this piece is exactly what I've been scrolling the feed for, something on relationships that is deeply specific and takes me through familiar feelings, lovely lovely read 💗
Wow, thank you so much for your kind words :) I think writing about the intricacies of relationships helps draw all of us closer together and if my writing can do anything to make love and romance a bit easier, then I’m on the right track … thank you so much for reading my piece!! X x
Something I’ve been wondering about for the past year (ever since I started scrolling through Substack really) is “what are we really discussing when we discuss relationships?” Like modern day Keats, it easy to scoff at the high drama we assign to our complicated relationships, esp. towards women posting about their relationships (I suspect Keats isn’t a man in his poem). But I what I think we are discussing when we discuss love is what it means to be modern. Maybe because women are still living lives really unimaginable a few generations ago, they are on the edge of modernity. I don’t know if men broadly see themselves that way – as cosmonauts of the future. For a time every modern male writer had a marriage plot novel under their name. The novel was the marriage plot. That to be modern was a dialogue with someone outside of oneself. For example, both James (Henry and Joyce) women figured as the path to modernity. There is neither without HJ’s female relationships or Joyce’s Nora. Whereas now the discussing of relationships or genres like the romcom are seen as essentially feminine. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that The Lover is set in Vietnam during French imperialism and the inter-racial relationship is taboo and its failure represents each character accepting their assigned roles in society.
Thank you for taking the time to write this all out! I totally get what you’re circling re: modernity, the marriage plot, and who gets to write themselves into the narrative. I also think there’s something funny (not ha ha funny, but you know what I mean) about how women writing about emotional complexity and romantic confusion often gets treated as a kind of new, overly dramatic genre, when it’s actually part of a long literary tradition—just one that’s finally being written by women, rather than through them.
Re: The Lover—yes, the colonial setting and its loaded dynamics are crucial. But I chose to pull that line out because it’s been lodged in my head for years, not because I wanted to engage with the book’s larger (and obviously essential) commentary on French imperialism. I knew the context, and still used it slightly out of context—tricky, maybe, but true to how the line lives in my brain.
So yes, love and modernity are connected. But I also think we sometimes intellectualise the emotional experience too quickly, especially when it’s women doing the feeling. And maybe this essay was my attempt to resist that urge for once ! X x
Re re: The Lover–It is such a resonant line. It’s one of those lines in literature that escapes its earthbound context into real philosophical insight. It can describe the nightmare of imperialism AND modern relationships.
It’s probably because I just read Lili Anolik’s two books on Eve Babitz, the changing nature of artistic sensibility has been on my mind. She argues that a certain “intellectual” NYC sensibility–cold, aloof, alcoholic–had become so dominant that there had to be a counter. Her stand-in for the former is Joan Didion. For the counter, Eve Babitz. I also don’t think it’s coincidence that writers like Susan Sontag or Pauline Kael argued for an emotional, visceral response to art and were also women. I really wonder though how what we are seeing now (in 2025) is a continuation of that sensibility but also something different.
you explained it all so perfectly, best article I've ever read about emotional unavailability. I lol'd hard at the Emotionally Swiss Cheesed man who touches your face and looks deeply into your eyes. We've all been there!
Omg thank you so much!!!! It’s a big subject and there really is so much nuance in something so seemingly simple/obvious. Almost tooooo many layers. And lol at the Swiss cheese one - we reallyyyyyy have all been there haven’t we hahah x x x
This is crazy. I’ve been going to therapy, reading bell hooks, Eric Fromm and what not to help me understand and prepare for the right relationship. I recently got out of one and it made me realize that I wasn’t being true to myself and my own standards. So this was a reaffirming read. Though it’s difficult to still decide to be vulnerable.
I can’t agree with you more - I’m sorry you’re going through a breakup (it’s what inspired this piece for me), and learning how to keep being vulnerable (ie emotionally available) despite the heartache is one of the hardest things to do, reading Eric Fromm or bell hooks or therapy sessions notwithstanding. You’re lovely ! X x
Gah, thank you so much!! Emotional availability (as in, one having it or not) is just one of those things that can be so so hard to recognize because it can change seemingly on a dime !
Omg thank you so so much, this is sooooo kind of you to say!!!!! I’m so glad you enjoyed it!!! Ik it’s quite long so I’m soo happy to know the elements could come together for you :) x x
This is literally so kind of you to say - WOW, thank you!!!! I’m so glad it gave you something you felt you needed and I hope it keeps on giving in diff ways with each reread x x x x
loved this, sadly this reflects the modern dating scene way too well. its almost scary how u keep running into the same version of the problem in different people and different settings.
Thank you so much for your kind and thoughtful comment! I agree - modern dating definitely has almost placed emotional unavailability on the front burner… unsure if it’s because of the rise of dating apps and the seemingly limitless “options” available through them which therefore creates a strange vacuum which allows people to give up easily and not address their emotional limitations when it comes to dating, or if it’s something else! “Dating” is one of those things that has become so unique in terms of its definition with each person! Some people think calling someone their boyfriend or girlfriend is, like, SUPER serious and therefore labels are “limiting” versus others who are a bit more laid back… idk! Just a crazy time for romance!!
An excellent in-depth breakdown of approaches to, or retreats from, loving someone else! I wonder what you think of how Keats thought about Modern Love (modern as of 1848, anyways):
And what is love? It is a doll dress’d up
For idleness to cosset, nurse, and dandle;
A thing of soft misnomers, so divine
That silly youth doth think to make itself
Divine by loving, and so goes on
Yawning and doting a whole summer long,
Till Miss’s comb is made a pearl tiara,
And common Wellingtons turn Romeo boots;
Then Cleopatra lives at number seven,
And Antony resides in Brunswick Square.
Fools! if some passions high have warm’d the world,
If Queens and Soldiers have play’d deep for hearts,
Eeeek thank you!!! Only you would respond to an essay on situationships with Keats, a Brunswick Square reference, and a beaver hat closer :) The poem feels like emotional unavailability… in iambic pentameter.
But seriously, thank you!! And yes, maybe modern love is just Cleopatra in number seven and Antony down the road, wondering who’s meant to text first. I’ll be over here nursing my weighty pearl and rereading this with a grin.
P.S. Am stealing “ye may love in spite of beaver hats” for the title of my memoir unless you want it for yourself hehe x x
this piece is exactly what I've been scrolling the feed for, something on relationships that is deeply specific and takes me through familiar feelings, lovely lovely read 💗
Wow, thank you so much for your kind words :) I think writing about the intricacies of relationships helps draw all of us closer together and if my writing can do anything to make love and romance a bit easier, then I’m on the right track … thank you so much for reading my piece!! X x
this is a deeply introspective piece and incredibly thought provoking, thank you so much for this.
Gah, thank you so much!!! That is soooo kind of you to say - I’m so glad it resonated even a bit with you x x
Something I’ve been wondering about for the past year (ever since I started scrolling through Substack really) is “what are we really discussing when we discuss relationships?” Like modern day Keats, it easy to scoff at the high drama we assign to our complicated relationships, esp. towards women posting about their relationships (I suspect Keats isn’t a man in his poem). But I what I think we are discussing when we discuss love is what it means to be modern. Maybe because women are still living lives really unimaginable a few generations ago, they are on the edge of modernity. I don’t know if men broadly see themselves that way – as cosmonauts of the future. For a time every modern male writer had a marriage plot novel under their name. The novel was the marriage plot. That to be modern was a dialogue with someone outside of oneself. For example, both James (Henry and Joyce) women figured as the path to modernity. There is neither without HJ’s female relationships or Joyce’s Nora. Whereas now the discussing of relationships or genres like the romcom are seen as essentially feminine. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that The Lover is set in Vietnam during French imperialism and the inter-racial relationship is taboo and its failure represents each character accepting their assigned roles in society.
Thank you for taking the time to write this all out! I totally get what you’re circling re: modernity, the marriage plot, and who gets to write themselves into the narrative. I also think there’s something funny (not ha ha funny, but you know what I mean) about how women writing about emotional complexity and romantic confusion often gets treated as a kind of new, overly dramatic genre, when it’s actually part of a long literary tradition—just one that’s finally being written by women, rather than through them.
Re: The Lover—yes, the colonial setting and its loaded dynamics are crucial. But I chose to pull that line out because it’s been lodged in my head for years, not because I wanted to engage with the book’s larger (and obviously essential) commentary on French imperialism. I knew the context, and still used it slightly out of context—tricky, maybe, but true to how the line lives in my brain.
So yes, love and modernity are connected. But I also think we sometimes intellectualise the emotional experience too quickly, especially when it’s women doing the feeling. And maybe this essay was my attempt to resist that urge for once ! X x
Re re: The Lover–It is such a resonant line. It’s one of those lines in literature that escapes its earthbound context into real philosophical insight. It can describe the nightmare of imperialism AND modern relationships.
It’s probably because I just read Lili Anolik’s two books on Eve Babitz, the changing nature of artistic sensibility has been on my mind. She argues that a certain “intellectual” NYC sensibility–cold, aloof, alcoholic–had become so dominant that there had to be a counter. Her stand-in for the former is Joan Didion. For the counter, Eve Babitz. I also don’t think it’s coincidence that writers like Susan Sontag or Pauline Kael argued for an emotional, visceral response to art and were also women. I really wonder though how what we are seeing now (in 2025) is a continuation of that sensibility but also something different.
you explained it all so perfectly, best article I've ever read about emotional unavailability. I lol'd hard at the Emotionally Swiss Cheesed man who touches your face and looks deeply into your eyes. We've all been there!
Omg thank you so much!!!! It’s a big subject and there really is so much nuance in something so seemingly simple/obvious. Almost tooooo many layers. And lol at the Swiss cheese one - we reallyyyyyy have all been there haven’t we hahah x x x
This is crazy. I’ve been going to therapy, reading bell hooks, Eric Fromm and what not to help me understand and prepare for the right relationship. I recently got out of one and it made me realize that I wasn’t being true to myself and my own standards. So this was a reaffirming read. Though it’s difficult to still decide to be vulnerable.
I can’t agree with you more - I’m sorry you’re going through a breakup (it’s what inspired this piece for me), and learning how to keep being vulnerable (ie emotionally available) despite the heartache is one of the hardest things to do, reading Eric Fromm or bell hooks or therapy sessions notwithstanding. You’re lovely ! X x
One of my favourite things I have read lately, wow. Triggered introspection and realisation for me in a sobering but important way
Gah, thank you so much!! Emotional availability (as in, one having it or not) is just one of those things that can be so so hard to recognize because it can change seemingly on a dime !
I loved reading this - every part of it!! It made me think, it made me laugh, it made me feel
It was incredible, thank you for sharing this wonderful piece with us!!
Omg thank you so so much, this is sooooo kind of you to say!!!!! I’m so glad you enjoyed it!!! Ik it’s quite long so I’m soo happy to know the elements could come together for you :) x x
brilliant brilliant essay
Eeeek, thank you so so much!!! How lovely of you to say!! X x :)
GIRL DAMN
Hahahah this comment made me very happy!!! THANK U FOR READING THIS PIECE GIRL !!!! X x x
I think this essay has had the same effect on me as the Lovers has had on you. I’ll think about this in one or two years. Maybe even in a decade.
I properly needed that essay though.
This is literally so kind of you to say - WOW, thank you!!!! I’m so glad it gave you something you felt you needed and I hope it keeps on giving in diff ways with each reread x x x x
loved this, sadly this reflects the modern dating scene way too well. its almost scary how u keep running into the same version of the problem in different people and different settings.
Thank you so much for your kind and thoughtful comment! I agree - modern dating definitely has almost placed emotional unavailability on the front burner… unsure if it’s because of the rise of dating apps and the seemingly limitless “options” available through them which therefore creates a strange vacuum which allows people to give up easily and not address their emotional limitations when it comes to dating, or if it’s something else! “Dating” is one of those things that has become so unique in terms of its definition with each person! Some people think calling someone their boyfriend or girlfriend is, like, SUPER serious and therefore labels are “limiting” versus others who are a bit more laid back… idk! Just a crazy time for romance!!
An excellent in-depth breakdown of approaches to, or retreats from, loving someone else! I wonder what you think of how Keats thought about Modern Love (modern as of 1848, anyways):
And what is love? It is a doll dress’d up
For idleness to cosset, nurse, and dandle;
A thing of soft misnomers, so divine
That silly youth doth think to make itself
Divine by loving, and so goes on
Yawning and doting a whole summer long,
Till Miss’s comb is made a pearl tiara,
And common Wellingtons turn Romeo boots;
Then Cleopatra lives at number seven,
And Antony resides in Brunswick Square.
Fools! if some passions high have warm’d the world,
If Queens and Soldiers have play’d deep for hearts,
It is no reason why such agonies
Should be more common than the growth of weeds.
Fools! make me whole again that weighty pearl
The Queen of Egypt melted, and I’ll say
That ye may love in spite of beaver hats.
Eeeek thank you!!! Only you would respond to an essay on situationships with Keats, a Brunswick Square reference, and a beaver hat closer :) The poem feels like emotional unavailability… in iambic pentameter.
But seriously, thank you!! And yes, maybe modern love is just Cleopatra in number seven and Antony down the road, wondering who’s meant to text first. I’ll be over here nursing my weighty pearl and rereading this with a grin.
P.S. Am stealing “ye may love in spite of beaver hats” for the title of my memoir unless you want it for yourself hehe x x