The Art of Love: Book Two

I found Ovid’s The Art of Love to be an insightful work, an honest look into both the male and female psyches. In reading books 1 and 2, a man may acquire surefire tools for attracting a woman and keeping her interested in him, while in book 3, a woman is reminded of the importance of her looks in seducing a man, and after she has seduced him it is up to her to keep up her sex appeal, while it is the duty of the man to keep her interest from waning. Despite the strict gender roles, or perhaps due to them, I believe The Art of Love to be a proponent of the societal liberation of women and a compelling argument against the concept of monogamy.
According to Ovid, any woman may be caught. Furthermore, he seems to imply that if a woman follows a beauty regimen specific to herself and exudes “elegance”, then she will be seen as desirable to many men. When viewed together, these elements pose a problem for monogamy, as it seems a woman who has already been caught by one man is not exempt from being caught by another man as well, as no woman is out of reach for a man employing the tools of The Art of Love. In this way, The Art of Love seems to argue, albeit unknowingly, in the interest of free love (the term used in this case to refer to love (not necessarily sex) being freely shared among two people, or several, depending on the individuals circumstances and interests). If the thesis of Ovid’s work, namely that any “intelligent man” can make any woman fall in love with him, is valid, then the concept or rather, construct of monogamy, seems to run in stark opposition to the very nature of humankind.
However, a problem arises in the age-old double standard between men and women. Namely, that it is acceptable, even natural for a man to obtain as many women as he chooses, while a woman, who cannot help but fall in love with any skillful employer of the rules set forth by The Art of Love, is nevertheless expected, with perhaps an exception or two, to remain faithful to just one lover regardless of her desires. Within its very pages, The Art of Love deems a woman of many lovers to be a “rarity” while stating that a woman who expects her lover to be faithful to her is asking far too much. Ovid is careful not to contradict himself in The Art of Love, as he does make an allowance for “cuckolding”, or adulterous behavior on the part of the woman. This is very skillful indeed, for had Ovid proposed outright that a woman should never commit an act of intimate indiscretion he would have directly contradicted his very thesis, that any intelligent man can capture the heart of any woman.
Herein lies the absurdity in the double standard between men and women, as illustrated by Ovid’s thesis. Man A pursues Woman B. Man A follows the rules set forth in the Art of Love and Woman B falls in love with him. Woman B has also been following the rules. She dresses in an elegant and attractive fashion, is careful to style her hair in the optimal way for her individual features, walks gracefully, is well-read, etc. Enter Man C. Man C has also read Ovid’s The Art of Love and is an expert in applying its rules. Intrigued by Woman B, Man C gets to work immediately, and inevitably, as Ovid’s thesis garuntees; Woman B falls in love with Man C. Now Woman B is in love with both Man A and Man C. According to the thesis, Man A, Man C and Woman B have each played his and her roles and all is well.
How is it then that Woman B is a “rarity”, as the work maintains? It cannot be that Woman B is in the minority as her falling in love with more than one man is a direct result of Ovid’s claim, that any intelligent man can catch any woman. So why is it that Woman E, Woman G, and Woman I are in the supposed majority of women who remain faithful to their Respective lovers, Man D, Man F and Man H? Could it be that these women have each only been pursued by one man as the thesis implies? Surely this cannot be the case, as Women E, Woman G, and Woman I have themselves read Ovid’s work and are therefore, appealing to many men.
It is my opinion that the majority of women have had to go against their natural, or not so natural (depending upon whether or not you believe Ovid’s methods to be authentic tools geared towards the male and female psyche) instincts in order to comply with society’s constructed belief that it is a good woman who resists her inclination towards what I call “free love”, and a better woman who has no inclination in the first place, though if Ovid’s thesis were true, every woman has the capacity to fall in love with more than one man, and more than that, will fall in love with any man who courts her in the fashion Ovid details in The Art of Love. Therefore, every woman must daily carry the burden of a Catch 22 when it comes to love, which may be illustrated in the following way: If a woman wants to fall in love, she must first be an object of desire. Being an object of desire necessarily includes but is not limited to her having a solid reputation. A solid reputation entails a woman’s faithfulness to one lover. A woman who is an object of desire will be wooed and won by any intelligent man with a mind to do so. A woman who is wooed and won by many men loses her reputation. A woman with a tarnished reputation will not be wooed. A woman who is not wooed will not fall in love.
As I hope I have made clear, I do not disagree with the majority of Ovid’s advice. I believe that the universe has a natural order to it, and that the “rules” for falling in love are a method for the preservation and application of that order. These rules have been in place long before Ovid captured them in words and I do not believe any of the fundamentals of his theory have changed throughout history, because natural order is not subject to change by filtering generations alone. That being said, it necessarily follows from the belief that Ovid is capturing the game of love, not inventing it, that I follow the same rules today, and do not disagree with him in any substantial way.
I agree with Ovid’s clear account of gender roles in heterosexual bonds. In terms of The Art of Love with regards to homosexual, and bisexual bonds I do not believe I have enough experience (which Ovid praises as the greatest means of attaining wisdom) to comment. In my own experience as a woman drawn towards intimate bonds with the opposite sex, I believe that a man pursues and a woman seduces. Furthermore, although it may appear that the man has the “upper-hand” in relations in that he can make any woman fall in love with him; let us not forget that it is the woman who seduces. It is she who puts forth the welcoming vibration in the first place. Both are active roles. Though the role of the pursuer seems on the surface to be more active, it is a woman’s secret as to how she makes her very active role appear passive, but that it a topic for another paper.
In conclusion, any disagreement I have lies more with society than it does with Ovid’s The Art of Love, although I am disappointed in the fact that he perpetuates the notion that a woman who loves many men is a “rarity”. I think this view only shows his ignorance, and takes nothing significant away from his guidebook. Moreover, Ovid’s thesis, that an intelligent man, i.e. one who follows the rules set forth by The Art of Love, can catch any woman, carries the implication that a woman can love many men, and yet still he felt compelled to include in his writing the belief that it is a rare woman to act on that love, only serves to highlight the consuming power of societal constructs.
Therefore, it is my belief that the abolition of the double-standard between men and women in intimate bonds is the only way to promote natural order. It is the only way to allow to man to freely be a man, and a woman to freely be a woman—an equal partnership based on order. Love truly is an art. It is not entirely free-form in the sense that it has boundaries. But those boundaries are set in place by the universe, not by society and not by law. The realization of this concept of free love carries enormous potential to positively influence relations between the genders, and well as the relationship a woman has with herself and other women.