The Tyranny of Passion

Love is 1% passion and 99% duty. -Valentino Casanova

In contemporary society, most significantly capitalist ones, there are exponentially increasing discussions of what love is. One could almost certainly be right to say that mankind is slowly losing the ability to articulate about what this idea really is as its boundaries slowly stretch and encompass over nearly all moral subjectivities. However, unless one examines carefully, it is hardly noticeable that most conversations, poetry, movies, philosophical debates, theological definitions and aesthetic restructurings of the beautiful core of this marvelous topic has been narrowly focused on one constitution, namely, that of passion.

Poetry lovers, take for example the eccentric poems of Byron, or for the drama-lovers, the scripts of Shakespeare. The sadistic intellectual, maybe the horribly dense interpretations of Luhmann, or the post-modern feminist, the criticisms of Foucault. Maybe those more scientifically inclined would appreciate the quantum theories of Einstein, those from the art schools Parisian fashion or Greek sculpturing. The theologians would pick something from the Gospels or the Song of Songs, the historians would pick legends of ill-fated lovers; the anthropologists will narrow down to the red heart-shape symbol, the musician will cling on to his favored genre or instrument.

But everything expressed, verbally or non-verbally, with words or without, all share the reductionist tendency to narrow down to the aspect of passion, simply because from it is the origin of all inspiration and energy. The tyranny of expressions of love then, must be the symbolic violence forced upon the notion of duty.


Passion never did sustain anything for long. Passion is akin to the numerous (for some perhaps, the rare or occasional) sprints of a marathon. We all enjoy taking over people during runs; it gives us a certain boost of self-esteem, creates a little bounce in our stride. But an experienced runner will tell you that the camera angles of the Olympic Games or F1 races are overly focused on the thrill of watching one world-class athlete take over another. No one tuned in to ESPN enjoys watching Lance Armstrong or Michael Schumacher lead from the beginning to the end of the race, unless one is a huge fan or a pundit. We forget that the race is simply about tunneling on when it seems impossible to, when giving up is a tempting option, when the horizon gets keeps repeating itself, or when there is no one beside you to give your trembling body courage.


It can be said that duty is all there is to love. I cannot even continue from this line for the sheer dullness of things to say about duty. No one likes to think of love as a duty, it's the stuff people tell you when passion has fizzled out. We look at an old couple feeding birds together on park bench and we go, "Aww, so sweet." Turning our eyes to a seductive R&B dance between two scantily dressed adolescents, we then hear ourselves say, "AWWsome. I wish I could have some of that too." Even for the extremely conservative-minded, a picture of two good-looking celebrities kissing is still preferable to the two white-haired oldies.


The worse part is that there is no way duty can come on par with passion. Terms such as "loyalty" and "faithfulness" today, are more associated with dogs and nerds, and totally unmentioned under the "Top 3 Attributes of Your Ideal Man" by "intelligent" and "attractive" women. Skepticism acts as a back-up, because should the rare occasion of the term "faithful" emit from her lips, one brushes it away by assuming that she probably hasn't dated before or she has, very unfortunately, must have been a huge bimbo to have gotten her heart broken too many times.

In today's world however, men without a sense of duty rank among the most desired, simply for the fact that they cannot be held down by any woman. Narcissistic, fickle-minded, thrill-induced, easily-swayed, bad-tempered, arrogant, emotional men with short attention spans and an agenda of personal glory and pleasure-seeking are the most attractive species today. They can be identified by the simple observation that when the situation is completely closed off to any potential of self-benefit, they leave or shut-down, regardless of whether they are responsible or not. Before the ladies should begin protesting however, one should first be able to explain why the list of most desirable men in the world would never include Gandhi, Mandela or Jesus, and yet harbor the likes of Christiano Ronaldo, Robbie Williams and Brad Pitt. Even Tiger Woods just made himself mobile, upwards.

It is also sad how the notion of duty is crushed by the simple equation of faithful = boring. The general assumption (that if you realize, equalizes all men by turning them into animals from the moral creatures that they actually are) is that a partner is faithful because of a lack of available options. And if he has a lack of available options, it must be because he is not attractive enough. And if he is not attractive enough, the lady (you) unfortunate enough to have chosen to be with him must be the stupidest woman in the world to pick such an unattractive man. "Eyes tia stamp", in Singapore slang. And every person (men and women included) always like to think that they deserve much more.

Just for the fun of it, other taken-for-granted equations include: handsome/beautiful = has high standards; rich = spoilt; power/wealth = knowledge; intelligent = lack of normative communication abilities; gay = will have sex with any available guy.

As much as there are historical origins for the creation of such social equations, one must be constantly self-aware of the tendency to generalize in order to make this complex world a little easier to understand. If not, as a woman, one would be dating every guy who asks one out, even that creepy old man with a lack of basic hygiene and social distancing skills. But the contrary also holds true, that as a woman, one might tend to make too quick an assumption and filter out even those who hold the greatest potential of bringing one happiness and direction in one's life.

A man with a sense of duty need not necessarily be boring. It is, after all, a man with a sense of duty, that will accord priority to the (however little) creative element in him to spice up the occasionally-needed passion required to liven the relationship AS a part of his duty. Rather than the most exciting and creative man with no sense of duty and therefore harbors no urgency to ignite the passion when the relationship needs it most.






The next time you look into the night sky and admire the stars and the fireworks, do not forget to credit the deep blackness surrounding them. It is, after all, the darkness that accentuates their magnificent, God-given beauty, without which, they would be diamonds hidden in a basket of glass shards. -Valentino Casanova

The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. -Paul (1 Cor 7:3)