan puts it as such:

“romantic love” is a condition in which your “love fantasies become ends in themselves.” You are blinded to LO’s “real” personality because you refuse to look at the facts.

There is truth in the claim that limerence is irrational. It is not love for the other based on mutual concern and affection, but it is rather love for love itself. Limerence is selfish in the sense that it disregards the person behind LO and reduces them to an abstracted ideal in the mind of the limerent. Tennov concedes to this, yet she found her respondents and informants to be quite aware of how illogical their limerent state is. She concludes that “while it is illogical, it is also normal, and therefore normal human beings can be illogical,” thus dismissing the psychoanalytical approach of pathologizing limerence.

Limerence is quite a universal experience that transcends human cultures. Yet it is not an experience shared by everyone. Tennov admits the existence of people, as her questionnaire and interviews have shown, who are nonlimerent. This raises more unanswerable questions about the nature of limerence and its origins.

In my personal opinion, and as someone who has experienced limerence, I do not believe it is pathological, despite how irrational or illogical I could have behaved at times. True, limerence is unsustainable if not transformed into true love, which is what must be sought after. That being said, I cannot view limerence as anything other than normal, just because of how ingrained it is in our culture: the music, the folkloric tales, the literature, the language, and so on. I do not seek after the feeling, nor do I wish to stay in its grasp, and yet I accept it as something normal.

I also do not agree with the author's claim that limerence is not a cultural invention. It is so in the sense that the way it is expressed differs among human societies. Though this ought not diminish from its material existence as a “complex involuntary human reaction pattern.”

The book, while it doesn't answer many of the mysteries behind limerence, doesn't shy away from asking the tough questions. I was quite pleased that the author even discussed the question of sexual difference and sexuality and their role in shaping limerence.

Find the first gameplay reveal for Dreams on a Pillow - an upcoming pseudo-stealth adventure game set during the Palestinian Nakba of 1948. Currently Crowdfunding on Launchgood!

Support the Game: https://launchgood.com/1948

It used to strike me as astonishing how the peoples of the Global South share the same sentiments toward their former colonizer. But in reality, this uniformity of sentiment and thought is merely a product of the material conditions of colonialism which are the same everywhere.

Fanon, in his renowned work, was able to crystallize these sentiments through a rigorous analysis of the anti-colonial war and the political, economic, social, and cultural emancipation of the colonized. “[D]ecolonization,” he writes, “is quite simply the substitution of one “species” of mankind by another. The substitution is unconditional, absolute, total, and seamless.” However, decolonization or total independence are not so simple in reality, as long as the colonizer is never ready to relinquish their colonial "property." Ultimately, “[t]he well-being and progress of Europe were built with the sweat and corpses of Blacks, Arabs, Indians, and Asians”; and this the European cannot give up without losing an essential part of oneself. Faced with the colonizer’s threats (“If you want independence, take it and go back to the Middle Ages”), the national liberation movement has only one of two possibilities: either the nationalist leaders would acquiesce and submit to the colonizer's will, or the underdeveloped nation shall endure the poverty that comes with independence. For even if political independence was achieved, it would be meaningless without economic sovereignty, which is the point of contention with the colonizer. Thus, “[t]he apotheosis of independence becomes the curse of independence.” “In the first scenario, the newly independent and underdeveloped nation makes concessions to its former colonial power: it signs economic and monetary agreements that make it economically dependent, accepts small injections of funds from the former colonial power to bolster its budget and adopts capitalism, enshrining the private property of the former colonists, which was previously acquired by force.

In the second scenario, which is no less arduous than the first, the national movement has no choice but to demand sacrifice from the starving people, to “ask them to make a gigantic effort.”

These famished individuals are required to undergo a regime of austerity, these atrophied muscles are required to work out of all proportion. An autarkic regime is established and each state, with the pitiful resources at its disposal, endeavors to address the mounting national hunger and the growing national poverty. We are witness to the mobilization of a people who now have to work themselves to exhaustion while a contemptuous and bloated Europe looks on.

Anti-colonial intellectuals like Fanon observed at the time the great battle between capitalism and socialism, which clearly manifested itself within the formerly colonized country. Fanon correctly judged that the conditions of the capitalist colonizer must absolutely not be accepted:

We know, of course, that the capitalist way of life is incapable of allowing us to achieve our national and universal project. Capitalist exploitation, the cartels and monopolies, are the enemies of the underdeveloped countries. On the other hand, the choice of a socialist regime, of a regime entirely devoted to the people, based on the principle that man is the most precious asset, will allow us to progress faster in greater harmony...

“The national revolution will be socialist,” thus wrote Jean-Paul Sartre in his preface to this book. “if it is stopped in its momentum, if the colonized bourgeoisie takes over power, the new state, despite its official sovereignty, will remain in the hands of the imperialists.” However, anti-colonial socialism cannot be utopian or fantastical the way leftist intellectuals in Europe imagined it. The liberation movement must necessarily adopt a strategy of total and radical immediacy. The role of the revolutionary activist is crucial here. This is not their own war, but the people’s war. And this must be reflected in the organization of the revolution:

In an underdeveloped country, the party must be organized in such a way that it does not merely maintain contact with the masses. The party must be the direct expression of the masses.

If we want to increase the gross national income, reduce the imports of certain useless, even harmful, products, improve agricultural production and fight illiteracy, we have to conduct an information campaign. The people must understand what is at stake. Public business must be the business of the public. We arrive therefore at the need to increase the number of local cells among the rank and file [...] The masses must be able to meet, discuss, put forward suggestions and receive instructions.

Here lies the absolute manifestation of the dictatorship of the proletariat in which the revolutionary takes power and gives it to the people.

To politicize the masses is not and cannot be to make a political speech. It means driving home to the masses that everything depends on them, that if we stagnate the fault is theirs, and that if we progress, they too are responsible, that there is no demiurge, no illustrious man taking responsibility for everything, but that the demiurge is the people and the magic lies in their hands and their hands alone.

To go back to my claim in my title, Western leftists and anarchists (not all of course) harshly criticise the "totalitarianism" of AES in the Global South because of their ignorance of the historical and material conditions that shaped the revolution, as showcased above, as well as the mechanisms through which Socialist regimes govern.

Socialism in the postcolonial world has always been under existential threat by the ex-colonial, capitalist forces. The DPRK, for instance, must be situated within the context of the dissection of Korea, the American imperialist war and the continuous threats to its sovereignty; Cuba within the context of the numerous assassination and coup attempts and the perpetual sanctions; China within the context of the imperialist incursions of the West and Japan, the foreign backing of warlords and the continuous fearmongering of Western propaganda, and so forth.

Moreover, the importance of this book for a Western reader has been succinctly expressed by Sartre:

Why bother to read it since it is not meant for us? [...] because Fanon analyzes you [Westerners] for his brothers and demolishes for them the mechanism of our alienations. Take advantage of it to discover your true self as an object. Our victims know us by their wounds and shackles: that is what makes their testimony irrefutable. They only need to know what we have done to them for us to realize what we have done to ourselves. Is this necessary? Yes, because Europe is doomed [...] Have the courage to read it, primarily because it will make you feel ashamed, and shame, as Marx said, is a revolutionary feeling. You see I, too, cannot lose my subjective illusion. I, too, say to you: “All is lost unless. . . .” I, a European, am stealing my enemy’s book and turning it into a way of healing Europe. Make the most of it.

I was browsing Reddit (anonymously) the other day when I stumbled upon a curious post. A suicidal person writing their final words and thanking the people who messaged them. I remember them writing something along the lines of:

I know it will be painful at first for my parents, but on the long run it will be a relief for them since they no longer have to carry the financial burden of a 24 year old failure.

It strikes me how a young individual can hold such grim ideas in their mind. And what's more upsetting is the futility in convincing them otherwise, that their life has just started and they have so much to live for, not to mention the immense pain and suffering they will bring to their circle of people. Of course, I don't know what this person has went through in order to reach such irreversible stage, but I still firmly believe that, for the most part at least, nothing justifies the act of suicide. This conviction stems not from a moralistic point of view, but rather from a very simple and benign concept: that of curiosity.

I remember reading Emil Cioran's The Trouble with Being Born many years ago, not being able to comprehed how the author had such a laissez faire attitude towards life.

The book consists of short aphorisms dealing with the themes of death, suicide, the meaningless of life and so forth. Cioran's writing is very nihilistic. It expresses the many feelings and ideas shared by suicidal individuals; of failing to grasp the meaning of life, or the fear of not living up to expectations, the remorse of existing in the first place. By reading The Trouble with Being Born at face value, one might believe that Cioran was hanging on a thread between continuing his depressing life or ending it all right after his ink dries. Yet, it may surprise the inattentive reader that Cioran died at the old age of 84, having lived a mostly stable life—with the exception of dealing with chronic insomnia, which influenced his writing. Indeed, he even made sure to be as healthy as possible in his later life so as to not accelerate his timely death. So, what gives?

The source of the author's disquietude, as the the title of the book, stems from the problem with being born, precisely that we are not given a choice in our own birth. We are thrown into the world without any clear guide on how to live life. To Cioran, every object from which a person tries to derive some meaning, is a mere distraction, and the only thing which prevails is the inevitability of one's own death. This fact alone is surely to bring anxiety to the intellect, as one tries to cling to some intrinsic meaning and to certain expectations we have of our destiny.

Cioran writes, “I know peace only when my ambitions sleep. Once they waken, anxiety repossesses me.” Expectation and ambition imply that there are successes and failures. Success further invigorates the metaphysical framework of meaning we have built for ourselves. Conversely, failing to achieve our ambitions or to be up to our expectations provokes a critical hit to said framework. What then happens when we are hit with a succession of relentless failures in life, when this facade of meaning shatters completely and we are left with the approaching abyss of death? To many, the logical step at this point would be to simply take one’s own life. But here exactly where the common thread between Cioran and the suicidal nihilist ends.

To Cioran, all of our ambitions are, as already mentioned, mere delusions and distractions to our looming death. Yet, paradoxically, that there is no point to live is more so a reason to persist on living. As much as there is no meaning to life, there is equally no true way to living life. Failure is the purest form of being human:

This is how we recognize the man who has tendencies toward an inner quest: he will set failure above any success, he will even seek it out, unconsciously of course. This is because failure, always essential, reveals us to ourselves, permits us to see ourselves as God sees us, whereas success distances us from what is most inward in ourselves and indeed in everything.

In other words, by embracing failure, one becomes liberated from the expectations they or society have set. One lives life as it comes without preconceived expectations or prospects; one lives life as a curious mystery waiting to unfold.

What's the point of commiting suicide when life will eventually end? As Cioran writes, with a sarcastic tone, “it’s not worth the bother of killing yourself, since you always kill yourself too late.” You are already born, it is a fact, so you might as well live your life to its natural end.

To go back to the claim I set at the beginning of this monologue, what prevents one from committing suicide should be curiosity to the many more experiences, interactions and, most possibly, fuck ups that life will bring before them. Not hope for a better future, but a relentless curiosity to what might come next, however inconsequential it may be.

I will end this monologue with one last quote from the book, which hopefully someone in need gets to read; it goes as such:

Astounding, the number of hours I have wasted on ? the “meaning” of what exists, of what happens…. But that “what” has no meaning, as all serious minds know. Hence they devote their time and their energy to more useful undertakings.

I was recently using this fork before it was recently archived. It seems that every dev who puts their hand on it quickly backtracks (understandably so) that it became almost like a curse. Anyways, is anybody aware of a fork that it is still actively developed and maintained? Thanks.

P.S. I know there are other open source apps with a similar function, but I am looking specifically for the unique design which ViMusic has for its UI.