#Eva Illouz

[crucifiedlovers]

"In its psychoanalytical meaning, fantasy refers to a thought process that is disconnected from reality; either it is a distorted memory from an actual event that took place, or it is that which hides from the self the reality of its instincts. In The Interpretation of Dreams, Sigmund Freud offers an additional perspective and views fantasy in terms that are very similar to dreams: that is, as compromise formations. In a compromise formation, the subject is unable to directly express her or his wishes—they must remain unconscious—and develops “symptoms” that at once express and deny the wish. The neurosis, fantasy, and dream then have the same function: they contain that which they deny and oppose; they thus address obliquely and indirectly a desire; they say without saying; they simultaneously contain and deny a certain reality. Dreams, fantasies, and neuroses address the world in this way because consciousness is obliged to repress content. Repressed content can refer to a taboo (sociologically: something deemed illegitimate) or to an object that elicits pain (e.g., desiring someone who regularly hurts and abandons us). Fantasy is not only a way to transcend the limitations of reality but also a way to incorporate that reality into the very gesture of fleeing from it (e.g., I may fantasize about hurting the person I actually desire). What is so powerful, then, about the Freudian notion is its view that fantasy both presents and distorts reality. Fantasy works around reality, incorporates it, defends the self against reality, and yet helps one live with it. In this view, a fantasy is a mediation between different systems, it includes that which it denies, and it offers a transition between different aspects of consciousness. We may surmise that this is also the reason that fantasy plays a crucial role in psychic and collective life, precisely because it addresses conflicts and deprivations and helps resolve them."

Eva Illouz, Hard-Core Romance

[anarkittyuwuuniverse]

"Although DSM III considerably expanded the range of behaviors defined as markers of mental disorder, the manual never actually defined what exactly qualified these behaviors as mental disorders. The creation of a classification system in which symptoms signified and thus qualified as markers of a mental or emotional disorder now pathologized a wide range of behaviors. For example, “oppositional disorder” (coded 313.81) is defined “as a pattern of disobedient, negativistic, and provocative opposition to authority figures,” “histrionic personality disorder” (coded 301.50) occurs when individuals are “lively and dramatic and always drawing attention to themselves,” and “avoidant and personality disorder” (coded 301.82) is characterized by “hypersensitivity to potential rejection, humiliation, or shame and unwillingness to enter into relationships unless given unusually strong guarantees of uncritical accep-tance.” With the attempt to carefully codify and classify pathologies, the category of mental disorder became very loose and very wide, including behaviors or personality traits that merely fell outside the range of what psychologists postulated was “average.” Behaviors or personality features that might have been previously categorized as “having a bad temper” were now in need of care and management and were henceforth pathologized. Herb Kutchins and Stuart Kirksuggest that the codification of pathologies is related to the close connection between mental health treatment and insurance coverage. DSM III grew out of the need to make the relationship between diagnosis and treatment tighter so that insurance companies (or other payers) could process claims more efficiently. As Kutchins and Kirk put it, “DSM is the psychotherapist’s password for insurance reimbursement.” DSM—which provides the code numbers to be listed on the claims for insurance reimbursement—is the bridge connecting mental health professionals and such large money-giving institutions as Medicaid, Social Security Disability Income, benefit programs for veterans, and Medicare. Not only is it used by the majority of mental health clinicians, but it is increasingly used by third parties such as “state legislatures, regulatory agencies, courts, licensing boards, insurance companies, child welfare authorities, police, etc.” In addition, pharmaceutical industries have an interest in the expansion of mental pathologies that can then be treated with psychiatric medications. As Kutchin and Kirk eloquently put it, “For drug companies, . . . unlabeled masses are a vast untapped market, the virgin Alaskan oil fields of mental disorder.” Thus the DSM, willfully or not, helps label and chart new mental health consumer territories, which in turn help expand pharmaceutical companies. Hence the expansion of the category of mental illness, dysfunction, or emotional pathology is related to the professional and financial interests of mental health professionals and drug companies. It is also related to the increasing use of psychological categories to claim benefits, compensations, or extenuating circumstances in courts. In this process, the DSM has clearly considerably enlarged the scope of psychologists’ authority, who now legislate over such questions as how much anger may be appropriately expressed, how much sexual desire one should have, how much anxiety one should feel, and which emotional behaviors should be given the label of “mental disease.”" -Saving the modern soul: Therapy, emotions and the culture of self-help by Eva Illouz

[lavideenrose]

"This is what the hackneyed 'you've got to love yourself first before someone else can love you' comes to express, without really knowing it—it comes to express the idea that you must make your self-worth independent of others' love of you, because their love cannot be counted on, whereas yours for yourself can. The problem however, at least for a sociologist, is that you can never be the source of your own self-worth. This is an idea concocted by psychologists, which does not have any sound sociological basis. We can only build self-worth through and with others. This is why building good and nurturing environments, as families, schools, workplaces, is so crucial."

Eva Illouz

[publicatiosui]

The language ideology that has been promoted by therapy resides in a number of beliefs: that self-knowledge is gained by introspection; that introspection can in turn help us understand, control, and come to terms with our social and emotional environment; and that verbal disclosure is the key to social relations. There are quite a few reasons to doubt many of the premises of the reigning psychological credo. Quoting the poet Theodor Roethke, the psychologist Timothy Wilson argues that "self-contemplation is a curse / that makes an old confusion worse."

-- Eva Illouz, Saving the Modern Soul

[aspho-dele]

[…] Dans une tribune publiée dans Le Monde le 15 novembre dernier, la sociologue franco-israélienne Eva Illouz faisait le constat de l’importance croissante en Israël d’un « fascisme juif » incarné par le député Itamar Ben Gvir. Depuis, Ben Gvir, qui « affiche un mépris ouvert pour les normes et les institutions démocratiques », est devenu ministre de la Sécurité nationale. Le passage du « populisme nationaliste », par lequel les démocraties périssent de mort lente, au fascisme est donc consommé. Parmi les multiples facteurs qui ont abouti à cette déroute de la démocratie, Eva Illouz accorde dans son nouveau livre une place primordiale aux émotions et à leur manipulation par des forces politiques qui contrôlent également les médias. L’émotionnel prime alors sur le rationnel et même parfois sur les intérêts socio-économiques de l’électorat.

Eva Illouz, Les émotions contre la démocratie. Trad. de l’anglais par Frédéric Joly. Premier Parallèle, 336 p., 22,90 €

[maaarine]

Eva Illouz:

“Si beaucoup d'organisations s'intéressent à cette notion de résilience, c'est qu'elles y trouvent un intérêt.

Un individu résilient, c'est un individu qui demande moins de soins, tout simplement.

Dans une société où les individus se sentent le droit de mettre en avant leur souffrance, et de convertir cette souffrance en exigence que l'institution ou l'organisation change son comportement, un individu résilient sera celui qui ne sent pas la souffrance, et qui sera donc beaucoup moins exigeant.

La résistance psychique est devenue une sorte de capital symbolique, quelque chose qu'on peut afficher comme signe à la fois qu'on est un investissement profitable pour l'organisation qui nous emploie, et à la fois comme signe d'une vie bien vécue ou réussie.

Il y a une transformation de psychisme en ressource, l'individu doit constamment faire appel à son psychisme comme ressource pour pouvoir s'auto-gérer dans des interactions sociales diverses et inattendues.

La psychologie positive s'est développée aux États-Unis, presque en conjonction avec des grandes institutions comme les grandes entreprises ou même les états.

C'est une psychologie dont le but a été de formuler des techniques pour rendre saillant et présent tout ce qui est positif en nous, et pour effacer ou nier toutes les expériences négatives.

La psychologie positive pense que nous avons en nous la capacité d'interpréter notre expérience de façon positive, de convertir toute souffrance en expérience qui va nous donner des forces.

C'est la raison pour laquelle l'armée américaine a recruté cette psychologie positive en lui donnant des budgets assez impressionnants, pour créer une force armée qui serait indomptable.

L'idée était précisément de transformer le soldat en soldat résilient.

Cette idée de résilience voulait dire que le soldat devait apprendre à ne pas être traumatisé par la mort d'un camarade ou par le fait que lui-même pouvait tuer quelqu'un dans un combat.

C'est là aussi qu'on voit les limites morales de cette philosophie.

On peut se demander si un être humain qui deviendrait parfaitement résilient à la mort de ses camarades ou à la mort infligée à quelqu'un d'autre, si c'est véritablement le genre d'être humain qu'on voudrait promouvoir.  (…)

La notion de résilience a au moins quelques effets pernicieux.

1) Elle va faire une hiérarchie entre les êtres humains en fonction de leur capacité à surmonter ou pas leur souffrance.

2) On peut se poser la question de savoir si la résilience n'est pas une façon que les états et les organisations ont de se dédouaner ou désolidariser des acteurs sociaux, car ce n’est pas pour rien si cette idée a une affinité avec l'idéologie néolibérale.

3) On n'arrive pas véritablement à voir la distinction entre la résilience qui garderait toute sa compassion vis-à-vis des autres, et la résilience de ceux qui deviennent imperméables au monde.”

Source: En-quête d'idées: saison 1: la résilience

[dipnotski]

Eva Illouz – Romantik Ütopyayı Tüketmek (2024)

Eva Illouz’un bu eseri 1900’lerin başından itibaren reklam panoları tarafından yönlendirilen aşkın ve demokratik tüketim ahlakı üzerine inşa edilen romantizmin nasıl piyasa ile buluşarak tüketim kültürüyle iç içe geçtiğini gözler önüne seriyor. Metodolojik titizliği elden bırakmayan ve “nasıl” sorusuna odaklanan bu kitabın problemi ne aşkın değersizleştirilmesi ne de evcilleştirilmesi: ‘Romantik…

[communistconsumerist]

Loving Lingerie! | How SKIMS Reiterates Consumable Conceptions of Phallic Love  

How scandalously sweet! Libido gets a helping of edible candy in SKIMS’ newest Valentine’s Day collection! The model—Lana Del Rey, the epitome of female submissive sexuality within the music industry—morphs into a cherub. Arrows pierce her embroidered breasts as they embellish her skin with wisps of white, adorning her frame where husbands would like to touch their wives. The Blue Velvet singer almost looks edible, lying in a pastel blue heart-shaped box, indeed wearing blue velvet—or, as SKIMS likes to market it, a 'Velvet Lace Teddy in Periwinkle'. 

What the scandalously styled singer and the CEO of SKIMS, Kim Kardashian, have crafted together ever-so carefully is a dulcet dream. In this dream, even when the cherub’s body is covered up, silk and lace hang onto the "female" body in a Kafkaesque manner, painting the portrait of a "woman" that only exists within the constructed confines of a draped frame. This image sags like a worn knicker, and it is painfully obvious that it is trying to prevent the sagging of the opposite—a worn phallus. The veil Del Rey wears only works as a reminder of what SKIMS is trying to sell—a woman’s expression of (bodily) Love. 

God has long disappeared to pass demur onto the phallus that lay opposite of this periwinkle phantasy, seeing that nowadays it is through secularity that sexuality can slip within the sphere of immaterial labor. Del Rey’s erotic capital shows no dissension to this notion. The singer’s “creative choices” and career based crusades have cleverly worked as a set of intangible skills and competence her discography helps to vindicate. They have landed her the most prestigious position there is for a "woman" when February’s cold has to be soothed with a perfervid calefaction of paucity—marketing lingerie on the day of Love. 

Understanding Del Rey's cultural coding in relation to her role in this ad campaign is vital, if one takes into account how eroticism has snowballed within the musician's lyricism ever since the release of her first album. The singer is famed for having “questioned the culture” that deems the sexuality she lays bare to be a romanticization of abuse. Yet while sex is no longer sacrilegious and ‘naturally’ infertile, her performance of eroticism blends all too well with body-smothering Valentine’s campaigns that blossom when the season of Love is nearing. As the likes of Eva Illouz would put it: objectification, during its course, provides a sense of empowerment and subjectivity. It enables a generation of economic value from the body—a self-objectification that ultimately reduces women’s voluntary participation in this “lingerie-ed self-loving” to a false consciousness that fails to account for the mechanisms of valuation contained in the marketed cloth. In this cloth—much like that of SKIMS’—all that is organic lies in the meshwork that cups the mammary gland of the woman. This organ is no longer productive for a child but is instead commodified by men. 

Or pornified. Patriarchically extirpated. Made phallic in its conception. 

Even though the aforementioned culture-questioner has spoken up about her “sometimes submissive or passive roles detailing my [Del Rey’s] sometimes submissive or passive roles in my [Del Rey’s] relationships," it has become hard to argue in favor of her dismissal for “setting back women a hundred of years." She is such a “right” fit for this Valentine’s campaign, after all!  

Yes, it might be that Del Rey has not draped her chest in the collection's heart-shaped candies—comestible as they come, confining the tit within a triangular frame, its strands of sweets functioning as a net. Neither has she worn its minimum-coverage throng and bralette—trimmed within its creases, embellished with heart-shaped rhinestones, making sure the teats and cucci spill out. Instead, what commodifies Del Rey’s selfhood is how the perfectly-placed cuts of her photographed bodysuits pass as an evaluation of Love, conducted on the basis of visual appearance. Here, the fashioned body—a commodity—is situated in a market of similar and competing commodities. 

It is no surprise then, consumeration finds that it proliferates best through heart-shaped cut-outs in Frolov’s Love-themed FW23 collection as well. As silk shimmies and swirls around the models' exposed stomachs and loins, stripteases unfold over their cloaked bodies, almost as if they are asking their audience to play-act the revelations of groins. It just so happens to be a coincidence that the hearts’ spikes—signifying Love—point towards the wearers’ reproductive organs! Likewise, Mirror Palais’ campaign for the 14th—dubbed ‘Forever Yours’—makes sure to accentuate the chest (again) with embroidered ribbon-ery. This ribbon-ery belabores bareness through material, ignores the wearer, and braids the camera’s lens to drop to the point where the elongation of a woman’s physique is eroticized.  

Whether through a bird’s-eye view or a worm’s—Mirror Palais makes it clear that on Valentine’s Day, a woman’s personhood should be traded for consumable erotica! 

SKIMS and the aforementioned brands have something in common, then—something Lana Del Rey does best. They sell submission as value, as erotic capital, in a Love market that generates uncertain returns. Lana del Rey is a victim, however. It is men who have dominated this visual-sexual industry, after all. Their eyes are embedded within every mediated depiction of what womanhood should be—whether we speak of her eternal devotion (fashioned through lace and veils) or her professions of love (fashioned through opportune bareness and whites). Their notions of docility and dominion are veiled within a marketed materialization of a body that asserts its independence through having its necessary product catered to be “for the woman”—not for the phallic gaze. What is campaigned as an “act of love” is a scandalously sweet scam. One promulgated to be made by choice—hence the use of ‘for her’ in all the campaigning.

Or ‘forever yours’ as labeling. 

SKIMS’ campaign ultimately presents a careful construction of this submissive sexuality, where cuts are placed neatly in one’s clothing to evoke a dynamicity that will appeal as striptease to a customer’s partner (akin to the male gaze). Lana Del Rey’s cultivated image of a compliant lover only exemplifies this—as well as the blue box of “chocolate” she looks so edible in. It is as if the brand is not even trying to hide that on Valentine’s Day—when skimpy bodices eat the flesh of the female and wrap it in craft paper, ever-so cute and cloying—the carnivorous phallic-phantasies that are being created through “leaflet and flyer” are culturally passable. It all shows that when push comes to shove—sex commodified, is Love sold. 

◆

Works referenced:

Illouz, E. (2021). The end of love: A Sociology of Negative Relations. John Wiley & Sons.

Lana Del Rey – Question for the culture. (2020). Genius. https://genius.com/Lana-del-rey-question-for-the-culture-annotated

◆

Related reviews:

previous | next

[vqtblog]

Ana Carbajosa: Guerra entre Israel y Gaza Eva Illouz, la socióloga del amor que se ocupa de la guerra

[crucifiedlovers]

Eva Illouz, Consuming the Romantic Utopia

[anarkittyuwuuniverse]

I think one of the wildest things I've learned from Eva Illouz' "Saving the modern soul" so far is just how inseparable ideas of "mental health" are from American capitalist ideas of self-actualization and self-realization, of attaining success and status. It was literally how Abraham Maslow (yeah the hierarchy of needs guy that people love to quote) who defined mental health and even being human as striving for success, whereas "mentally ill" people are those who have "built up all sorts of neurotic defenses against being human", those who don't strive for "self-fulfillment" and success. It explains so much about how we still view therapy and mental health today.

[inklores]

miguel o'hara── a study in security

it's really funny how most of my finals this quarter have me reading so many pieces that relate with the fics i'm writing and the characters i have brainrot over. i'm reading chapter 6 of eva illouz's book, "why love hurts," and the section about how love and security can't always co-exist hit me... because that is exactly how miguel o'hara regulates his life and shapes his influence within the spider-society.

"Security is often seen as incompatible with passion, or even as leading to its demise. But I would argue that this need for “security” and/or for “adventure” is not an invariant constituent of the psyche; or if it is, then security and adventure take on changing shapes in different cultural structures. They are also outcomes of the social organization of the psyche. Security derives from the capacity to control and to predict one’s environment; adventure, by contrast, derives from feeling challenged, either in one’s social identity or in the ways in which one knows how to do things." (Illouz, 219).

rewatching atsv and i notice just how locked and authoritative miguel runs his facility. micromanaged down to the knick-knacks hobie swipes. the differences in lighting and color theory with how miles & the gang associate with different spider-people, being lit in white and warm shades... then we meet miguel and he is in pitch dark with reddish and deep blue undertones. his character design is similar to the spot, where the sketch design is still visible amidst the rendering and coloring. this color palette carries with him and it sucks all his interactions in with it. from berating gwen after miles escapes to watching archival footage of his daughter, it's so deeply rooted that breaking out of that sphere will quite literally destroy what little he already has left and what he managed to preserve.

the man is STRESSED. we see that from his design to his dialogue. he believes he is single-handedly keeping the multiverse together and he expresses it multiple times. he thinks he can't have comfort and duty at the same time, believing that is what it means to be spider-man. it takes away his humor too, pointed out by peter b. when he says all spider-men are supposed to be funny. the only time he really shows any sort of wit is when he interacts with lyla and maybe jess, but even then, it's so dry and sarcastic. (save his interaction with baby mayday bc that man is also a father.)

but he's "okay" with this great responsibility. this is his security because it's what he's able to control when once, he wasn't able to control anything and it left him so badly wounded that it isolated any possibility of change or evolution for the order of things. when miles left, he shouted, "ALL HE HAD TO DO WAS LISTEN!" and then a softer, almost baffled and frustrated, "why didn't he listen...?"

illouz talks about how visual stimulations or even the presence of something we can hear or see can shape or crush the way we look at ourselves.

Research on the impact of media images on how individuals perceive their bodies suggests that images of perfect bodies have negative effects on self-esteem and self-concept because watching these images suggests to people both that others can achieve them more easily (competitiveness) and that others view them as important (normative legitimacy). Media images thus become a source of disappointment through the implicit mediation of what we think they say about others’ expectations of us and about their achievements compared to ours. Widespread images of love may instill ideas that others achieve love when we do not, and that achieving love is normatively important for successful life. (Illouz, 220).

hobie mentioned it before we officially meet miguel. he says miles seemingly has it alright with his parents and stable family life. and someone like miguel, who keeps a watchful eye over everything that goes on with spidermen, knows that. and he's jealous of it, i would argue. he believes as spider-man, there is a required sacrifice or weight of loss to carry.

while it is a very recurring trope with every iteration of spider-man that's been watched or read, miles has felt loss and loneliness. but he hasn't felt it in the way miguel has because what miguel went through is so singular and unique to him. the only ones who may understand what that would feel like would be gwen or even pav, seeing their dimension and/or livelihood beginning to crumble.

but miles has everything... and is also spider-man and i just know that burns miguel. it's not what he believes should be the order of the "spider-man journey," even though happiness and responsibility can and has worked together. example, peter b. and his daughter.

it's inconceivable for miguel to think something or someone can deny him or run the other way. because everyone is primed to understand that it's his way or quite literally, the destruction of everything. nobody can suggest another way. nobody can say no. aside from the doomsday vibes, miguel is also objectively scary when he’s genuinely angry. not even irritated or annoyed. irate. he’s also colossal. he’s mr. property damage. this need for control and this ability to maintain it under his thumb fuels his antagonistic relationship with anomalies or things he sees as a threat to his security. he doesn't like to be challenged, he likes to be listened to because he knows how the multiverse works and what can come out of it if even a single spider-person has a foot out of line.

and with all the hints left over at the end of the film of how miguel may be wrong, that there is a way to fix the multiverse while protecting the people they love, there will be some serious fractures to his security and everything will open up once again.

[publicatiosui]

The deployment of rational management of people in the contemporary corporation contributes to the constitution of a complex personality structure that both masters and expresses emotions, that is both rational and sympathetic, that both masters one's self-image and is able to decipher others' motives. Thus, by an ironic twist of cultural history, the self-interested Homo economicus of Adam Smith has been recast by psychologists as a Homo communicans who reflexively monitors his words and emotions, controls his self-image, and pays tribute to the other's point of view.

--Eva Illouz, Saving the Modern Soul

[transmutationisms]

what are your thoughts on therapy for traumatized individuals? i agree with eva illouz on a lot of things (therapy doesn’t address the political, further individualization & alienation from community) but i am about to start emdr w my therapist soon and i wonder if it’s even worth it.

this is definitely a determination u have to make for yrself; therapy is like most medical interventions in that no matter how flawed or potentially harmful it is, some people report success w/ it. i remember looking into emdr a few years back & thinking it seemed likely to be mostly placebo effect, but if something works then who cares why?

[dipnotski]

Eva Illouz ve Edgar Cabanas – Mutlu Yurttaş İmalatı (2023)

Günümüzde mutluluk baskısı, hayatlarımızın seyrini ve yönünü belirleyen temel bir etkene dönüştü. Her fırsatta ve her alanda karşımıza çıkan pozitiflik salgınından sakınmak artık neredeyse mümkün değil. Mutluluk tali bir hedef veya slogan olmanın ötesinde, herkesin açıkça peşinde koştuğu bir ürün gibi görülüyor. Pozitif psikologlar, mutluluk uzmanları ve kişisel gelişim eğitmenlerinden oluşan…

[some-velvet-morning]

eva illouz, cold intimacies