Erich Fromm

　　Pre-reading

　　Erich Fromm (March 23, 1900-March 18, 1980) was born in Germany and was educated as a psychoanalyst. In 1934 he immigrated to the United States, where he served as a professor at Columbia University and New York University, and traveled widely to speak at other universities throughout North America. Erich Fromm is widely appreciated for his insights on human relationships and the humanistic philosophy. Fromm’s writings are notable as much for their social and political commentary as for their philosophical and psychological underpinnings. His important works include Escape from Freedom (1941), a founding work of political psychology, Man for Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology of Ethics (1947), outlining Fromm’s theory of human character, and The Sane Society (1955), arguing in favor of a humanistic and democratic socialism.

　　The Art of Loving, first published in 1956, is Fromm’s most popular book. In this book, Fromm considers love to be an interpersonal creative human capacity rather than an emotion, and he views the experience of “falling in love” as evidence of one’s failure to understand the true nature of love, which he believes always involves the common elements of care, responsibility, respect, and knowledge. Seen in these terms, love is hard work, but it is also the most rewarding kind of work, and the ability to love becomes one of the most important things in life.

　　Presenting love as a skill that can be taught and developed, Fromm rejects the idea of love as something magical and mysterious that cannot be analyzed and explained. Fromm demonstrates that, although modern humans are alienated from each other and from nature and they seek refuge from their aloneness in romantic love and marriage, the qualities of care and responsibility are generally absent from most human relationships. He asserts that few people in modern society have respect for the autonomy of their fellow human beings, much less the objective knowledge of what other people truly want and need. Contrasting the current belief that a couple should be a well-assorted team, sexually and functionally, working towards a common aim, Fromm describes true love and intimacy in terms of willful commitment directed toward a single unique individual.

　　The following passage is the Foreword and Part 1 taken from the book The Art of Loving.

　　Prompts for Your Reading

　　1.Would you expect the content of the following passage to be like what a so-called relationship coach’s advice concerning love and romance?

　　2.What is the purpose of the foreword?

　　3.What does Fromm mean by “loving”?

　　4.Part 1 mainly deals with two questions. What are they?

　　5.How many premises are there behind the attitude that there is nothing to be learned about love? What are the premises?

　　6.What is meant by a “love object”?

　　7.What changes which occurred in the twentieth century have enhanced the importance of the choice of a “love object”?

　　8.What is the difference between “falling” in love and the permanent state of being in love?

　　9.What are the necessary steps in learning any art?

　　10.What is the general logic behind the organization of ideas in this passage? Work out an idea flow chart to illustrate train of thought in this passage.

　　11.How does the author achieve being academic and being readable at the same time?

　　Foreword

　　[1] The reading of this book would be a disappointing experience of anyone who expects easy instruction in the art of loving. This book, on the contrary, wants to show that love is not a sentiment which can be easily indulged in by anyone regardless of the level of maturity reached by him. It wants to convince the reader that all his attempts for love are bound to fail, unless he tries most actively to develop his total personality, so as to achieve a productive orientation; that, satisfaction in individual love cannot be attained without the capacity to love one’s neighbor, without true humility, courage, faith and discipline. In a culture in which these qualities are rare, the attainment of the capacity to love must remain a rare achievement. Or — anyone can ask himself how many truly loving persons he has known.

　　[2] Yet, the difficulty of the task must not be a reason to abstain from trying to know the difficulties as well as the conditions for its achievement. To avoid unnecessary complications I have tried to deal with the problem in a language which is non-technical as far as this is possible. For the same reason I have also kept to a minimum references to the literature on love.

　　[3] For another problem I did not find a completely satisfactory solution; that, namely, of avoiding repetition of ideas expressed in previous books of mine. The reader familiar, especially, with Escape from Freedom,Man for Himself, and The Sane Society, will find in this book many ideas expressed in the previous works. However, The Art of Loving is by no means mainly a recapitulation. It presents many ideas beyond the previously expressed ones, and quite naturally even older ones sometimes gain new perspectives by the fact that they are all centered around one topic, that of the art of loving.

　　[4]“He who knows nothing, loves nothing. He who can do nothing understands nothing. He who understands nothing is worthless. But he who understands also loves, notices, sees... The more knowledge is inherent in a thing, the greater the love... Anyone who imagines that all fruits ripen at the same time as the strawberries knows nothing about grapes.”

　　—Paracelsus1

　　Part 1 Is Love an Art?

　　[5] Is love an art? Then it requires knowledge and effort. Or is love a pleasant sensation, which to experience is a matter of chance, something one “falls into” if one is lucky? This little book is based on the former premise, while undoubtedly the majority of people today believe in the latter.

　　[6] Not that people think that love is not important. They are starved for it; they watch endless numbers of films about happy and unhappy love stories; they listen to hundreds of trashy songs about love — yet hardly anyone thinks that there is anything that needs to be learned about love.

　　[7] This peculiar attitude is based on several premises which either singly or combined tend to uphold it. Most people see the problem of love primarily as that of being loved rather than that of loving, of one’s capacity to love. Hence the problem to them is how to be loved, how to be lovable. In pursuit of this aim they follow several paths. One, which is especially used by men, is to be successful, to be as powerful and rich as the social margin2 of one’s position permits. Another, used especially by women, is to make oneself attractive, by cultivating one’s body, dress, etc. Other ways of making oneself attractive, used both by men and women, are to develop pleasant manners, interesting conversation, to be helpful, modest, and inoffensive. Many of the ways to make oneself lovable are the same as those used to make oneself successful, “to win friends and influence people”. As a matter of fact, what most people in our culture mean by being lovable is essentially a mixture between being popular and having sex appeal.

　　[8] A second premise behind the attitude that there is nothing to be learned about love is the assumption that the problem of love is the problem of an object, not the problem of a faculty3. People think that to love is simple, but that to find the right object to love — or to be loved by — is difficult. This attitude has several reasons rooted in the development of modem society. One reason is the great change which occurred in the twentieth century with respect to the choice of a “love object”.

　　[9] In the Victorian age, as in many traditional cultures, love was mostly not a spontaneous personal experience which then might lead to marriage. On the contrary, marriage was contracted by convention — either by the respective families, or by a marriage broker4, or without the help of such intermediaries5; it was concluded on the basis of social considerations, and love was supposed to develop once the marriage had been concluded. In the last few generations the concept of romantic love has become almost universal in the western world. In the United States, while considerations of a conventional nature are not entirely absent, to a vast extent people are in search of “romantic love”, of the personal experience of love which then should lead to marriage. This new concept of freedom in love must have greatly enhanced the importance of the object as against the importance of the function.

　　[10] Closely related to this factor is another feature characteristic of contemporary culture. Our whole culture is based on the appetite for buying, on the idea of a mutually favorable exchange. Modem man’s happiness consists in the thrill of looking at the shop windows, and in buying all that he can afford to buy, either for cash or on installments. He(or she) looks at people in a similar way. For the man an attractive girl — and for the woman an attractive man — are the prizes they are after. “Attractive” usually means a nice package6 of qualities which are popular and sought after on the personality market. What specifically makes a person attractive depends on the fashion of the time, physically as well as mentally. During the twenties, a drinking and smoking girl, tough and sexy, was attractive; today the fashion demands more domesticity and coyness. At the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of this century, a man had to be aggressive and ambitious; today he has to be social and tolerant in order to be an attractive “package”.

　　[11] At any rate, the sense of falling in love develops usually only with regard to such human commodities as are within reach of one’s own possibilities for exchange. I am out for a bargain; the object should be desirable from the standpoint of its social value, and at the same time should want me, considering my overt and hidden assets and potentialities. Two persons thus fall in love when they feel they have found the best object available on the market, considering the limitations of their own exchange values. Often, as in buying real estate, the hidden potentialities which can be developed play a considerable role in this bargain. In a culture in which the marketing orientation prevails, and in which material success is the outstanding value, there is little reason to be surprised that human love relations follow the same pattern of exchange which governs the commodity and the labor market.

　　[12] The third error leading to the assumption that there is nothing to be learned about love lies in the confusion between the initial experience of “falling” in love, and the permanent state of being in love, or as we might better say, of “standing” in love. If two people who have been strangers, as all of us are, suddenly let the wall between them break down, and feel close, feel one, this moment of oneness is one of the most exhilarating, most exciting experiences in life. It is all the more wonderful and miraculous for persons who have been shut off, isolated, without love. This miracle of sudden intimacy is often facilitated if it is combined with, or initiated by, sexual attraction and consummation. However, this type of love is by its very nature not lasting. The two persons become well acquainted, their intimacy loses more and more its miraculous character, until their antagonism, their disappointments, their mutual boredom kill whatever is left of the initial excitement. Yet in the beginning they do not know all this: in fact, they take the intensity of the infatuation7 for proof of the intensity of their love, while it may only prove the degree of their preceding loneliness.

　　[13] This attitude — that nothing is easier than to love — has continued to be the prevalent idea about love in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. There is hardly any activity, any enterprise, which is started with such tremendous hopes and expectations, and yet, which fails so regularly, as love. If this were the case with any other activity, people would be eager to know the reasons for the failures, and to learn how one could do better — or they would give up the activity. Since the latter is impossible in the case of love, there seems to be only one adequate way to overcome the failure of love — to examine the reasons for this failure, and to proceed to study the meaning of love.

　　[14] The first step to take is to become aware that love is an art, just as living is an art; if we want to learn to love we must proceed in the same way we have to proceed if we want to learn any other art, say music, painting, carpentry, or the art of medicine or engineering.

　　[15] What are the necessary steps in learning any art?

　　[16] The process of learning an art can be divided into two parts: one, the mastery of the theory; the other, the mastery of the practice. If I want to learn the art of medicine, I must first know the facts about the human body, and about various diseases. When I have all this theoretical knowledge, I am by no means competent in the art of medicine. I shall become a master in this art only after a great deal of practice, until eventually the results of my theoretical knowledge and the results of my practice are blended into one — my intuition, the essence of the mastery of any art. But, aside from learning the theory and practice, there is a third factor necessary to becoming a master in any art — the mastery of the art must be a matter of ultimate concern; there must be nothing else in the world more important than the art. This holds true for music, for medicine, for carpentry — and for love. And, maybe, here lies the answer to the question of why people in our culture try so rarely to learn this art, in spite of their obvious failures: in spite of the deep-seated craving for love, almost everything else is considered to be more important than love: success, prestige, money, power — almost all our energy is used for the learning of how to achieve these aims, and almost none to learn the art of loving.

　　[17] Could it be that only those things are considered worthy of being learned with which one can earn money or prestige, and that love, which “only” profits the soul, but is profitless in the modern sense, is a luxury we have no right to spend much energy on? However this may be, the following discussion will treat the art of loving in the sense of the forgoing divisions: first I shall discuss the theory of love — and this will comprise the greater part of the book; and secondly I shall discuss the practice of love — little as can be said about practice in this, as in any other field.

　　Notes

　　1.Paracelsus: (1493-1541) Swiss German Renaissance physician, botanist, astrologer, and general occultist, founder of the discipline of toxicology. He is also known as a revolutionary for insisting upon using observations of nature, rather than looking to ancient texts. Modern psychology often also credits him for being the first to note that some diseases are rooted in psychological illness.

　　2.social margin: If a person has social margin, there is some freedom for him or her to choose what to do or decide how to do in order to make a permissible difference. Social margin allows people some measure of freedom to change or improve within limits.

　　3.faculty: a physical or mental ability, natural or acquired, for a particular kind of action.

　　4.marriage broker: The marriage broker, or matchmaker was an essential advisor and assistant in arranged marriages.

　　5.intermediary: intermediate agent or agency, go-between or mediator, or a medium or means中间人，中介，中间商

　　6.package: something conceived of as a compact unit having particular characteristics

　　7.infatuation: foolish and usually extravagant passion, love or admiration which can make one unable to think clearly or sensibly 迷恋，痴迷

　　Questions for Further Thinking

　　1.In the very beginning of this passage/book, Fromm claims that love is not a sentiment which can be easily indulged in by anyone regardless of the level of maturity reached by him. Does this apply to children? How do children perceive love?

　　2.The author claims that mastery of an art requires knowledge and effort without providing evidence or reasoning to justify this claim. Do you think all claims need to be justified and supported?

　　3.The author relates to the phenomenon that in the “market” of love, being lovable is equated with being successful and popular. Is this still true today in our culture and in other cultures? What assessment do you make of yourself as a potential “love object”on the personality market?

　　4.The author believes that learning the art of loving is like learning the art of music, painting or carpentry. Is this comparison legitimate? Is there any difference between the art of loving and the rest of the arts? What differences might there be?

　　5.To what degree do you believe theoretical knowledge can help improve the ability to love? Or do you believe love should be more on the spontaneous side rather than be something knowledge-intensive and technical?

　　After-reading Assignment

　　Oral Work

　　1.Popular culture and mass media, including movies and songs, play an important part in consolidating people’s values and attitudes toward love and life. Study the lyrics of a contemporary love song you like and analyze the values embodied in the song. Do the values coincide with what Fromm reveals about modern people’s conception of love? Are there any changes or discrepancies? Report your findings to your class.

　　2.On today’s so-called personality market, what qualities would compose a “nice package” —for men and women respectively — that would be considered fashionable and sought after? Work with your classmates and conduct a survey to find out about the top five most desirable qualities (personal assets and potentialities) in both men and women. Report your findings to the class and explain what these qualities reveal about people’s value orientations.

　　3.Do you agree with the author that modern men’s happiness consists in the thrill of looking at the shop windows and keeping buying? Why is consumption connected with the gaining of happiness? Discuss this question with your classmates/roommates. Choose a spokesperson to organize the results of your discussion and report them to your class.

　　4.It is said that if one cannot love himself/herself properly, one cannot possibly love others. Does this mean the love of oneself comes before loving others? Then is the love of oneself a form of arrogance, conceit or egocentrism? Further your reading on this topic and find out what Fromm and other psychologists say about self-love. Report your findings to your class in a 3-minute presentation.

　　Written Work

　　1.Do you personally know a truly loving person? What qualities does he or she have? Are these qualities the same as what Fromm has specified, namely, humility, courage, faith and discipline? Write an essay of about 400 words to describe this person focusing on his/her qualities as a loving person.

　　2.Which idea in this passage strikes you as most truthful, and which idea strikes you as being a bit too strong or even biased? Write down these two ideas and list further evidence and reasoning to support or contradict them. Exchange the results of your work with your classmates and see whether you respond to the author’s ideas in similar or different ways.

　　3.Concerning the “productive orientation” (in Paragraph 1), Fromm explains that the most important sphere of loving is that man should give — he gives his life, which is what alive in him (his joy, his interest, his understanding, his humor, his sadness, etc.) to the one he loves, by which he tries to enrich the other. This means that a person has produced love to make the love potent. Conduct a survey among urban youth to find out whether modern young people are ready to be the producer in a romantic relationship. What are the things they are willing to produce or give? What are the things they don’t feel secure about or are not willing to give? Find out about the concerns behind the reluctance to be the giver in a relationship and write a short report to present your findings.

　　Further Readings

　　Of marriage and single life by Francis Bacon

　　The Art of Loving by Erich Fromm

　　Loveby M. Stendhal

　　Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus by John Gray Seven Levels of Intimacy by Matthew Kelly