Стопка ненаписанных постов в моей голове все прибывает, поэтому просто коротко напишу про важную книжку, которая попалась мне еще летом.
Esther Perel — Mating in Captivity: Unlocking Erotic Intelligence.
Простите, сейчас совсем нет времени переводить. Коротко говоря, эта книга о том как возможно сохранить желание в длительных отношениях, возможно ли «поженить» желание и сложно-переводимое commitment, и если да, то как. Самое ценное, что это не просто теория или рассуждения, а живые истории клиентов автора, выводы из ее терапевтической практики.
Автор говорит на девяти языках, родилась в Бельгии, росла в Израиле, живет в Штатах, много работает как семейный терапевт с кросс-культурными браками (так что книга еще и социокультурное исследование развития и трансформации семейных отношений, чем в том числе и интересна), в тексте раскиданы около-французские слова, а по-английски говорит со смешным акцентом — поначалу немного отвлекает, потом привыкаешь, добавляет шарму. И она очень живо передает речь своих клиентов (особенно когда люди в паре ругаются друг на друга), наверное тот случай, когда слушать лучше. Правда, записана аудиокнига одним длинным треком.
Скачать: здесь pdf (1.3 мб), здесь audio (mp3, 280 мб).
Cтатьи (похожи на отрывки из книги):
«The Double Flame»
«The Erotic Intelligence»
We find the same polarities in every system: stability and change, passion and reason, personal interest and collective wellbeing, action and reflection (to name but a few). These tensions exist in individuals, in couples, and in large organizations. They express dynamics that are part of the very nature of reality. Barry Johnson, an expert on leadership who is the author of Polarity Management: Identifying and Managing Unsolvable Problems, describes polarities as sets of interdependent opposites that belong to the same whole — you can’t choose one over the other; the system needs both to survive.»
«The caring, protective elements that nurture home life can go against the rebellious spirit of carnal love. We often choose a partner who makes us feel cherished; but after the initial romance we find, like Candace, that we can’t sexualize him or her. We long to create closeness in our relationships, to bridge the space between our partner and ourselves, but, ironically, it is this very space between self and other that is the erotic synapse. In order to bring lust home, we need to re-create the distance that we worked so hard to bridge. Erotic intelligence is about creating distance, then bringing that space to life.»
«I suggest that our ability to tolerate our separateness — and the fundamental insecurity it engenders — is a precondition for maintaining interest and desire in a relationship. Instead of always striving for closeness, I argue that couples may be better off cultivating their separate selves. If cultivating separateness sounds harsh, let’s think of it instead as nurturing a sense of selfhood. The French psychologist Jacques Salomé talks about the need to develop a personal intimacy with one’s own self as a counterbalance to the couple.»
«In our mutual intimacy we make love, we have children, and we share physical space and interests. Indeed, we blend the essential parts of our lives. But “essential” does not mean “all.” Personal intimacy demarcates a private zone, one that requires tolerance and respect. It is a space — physical, emotional, and intellectual — that belongs only to me. Not everything needs to be revealed. Everyone should cultivate a secret garden. Love enjoys knowing everything about you; desire needs mystery. Love likes to shrink the distance that exists between me and you, while desire is energized by it. If intimacy grows through repetition and familiarity, eroticism is numbed by repetition. It thrives on the mysterious, the novel, and the unexpected. Love is about having; desire is about wanting. When the impulse to share becomes obligatory, when personal boundaries are no longer respected, when only the shared space of togetherness is acknowledged and private space is denied, fusion replaces intimacy and possession co-opts love. It is also the kiss of death for sex. Deprived of enigma, intimacy becomes cruel when it excludes any possibility of discovery. Where there is nothing left to hide, there is nothing left to seek.»
«We create a bridge of things unknown by making a perceptual shift, and it is on this bridge, in the space between us, that we can meet and play with the erotic. Sometimes introducing mystery is nothing more than a shift in perception. In the words of Proust, “The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes.” The question posed earlier — “Can we want what we already have?” — invites us to admit that we never “have” our partners. It is our willingness to engage with the mystery that keeps desire alive. Faced with the irrefutable otherness of our partner, we can respond with fear or with curiosity. We can try to reduce them to a knowable entity, or we can embrace their persistent mystery. When we resist the urge to control, when we keep ourselves open, we preserve the possibility of discovery. Eroticism resides in the ambiguous space between anxiety and fascination. We remain interested in our partners; they delight us, and we’re drawn to them. It is not mere emotional anxiety, but rather the existential reality that there is no permanence, no lasting holding. When we trade passion for reality, maybe we are just trading one fiction for another.»
«In the liberating expression of sexuality we give in to our unruly impulses and the disavowed, lurid parts of ourselves. Mordechai Gafni, a scholar of Jewish mysticism, explains that fantasies are like mirrors. We hold them in front of us in order to see what is behind. We spot images of ourselves that are otherwise inaccessible. If commitment requires a trade-off of freedom for security, then eroticism is the gateway back to freedom. In the broad expansiveness of our imagination we uncover the freedom that allows us to tolerate the confi nes of reality. The very dynamics of power and control that can be challenging in an emotional relationship can, when eroticized, become highly desirable. In the crucible of the erotic mind, we bring the more vexing components of love—dependency, surrender, jealousy, aggression, even hostility—and transform them into powerful sources of excitement. […]The imbalance of power is both safe and sexy — at once protective and liberating.»
«In my work with couples, I aim to uncover dynamics of power. I try to make them manifest, to examine the tensions, and to redress the inequities. I also look at the harmonious imbalances unique to each couple. Not all inequities are a source of trouble. Sometimes these form a couple’s basis of harmony. I don’t seek just to neutralize power; I also seek to harness it. Together, we look for ways to express it safely, creatively, fearlessly, and sexually.»
«We are indeed a nation that prides itself on efficiency. But here’s the catch: eroticism is inefficient. It loves to squander time and resources. As Adam Phillips wryly notes, “In our erotic life work does not work… trying is always trying too hard. Eroticism is an imaginative act, and you can’t measure it. We glorify efficiency and fail to recognize that the erotic space is a radiant interlude in which we luxuriate, indifferent to demands of productivity; pleasure is the only goal. Octavio Paz writes, “The moment of merging is a crack in time, a balm against the wounds inflicted by the minutes and hours of time. A moment totally eternal as it is ephemeral.” It is a leap into a world beyond.»
«Loving another without losing ourselves is the central dilemma of intimacy. Our ability to negotiate the dual needs for connection and autonomy stems from what we learned as children, and often takes a lifetime of practice. It affects not only how we love but also how we make love. Erotic intimacy holds the double promise of finding oneself and losing oneself. It is an experience of merging and of total self-absorption, of mutuality and selfishness. To be inside another and inside ourselves at the same time is a double stance that borders on the mystical. The momentary oneness we feel with our beloved grows out of our ability to acknowledge our indissoluble separateness. In order to be one, you must first be two.»
«Reconciling the domestic and the erotic is a delicate balancing act that we achieve intermittently at best. It requires knowing your partner while recognizing his persistent mystery; creating security while remaining open to the unknown; cultivating intimacy that respects privacy. Separateness and togetherness alternate, or proceed in counterpoint. Desire resists confinement, and commitment mustn’t swallow freedom whole. At the same time, eroticism in the home requires active engagement and willful intent. It is an ongoing resistance to the message that marriage is serious, more work than play; and that passion is for teenagers and the immature. We must unpack our ambivalence about pleasure, and challenge our pervasive discomfort with sexuality, particularly in the context of family. Complaining of sexual boredom is easy and conventional. Nurturing eroticism in the home is an act of open defiance.»
— Выделение мое. Цитаты звучат как-то сухо без историй, который их иллюстрируют, ну уж не перепечатывать же книжку целиком :)
Вообще книга переведена на много языков, а по-русски нет. Если у кого есть знакомые издатели — посоветуйте, мне кажется, хорошее дело, мир станет немного лучше.
Update: Судя по тому, что книжку уже скачало человек пятьдесят, тема большая. Если прочитаете, напишите, пожалуйста, что вы думаете. Было бы интересно обсудить.