Product Description

Raises one of the deepest and most puzzling questions we can put to ourselves ' What is Love?' Drawing on writers and thinkers as diverse as Plato, Tolstoy, Freud and Stendhal, John Armstrong explores how our perception of love is formed by culture and history. For anyone who believes or disbelieves in love.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #46651 in Books
• Published on: 2003-01-30
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 176 pages

Amazon.co.uk Reviews
Love may be a serious drug, but, as John Armstrong divulges in his artful, quietly impassioned treatise on its philosophical qualities, Conditions of Love, its intoxicating qualities can still be distilled and soberly considered. Armstrong, already the author of the discerningly reflective The Intimate Philosophy of Art, is proving himself the master of his form: elegant, scholarly studies that wear their learning lightly, but surely. In turning his focus from looking at art to the art of loving, he provides the perfect median between the two, and dissects what we perceive of as love, and how it stands up to our demanding preconceptions. With calm assurance, he leads us through the froth to the substance of its being, from the evasive nebulousness of its definition, to its place within an evolutionary framework, in doing so touching on theories of experimental psychology also considered by Geoffrey Miller in The Mating Mind. If that perhaps takes the romance out of love, then Armstrong argues that we need to, if we are to strip bare our adolescent notions to reveal a mature, sustainable version which will endure. Backing up his evocations with considered and illuminating reference to the best efforts of the writers and painters, from Plato, Ovid, Turgenev and Goethe, to Ruskin and Chardin, who contribute to our celebration, but also our stereotypes, of love, Armstrong argues for personal responsibility, and a rejection of the restless masochism which drives so many to seek out an idealised partner, or inadvertently seek refuge in the despair of infatuation. As his title puts it, love is best considered as conditional rather than existing as a precondition, and if handled altruistically, can reap the rewards the artists exalt. In marrying the carnal and the cardinal with a poet's sensibility and a philosopher's rigour, much as Alain de Botton did in Essays in Love, John Armstrong guides us towards a more mature, imaginative future, less rosy, but perhaps more rooted. Love may, ultimately, perhaps definingly, prove ineffable, but Conditions of Love charges us with the power to facilitate its bloom, and the inspiration to achieve it. --David Vincent

The Guardian
“Wryly right”

The Sunday Times
“ Wise, discursive…It is powerful and valuable”

Customer Reviews

Insightful
Great book on the question of love. It discusses the sources and condition of love from various aspects. It also writes about what does the way and whom we fall in love with says about us. It discusses and contrasts the question using many different schools of thought. Although it does not mention Jung's views on condition of love explicitly, it actually explains 'why do we fall in love?' from Jung's perspective as well. Insightful.

Easy to read and educative
I am puzzled by one of the negative reviews of this book: Armstrong does deal with jealousy, approaching it from an evolutionary psychological perspective; he does cross reference; his bibliography includes some of the most notable books written on love; and if he refers to 'females', at least he is consistent by referring to 'males' too. True, he doesn't cite texts on love written by women, and that is a shortcoming, but this lack certainly does not lead to a one-sidedness in his discussion of love. You may not be satisfied with what he says about all or some of these things, but at least do him the small honour of giving an accurate account of what the book contains.

I liked this book. I thought Armstrong did a good job of showing how our idea of love has evolved over the millennia, how revolutionary ideas such as evolution, Marxism and psychoanalysis have left indelible marks on our idea of what love is, enriching the concept while also making it increasingly more complex. All of this is done in a comprehensible language, with a logical structure, and easily manageable and sensibly divided chapters.

Armstrong's argument seems to be that there is no essence of love, and that to go in search of a hard and fast definition is doomed from the start and based on an error of thinking. Love is not any one thing, but a host of related things which are neither identical with each other nor legitimately reducible to something held in common. He shows the many aspects of love: friendly, parental, childish, long-term, passionate, unrequited, and so on. You are left ultimately with an impression of the complexity of the notion and the futility of the attempt to reduce it to one simple thing, an endeavour which the question 'What is love?' all too irresistibly invites.

A good read on the topic of love in philosophy and writing
I really liked this book and didnt feel let down in the way that other readers did, in fact I own it in paperback and hard back, I do think it is far superior to his other book on the topic of beauty, which I thought was sorry rubbish.

Although there does not seem to be a very coherent or consistent line of reasoning or advice, then again its not a book like that, if that is what you would prefer I really would recommend either Eric Fromm's Art of Love or Falling In Love by Ayala Maclach Pines, both psychologists rather than philosophers and writing with the intention of instructing their readers.

Armstrong begins with the ideas of love current or utilised by plato and socrates and classical philosphers, goes on to investigate literary theories, such as Stendahls treatment of love as a process of crystalisation, the differences between reality and illusion or imagination.

It did take me a long time to read, not because its a long book but there is a variation between the really good chapters, which are packed with ideas and point up avenues you might like to investigate further (its not an exhaustive investigation), and less compelling chapters which are bridging between different topics, revisit a topic from earlier on or whose purpose might be better known to Armstrong than anyone else.

Its very true that Armstrong neglects to investigate what women have written on the topic, although I cant think right away of any prominent female philosophers other than Simone de Beauvoir. I really dont think that this book is as bad on the topic as Alain de Botton's essays on love, it was a really poor book.