Final Blog

Kissing Jessica Stein:

Charles Herman-Wurmfeld did an exceptional job of exposing the true essence of what desire truly is. We want we do not have, rather can not obtain, therefore we search for what we believe we want only to find out that it is not what we truly desired from the beginning.

            Within the film we see a young woman, Jessica, searching for “Mr. Right” and in her pursuit she actually comes across what appears to be “Ms. Right” as Ms. Right was searching for some form of fulfillment of her own. Curiosity, being fueled by desire, led to what we call a “bi-curious” relationship. Neither of the women were truly interested in the idea of lesbianism however, they were interested in finding a satisfaction through each other that could never truly be obtained. The relationship cycle took its course and to no surprise, the relationship came to an end. “Ms. Right” found no satisfaction from plain ole Jessica; she needed excitement and sexual fulfillment while Jessica was searching for emotional companionship. The desirers were caught in the trap of trying to satisfy one’s desire with a lack. Desire is nothing more than the longing for what one does not have.

            Attempting to fulfill desire through the curiosity of sharing a common interest with an individual, later to find out that they are not who you thought of them to be, is a very dangerous endeavor if one is ultimately concerned about protecting their sense of “self.” But what is self?

Kristeva’s “Tales of Love”:

            This was a tough read for me being that it was written from a psychoanalyst. I did however manage to make connections to Zizek, as well as having a few eureka moments of my own.

            “…actually, the feeling, during love, of having had to expend if not give up desires and aspirations, isn’t this in fact the price we must pay for the violence of our passions about other?” This statement completely coincides with Zizek’s point about the foolishness in the pursuit of happiness do to the contradicting suffering that must take place to get there. Kristeva’s claim that “love never dwells in us without burning us” also supports Zizek and reveals the suffering nature of desire. As we discussed last class, Love is fueled by Desire, as it is Desire that needs Love in order to be pursued. It is a confusing concept to grasp, yes. The solution I can give to truly understand such topic is experience.

Love and Desire Thought:

            With the end of the semester approaching, I can truly say that I am more than pleased with the decision I made to apply to take this course. I’ve always longed to discuss deep material such as Love and Desire. Never truly accepting knowing what Love and Desire was truly about, I absorbed every ounce of information concerning this class that could help me understand the matters as well as finding answers to questions based off experiences that I have had and having in my life. Aside from the idea of Desire, as well as Solaris, yes I believe that Solaris can be viewed as a crucial theme within the course, the concept of “self” that we discussed has been my field of interest. Up until the revealing of the concept, I never truly took the time to try and look at my life from the outside in. What do I look like through the eyes of others? This question stays on my mind constantly. It’s not more so me attempting to figure out who I am, rather figuring out who people see me to be.

            And I’m sure I’m not the only one who shares this notion but I am proud to say that I am not and will not be for a very long time ready for a committed relationship. With all I have going on in my life, how could I be prepared to lose myself in another, to suffer for the happiness of my liver, to pursue desires that I’m not really sure I have? Dealing with those things at a later date is perfectly fine with me. When the time comes, I will be ready. As for now, I will continue to grow, change, and figure out this idea of self until I myself am realized through the fulfillment of another.

Anna Clark's "Desire" (Ch. 12)

     Within Chapter 12 of Desire, the main topic of discussion is found in what is called "sexual citizenship." This topic caught me by surprise do to the fact that within the Church and government one's natural sexual desires shifted from a innate humane feeling to a revolutionary movement. It is stated that over time, sex has been glorified and blown out of proportion through the media in order to influence generations. In the eyes of the church, it can be concluded that sex is a natural desire, a bond that should be shared between husband and wife to sanctify the unity of marriage and symbolize the divinity of the God head. However, as it is displayed in the media sex is now a "citizenship" and has been liberated in order for freedom of expression to take place. It's not more of the action of sex but the very desires of sexual pleasures that must be taken into account. Therefore, I pose the question, how strong is desire?
     An excerpt from the chapter reads "...They repudiate Lacan's idea that desire was a lack. If we think of desire as lack, we want to plug this whole by acquiring objects, tapped by capitalism. Instead, Deleuze and Guattari wanted revolutionary desire to flow through one person to another in "desiring machines" formed of "great gregarious masses." In revolutionary love, possessive love would disappear and "persons give way to decoded flows of desire, two lines of vibration." Desire was once again perceived as an abstract force detached from the person." 
     If we are to accept this claim made in the prior sentence above that desire was may be viewed as an abstract force detached from the person, what say we then? Are our lives influence/controlled by an outside force in which we have no control? Are our desires not our own? This idea now questions the very thought of desire being a lack but a force, an entity that can not be obtained. With this in mind, the symbolic elements of Celestina come to mind. Was she not the symbol of a force that flowed from person to person while being detached from each person? In the end Celestina died, however her spirit still lived on. So shall we say that desire is not a "lack" per say but a force that can never truly be tangible and in itself there is no satisfaction? By definition, desire is defined as a longing or craving, as for something that brings satisfaction or enjoyment. This definition supports the claim that desire is wanting what we can not have yet it does not express evidence that in itself desire can be perceived as an abstract force detached from the person.
     One thing is certain, no matter how one perceives desire, whether it be a lack or an abstract force, it can never be satisfied and will always be a product of longing for something that neither exists or is achieved.

Love Song

Golden; Chrisette Michele

Take me back in the day when loving was pure

Love ain't going away, love is always cure

Life's not always perfect but love's always forever

Let's let true love connect, let's try lasting together

I'm so ready to love, I'm so ready to promise my all

I'm so ready to give to the day that my life is no more

I'll be everything that this woman could possibly be

'Cause I'm ready to be like the olden days

When commitment was golden

Be the man of my dreams and get down on one knee, love

Say you'll be all I need and then ask me to marry you, my love

Let's take two golden bands and let's walk down the isle, love

I'll say I do and you'll say I do, may good God and commitment, oh

I'm so ready to love, I'm so ready to promise my all, all

(Promise my all)

And I'm so ready to give to the day that my life is no more

(My life is no more)

I'll be everything that this woman could possibly be, yes, I will

(Possibly be)

'Cause I'm ready to be like the olden days

When commitment was golden

(Golden)

Let's last forever

Now typical American, shady love

Let's stay together

May God smile upon our everlasting lives

I'm so ready to love, I'm so ready to promise my all, yes, I am

(Promise my all)

I'm so ready to give to the day that my life is no more

(My life is no more)

And I'll be everything that this woman can possibly be, yes, I will

(Possibly be)

'Cause I'm ready to be like the olden days

When commitment was golden

(Golden)

I'm so ready to love, I'm so ready to promise my all, yeah, yeah

(Promise my all)

And I'm so ready to give to the day that my life is no more

(My life is no more)

I'ma be everything that this woman could possibly be

(Possibly be)

'Cause I'm ready to be like the olden days

When commitment was golden

(Golden)

Golden, golden, golden, golden love

Our commitment is golden

        I think that it's safe to say that these words speak for themselves. One might conclude that this poetry is similar to that of Troubador. Growing up, one might say that I was a "hopeless romantic," loving the very idea of a "perfect love." Like many of us I grew up with a fairy tale of how Love should be, a Medieval courtly love if you will, the prince coming to rescue the damsel in distress as they live a life of reverie. Golden encompasses every nuance in such a love. I'm still that hopeless romantic and I still believe in that "fairy tale" love. Fairy tales are nothing more than an ignored reality and Chrisette Michele does an exceptional job of delivering the Hopeless Romantic's Anthem. 

Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eeec7K4VQ1c

Vargas Llosa's "The Bad Girl" - Week Two

The topic of discussion that I wish to discuss is the Bad Girl's pursuit of Ricardo by telephone. This event perplexes my mind and truly has me wondering about the games/tricks that The Bad Girl plays or is it that her tricks have tricked her? If I understood correctly, from the time of their first interaction, The Bad Girl had no true interest in Ricardo. Ricardo would confess his love time and time again yet The Bad Girl literally treated him like a puppy, announcing that he was "unworthy." Still, Ricardo never lost hope, never lost his will to love (lust) her despite her clear neglect of his feelings and emotions. As the events lead up to the "Pursuit of Ricardo," I question, what happened in the Bad Girl's mind? What caused her to retreat to the one who she was not pursuing? We discover that after the Ricardo finally answers the phone and asks to meet, The Bad Girl appears dressed like a beggar and looks so sick he thinks she's going to die. She eventually faints and he takes her to his apartment and then to the hospital. She claims that she was in prison and they raped her, but he doesn't believe her. If I was Ricardo, I doubt that I would've believed her either but as I look deeper, I find that here is some truth in The Bad Girls claim.

Claim 1: She was in prison.

This claim serves as a metaphor to the emotional prison she was in. Here you have a girl that from the time of her character's introduction, she was not fully characterized. Her character lacks substance, lacks understanding. As seen in Madame Bovary and other sources of reference concerning Desire, she is lacking/empty. I hate to be cliche' but she winds up looking for love in all the wrong places. I retract that and conclude that she wasn't looking for love yet only satisfaction for her burning desire. However, as we all are, she's human. After you search and search for something to exist that doesn't, you lose yourself. There is no sense of connection to reality because for so long a dream was being chased. This can serve as a prison-like construct of the soul.

Claim 2: She was raped.

For a mighty promiscuous woman, the word rape doesn't seem likely to be in her vocabulary. Could you believe that one who enjoys violence would claim to have been assaulted or involved in an involuntary act? The point of the matter is that in a sense, The Bad Girl was raped. Raped in this sense meaning the taking of one's innocence, one's purity. Am I suggesting that The Bad Girl was a pure woman? No. But what I do suggest is that underneath The Bad Girl is a good girl who's been hurting for a while now. And who does one go to when they are in need of healing, the one who showed consistant love over a period of time. Unfortunately, that happened to be Ricardo.

I say unfortunately for Ricardo's case because like most good boy's he falls in the trap of the Super Hero syndrome, a syndrome that I know all too well. Upon their meeting, we see that The Bad Girl appears as a sick beggar who is in dire need. What does Ricardo do? He helps her and tries to restore what innocence she may have had but as it is in her nature, The Bad Girl overpowers the good girl and eventually leaves again to play games of "Love." This is a cycle that is seen all throughout Love in American Culture. The good boy goes after the bad girl, thinking that she is the source of the answer of his problems and later gets burned in the end. Blinded by the image of the romantic couple, the good boy can not see the darkness lurking within this girl. There is no good and there is no chance of a relationship. In reality she is a shadow; in his eyes she is a rose. Oil and water do not flow together. I speak from experience.

Vargas Llosa's "The Bad Girl" - Week One

     One cannot write about The Bad Girl without first paying hommage to the prior, Madame Bovary. Is not this novel just a more modernized recreation of the tale of desire and obsession only with a new twist? "The Bad Girl" serves as a young Emma Bovary only with more ambition, drive, and overall fuel for passion. The novel begins with the classic story of a young lover being attracted to what he believed to be a young Chilean girl, whom everyone was in love with. Her grace, her beauty, her dance, her curves, her... blah blah blah, were oh so captivating. Turns out the girl wasn't even who she said she was. Which brings me to my first point, a false sense of reality.
     We,ve learned that our eyes are our biggest detriment in this thing called "love." We become attracted to what we think we see and from there Cupid strikes us and our passioned desire takes over. As read in the text, Ricardo, as well as every other boy in the town, was love struck by Lily. Everything about her made them want her. This obsession was purely originated by what was perceived about this girl. And while they were desiring Lily, she was desiring a life that was fabricated by her own imagination. Now on to the matter of incessant desire.
     Not too far after the Lily's character was introduced was she exposed as a liar, fabricating stories about her life in Chile. What does this tell us? Already the motif created from Ovid's Narcissus is revealed, "...The thing you are seeing does not exist...What you see is only a shadow, image, cast by your imagination..." This reveals that the object of Ricardo's desire and who this mysterious woman, known as "Lily," hopes to be does not exist. As in Madame Bovary, you have a young woman wanting to live a life of high status, a life of societal acceptance, and will do anything to gain it. This desire does not leave Ricardo nor Neo-Emma as they move on in life. As Ricardo is living his dream as an interpreter for Unesco, Neo-Emma becomes "Comrade Arlette," a member of the Cuban revolution. Upon recognition, Ricardo immediately revisits his passionate hopes of having Neo-Emma fulfill his desire. Funny thing is, the girl whom Ricardo described to Neo-Emma, the one he had "fallen in lust with, was no remembered at all. Comrade Arlette denied ever being such girl. Why? The girl never existed. As Ricardo attempts to act upon his desire, Comrade Arlette toys with him; she finds him unworthy of the minimal attention of that is showed to him. One would suggest that Ricardo should just move on and let his childhood crush go but he cannot do such a thing; Cupid's arrow was already heart deep. Ricardo falls in the category of "puppy." Pity.
     As we've learned so far while dealing with desire, an encounter is bound to happen with: false sense of reality, incessant lust, blindness, broken dreams, and a life of unfulfilled satisfaction.
I can't wait to engage in the discussion concerning "The Bad Girl."

Soderbergh's "Solaris" and Guadgnino's "I Am Love"

Solaris:
- Soderbergh

     Only a fool desires poison and loves what is not real. Is it poison that one desires or is the desire poisoning? - DP

     Soderbergh's film does a wonder as it explores a very prominent theme in the idea of Love and Desire, hidden desire. Is it not man's dream to have what he desires even if it goes unspoken? And once this desire is achieved, is it really what he wants? This is what the film explores. You take a recently widowed man and put him in an environment that produces what he desires the most, reconnecting with his wife, and what do you get? Human nature. Chris, the protagonist, has failed to let go of the attachment he has for his wife, his hidden desire, and he ultimately loses his life for it, or does he?
     'Solaris' can be symbolized as "fulfilled desire," however, the desire which is fulfilled is nothing more than a replica, a copy, of what one truly wants. It does not exist; it will never exist. For unjustified desire will never find fulfillment. As Chris' replica of Rheya is revealed, it is discovered that she is nothing more than an image. Dr. Gordon, Snow, Gibarian, and even Rheya all try to inform Chris that "the thing you are seeing does not exist: only turn aside and you will lose what you love. What you see is but the shadow, image, cast by your imagination, in itself it is nothing. It comes with you, and lasts while you are there; it will go when you go, if go you can." (Narrator from Narcissus). Chris hears their words but accepts his desire. He can't let go. He does not care that "Rheya" is not real, as long as he can be with something/someone that reminds him of her. Ah, but what does he remember? Rheya's first replica was immediately sent away due to Chris' inability to accept what he sees, although, upon second arrival Chris' desires takes over and he spends his time fighting to believe that one, she is real, and two they can be together. However Rheya's second image tries to commit suicide, why? Because that is how she was remembered. Chris could not accept that he remembered is loving wife wrong. Rheya then begs to be sent back to Solaris due to her acceptance that she is not who Chris wants her to be, and although she felt his love, they could not share a life on earth nor on the space station. She disregards saying that they could not be together on Solaris. Why is this? It's as if she wanted Chris to find her in Solaris.
      As Dr. Gordon has had enough of her own pseudo desires played upon and departs for earth, it appears that Chris makes the decision to stay on the space station and becomes apart of Solaris, where he finds his chance to have his desire so called, "fulfilled." Dead or alive, he does not care. He is content with having what he believe he wants. Chris is forever lost in the pursuit of his desire.
     After analyzing the themes depicted in this film I question, how foolish can one be to hold on to something that tells him that she is not real? How willing is one to give up his own life so that what he desires can be fulfilled? What fuels our passion that we cannot let go? What sense of reality does one have as he indulges in his desire? How can one ignore truth when fiction and reality appear as one?
     

We will always long for forbidden things and desire what is denied us. 

- Froncois Rabelais

I Am Love

- Guagnino

     The more and more that we dive into the theme of Love and Desire, I'm discovering that humanity has no true morality. Being ruled by the flesh, some commit suicide, others adultery, and there's a lack of love toward family, as seen in I Am Love. This movie seems very similar to Madame Bovary. A woman is trapped in a marriage with no passion she has no social freedom except the women in her family, and she needs dreams of living a more fulfilling life. However, the only difference is that now, unlike Madame Bovary, Emma's desires seem to be fulfilled, she appears to find her desire being satisfied in Antonio. Ah another tale of a woman finding completeness in the one who takes her away from her troubles and makes love to her to make her happy. How refreshing. (Please note the sarcasm in the previous sentence. This film kind of irritated me).

     What is striking about this film is that the fuel for Emma's passion is found in her daughter, Betta. Betta leaves her own relationship to find pleasure in her new found lesbian love. Betta's lack of fear in committing her own sin encourages Emma to have the same boldness with Antonio. Emma takes no thought for actions and considers the notion that since Betta's doing it and is happy, so can I. 

     Now, it was suggested in the film that Emma and Antonio's relationship was wrong and I completely agree. Reason being, Emma neglects the respect she should have for her son as Antonio should have for his best friend. How might one feel if their best friend whom they love so much and invest so much effort in, started sleeping with their mother? Tragic I tell you. And to think that after Edo, Emma's son, finds out about this she would forget her desire and tend to her child. Surprisingly, Emma tries to justify her actions to Edo and in turn loses her son. Edo dies from not wanting to be touched by such a horrid woman, slips off a ledge, hits his hed on the concrete, and dies. Some might say that it was the blow to the head that killed Edo but I blame Emma's forbidden desire. And to take it a step further, Emma tells her husband, Tacredi, about her love affair immediately after the funeral for Edo. After realizing that she has no life back at her home, she changes her clothes, gets a reassuring glance from Betta and leaves what life she knew behind.

    I get that she might've been unhappy, I can sympathize that she wanted her desires to be fulfilled, I can even understand being attracted to Antonio, but to have no regard or caution for her actions is where I draw the line. Is there no one else she could've found fulfillment in? Did she have to let Antonio cut her hair? Did she have to give Antonio her "ukha"? (slaps forehead) If you're going to be promiscuous at least have some class about it. And for goodness sake, would it hurt to actually mourn over your son? I don't even think that Emma was genuinely concerned that her son died. She had a brief moment of melancholy and guilt but then runs back to the very thing that caused his death. Now we are not certain that Emma ran back to Antonio but it is definitely suggested in the film.

//

Oh Desire, How cunning you are, how daring, how brave. 

You have no limits on your power and no regard to death. 

No regard to life, your ambitions never rest. 

Lost in you the lovers are, due to your persuasion that your answer is not far.

Fueled by Passion you can fulfill lives or destroy them.

How wise you are to prey on the hearts of men.

Oh Desire, how destructive you are, so blasphemes. I am ashamed. 

- DP 

   

Flaubert's "Madame Bovary" - Week Two

The Death of Madame Bovary:

Poisoned by Desire, she suffered in vain.
No hope for satisfaction, her lacking remained.
Filled with dreams of twilight and a heart ever vexed,
The object of her eyes left her in doomed regret.

Blindly seeing a life unreal, reality moves on.
Like water to a dessert, where did she belong?
Complete with everything but wanting nothing,
What could this life offer that was worth her living?

Trapped by the one who glorifies lust,
only Death could remove her from what she could not become.
For one can not elude the shadow of what is not.
Close your eyes fair maiden, have you forgot?

 Madame! Madame! Blind, the beggar was not.

                                                          -DP (Daydreaming Poet)

"We will always long for forbidden things, and desire what is denied us."

     - Froncois Rabelais

Flaubert's "Madame Bovary" - Week One

     In comparison to the previous readings/viewings of love, Madame Bovary turns the attention to the precepts to love, "desire." It is often found in Literature that the desire of a woman is to live the life as she sees herself living, not necessarily as she is living. There is a need to break free from societal constraints and impose the feministic plight of freedom. The persona of Emma is characterized through the desire to be...free. To get what she wants but knows she can not have. I inquire, why can't she have it?

     Emma's upbringing can be viewed as less than desirable. She lived as society wanted her to live, the simple peasant life, staying in her place. However, she lived another life in her novels, in music, in poetry. She had long dreamed of falling in love, having material items, being free to express her inner longings and ultimately having them fulfilled. The joining together of herself and Charles is sort of a rags to riches tale, although, it is not enough to satisfy what she really wants. In the beginning, Charles was Emma's "way of escape", but to what? We find that Emma wants so much more as the plot progresses to the scene at the ball. Emma was instantly captivated by the  "good life." Overtaken by the fancy clothes, adoring men, high class food, wonderful music, Emma's desire took ignition and later taking shape and form. Charles was no longer her fix. She had to have more; she had to be satisfied. She had to have... Leon?

     I wish to end here because I am looking forward to what will be discussed in class but I must pose this question: What can man say about desire that it is nothing more than a pursuit to become who we perceive we are not and a chance to have what doesn't really exist? But what if our desire has substance? What if the object is obtainable? Can we say that it is no longer desire or an endeavor? Are we foolish to embark on the endeavor of wanting? Somewhere inside of us we must know that what we want either has potential to be obtained or it is what's needed to keep us from the insanity of what life can sometimes offer.

Fernando de Rojas's "Celestina" (Week One)

1.    Before the interpretation of the garden in Act One is assessed, one must first analyze the reasoning for Calisto's arrival to this place. The plot reveals that Calisto enters a garden in pursuit of his falcon and finds Melibea there. My first thought questioned Rojas use of a falcon. What does a falcon represent? In my research I discovered that the falcon is a symbol of liberty, freedom, and victory. It also symbolizes hope to all those who are in bondage whether: moral, emotional, or spiritual.
       With all this in mind, it's clear that before Calisto's encounter with Melibea, he was a free man, one not yet in bondage to the prison of love.
       As the plot develops, we see young Calisto adventuring into a garden. What does this garden represent? Well, it is found throughout literature that gardens are thought of as an image of the soul and innocence. They are commonly considered feminine and represent fertility. Gardens are used to create peace between people.
       In the case of Melibea's garden, it can be interpreted that the garden signifies her "self," the object of desire that traps Calisto into the prison of being "in love" with her.
       Upon first interaction, first sight, Calisto is struck with one of Cupid's treacherous arrows. Like all victims, an expression of admired beauty, faithful loyalty, and desire to suffer has been released to the beloved. However, the beloved in this work has no interest in what she describes as "illicit love." Calisto is immediately rejected, thus the pain of the embraced suffering settles in. The poison begins to spread.
       Melibea's reaction seems harsh an uncalled for but what would push her to this point?
"...The intent of your words, Calisto, has been what would be expected from the wit of a man like you, but your words will be wasted against the virtue of a woman like me. Be gone fool, for my patience cannot tolerate that illicit love I perceive in your heart should sing out its delights."
       With her response, Melibea characterizes herself as virtuous and impatient to the unlawfulness of the "love at first sight" concept. One would suggest that Melibea's eyes are open and not clouded by the desires of love. She shuts down the very process of the love cycle but ignites it by her rejection. Melibea has ignited Calisto's desire. He now wants what he cannot have. And given the role that Melibea is given throughout the work, this was not done out of trickery but out of genuine heart.
       It is necessary to keep the finer details of this scene in the front of the mind in order for other act's plots to be understood and assessed.

Troubadour Poetry, Slavoj Žižek, and Buñuel’s “That Obscure Object of Desire”

Concerning the themes discussed in last weeks discussion, both the poetry and essay collective elaborate and support the ideas of love possessing an oxymoronic relationship of torment and pleasure as well as the object of one's desire never being captured.

Troubador Poetry;

"My heart sighs, my eyes weep, because I love her so much, and I suffer for it."

 

Why would one suffer for having an immense love for someone else? Revealed in this quote, I believe it is safe to assume that the poet realizes that to love he must be tormented by the lacking of what humans desire the most, the reciprocation of love. However, a new theme of love is explored throughout the poem. An idea that the suffering of love is only for a moment, a test to prove to Love that he is worthy.

"This love wounds my heart with a sweet taste, so gently, I die of grief a hundred times a day and a hundred times revive with joy. My pain seems beautiful, this pain is worth more than any pleasure; and since I find this bad so good, how the good will be when this suffering is done."

The question here though remains, will the suffering end? What causes the poet to believe that his suffering will leave. As long as he continues to love, he will always suffer in some way. 

Courtly Love, or Woman as Thing;

Early on in this essay a new philosophy was proposed about both themes, the mirror and the object of desire, sharing an intricate.

"The mirror may on occasion imply the mechanics of narcism, and especially the dimension of destruction or aggression that we will encounter subsequently. But it also fulfills another role, a role as limit. It is that which cannot be crossed. And the only organization in which it participates is that the inaccessibility of the object."

This thought causes me to assume that what we see in the mirror is not only what we desire to understand but also our limiting factor in ever being complete. The object we see in the mirror is all but attainable. 

That Obscure Object of Desire;

1. With thoughts of why the film is titled, "That Obscure Object of Desire," I am brought to a quote in the film made by Conchita that expresses and reveals the very nature of desire.

"You want what I won't give you. It's not me you want...If I gave you what you want, you'd stop loving me."

Conchita understands that Mathieu is not in the pursuit of loving her but what he cannot have, let alone see. This revelation is awfully similar to the one made in Narcissus. At the point of Narcissus' tormenting ordeal of knowing himself, the narrator propose an explanation, almost identical to the one of Conchta's to Mateo's. It reads, "The thing you are seeing does not exist: only turn aside and you will lose what you love. What you see is but the shadow cast by your own reflection, in itself it is nothing. It comes with you, and lasts while you are there; it will go when you go, if go you can."

The solidifying meaning of the "obscure object" of desire is something that has no form of existence. It is desire that causes one to see what cannot be seen and pursue what does not exist. The evidence of absence has no true validation. 

Song of Songs, Narcissus, and Lacan's "Mirror Stage"

Song of Songs:

2. Song of Songs portrays two passionate lovers who revel in the emotional and physical pleasures of human intimacy. Fundamentally, this text may be viewed as erotic but aesthetically this text can be viewed as informally educational in context.
    Questions that come to mind include: What originated the erotic contour throughout this ext? How is the eroticism maintained? Was there a contrast between Love and Lust?

Narcissus:

4. It would be assumed that narcissus falls in Love with himself but as the text reads, he is in love with the shadow of his reflection. Infatuated by what he sees, Narcissus does not realize that what he sees does not exist.
    On page 85, in the second paragraph, the narrator digresses to his own thoughts about not only Narcissus' situation but the idea of being "in love." It reads, "The thing you are seeing does not exist: only turn aside and you will lose what you love. What you see is but the shadow cast by your reflection; in itself it is nothing. It comes with you, and lasts while you are there' it will go when you go, if go you can.
   If I could interpret the thought I would so as such, "In the case of Love, what you are seeing does not exist. What you see is the shadow cast by your own desire, in itself it is nothing. You only want what you can not obtain but what you can not obtain has no limits. You know not what you want. What you desire comes with you, and lasts while you are there; it will go when you go, if you can go. If you can let go of your desire to love, the desire of Love will let go of you.

Lacan:

5. From what I could grasp, The Mirror Stage does serve as the psychoanalytical rewriting of the Narcissus myth. There were a couple of references that supported this idea however there was one that in particular that captured the theme of the Narcissus myth.
   "The function of the mirror stage thus turns out, in my view, to be a particular case of the function of images, which is to establish a relationship between an organism and its reality..."
   This view of the mirror stage encompasses the dilemma that Narcissus faced, a relationship between reality and an organism, Love and Desire.