A kiss is still a kiss. A sigh is still a sigh. The fundamental thing applies, as time goes by. And when two lovers woo, they still say I love you. No matter what the future brings. On that you can rely, as time goes by. It’s the same old story, a fight for love and glory, a case of do-or-die. The world will always welcome lovers, as time goes by.
From the movie “Casablanca”
The background of the quoted song above is a movie, a love story in the time of World War II. In this context, the song is telling us that no matter the different circumstances, people still say, “I love you.”
But is it really the same? I am writing this column on Valentine’s Day itself and my thoughts wander on how different are expressions of love and affection back in my youth and in today’s cultural milieu which is driven by social media and artificial intelligence.
Take the case of writing love letters. Is it a lost art these days? Back in my youth, we used the thesaurus to make love letters more flowery and exquisite. Instead of simply writing, “I miss you,” lovers would then write, “I feel itchy in every inch of my body and the only cure I can imagine is to see you again.” But now, teenagers would use text messages or correspond in messenger, and write “C u n SM.” If you cannot immediately decipher what this means, chances are you belong to my generation.
A traditional love letter in the past may contain such statements, “Weeks after we last met, I still could feel the tender skin, the warm smile and the guarded laughter that could brighten the gloomiest of days. I still look at the few pictures we have together like they are treasured jewels. Indeed, I now realize the truth that absence makes the heart grow fonder.”
But the youth today would seem to think that writing full sentences, without resorting to abbreviations, is a grievous sin. Thus, “I love you” would simply be written “Ily.” I miss you so much, would now be imysm. (Well, to qualify, it is actually not this generation who started the habit of abbreviating love messages. Alma Moreno, then a sultry actress who was not exactly articulate except when she was dancing, would shout every time she would end her TV show, “one-four-three-four-four.” It was directed to Dolphy and it meant, “I love you very much.” But that is another story.”)
But love letters then, undoubtedly of more literary value, were easier to intercept. Can you imagine how differently history would have evolved if Messenger, Whatsapp and Viber were available then during Rizal’s time and his communications to Leonor Rivera would not have been intercepted by her mother? Would Rizal have been able to navigate much better his amorous desires and his passion for the patria adorada? Today, those who curtail lovers’ freedom of expression should know that the same thoughts and feelings can be expressed in social media. Indeed, lovers can choose to make their feelings public, if they so desire.
Of course, there is also the possibility today that one’s account in Messenger be hacked. They say that social media actually spells the death of privacy. But that would take some technological expertise which only few possess. In contrast, opening letters in the past did not need any expertise. It only needed the absence of scruples.
And talking of Jose Rizal, let us take a paragraph from the Noli Me Tángere to see how described the communication of two lovers, “what were those two souls saying, who were communicating in the language of the eyes, more perfectly than with the lips, a language given by the soul so that the sound does not disturb the ecstasy of feeling...” (from Chapter 7 of Noli).
Am I saying that in the past, people can express better their feelings? Not necessarily so. In fact, it was only a generation ago, when those who cannot write poetry can choose to send Hallmark cards, which was practically poetry for sale.
It is not a question of which generation could express better. We simply employ whatever human ingenuity has made available. Those who take pride now in their facility with the written language should also wonder how love was expressed before the alphabet was invented.
Is it correct to say that only the expressions have changed, but it is still the same old love story? Call me hopelessly romantic but I refuse to believe that all loves are similar and they differ only in expressions. We take poetry out of love if we believe that “it is still the same old story, a fight for love and glory.”