Laura Kipnis Against Love Analysis
“Against Love”: immediately controversy is conveyed by the title of Laura Kipnis’ article on modern relationships. The reader is put on the defensive as Kipnis starts her argument with strong metaphors attacking one of the most basic human interactions that we see as natural and embrace without question. Namely, love, a word held in superposition between complex and simple. Kipnis argues it has been overrated and too much is sacrificed in the pursuit of making it last. Defining her own terms that apply to most relationships such as “advanced intimacy” and “mutuality” she provides a new perspective on old notions. Her tone throughout is consistently sarcastic but make no mistake, Kipnis is addressing a real issue on what we value as a society. Descriptive language is Kipnis’ fishing line that keeps you reading, often creating vivid and objectionable images that no one can avoid cringing at. Concepts surrounding love and the ideal couple change from age to age and from culture to culture but Kipnis doesn’t disregard this. She compares today’s norms to historical precedence as she identifies the shift from focusing on the convenience of financially organized marriages to the achievement of unending life-long love. Kipnis’ article presents a fascinating argument by proposing an idea
…show more content…
Kipnis maintains her resolve with an apt allusion that “the expression of needs” is often the Trojan horse of intimate warfare, since expressing needs means, by definition, that one’s partner has thus far failed to meet them.” (Par.24). She uses allusion to define “modern love’s central anxiety, that structuring social contradiction the size of the San Andreas Fault: namely, the expectation that romance and sexual attraction can last a lifetime of coupled togetherness…”(Par.3). Her main point here is to create descriptions that pull you into her perception of love’s
Kipnis maintains her resolve with an apt allusion that “the expression of needs” is often the Trojan horse of intimate warfare, since expressing needs means, by definition, that one’s partner has thus far failed to meet them.” (Par.24). She uses allusion to define “modern love’s central anxiety, that structuring social contradiction the size of the San Andreas Fault: namely, the expectation that romance and sexual attraction can last a lifetime of coupled togetherness…”(Par.3). Her main point here is to create descriptions that pull you into her perception of love’s