Whatever “in love” means

Whatever “in love” means.

Those few words are the last nail in the coffin for the modern fairy tale of Prince Charming and his beautiful, kind and caring Princess. If Diana, Princess of Wales, could not find equal love, what gives the rest of the world hope? 

The most significant influence and understanding of love come from art. Music, film, and literature are the purest forms of expression from the artist's core, the turbulence of romance. I suppose Taylor Swift breaks up songs to Adele’s infamous ballads. These forms of expression are the light at the end of a dark tunnel of sore and longing for true love.

Unrequited love is when one person yearns for unconditional love from another who does not feel the same. 

The idea of unrequited can be seen in the literature of our past. Victor Hugo declared the hunchback of Notre-dame physical appearance the most crucial factor in love. Through literature and art, we have seen how devotion is adapted and redefined; with his dramatics, Shakespeare shows that love is an all-consuming and powerful thing that can lead to the most tragic endings. 

Munoz once said unrequited love is not love and could be closer to infatuation than real love.

When searching for unrequited love, Google gives you a pithier website advising people how to overcome and move past this kind of love, as if it were a self-love book. Or it is a how-to of simple steps to fall out of love with someone. Love is not as simple as instructions to make a cake. It is not a format of prosecution. We are a generation that sees a problem within us and strives to improve our imperfections, constantly scrutinising and titivating over the most minor things. You do plan who you fall for. That is the reality of love and heartbreak. There will inevitably be frogs along the way. People need to be less focused on sorting out love and instead letting the possibility of love happen to them, true love with the good and the bad, but love in the purest sense.

What is love?

We have been painted a picture of what “in love” is. It is the desire for fifty shades of grey or the need in Romeo and Juliet. The arts have romanticised love in its full glory. So is it so hard not to question what “In love” is when another person has their definition for it wherever you go? Or is it a matter of opinion? Is it sacrifice, pleasure or companionship?

Love must be defined in categories.

• Eros- erotic, enthusiastic, possibly sexual love
• Philia: love of friends and equals
• Storge: love of parents for children
• Agape: love of humankind

The Cambridge Dictionary defines love as “to like another adult very much and be romantically and sexually attracted to them, or to have strong feelings of liking a friend or person in your family.” This definition sounds like a parent trying to explain to a young child what love may be in a wedding environment, minus the sex part; it doesn’t describe the utter yearning that Shakespeare describes. Love has become irrelevant, less about passion and needs and more about need and want. 

True love

Those two words have made humankind go wild. It is a part of everyone’s ambition and desire. It is a driving element in our creativity through music. Many artists have interpreted it as this powerful, overwhelming, complicated feeling that does not always have the successful conclusion we expect from the story books. It can be defined simply as faithful or genuine love. Is that enough? Does the next generation believe in true love, or is it a long-lost fantasy? We live in a world of uncertainty with internet catfishing and a laissez-faire attitude to being exclusive; situationship is the word. Some say that to be genuinely in love with someone, you must love yourself, but are we, humans, able to expect our falls and stop nit-picking ourselves? J.S Park says, “Real love does not meet you at your best. It meets you in your mess,” is love supposed to be the remedy for everything? Love cannot be the be-all and end-all. When researching literature quotes surrounding true love, Richard Bach repeatedly used this simple sentence: “True love stories never have endings.” Is true love supposed to be omnipotent and all-consuming? In this modern age, people strive for others to fulfil life expectations. Are the words of Hemingway, “ I am so in love with you that there isn’t anything else”, just a cynic or a cliché? Oscar Wilde once said, “You don’t love someone for their looks or their clothes or for their fancy car,  but because they sing a song only you can hear” It feels like the tables have turned. People have lost the power to sing and only look for materialism, which begs whether true love exists or if we are all hopeless romantics. So I leave you with the words of Shakespeare: “ I love you with so much of my heart that none is left to protect.”

Love at first sight

The Love at First Sight TV show is a phenomenon that advertises people finding love but just wanting fame—why did the romance go?

Love, at first sight, is when at first meeting someone or seeing them, you fall utterly head over heels for someone. There is immense pressure to find this person and never let them go, believing they are the one for you. When we think about Shakespeare, we do not think of a hopeless romantic but a man tormented by love. He writes about unrequited love, people falling for the wrong person, and finally, people taking their own lives for love. But to think he has so much to say about the most genuine love of all when he said, “When I saw you, I fell in love, and you smiled because you knew.” 

I don't believe in love at first sight; how can you tell a person from the outside if they are good on the inside? Love is nurtured over time. It is not something to throw around like a rugby ball; it means something. True love can be seen in Beauty and the Beast, a pure representation of true love, not about appearances but personal characteristics that come first and look second. The truth is, if there were one original Disney princess I would let my child idolise, it would be Belle; she was determined, strong, had no vanity, had two senses, and loved to read. She knew her worth and was sore for what she wanted for herself. However, I would instead do all that in joggers and not a ball gown, instead personally.

True love can exist only in books, movies, and fantasies, but it is too good to be valid to play out in real life; I will leave that to the likes of Hugh Grant, Richard Gere, and Richard Curtis to represent.

In its current form, a soulmate is a romantic or platonic partner, implying an exclusive lifelong bond. We live in an era where marriage is expected to be for life, so soulmates, too. When we get married, there is still an out. The fear around finding your soulmates is immense.

To place someone on a pedestal and judge them for everything they have. Soulmates suggest compatibility beyond a reasonable doubt. How are you supposed to develop if you're attached at the hip to another? I am pragmatic, not a romantic. With that, I believe in love and marriage and wish nothing but a long, fruitful marriage for myself, but the pressure to find the one, marry the one, have kids with the one and live happily ever after with them is something no person should experience. I have watched in my bed sad and alone women cry about sleeping alone. I love having my own space, not fearing hitting them or keeping anyone else, and starfish to my content. I've grown to like my own company. However,  I am not a cat person, so the idea would be that finding someone doesn't have to be a soulmate but a mate.

To conclude my rant, these societal expectations placed by Hollywood are ridiculous. Half the people in Hollywood are divorced. Romance is a concept and figure or speech. Love is pure and innocent and cannot be made up or faked. Soulmates are just like souls. They come and go as they please but never stay.

So, what does “in love” mean to you and me?

In love means that butterfly feeling of excitement when they message back, the anxiety when you see them. In love is the need to be around this person, even with others there. Love is a state of vulnerability when you open yourself to another person. It is something you wouldn’t ever understand until you've experienced it. It cannot be explained; it is only felt. It doesn't have to be romantic and sexual; it is the desire for companionship. In love could be a friend and confident someone who will hold your hair back when you are ill and make you a hot water bottle. There's no going back once you have fallen through that rabbit hole. You are in Wonderland now. In love is a phase like a honeymoon where everything seems idyllic, romanticised, and perfect, but it is not meant to last; relationships are rollercoasters. They go up and down and all around. It is a boat on choppy seas