Love to hate: (book) Why? is the simple, impulsive question we ask when confronted by horrible acts of hatred and violence. Why do students shoot fellow students or employees their coworkers? Why do mothers drown their children or husbands stalk and kill their wives? Love to Hate challenges us to turn this question upon ourselves at a deeper level. Why, as a culture, are we so fascinated by these acts? Why do we bestow celebrity on the perpetrators, while allowing the victims to fade into a second death of obscurity? Are we, as Pope John Paul II famously accused, "a culture of death"? And if so, how can we break free of this unacknowledged aspect of the cycle of violence? Unlike those who point solely to media imagery, splintered families, or lax gun control laws in search of the roots of America's endemic violence, Jody M. Roy suggests that we all must be held responsible. She argues that we reveal our love affair with hatred and violence in the ways we think and speak in our daily lives and in our popular culture. The very words we use function as building blocks of callousness and contempt, betraying our immersion in subtexts of violence and hatred. These subtexts are further revealed in our complex attitudes toward street gangs, school shooters, serial killers, and hate groups and the paroxysms of violence they unleash. As spectators, driven by our impulse to watch, we become an integral part of the equation of violence. In the book's final section, "Freeing Ourselves of Our Obsession with Hatred and Violence," Roy offers practical steps we can take -- as parents, consumers, and voters -- to free ourselves from linguistic and cultural complicity and to help create in America a culture of life. Obsession: (book) We live in an age of obsession. Not only are we hopelessly devoted to our work, strangely addicted to our favorite television shows, and desperately impassioned about our cars, we admire obsession in others: we demand that lovers be infatuated with one another in films, we respond to the passion of single-minded musicians, we cheer on driven athletes. To be obsessive is to be American; to be obsessive is to be modern. But obsession is not only a phenomenon of modern existence: it is a medical category- both a pathology and a goal. Behind this paradox lies a fascinating history, which Lennard J. Davis tells in Obsession. Beginning with the roots of the disease in demonic possession and its secular successors, Davis traces the evolution of obsessive behavior from a social and religious fact of life into a medical and psychiatric problem. From obsessive aspects of professional specialization to obsessive compulsive disorder and nymphomania, no variety of obsession eludes Davis's graceful analysis. Love: The philosophy of love For centuries, popular writers and respected scholars have written about and analyzed the phenomenon of love without exhausting its potential for contemporary debate. By representing the three major traditions in the philosophy of love--Platonic eros, Christian agape, and Aristotelian philia--editor Alan Soble has not only examined the intellectual problem of what "love" is, but has designed a dialogue among the three traditions in genuine philosophical style. "Eros is acquisitive, egocentric or even selfish; agape is a giving love. Eros is an unconstant, unfaithful love, while agape is unwavering and continues to give despite ingratitude. Eros is a love that responds to the merit or value of its object; while agape creates value in its object as a result of loving it... Finally, eros is an ascending love, the human's route to God; agape is a descending love, God's route to humans... Philia is caught between eros and agape."--From the Introduction to Eros, Agape and Philia ISSUES EXPLORED: --What is the state of love today as seen through the eyes of Plato, Aristotle, and Paul? --How do relations between the sexes illustrate the difficulties of love? --What are the nature and effects of exclusivity, reciprocity, and constancy? --What are the conceptual and psychological ties between sex and love? --Does it make any sense to think of love in moral terms? Irish Revel I am obsessed quite irrationally by the notion of love ..." writes Edna O'Brien. "It's an obsession and I know it's very limiting. At the same time it's what I feel truest and most persistently about, and therefore it's the thing that I have to write about" (Rafroidi and Harmon 272). And write about it she does - the obsession, that is, perhaps more than the love. A reading of O'Brien's stories, beginning with the 1969 collection, The Love Object, reveals that several of her characters share their author's obsession with "the notion of love." Yet between these women and their love objects there is so little real connection, so little love. For them, obsession with love seems to stand in the way of its attainment. That O'Brien's protagonists should find themselves in this bind is perhaps not surprising. Obsession - a "persistent or inescapable preoccupation with an idea or emotion" - seems to involve not only compulsion but insatiability. A person obsessed, whether with an idee fixe or a person, seems disinclined, or perhaps unable, to feed her obsession to the point of satiation. Obsession, like addiction, sets in motion a self-fueling and potentially endless cycle. Love and obsession are, in a sense, opposites. Obsession feeds on itself, is selfabsorbed, while love reaches beyond the self toward authentic contact with another. In the stories considered here there are moments of genuine love and compassion. But these occur only as their protagonists free themselves, or are torn, from the grip of their obsession. "Irish Revel," one of O'Brien's early stories from The Love Object, pictures what might be called the birth of the obsession. It opens with a young country girl, Mary, making her way by bicycle to town. She has been invited to a party at the home of Mrs. Rogers, one of her "betters," and welcomes the ride as an opportunity to entertain in solitude her treasured memories of John Roland, the young painter she met two years earlier, also while visiting Mrs. Rogers's house. Perhaps, magically, he will be there again. Soon after her arrival at the party, she realizes not only that her dream of seeing John is a groundless fantasy, but also that she has only been invited to serve guests, clean up, and add color to the affair. She takes shelter in daydreaming again of John and remembers a ride she took with him on his bicycle: "They did not talk for miles; she had his stomach encased in the delicate and frantic grasp of a girl in love and no matter how far they rode they seemed always to be riding into a golden haze" (O'Brien, Love Objects 96). She then recalls his calling her "Sweet Mary" and remembers his explanation that "he could not love her, because he already loved his wife and children ..." (97). At the close of "Irish Revel," Mary returns home burdened with her fruitless hopes and crushed by the ordinariness and crudity of the party. She stops briefly for a view of the countryside from a hill above her home and surveys it in a way that clearly echoes Joyce's language in "The Dead" (Eckley 81). However, instead of the falling snow that Gabriel Conroy views from his hotel window, a snow that softens the harsh outlines of the physical world and suggests gentle acceptance, Mary witnesses an unforgiving frost: The poor birds could get no food, as the ground was frozen hard. Frost was general all over Ireland; frost like a weird blossom on the branches, on the riverbank from which Long John Salmon leaped in his great, hairy nakedness, on the plough left out all winter; frost on the stony fields, and on all the slime and ugliness of the world. (O'Brien, Love Object 113). Partner Stalking: How Women Respond, Cope, and Survive Despair surrounds her on all sides, from the frozen, unyielding landscape to the equally grim vista of her family's cottage, evoking as it does the specter of a dead-end life: "She was at the top of the hill now, and could see her own house, like a little white box at the end of the world, waiting to receive her" (114). …