In Praise of Love - Alain Badiou
with Nicolas Truong
Translated by Peter Bush
Originally published in 2009 in France as Éloge de l’amour by Flammarion SA Press, Paris
Printed in 2012 in the United Kingdom by Serpent’s Tail, London, UK
Printed in 2012 in the United States by The New Press, New York, NY
112 pages
ISBN: 978-1-59558-877-7
Love and philosophy are often viewed as opposites. We are often taught that love is a matter of the heart, while philosophy is a matter of the mind. This dichotomy, however, ignores the complexity of love as both an unavoidable, sometimes irrational emotion and a conscious choice. All too often, however, we try to constrain and control love. Through dating apps and websites, we are given the promise that we can find the “perfect match” by submitting our preferences and tastes to an algorithm. We swipe left and right, combing through an endless array of profile pictures and personal preferences until we think we’ve found the perfect partner (either for life or just for one night).
We are easily seduced by the promise of a risk-free love, a love that promises not to hurt us or disturb our busy routines. As such, we can all too easily treat love as a transactional investment. But is such a love, a “love without the fall,” really even love at all? In his short book, In Praise of Love, philosopher Alain Badiou confronts this false conception of love that is so tied up with consumerism and exchange. Love, Badiou argues, is an Event that ruptures our sense of self and is a vitally essential component of philosophy that has the potential to transform our relationship with the world.
Overview:
In Praise of Love is essentially the transcript of a dialogue between Badiou and Nicolas Truong during the “Theater of Ideas” series held at the Avignon Festival on July 14, 2008. In the course of their dialogue, Badiou reflects on the nature of love in the contemporary world. Badiou argues that love is a transformative and radical force, challenging the dominant ideas of individualism and consumerism. He critiques how modern society has reduced love to a mere pursuit of personal pleasure, driven by individual desires and market forces.
Rather than losing each other in the essence of a unified and undivided One, true love, according to Badiou, is about the creation of a shared, new reality between the Two. Love, for Badiou, is an event—a rupture in ordinary life that allows individuals to transcend their own isolated existence and experience the world from the perspective of another. It is the interruption of the Other into our lives, forever changing and disturbing how we see the world. He believes that love has the power to bring about change, defy social norms, and create new ways of being together.
Badiou also discusses the role of fidelity in love, asserting that love requires commitment and loyalty, which are not always easy but are necessary for love to flourish. This is the inherent difficulty of love, as it is “a declaration of eternity to be fulfilled or unfurled as best it can be within time: eternity descending into time” (47). Badiou contrasts love with other forms of social connection, such as friendship or family, which are often governed by societal norms and expectations. Utilizing a wide range of philosophers and writers including Plato, Kierkegaard, Proust, Lacan, Beckett, and de Beauvoir, Badiou argues that love leads one away from the self by reorienting us toward Otherness and difference, which carries both personal and political implications for radical transformation.
Deeper Dive:
In this brief exchange, Badiou seeks to reunite the discipline of philosophy with the concept of love. Following his previous work in establishing his four conditions (or “truth procedures”) of philosophy (art, science, politics, and love), Badiou elaborates further on the latter of these conditions. Starting with Plato’s insistence, "Anyone who doesn't take love as a starting point will never understand the nature of philosophy” (3), Badiou hopes to illuminate how love is a central component of philosophy. He writes, “I have suggested that a philosopher (and this neutral noun naturally encompasses both male and female varieties) must be an accomplished scientist, an amateur poet and a political activist, but also has to accept that the realm of thought is never sealed off from the violent onslaughts of love” (1-2).
In the first chapter, Badiou aims to redefine and rescue love, which all too often seems to be under threat by a culture defined by consumerism and individualism. He shares his fervid distaste for dating sites, which attempt to minimize or eliminate the inherent risk and spontaneity of love. Badiou refers to this as the safety threat, in which consumerism in the form of dating coaches and apps has promised to remove the risk of rejection and the messiness of love, but by doing so, remove the kernel of risk upon which love is predicated. By either relying on the safety of online dating coaches or on dating apps to provide an endless array of hedonistic pleasure, the modern subject, for Badiou, too often avoids confronting the full reality of love, which is inherently full of risk.
In the second chapter, Badiou outlines the various ways in which philosophers have theorized love. He contrasts Schopenhauer’s fervid pessimism toward love with Kierkegaard’s tripartite schema of subjective experience (aesthetic, ethical, and absolute). For Kierkegaard, the human subject ideally moves through each of these stages, from the vanity and self-absorption of the Aesthetic to the confession and demonstration of love toward the Other in the Ethical, and finally to the consummation and fulfillment of love in the Absolute. Thus, for Badiou, Kierkegaard is a philosopher who believed that love is divine, as opposed to Schopenhauer who believed it was an illusion.
This leads Badiou to outline three general viewpoints of love in philosophical thought: 1) the Romanticist vision, which sees love as a grand ecstatic encounter, 2) the legalistic vision, which views love as a social contract and an ethical commitment, and 3) the skeptical vision, which sees love as merely an illusion. Badiou believes that each of these visions is insufficient to account for the reality of love, and he proposes a fourth alternative: Love as a grand adventure and a quest for truth. Badiou sees love as a transition from being-in-the-world as One to now Two. The couple moves from the encounter of the Event to living in a union and participating in the construction of truth as Two.
He then contrasts these visions with the ideas of Lacan and his famous aphorism in Seminar XX, “There is no sexual relationship.” By this, Lacan means that the sexual act is not merely two bodies interacting and uniting, but rather, there is always a third mediating fantasy that operates to keep the sexual act from devolving into absurdity. For Badiou, instead of love simply acting as an ideological cover for sexual desire, the declaration of love “is what produces the effects of desire, and not desire itself” (36).
In the third chapter, Badiou further elaborates on his own alternative understanding of love. For Badiou, love is centered around the contingent chance encounter. This seemingly contingent event completely disorients two individuals, as their universe is now centered around the Other. Difference, dislocation, and disjuncture are all key elements of love, and it is only by entering into this risky venture that one finds a true, enduring love. Love, for Badiou, challenges two people to construct a new life, “no longer from the perspective of One, but from the perspective of Two” (29). This is the essential element of love that Badiou repeatedly emphasizes throughout this slim volume.
For Badiou, love also requires a long-term commitment, which is the focus of the fourth chapter. While it is not exclusively within the domain of the creation of a nuclear family (indeed, Badiou affirms that infertile or same-sex couples are still participants in the truth procedure of love), love requires that the Two continually enfold each other into the One, while remaining Two. Even if a child arrives upon the scene of the Two, they act as a singular “point” in which the truth event of love (the Two) must be radically re-affirmed.
In the Fifth Chapter, Badiou shifts his attention toward the relationship between love and politics. He reaffirms his position that love is centered around the Two, while he argues that politics is focused on the collective. He is skeptical of any notion of a “politics of love,” as he views politics as a discourse that necessitates an enemy. In his view, politics is about identifying and battling rivals, or enemies, which is wholly incompatible with love. While a rival can be introduced within a love triangle situation, Badiou believes that the jealousy it engenders is not a condition of love. Rather than an external enemy, the real threat to love is internal division and conflict between the Two.
He then discusses the relationship between communism, religion, and love. Badiou insists that communism’s goal is to integrate a wide array of the proletariat into a singular party apparatus. Christianity, in Badiou’s reading, focuses primarily on the transcendent love of God, and similarly turns love into a communal force. By contrast, Badiou argues that love is always immanent, in the here and now, and exclusively between the Two. In short, Badiou argues that both communism and Christianity are focused on transcendent love, whether centered around the Party or the Divine, whereas politics is primarily concerned with hatred of an enemy. Therefore, we must be cautious not to turn our political party or project into a fetish object, rather than serving as a vehicle for the will of its constituents. Communism can be reinvented with an orientation toward love, opening up new possibilities, though Badiou remains wary of intermingling any form of love and politics.
In the sixth chapter, Badiou turns his attention to the connection between love and art, namely theater. Badiou argues that Surrealism, as simultaneously an artistic and political project with far-reaching influence, was an attempt to reinvent love as it reflected the whirlwind, often irrational encounter of love. He also discusses his love of Samuel Beckett’s work, which highlights the day-to-day, seemingly monotonous work of love that consumes your attention day by day but is never fully completed as you grow old together with the Other. He also talks about his personal history of participating in the theater, especially in his youth. In theater, the mind and the body are intimately connected, and it vividly illustrates the deep impact that ideas have on the body. Additionally, he highlights the camaraderie and comradeship that is built within the theater community, as each actor comes together and builds an intimate bond for a project, only to eventually disband and go separate ways. Here, Badiou once again insists that art is a truth procedure and that every philosopher must also be an actor, seducing and acting in the service of truth (93-94).
In his conclusion, Badiou offers commentary on his contemporary political discourse in France. He offers a few brief conjectures on the power of love to serve as a locus of resistance against the forces of neoliberal capitalism and liberal democracy. Badiou also discusses the “two histories” of France: revolution and reaction (counter-revolution). Badiou argues that capitalism is incompatible with love, as capitalism turns the subject inward toward itself in the form of identity, which draws us away from the Other. The ideology of the Reactionary is one centered on an opposition to difference in order to protect a socially constructed identity. Due to this distaste for difference, reactionary thinking is inherently anti-love, and if we want a different world, then we must practice love and become open to difference, engaging in the dialectical dance of love.
Commendations:
There are a few key strengths to this slim volume. First of all, due to its compact size, it is a quick and relatively light read. Even if you have no background in philosophy, you can easily read through this book in one sitting. While some of the finer nuances of Badiou’s thought may be too obscure and difficult to fully grasp if you’re unfamiliar with the works he references, the main thrust of the book is easy to understand. Even though it engages in the typical meandering and profuse style of writing that typifies much of French philosophy, this work’s short length and conversational style make it a much more approachable entry into Badiou’s larger and more complex work.
In terms of content, I appreciated Badiou’s basic philosophical reflections on love, especially his attempts to combat the commercialization and individualism of modern dating. Badiou's work provides a profound philosophical exploration of love, touching on various themes such as subjectivity, truth, and politics through the lens of philosophy and literature. He critiques how market-driven desires have redefined intimacy and personal relationships, leaving us more isolated and lonely than ever. In a world dominated by consumerism and individualism, Badiou challenges readers to view love as something that transcends mere romantic or sexual relationships.
Combating the tendency for us to try to contain love within a risk-free bubble, Badiou urges us to attend to the long-term daily work of love and the risk and messiness that come along with it. His interpretation sees love as an event capable of breaking norms and creating new realities, which is refreshing in a time when love is often trivialized. This intellectual framework offers us a way to think about love as more than merely a strong personal emotion, but also an Event with enormous transformative potential.
From personal experience, I have found that the lasting, deep, risky form of love is much more terrifying and satisfying than trying to find love with a contractual, risk-free approach. His idea that love involves commitment, transformation, and shared meaning presents an ethical vision that stands in contrast to the often transactional nature of relationships in the modern world. It’s a compelling call for deeper, more authentic connections, which is desperately needed in our increasingly alienated society. As such, Badiou is often at his strongest when he injects his personal experiences of love, loss, and comradeship into the conversation, which have stuck with me long after the more abstract, theoretical musings have faded away.
Furthermore, I also appreciated Badiou’s attempts to link love and politics, even if he is incredibly wary of such an endeavor. He believes that love is a revolutionary act, as it is predicated on difference and disorientation, which decenters the subject and allows for transformation to occur. He juxtaposes this with reactionary thinking, which is predicated on maintaining a stable identity and a rejection of difference, making it in direct opposition to love. This is especially important in our current reactionary milieu, in which white supremacists and fascists who have taken over the federal government predicate their inhumane actions against immigrants and racial and sexual minorities on the basis of protecting their fragile sense of identity (white, Western, and overwhelmingly wealthy).
Critique:
On the other hand, In Praise of Love contains several notable weaknesses. First of all, while it is an incredibly quick read and more accessible than other philosophical texts, this volume is still often abstract, often requiring a high level of philosophical background to engage with all of its finer nuances fully. This makes the book less accessible for general readers, especially those unfamiliar with Badiou's philosophical work or the broader scope of continental philosophy in the twentieth century.
Additionally, since the book is essentially the transcript of a conversation between Badiou and Truong, it can often feel unfocused and meandering. Badiou often goes on tangents or loses his train of thought, often following rabbit holes, repeating himself, or sometimes directly contradicting himself in places. The basic premise of the book is pretty simple, but in the typical fashion of French philosophers, Badiou takes an incredibly circuitous path to make his point, ultimately diluting and muddling the impact of his main thesis. What could have been a succinct and punchy 10-page essay gets stretched out to a small 100-page book.
The dialogue format also highlights another key weakness: Truong’s questions are also often disconnected from what Badiou is saying. His questions often encourage Badiou to dig deeper into theoretical questions instead of practical application, and they do not add much to the overall direction of the dialogue. As such, you won’t find a tightly argued treatise here, but rather a tangential, often unfocused conversation.
One of the book's biggest weaknesses is Badiou’s narrow vision of what constitutes love. In many ways, it seems like an idealized abstraction of a transcendental, world-altering attachment that can feel detached from the more mundane and complex realities of romantic relationships. While his analysis is well worth considering, it can feel overly dismissive of the diversity of modern relationships. Badiou correctly focuses on the negative consequences of consumerism and individualism, but then doesn’t reckon with how relationships have evolved in more positive or complex directions in contemporary society. Badiou often finds himself within the narrow scope of a Western, overwhelmingly heterosexual, and strictly monogamous conception of love. This rather conservative view of love limits his argument’s persuasive power and application, especially since concepts of love vary greatly across cultures.
Likewise, while Badiou has given much more in-depth and thoughtful commentary on religion, his understanding of Christianity is rather surface-level and one-dimensional in this conversation. Badiou insists that Christianity is wholly focused on the transcendent love of God, which is in opposition to his belief that love is imminent. However, this completely disregards the fact that the figure of Christ is an immanent manifestation of the transcendent, the Divine immersing Himself in humanity in the manifestation of Christ. From a Christian view, Christ's love is the transcendent love of God made immanent, and, if you follow Zizek and other radical theologians, the Holy Spirit is the continuing manifestation of this transcendent love among the community of believers. In this regard, Badiou’s commentary is surprisingly dismissive and underdeveloped.
Finally, one of the biggest frustrations of this work is the theoretical looseness of many of Badiou’s definitions and conceptions. His chapter on politics, while insightful in places, remains woefully underdeveloped, as he is staunch in his insistence on the opposition between politics and love. Then, in the next breath, he lauds revolutionary politics as pro-love and reactionary politics as anti-love. Likewise, throughout this brief conversation, Badiou employs at least a half-dozen or more definitions of love, each suiting his particular argument at any particular moment. This will likely frustrate anyone looking for theoretical and conceptual precision, as Badiou (quite like his friend and interlocutor, Slavoj Zizek) often has a penchant for shooting from the hip, following tangents, and remaining quite comfortable in contradiction. The book ends rather abruptly, with no summarization or attempt to wrap up the conversation in a cohesive way. In the end, the work is rather messy and unfocused, and will likely frustrate more than illuminate.
Conclusion:
Overall, In Praise of Love is an insightful, if unfocused critique of our modern approach to love, as Badiou offers a challenging but intellectually rewarding examination of love through the lens of philosophy and politics. While too detached and theoretically underdeveloped in many places, the book does offer plenty of thoughtful insights and challenges to consider when it comes to how we view love. Due to its short length, I can easily recommend it to those who are interested in spending a quick weekend morning or evening reading a brief philosophical defense of love. Additionally, for those who are unfamiliar with Badiou, this is also a great place to start. While it may not be as theoretically rich or well-argued as most of his other works, this brief volume provides a great sample of his basic theoretical and philosophical approach. If you already have an acquired taste for French philosophy, then you’ll likely feel right at home in Badiou and Truong’s company.