ah, thank you for your kind reply. i don't know that i would go quite that far, because i can hardly consider absence and loss as nothing; the space has not been emptied yet, and it is still teeming with ghosts. if anything, absence strikes me as a peculiar form of presence that continues exerting pressure despite the lack of an object to point to, an overwhelm of a different sort; less a void than a saturation, like deafening static.
and perhaps this is where we differ; i am not entirely convinced love occupies the privileged position you are assigning to it (though i suspect this says more about us as people than it does about poetry, make of that what you will). ie; you can reach toward things you do not love, and mourn things you never wanted; longing does not always imply affection, nor does attachment necessarily imply devotion. love can be a hateful thing, too. it often is.
that said, i do concede that love easily becomes entangled in these movements, though i'd be reluctant to reduce them to a single common source (and where does that tendency come from, for you? nature or nurture? i don't even know where i'd stand on that question). i suspect we all have a habit of identifying whichever force feels most foundational to us personally and then looking for it everywhere. for some people it is desire; for others grief, beauty, power, fear, God, etc etc. perhaps love is simply your preferred universal solvent, the force from which other experiences emerge (though rereading your work, i wonder what exactly it is that you call love, your poems speak to me of witnessing, of knowing and being known, wanting, being undone by significance; all familiar terrains, and yet you seem to inhabit them differently. for instance; your speakers rarely seem interested in possessing anything, not in any conventional sense, at least, and even in your poem about hunger, the emphasis falls on knowing and being known and desire feels almost secondary to the witness, the beloved is present but as something observed rather than engaged with directly. is that deliberate? how does that work).
tbf, i had never really considered that someone might treat love as the broader category and obsession as one of its expressions; my instinct has always been the reverse. as i see it, the reaching precedes its object. in any case, i am still curious what exactly you mean when you call all of these movements love, because reading your poems, i have the distinct sense that we are pointing toward many of the same experiences while arranging them into entirely different constellations
my apologies for the lateness, i have been met with significant exhaustion and wished to take my time on this.
perhaps my example was improper, as it came off a bit too literal. not to say there is necessarily nothing within that darkness or light, as true nothingness cannot bring forth anything. i was more making a reference to the artistic concept itself. white and black (the values to represent light and dark, of course) both exist as their own colors with their own properties, characteristics being able to create definition in their own right. thusly, there is something behind the absence of hue which exonerates itself of being truly nothing. i say ‘nothing’ as a broader term. i do not find the idea of ‘nothing’, in the sense there is an absolute lack of anything, to be realistic, but instead something fantastical. even the vast depths of space contains *something*, and for ‘nothing’ to exist, it must firstly exist.
i do agree it to be due to how we differ as people. i'm an optimist, so everything is seen through a positive lens where possible. this part may be a bit annoying, so please bear with me. love as a concept cannot be truly defined, as it's different to everyone -- we all experience and witness it in separate manners. with this in mind, i do not necessarily find love to consistently hold positive meaning. it finds relation to jealousy, fear, despair, contentment, and hate. i will reference the valence-arousal model for emotions here, which may aid in understanding. with this model, you may separate out emotions based on their level of arousal and positive/negative valence. love and hate are especially notable in their connection as they both have similar arousal levels, and may only differ in valence. 'like' and 'dislike' are more moderate forms of the feelings, but still apply in their relation to one another. this is my interpretation, but if you're reaching towards something, there's some form of motivation behind it (i don't believe you can reach towards something neutrally, but correct me if i'm wrong!). you don't have to feel the highest arousal state of love in order to reach towards it, but generally you must experience *something* positive if it's spurring you into action. humans, at their core, are selfish beings (not meant in a negative light) so our brains will reward themselves if to encourage a certain action. or, you may experience something negative -- but that also has it's motivation in some form. all of this to say, it is not necessarily romantic love which draws you, but something enough to attract you into reaching towards it, a love for what it may give or provide benefit. in terms of mourning what one does not want, you may not want it, yes, but you still dedicate feeling towards said thing. you may not love it to the point of wanting it, but i find that you can love something for its absence as well (or, how its changed you). i agree that attachment does not imply devotion, i am unsure if that was stated by me but i apologize if it came off that way. when i state that all poems are borne from love, i speak of our dedication to the craft. all poetry spawns from some form of passion, and in it we imbue parts of ourselves into the work. you don't necessarily have to hold intense feelings toward what you're writing (love or hate) about (or write about love at all), but if you did not love what you were doing, and/or find inspiration from said thing, i don't find that a poem could exist. (here, i want to specifically reference people who list themselves as poets as i understand some do not dedicate themselves as much to poetry). please ask questions if you have any. before this, i have not explained anything philosophical/abstract to anyone.
ah . . . i apologize for my overzealous rambling. i am unsure of where this tendency comes from. i have always been hyperempathetic (having a "big heart" so to speak), but my positivity towards loss is more nurture. if you asked me about love several years ago, i would have provided a vastly different answer. in this, i find agreeance with your statement. our brains hallucinate all of our senses (this is a whole other neuroscience concept i could ramble on about), in this, there is bias towards how we may experience the world. in addition, our beliefs also shape this experience. this to say that we all have our own unique lens in which we view the world. my poems on this account are more dedicated to the obsessive facet of my love, rather than the more. general romanticism of it (if that makes sense)? i am extreme in the ways i love, and wish to be loved in turn, but it coexists alongside a softer version; often found in traditional love melodies. i do not feature this, as it is something i accept (being more conventional). my extreme nature, however, is something i deeply struggle with. it is what majorly dictates my love, but despite it's prominence, i find fear. i explore it within my writings as an attempt to acknowledge this part of myself, due to struggles with shame and guilt. in this, is why there is often distance nestled within my poetry. separation from a beloved, desire, and from what i wish to possess. i subconsciously reject myself, as i cannot seem to permit full indulgence of my desires. i did not expect this to be properly noted by a reader. there is a love in this fear, regardless; a budding acceptance of my true nature. i do my best to find love in who i've become as a person, stripped of facade, despite shortcomings and tribulations. having said all this, it is difficult to explicate what love means to me because of how complex it is (especially when regarding obsession), i simply feel it's intensities. at the core of it all i find love (platonic or romantic) to primarily feature a conscious knowing of the other, wholly understanding what constitutes their being and behaviors. that is what i feature in most of my works, yearning in its absence. i'll do my best to ponder over the meaning of love a bit more, it really is a challenge to describe it . . . i need to get this out, anyways!!! it's been far too long.
titsay
snowghoul
germansingergirl
baratheonpilled
izzy806
yousharknotpass
gracieabrams
turnnoffyourmind