This year has been a very refreshing period of time. Outside of obvious controversies regarding this year’s education with quarantine due to the COVID-19 pandemic, I feel as if this year has truly been very educational regarding my writing processes. Before taking this class, a lot of my writing habits were very tacit, and not really apparent to my consciousness. A lot of my writing skills occurred unconsciously, and I always followed a certain process that would always seem to develop on its own, hence why I’ve grown particularly accustomed to “winging” my assignments. However, as of this semester, I feel as though I’ve become more aware of these passive habits I harbor, as well as taking some steps in order to improve them. In particular, I feel as though this year has truly assisted my development of arguments and refutations. As opposed to how my arguments formed before, now there is a clear stance and supporting of evidence to support them, as opposed to the hollow skeleton of statements that used to accompany my thesis. Therefore, this semester, albeit through an online course that may have truly lacked the in-person authentic experience, has been particularly beneficial to my writing skills.

Samuel Cartagena

Schmidt

FIQWS

11/14

Researched Critical Analysis Essay (20%)

What does it mean to love? Throughout history, the meaning of love has often been speculated by many interpreters, and though many of us are capable of resonating with this particular emotion, we are never truly able to determine why this phenomenon exists, as many different stages within our lives define the interpretation of love differently. In seeking to understand that which we don’t understand, we often search for the circumstances that border that particular concept, to derive meanings from the comparison and connections of ideas. Therefore, in seeking to understand the meaning of love, we need only look at the behaviors of people who are in love. Love is often revered as a positive concept that brings pure emotions and joy into life, albeit it can also accompany negative behavior that represents darker ambitions that humans are capable of expressing. Although the belief of love resonating more with pure traits seems a more beautiful idea, we have seen many examples throughout history that advocate that perhaps all that glitters is not gold. In more recent years within our history, the human mindset has been criticized to a vastly greater extent than in the classical era’s that formed the stigma that to love was only to feel passionate and romantic emotions for another. This semester we have projected an immense amount of thought into the operations behind love. In particular, we have invested an incredible amount of time towards the actual mechanisms behind romantic relationships. This assignment will serve as a critical analysis into the nature of love, and to determine whether love is as blissful as it may appear, or if to love, one must also resign themselves to the sensation of pain.

Sigmund Freud was known to many as the founder of psychoanalysis and a great critic of human behavior, being the first to popularize the belief that the human mind is not as pure as we would have liked to believe. Freud became infamous for his case studies within his field, and for his proposal of ideas that seemed radical at the time of discovery. Perhaps his single most essential concept was that the human psyche was composed of several aspects that reflected many different schemas and patterns of thoughts expressed within human behavior. Freud’s theory of personality saw the psyche structured into three elements – the id, ego, and superego. (Freud, 1923) These were recognized as systems that were naturally integrated into the brain and have developed as a result of human evolution, representing several phases of thought that the human mind operates within. Freud proposed that the id was the primitive and instinctual part of the human mind that incorporates sexual and aggressive drives and hidden memories, and the part of the unconscious psyche which responded directly and immediately to basic urges and desires. The super-ego operates as an ethical conscience and the aspect of the personality that provides moral standards by which the ego operates. And the ego was the sensible half that mediated between the needs of the id and the super-ego, serving as an individual’s connection to reality. Freud’s discoveries regarding human developmental behavior are particularly important within the analysis of love as it is expressed within human beings, and he recognized this within his work when he elaborated that these particular aspects of the human psyche were also represented in other aspects of human personality. Freud expanded on the aspects of the human psyche with his pleasure principle, which served as the natural guide of the id that sought gratification for an individual’s urges. When we consider the application of these basic urges within romance, we understand that as most relationships occur between two individuals, there is often a give-and-take relationship that addresses both of their urges respectively, with each partner typically fulfilling specific purposes within the relationship. It is then that we can conclude that each relationship has its own particular dynamic, with one partner typically expressing more dominant behavior, and the other expressing more submissive behavior. 

Freud’s pleasure principle applies even to these dynamics of the psyche, through the id. (Freud, 1920) The pleasure principle is the concept that each urge the body receives must be satisfied immediately, whatever the consequences. When the id experiences its urges being fulfilled, and we experience pleasure, and when we don’t satisfy these urges, we experience displeasure. The id engages within the most basic form of thinking,  which is primitive and irrational. This form of the psyche has no comprehension of objective reality and is selfish and wishful in nature. The ego is then made relevant in regards to the pleasure principle, through the application of a sense of realism based on societal standards and etiquette, by mediating specifically the unrealistic urges and desires that the id may want. Freud directly states, “The ego is that part of the id which has been modified by the direct influence of the external world.” (Freud, 1923, p. 25) The ego operates by working out realistic ways of satisfying the id’s urges and sacrifices immediate gratification from the pleasure principle in order to allow the individual to remain better suited within society. The ego considers the social realities and norms behind the individual’s behavioral etiquette and designs specific rules in deciding how to behave. Lastly, the pleasure principle also applies in regards to the super-ego, as it functions in a way that is similar to the ego in controlling the id’s impulses. However, the super-ego functions especially as a disciplinary assistant, rather than a moral compass, by controlling specifically that which society may not view as openly, such as sex and aggressive impulses. The super-ego serves as an individual’s source of discipline, as it persuades the ego to pursue genuine goals and moralistic aspirations rather than simple and realistic ones that it can achieve. As all aspects of the psyche correspond within this pleasure principle, we can only interpret that the behaviors that follow must also apply in the same sense.

It is from here that we derive specific behaviors around love and relationships based on the psyche’s interpretation of the pleasure principle. It is surprisingly common for individuals within relationships to develop certain behaviors based on the developments of these psyches, specifically those of masochistic and sadistic tendencies. Depending on how their pleasure principle may have manifested as a result of the lives they lived in cultivating their id, ego, and super-ego, an individual within a relationship may develop these behavioral tendencies. An individual who grew attached to the notion of having their pleasures denied may develop masochistic tendencies, and grow an attachment to experiencing pain and suffering, as their method of pleasure, especially within a sexual context. An individual who grew into the notion of having their pleasures fulfilled by others would be more likely to become a sadistic individual, and derive pleasure and satisfaction in inflicting pain onto others. This semester in studying Russian literature, we have subjected ourselves to the studying of several characters and individuals who partake in several different romantic behaviors and relationships with one another as a result of the psyche’s that they developed throughout the course of their lives. The most popular example of these developmental schemas in action and how they affected the narrative corresponding within these characters lies within the Russian narrative, The Torrents of Spring. The novel depicts the tale of Dimitry Pavlovich Sanin, a man who is particularly encapsulated within a romantic dilemma.

In summary, the novel serves as an accurate depiction of several psyche archetypes that have been bred by the upbringing of the characters lives as fulfilled within the narrative. A middle aged Sanin reflects on the events of his past life to illuminate the narrative, to a tormenting vision of the vanity of human life, specifically envisioning himself on a boat in midst of a body of water, with several monsters rising from the depths to cascade him in misery. This reflects his fear of age and death, that may have arisen as a result of the events that he ends up reflecting on, the events that he feels led him down to the debaucherous lifestyle that has brought him such suffering. The novel essentially depicts a younger Sanin in the midst of a strange relationship, in which he grows an attraction to someone who is already present within a relationship. This however, is not the focus of the referencing of the narrative. The short summary of the beginning of the narrative serves as a segue to one specific character that deserves an incredible amount of attention, Maria Nikolayevna Polozov. This character takes an unnatural amount of interest in the affairs of Sanin after he explains that he holds admiration for another, and ends up utilizing her feminine charms to ensnare Sanin into meeting her sexual desires. Maria establishes herself as a promiscuous woman who holds interest in demoralizing and corrupting Sanin, in a manner akin to a carnivorous creature devouring their prey. When merely interacting with her upon having initially met her, Sanin is immediately intelligent enough to know that there was more to Maria than met his glance. “Snake! ah, she’s a snake!” Sanin was thinking meanwhile; “but what a lovely snake!” (Turgenev, 72) Sanin is capable of discerning through Maria’s very subtle actions, that spoke with such grace and attraction, along with her eyes that glanced at his figure, that the nature of Maria’s actions was not as pure as she had intended. Unfortunately for Sanin, he was not the wiser within this instance, and ends up allowing himself to be exploited by Maria, who had also been in a married relationship, but was allowed to freely pursue sexual interests at her discretion. 

Maria embodies sadistic tendencies in this regard, given that she understands Sanin’s goals to obtain the affection of Gemma, the woman who he loves that is in a relationship. Maria, also within a relationship, instead chooses to continue to utilize the flexibility of her arrangement with her partner to use it as a tool to pursue her own desires, which is the degradation of Sanin upon his goal. Maria aims to corrupt and debase Sanin so that he sinks even further morally than he had already sunk before, aiming to seduce and attract Sanin’s affections toward her as an obstacle in the presence of Sanin earning the affections of Gemma. Maria takes personal delight out of degrading the plans that Sanin has concocted within his mind, and thus can be said to display a lesser control over her id, often gratifying her own pleasure principle as often as she can provide. Sanin also displays sadistic tendencies of a similar motive when he seeks to attain the affections of Gemma from Karl Kluber. Conversely, Sanin displays masochistic tendencies within these actions, as he allows himself to be captured in Maria’s charms, despite him already having taken notice of her potential ulterior motives, he allows himself to fall into the trap and fulfill her desires at the expense of the desire he had before. He allows himself to feel pleasure at the unconscious knowledge of his plans for Gemma being thwarted by the arrival of someone with as much feminine charm as Maria. He remains focused on his goal consciously, despite this unconscious acknowledgement of her dangerousness and eventually begins to return the same signals he was scrupulous of. “Those eyes of hers seemed to ramble, seemed to hover over his features, and he smiled in response to them—a smile of civility, but still a smile. It was so much gained for her that he had gone off into abstractions, that he was discoursing upon truth in personal relations, upon duty, the sacredness of love and marriage…. It is well known that these abstract propositions serve admirably as a beginning … as a starting-point….” (Turgenev, 72)

We can ascertain through the behaviors of the characters within the narrative, as well as the developmental schema that Freud proposes that these characters are sound evidence behind the suffering that love can bring. Love is beheld as an object of desire within the narrative, and these characters are ensnared within a web that surpasses each of their individual motives. As Maria had intended for Sanin, his admiration for another ends up being debased entirely, as his life course is altered onto that prophetic vision that the middle-aged Sanin views many years into the future as the event that led to his midlife crisis. A young pure-hearted Sanin could not have possibly anticipated that the affections he would hold for one woman at a time, could possibly have led him on the downward spiral that his life progressed into. What was once an innocent young man’s dark ambition, ended up becoming a massive controversy that ruined the dreams he might have held in such high regard in allowing himself to love people that he should not have loved. The previous images of love that Sanin held in such high regard at the beginning of his encounter with Gemma vanish into a debaucherous lifestyle that never truly gives him the satisfaction that he sought for, and imposed him with the fear of morality and a hatred for the futility of life. With all of these arrangements together, it is indefinitely easy to ascertain that love is not as positive as Sanin or any other positive interpreter may have initially believed, because it holds the potential to bring about a great amount of suffering. 

Works Cited

Freud, S. (1920). Beyond the pleasure principle.

Freud, S. (1923)  The ego and the id.

Ivan Turgenev, The Torrents of Spring

In Benedict Carey’s, “The Brain in Love”, Carey takes an incredible amount of time to study the effects of the human mind when engaged in romantic activity. Carey attempts to do this in a plethora of methods, such as referencing cultural values and scientific advances in order to illustrate the effect of love on human brains. At the start of his analysis, he begins by addressing some of the preconceptions behind love, specifically that of its origin. From the perspective of a rhetorical analysis, it seems a very efficient motive to attempt to create a background for a subject before an analysis is delivered. After all, it is an inefficient strategy to address a concern without initially defining where this concern might stem from. He does this by briefly discussing the origins of love, and how the rationale for its existence within human culture remains much of a mystery. Within the introduction of his analysis, Carey addresses this factor with deep consideration. “We know that there’s an inborn human urge to mate, after all. Love is a mystery, a promise, an arrow from Cupid’s bow.” (Carey, 400) Through the addressing of the mystery, and through the alluding of this cultural myth, Carey creates a familiar sense of understanding that all humans could relate towards, to further the importance of his study.

Following this brief moment of introspection, Carey begins to discuss the many different possible reasons for this mystery, briefly discussing all of the different possible reasons that humans love in the first place. This leads him to the main focus of his rhetorical analysis, that being the biological reasoning behind romance. Carey explicates that the biology of love assists greatly in understanding a specific form of love. “The biology of romance helps account for how we might think about passionate love, and explain its insanity…” (Carey, 400) In our Russian Love and Literature class, we briefly covered the many forms of love, so from the perspective of analysis, it is clear that he means to address the effects of Eros, or passionate love, within the human mind.

Moving forwards, Carey begins to discuss his intent for studying the effect of Eros within human brains, as well as the narrowing out of a particular study group to measure off of. Carey then moves his own analysis to the works of Helen Fisher, an anthropologist who is interested in conducting an experiment on 18 college students recently invested within romantic relationships, as his own analysis becomes centered more around scientific analysis rather than cultural preconceptions of love. Fisher realizes rather expeditiously, after 3.000 brain scans of an MRI machine of her target group, that their brain activity patterns are displayed differently from that of a friend, to that of a romantic partner, already indicating that Eros can be measured within the human mind. (Carey, 401) Connecting back towards our Russian Love and Literature sessions, we understand that the Ancient Greeks also had a word for describing the type of love that occurs without romantic attraction, and the type of sensation that was usually shared between family members or friends, that being Philia. Fisher’s study indicates that each of these forms of love have a different effect on the brain, which is why their MRI scans could be vastly different.

Carey then turns his attention towards two neurobiologists, Andreas Bartels and Semir Zeki, who study the effects of Fisher’s experiment in great detail. They note that the brain scans that show the effects of Eros, or romantic attraction, have shown activity within the areas of the brain that have a high concentration of dopamine, which is the main chemical messenger behind reward factors and pleasure. Bartels and Zeki then compared the MRI images to brain scans from people within other emotional states, such as that of sexual arousal or drug induced euphoria to explicate that these brain scans were very similar to those of people who were in romantic love. (Carey, 401) From the perspective of a rhetorical analysis, this creates a very intriguing twist onto his case study, as it indicates that in a literal sense, romantic love and sexual arousal can be compared to a form of euphoric arousal brought about by drug usage. It creates a sense of understanding within an analysis based perspective, as it explains why individuals within love often perform extreme actions to preserve it, just as someone under the influence of an addiction to drugs might perform extreme actions to attain more drugs. What Carey previously describes as a mystery is suddenly a much more cohesive and descriptive definition, as the sensation of romantic love is now able to be compared to other phenomena we might interact with in our daily lives. 

It becomes clear at this iteration of his essay, that his thesis is quite literally to explicate love being comparable to that of drugs, on the human brain. And to further elaborate this perspective, Carey then motions to describe two other experiments that may have a relation to sensations of drug usage to measure their relation to Eros. These experiments were conducted by Ellen Berscheid, and a separate group of psychologists within a 1996 study. Following Berscheid’s study of idealization within partners, Carey concludes that idealization is crucial for a longer term relationship, through, “…magnifying the other’s virtues and explaining away their flaws.” (Carey, 402) This is also common within prevalent drug usage, as people who develop a dependency towards drugs often rationalize their dependency as something that is productive towards their usage of it. This is an extremely efficient usage of information to support Carey’s thesis, because it shows first hand how the relation of drug usage and passionate love could have similar effects within a similarly important area. Carey indicates that the presence of romantic love benefits most from idealization and self ratifying, just as drug addicts rationalize their addiction. 

Lastly, Carey interpolates the work of the group of psychologists from 1996, who study the effects of idealization within that of long term relationships. They also conclude that those who idealized their partner ended up having a longer relationship with them, but with the added notion that eventually, even this form of passionate love must be readdressed, because with long term usage, it begins to depreciate the relationships value. “If passionate romance is like a drug, then it is bound to lose its kick.” (Carey, 403) Carey interpolates this final piece of evidence in order to create the argument that passionate romance, or Eros, is similar in its behavior to drug usage once again. Repeated drug usage is infamously known for being incredibly addictive because of the sensations that they can create within the human body, but they are also infamously known for creating a sort of depression within the human brain from repetitive over usage. 

From a rhetorical perspective, Carey finalizes his analysis of love and drug usage extremely efficiently, through the description of their effects on the human brain throughout all possible stages of their usage. Not only does Carey discuss in detail about something as mysterious and elusive in definition as love, but does he compare it to something that we can easily understand and even continue to research, which seems to drive away the figurative fog clad behind our understanding of love and its preconceived notions. Thus, we can conclude that Carey forms an incredibly powerful argument on the presence of love within human brains.

Love is extraordinary. It is a feeling that can be felt by all humans, despite the fact that they may never truly feel it in the same way. Despite that, positive human experiences with romance have caused for there to be some sort of passive interest, for all humans to experience love at least once in their lifetime. As something that can bring high levels of pleasure, and something that can bring high levels of pain at the same time, only one thing can truly be said about love – it is a very complex emotion. To make this already complex process any harder to interpret, It does not help that narcissism can also be a factor in most relationships. The presence of narcissism is extremely detrimental to the forming of relationships.

 In our Russian Love and Literature class this semester, we briefly studied the effects of narcissism within relationships through the study of Lermontov’s, “A Hero of Our Time.” The story depicts the tale of Pechorin, a man with narcissistic habits that affect his relationships with others throughout the narrative, providing the perfect case study for narcissism within relationships. As opposed to the previous conceptions about love – narcissistic behavior is not as difficult to interpret. Although the expressions of this behavior all manifest themselves differently, narcissism is identified mainly through certain recognizable behavioral traits, such as a grandiose sense of self importance, and a lack of empathy for others. 

Pechorin is a prime example of this behavior within the narrative, and most, if not all of his actions taken within the story are for that of his own gain, and not for anyone else. Although his actions might differ slightly due to the behavioral mannerisms and customs differing from the time he is from, in contrast to our own – Pechorin still shows an impeccable amount of narcissism. As a narcissist Pechorin is very vain within his expression of romanticism, and often takes it upon himself to seduce women into loving him to prove something to himself, rather than for the purpose of actually being a part of a romantic relationship with women. He is never satisfied with merely having the affections of a single woman, and seeks to prove to himself his own value by playing games with women, and never reciprocating the sense of attachment that the women who bestow him affection, return to him. He relishes the feeling of dominating the emotions and behavior of the women he interacts with, and meticulously breaks down every woman he deems worthy of his time, forcing them to exist as pawns, in a game with himself. 

Pechorin defends his thinking perspective within the narrative by equating his methods to nothing more than meaningless actions, indicating that the actions taken by Pechorin do not hold any value towards him. “I never became the slave of the women I loved; on the contrary, I  have always gained unconquerable power over their will and heart, with no effort at all…Is it because I never treasured anything too much, while they incessantly feared to let me slip out of their hands?” (101). Pechorin’s analysis of his own behavior provides an impregnable statement towards the morality of a narcissist within a relationship, and further proves that narcissistic behavior is detrimental towards relationships. Pechorin is incapable of allowing himself to feel the same vulnerability that the women who interact with him are instantly made susceptible to. Therefore, while he is capable of manipulating their emotional state and mentality to meet his own whims, this unique effect is unable to be reciprocated by his would-be romantic interests. 

In relationships, an important factor that is scarcely considered is that of the balance of power. By allowing someone to have influence over your emotional state, you are additionally allowing for them to be able to have control over a very important sector of your life. If they are sanctioned the ability to do so, manipulation over this emotional state can cause them to be able to influence your state of happiness, or even being able to plunge it into a state of sorrow. Hence in romantic relationships, where the levels of trust are at default much higher than that of random occasions. To establish interest for someone romantically, one additionally sacrifices the ability for that person to be unable to affect them emotionally, and bestows them a certain level of trust and presence within their thoughts. A narcissistic approach to romance, however, causes for only one side of a relationship to be held to these standards, causing for the narcissistic individual to hold all of the power within a relationship, due to the other partner being unable to share a certain amount of trust and presence within their mentality.

To further explore what the presence of narcissism bestows within relationships, we can once again look towards Pechorin’s behavior. Pechorin relies on other people’s emotions to satisfy his own as a form of admiration and attention. In this sense, the presence of ego, and this pursuit of a false sense of self is the only motivation that invites Pechorin to seduce women. “Ambition with me has been suppressed by circumstances, but it has manifested itself in another form since ambition is nothing else than thirst for power, and my main pleasure – which is to subjugate to my will all that surrounds me and to excite the emotions of love, devotion, and fear in relation to me.” (116). Pechorin and other narcissists alike do not only share the ability to easily manipulate the affections of others with no attachment, but they also share the trait of acting entirely for their envisioned sense of purpose, with no regards for others.

Pechorin is envisioned as the embodiment of the Byronic hero, a hero with a tragic backstory and a rebellious attitude, distressed by wrongs he has committed in the past. Pechorin is additionally envisioned as a womanizer, one who observes the behavioral traits of women in order to form assumptions on their behavior that allow him to be able to manipulate them more efficiently. More specifically, Pechorin is a womanizer that relates very closely to Giacomo Casanova, a man whose name has become synonymous with the manipulation of women in romantic levels, and is known for his deeply observant and patient behavior. Pechorin behaves in a very enigmatic manner to attract the attention of the women who he intends to seduce, and using his observed behavior of them in order to be able to constantly be able to manipulate their emotional states. 

If the sensation of love is supposed to reflect an intense feeling of deep affection for someone, then a narcissistic such as Pechorin, who behaves for the pursuit of his own self-interest and the upholding of a fictional image of himself within his mind, should be incapable of feeling anything even remotely related to a level of affection for someone else. Those who find themselves in a relationship with a narcissistic individual can equate, after some level of observation, that the presence of trust and responsibility within the pair might appear misbalanced. The presence of power in narcissistic relationships is present within one partner, as the other partner is constantly subject to the emotional abuse of the narcissist, who purposely toys with their affections in order to prove to themselves that they are as superior as they might claim. As such, Pechorin and all narcissists alike, harbor self-destructive behaviors that do not promote a healthy romantic relationship, and instead, promote an unhealthy and often abusive relationship.

A narcissist is only as effective as those who can entertain their behavior, therefore, although Pechorin is a narcissist, he is not totally at fault for the events that occur within the narrative. Princess Mary, perhaps due to her position within the narrative, and the setting and time in which the narrative took place, behaves in a way that seems to entertain and invite the narcissistic efforts of Pechorin. As a noblewoman herself, Mary was accustomed to often serving as the object of interest of other men, and often grew bored of exercising these affections, due to her vain behavior. As a result of this, Mary is immediately encapsulated by interest with Pechorin, as he behaves completely different from the other men that she encounters within her daily life. Mary, employed by the customs of her time, desires to conquer Pechorin, as much as he desires to conquer her affections. Mary views his behavior as alluring and intriguing as she has never experienced someone treat her as Pechorin does. As Mary was expected to have been proposed to as a noblewoman, and Pechorin does not propose his feelings towards her directly, Mary is forced to subjugate Pechorin’s games, and falls for his unconventional method of affection.

This shows how people can be blinded to the reality of someone’s actions when they are falling in love with that person. Love is a very complex emotion, that is difficult to interpret, despite the sensation being particularly similar towards all those who experience it. The presence of narcissism is thus even more of a detriment towards the pursuit of a romantic relationship, because of the several impositions on trust and the balance of power that it brings with it. In a romantic relationship, affection is garnered through a sense of trust and responsibility being shared between two partners, and in a narcissistic relationship, only one partner sacrifices their sense of trust and responsibility to meet the desires of another. A relationship describes the interaction that two people have with one another, and a romantic relationship is credited with the presence and value of equal trust with one another. In a romantic relationship, trust is not truly possible, as it is impossible to know how the narcissist feels about their partner, and subjects them to the manipulation of the narcissist. 

Ephemeral. When thinking of New York City based on my experiences, this is the only word that truly comes to mind. New York possesses several layers of conception, in which I believe each is much more circumstantial than the last, and the further amount of time that they spend within this area, the faster these layers will progress, and build different ideas. There is the physical space that the territory occupies, the spaces within that territory that have a more personal relationship, and the idea of the spaces within the city, to complete it, and even then, more arguments could be provided for others. An infamously popular location – it is only natural that this area possesses several abstractions behind it.

 As a resident of the city for all of my life, the abstraction simply isn’t as complex to me anymore as it is for tourists, or people who have never visited. This “idea” of a city which allows all of its residents to pursue its dreams seems laughable, but to the same degree, it holds my expectations for every other city to a particular cadence. This idea for me has never truly existed, due to my thoughts being influenced by the cold and hard reality that my parents instilled into me from a young age, as second generation immigrants who arrived to pursue the education and opportunities this abstraction had almost promised to them. 

That being said, I also cannot say that my “story” of New York is that of a sinister, malevolent entity which feeds off of your dreams and your money alike, until it slowly depresses you. I feel as of contrast to the many individuals that I’ve had the opportunity of studying recently, my expectations have always been realistic for my time here. I know it not to be the apparent location for the holy grail, nor the hidden method for attaining the seven-fold path and ascending into Nirvana. I also know it not to be this financial hell, with far too many resources for human temptation to preserve their good moral character, and transform into sinful demons. As I continue to study these accounts of those who have briefly stayed within the gates of this city, that these perspectives dictate unilateral issues, of biblical proportion.

I say this, but it cannot be expected as anything else. It is only natural for individuals to account for their own perspective, especially when tourists of the same kind merely only discuss in heavy detail about the extreme abstractions of the city, and leave out the small presences that make up the city. Often you find that most tourists usually visit the same places, in hopes of fulfilling their inner desires to visit the same places that many others have visited before them. A fine example of this will always be the Empire State Building. As a resident of the city all of my life, nary a time has passed in which I was walking past 34th street, that I have not seen several sightseeing buses and hordes of tourists, all lined up to visit the same skyscraper that many individuals have seen for years. 

This is a key point in which the abstraction is prevalent, however. As a resident of New York who has witnessed the same skyscraper several times, it is still wonderful to gaze at from time to time, as it truly is an impressive structure. And yet, I find it almost laughable, as someone who has experienced this circumstance so many times, that I am capable of witnessing tourists and guests from outside of the city paying hundreds of dollars to travel the city and visit the building. In emotionally excited states, enveloped in tears of happiness, or profound surprise with widened gazes, as their mind tells them that this is everything that the city has to offer at the time. This as you can determine, is one of the more humorous situations that you can find yourself in as a resident. Not because the Empire State Building and the other attractions of the city are not truthfully a sight to behold, as if they are not magnificent structures that deserve the ability to be displayed for all residents of the city. It is humorous because events like these are what contribute to the ephemerality of the city.

Frequent spectators and visitors take in the sharp gazes, take in the large amount of business and resources, and take in the large amounts of people as inspiration for themselves. They take all of these phenomena in, and subjectively use it to reinforce their values, telling themselves that the dream that they have always put off, the dreams that their parents told them were not accomplishable when they were younger, were suddenly realistic here, in this apparent utopia of growth and prosperity. While they are not exactly incorrect in saying that New York City possesses a lot more to it than other cities may have to offer, it is not exactly a utopia cultivated for their own experiences. The visitation trips and the ideas that follow always are magnificent, because that is what their minds want to tell them. 

Deep within their subconscious, they selfishly provide this abstraction of New York City with a responsibility. The responsibility to adhere to their dreams and provide them with the means to attain their previously untrainable goals. Failure to adhere to these goals will result in the abstraction of the city to decrease in quality, to gain a more negative connotation to it, as opposed to the previously perfect image concocted within their mentality. Whereas an individual success provides further to this deluded abstraction, further decreasing the reality that a city could contain some imperfections within it.

An example of these deluded expectations is especially shown in Joan Didion’s, “Goodbye to All That.” In this essay, Joan Didion describes her personal experience within New York City, and almost perfectly demonstrates the effects of this illusion of grandeur that most visitors not native to the city are often captured in. In this essay, she states, “New York was no mere city. It was an infinitely romantic notion, the mysterious nexus of all love and money and power, the shining and perishable dream itself”, (Didion, 231.) Within this, we already have an example of how far this false image extends to. It is one thing to say that New York has access to a bountiful amount of resources, due to its proficiency with business. Of course, I recognize as a native New Yorker that the culturally rich city with so many different backgrounds is unlike many other places within the world, but to say that New York is a utopia, is nothing more than a lie. New York as a location does not differ much from the rest of the world, so to claim that it could somehow provide supernatural gifts unseen by the rest of the world is in of itself asking to be disappointed, because you would be holding the city to unrealistic expectations.

Following this, we can see now why so many individuals make the same mistake. By personifying the city as if being resident to some higher deity worshipped for specific purposes, you take away the element of realism within the city, and forget that as a physical location it is not very different from the other locations in this world we share together. As a native to the city, I personally find some crude form of entertainment through this notion, as I have lived within this city all of my life, and I have not experienced the same illusion that she has. Though I understand that the city is truly great, and holds a lot of potential for pursuing lives you could only dream about – this does not equate to the city somehow being a paradise. As a child, my family members always told the tourists that they interacted with to always wait until they received their first rent notice, to see if this was truly a city with supernatural qualities.

Yet another example of this false idealization in practice is displayed within Meghan Daum’s “My Misspent Youth.” In this essay narrative, Meghan Daum tells the tale of a very similar stage in her life, in which she was captured by a false idea within her mind, that led her to a period of misery following her time in New York. Meghan describes being enchanted with a particular structure in New York, and because it alluded to her vision for herself, she allowed her life within New York to be consumed by this desire. Meghan states, “From that moment on, everything I did, every decision I made, every college applied to or not applied to, every job taken or not taken, was based on an unwavering determination to live in a prewar, oak-floored apartment, on or at least in the immediate vicinity of 104th street and West End Avenue, (Daum, 2.) In any sense, we can already determine that the location was not responsible for her delusions of grandeur, and if anything, it was solely through her own dreams and misconstrued vision that had allowed her to be consumed by her own desires.

It is one thing for a city to have access to more opportunities than other cities, and perhaps provide an appealing setting for residency, but to say that the city itself could alter the basis of human decisions to this extent would be nothing more than illogical. As a resident of the city, who can be said to have some experience with temporary visitors or residents, I can say that I’ve seen this particular altercation occur far more times than I should be able to say. As I was born and raised here, I can say that I’ve witnessed everything that the city has to offer. I can understand why some places are highly revered, and some other places, such as 125th street and Lexington, are not. It is not that I simply have not experienced the magic, it is that I do not think that what the city brings is truly magic.

Naturally, it must have its own social ecosystem that is specific to only New York, as this ecosystem is responsible for heavy praise and influence towards other observers, but ultimately, it is not as if the city has something integral within its design that separates it from other cities, at least design factors that can also be acquired. Contrary to these perspectives that state that the city possesses some spark of heaven here, and the flames of Hell in another, I believe that it is merely a prosperous location. I understand that other locations may not be as fortunate enough to have Deli’s accessible within walking distance, or the ability to jaywalk without consideration, or having beautiful apartment complexes – but this is not something that cannot be replicated by other places. 

I believe that the reason why New York is so unique is because of its residents. How they seem so separate at times and concerned with their own lives, and yet when the time comes, they always manage to become whole. The relationship that exists between a New Yorker and their sandwich maker at the Deli, or the relationship that exists with a New Yorker and a bus driver – these aren’t constructs that cannot be replicated by other cities, but it’s cultural effect is something that is specific for New York. That is the only true “magic”, if any, behind the city. The magic that these spectators are so bewildered by, and the magic that they believe is tied to superficial things, such as skyscrapers, venues, and places of residency. New York, to me, has always been about the culture, and that is why it has always prospered, and why it will continue to prosper.