What do you think?
Rate this book
The School of Life
How to Think More About Sex
Covering such topics as adultery, lust, pornography and impotence, Alain de Botton argues that 21st century sex will always be a balancing act of trust versus risk, and of primal desire versus studied civility. By examining sex from a subjective perspective, he uncovers new ideas on how we can achieve that balance.
144 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 2012
About the author
Alain de Botton
144 books14.1k followersAlain de Botton is a writer and television producer who lives in London and aims to make philosophy relevant to everyday life. He can be contacted by email directly via www.alaindebotton.com
He is a writer of essayistic books, which refer both to his own experiences and ideas- and those of artists, philosophers and thinkers. It's a style of writing that has been termed a 'philosophy of everyday life.'
His first book, Essays in Love [titled On Love in the US], minutely analysed the process of falling in and out of love. The style of the book was unusual, because it mixed elements of a novel together with reflections and analyses normally found in a piece of non-fiction. It's a book of which many readers are still fondest.
Bibliography:
* Essays In Love (1993)
* The Romantic Movement (1994)
* Kiss and Tell (1995)
* How Proust Can Change Your Life (1997)
* The Consolations of Philosophy (2000)
* The Art of Travel (2002)
* Status Anxiety (2004)
* The Architecture of Happiness (2006)
* The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work (2009)
He is a writer of essayistic books, which refer both to his own experiences and ideas- and those of artists, philosophers and thinkers. It's a style of writing that has been termed a 'philosophy of everyday life.'
His first book, Essays in Love [titled On Love in the US], minutely analysed the process of falling in and out of love. The style of the book was unusual, because it mixed elements of a novel together with reflections and analyses normally found in a piece of non-fiction. It's a book of which many readers are still fondest.
Bibliography:
* Essays In Love (1993)
* The Romantic Movement (1994)
* Kiss and Tell (1995)
* How Proust Can Change Your Life (1997)
* The Consolations of Philosophy (2000)
* The Art of Travel (2002)
* Status Anxiety (2004)
* The Architecture of Happiness (2006)
* The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work (2009)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 625 reviews
May 20, 2020
This should be required reading for everyone tbh
November 15, 2019
The latest in my reading series "Books With Titles That Get Me Funny Looks On The Bus" -- all part of an ongoing project to keep my own special brand of social awkwardness thriving.
Cheeky title aside, this is an interesting look at the various ways in which sexuality informs (and warps) our lives. In particular, it is geared towards readers in committed relationships struggling with the mundane, powerful realities of everyday life that can make trying to remain a sexual being with the person you love so difficult. To quote: "To fall in love with another is to bless him or her with an idea of who he or she should be in our eyes; it is to attempt to incarnate perfection across a limitless range of activities (how to educate the children and what sort of house to buy) to the lowest (where the sofa should go and how to spend Tuesday evening). In love we are therefore never far from the possibility of a painful or irritating betrayal of one of our ideals. Once we are involved in a relationship, there is no longer any such thing as a minor detail."
Botton's strident call for an outright ban of pornography is compelling but will make anyone opposed to censorship deeply uncomfortable. More interesting (and, perhaps, feasible) is his suggestion that we might, like Christian artists during the Renaissance who used sexuality in their paintings and sculptures to make lofty principles more appealing, start creating a new kind of pornography with artistic merit. Throughout the book Botton argues that our society has tried to repress and ignore the nature of sexuality, ensuring the kind of frustrations that come with unrealistic expectations.
At the core of this book is the basic idea that our sexual natures are, more often than not, a source of discomfort, pain, awkwardness, loneliness, disappointment, failure, etc. The list of miseries is long and will be familiar to anyone. Still, sex and our need for it are here to stay. “All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone," the philosopher Pascal famously wrote. Sex is probably the main reason for this. But, as Botton writes in his conclusion, "sex gets us out of the house and out of ourselves." For while sex may be at the root of a great deal of pain and wasted time/energy, it is also the heart of our greatest pleasures -- not only (or even primarily) the act itself, but all the wonders we have created in our efforts to get some.
Cheeky title aside, this is an interesting look at the various ways in which sexuality informs (and warps) our lives. In particular, it is geared towards readers in committed relationships struggling with the mundane, powerful realities of everyday life that can make trying to remain a sexual being with the person you love so difficult. To quote: "To fall in love with another is to bless him or her with an idea of who he or she should be in our eyes; it is to attempt to incarnate perfection across a limitless range of activities (how to educate the children and what sort of house to buy) to the lowest (where the sofa should go and how to spend Tuesday evening). In love we are therefore never far from the possibility of a painful or irritating betrayal of one of our ideals. Once we are involved in a relationship, there is no longer any such thing as a minor detail."
Botton's strident call for an outright ban of pornography is compelling but will make anyone opposed to censorship deeply uncomfortable. More interesting (and, perhaps, feasible) is his suggestion that we might, like Christian artists during the Renaissance who used sexuality in their paintings and sculptures to make lofty principles more appealing, start creating a new kind of pornography with artistic merit. Throughout the book Botton argues that our society has tried to repress and ignore the nature of sexuality, ensuring the kind of frustrations that come with unrealistic expectations.
At the core of this book is the basic idea that our sexual natures are, more often than not, a source of discomfort, pain, awkwardness, loneliness, disappointment, failure, etc. The list of miseries is long and will be familiar to anyone. Still, sex and our need for it are here to stay. “All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone," the philosopher Pascal famously wrote. Sex is probably the main reason for this. But, as Botton writes in his conclusion, "sex gets us out of the house and out of ourselves." For while sex may be at the root of a great deal of pain and wasted time/energy, it is also the heart of our greatest pleasures -- not only (or even primarily) the act itself, but all the wonders we have created in our efforts to get some.
January 13, 2013
When I showed my friend this book, he said it looked like something Carrie of Sex and the City would read. I sneered. This book? Alain De Botton’s slim volume on the philosophy of sexuality, a book so hip there’s not even a picture on the cover, just a serif font and the author’s name? Pfft. Yeah. Right. Screw yew, dude. This thing was written for the under-sexed, under-Benzo’d undergraduate.
So I sat down and started reading it. De Botton gets off to an obvious but well-stated start. We deal with sex in inefficient, unhealthy and conservative ways. We’re clueless when it comes to the subject. Sure, Masters and Johnson can walk you through all the specifics of the “plateau” but can anyone explain concretely the existential dread you feel after hooking up with some random 21 year-old who wears Etnies sneakers and jelly bracelets from Hot Topic? De Botton would call that one of the “peculiar difficulties imposed by our unavoidable possession of a sex drive.” (I’d probably agree.)
Before studying the difficulties, De Botton comments on the “pleasures of sex.” This first half of the book is very enjoyable -- the author covers how sex can liberate the self, unite people, loosen conceptions of status, dazzle the senses and mind. I especially liked the commentary on how sex is a communion of the “polluted sides of our selves”--accurate, it sounds cool, and it reminds me of “Purity and Danger,” the classic wherein society effectively relegates dirt and other nastiness to the outermost periphery of social reality. Sex, then, allows us to transform the profane and forbidden into the honest and the lovely. “At the precise juncture where disgust could be at its height,” De Botton writes, “We find only welcome and permission.”
The chapter “Can Sexiness Be Profound?” is also very illuminating. De Botton says the “inner beauty vs. outer beauty” eternal deathmatch is dumb. Pithily citing a few no-name studies, De Botton argues that the outside mimics the inside. “Getting turned on is a process that engages the whole self,” he says. Who hasn’t fantasized beyond the errant sexual thoughts that bubble up when you think of a crush? Who hasn’t assigned a love interest the goodness of a minor deity solely on the basis of their cute bum or their nice lips? De Botton argues we are attracted to people because they offer a “promise of happiness.” Captivating, encouraging and succinct, it’s my favorite section in the book.
The second-half was the book my friend prophesied: a bright pink pop-philosophy tome Carrie Bradshaw would be proud to tote around in her clutch. Focusing more on sexual issues within established relationships, the forecast is grimmer here -- adultery is inevitable, the institution of family is a running joke, sexual rejections are apt at sending one into an “epicentre of suffering.” Yikes. o_O De Boton also begins to offer some bizarre advice, culminating in the chapter on adultery, suggesting people enjoy some infidelity or achieve a “colossal failure of the imagination.”
Despite a great amount of insight littered throughout, there’s an equal amount of weaknesses. Some of De Botton’s ideas are just so far removed from reality. My fave: porno of the future should not only take aesthetic cues from the “sexiness” of Renaissance-era Madonnas, but should incorporate “people performing oral sex on one another with an air of sweetness and regard.” Excuse me? Does that scene come before or after the gangbang in the “former Soviet Union” De Botton described 20 pages prior? Because, see, any porn industry wherein such films exist ain’t ready for “witty” porn stars or “people caught looking embarrassed.” (Well, the latter actually exists; it’s called “Gay-for-Pay” and I don’t think it’s the aloofness De Botton had in mind.)
The book ends with a bibliography (annoyingly titled "Homework") in which De Botton claims, "I have learnt about pornography from Pornhub .com," before going on to recommend Natalie Merchant's album "Ophelia." Hmm. At the end of journey, you can't help thinking that maybe De Botton is not the best tour guide for the caverns of human desire. His prose is comfortably sparky, and he expresses his ideas thoughtfully. He makes an impact with big, initial concepts about sex and self, shame and kink. But De Botton leaves the fire unkindled after the first half. He flings some intriguing ideas around before settling into a series of so-so cultural criticisms. (Jane Austen inspired the myth of a perfect marriage! Porn abandons aesthetics! Impotence is a sign of respect! etc. etc.) His chapters on porn and Natalie Portman (separate chapters fyi) are amusing(ly strange) in their own right.
So does De Botton succeed? Does one walk away from “How To Think About Sex” empowered and virile, ready to tame the wild “problem” of sex? No, not really. In his conclusion, De Botton somewhat cops out. “We would be so much better off if we didn’t have a sex drive,” he writes. Really? 170 pages to glean that gem? De Botton then chalks up sex as just one of those cah-razy things we have to deal with as human beings. Great. Awesome. Now what?
Da Takeaway: De Botton thinks sex is a desirous monster we must approach cautiously. If we win its favor, we’re treated to physical bliss, an escape from self, possibly even a completion of self. Still, De Botton reminds us throughout: sex is a force of nature, not some domesticated impulse. Sex is, and will always be, 100-percent cray.
So I sat down and started reading it. De Botton gets off to an obvious but well-stated start. We deal with sex in inefficient, unhealthy and conservative ways. We’re clueless when it comes to the subject. Sure, Masters and Johnson can walk you through all the specifics of the “plateau” but can anyone explain concretely the existential dread you feel after hooking up with some random 21 year-old who wears Etnies sneakers and jelly bracelets from Hot Topic? De Botton would call that one of the “peculiar difficulties imposed by our unavoidable possession of a sex drive.” (I’d probably agree.)
Before studying the difficulties, De Botton comments on the “pleasures of sex.” This first half of the book is very enjoyable -- the author covers how sex can liberate the self, unite people, loosen conceptions of status, dazzle the senses and mind. I especially liked the commentary on how sex is a communion of the “polluted sides of our selves”--accurate, it sounds cool, and it reminds me of “Purity and Danger,” the classic wherein society effectively relegates dirt and other nastiness to the outermost periphery of social reality. Sex, then, allows us to transform the profane and forbidden into the honest and the lovely. “At the precise juncture where disgust could be at its height,” De Botton writes, “We find only welcome and permission.”
The chapter “Can Sexiness Be Profound?” is also very illuminating. De Botton says the “inner beauty vs. outer beauty” eternal deathmatch is dumb. Pithily citing a few no-name studies, De Botton argues that the outside mimics the inside. “Getting turned on is a process that engages the whole self,” he says. Who hasn’t fantasized beyond the errant sexual thoughts that bubble up when you think of a crush? Who hasn’t assigned a love interest the goodness of a minor deity solely on the basis of their cute bum or their nice lips? De Botton argues we are attracted to people because they offer a “promise of happiness.” Captivating, encouraging and succinct, it’s my favorite section in the book.
The second-half was the book my friend prophesied: a bright pink pop-philosophy tome Carrie Bradshaw would be proud to tote around in her clutch. Focusing more on sexual issues within established relationships, the forecast is grimmer here -- adultery is inevitable, the institution of family is a running joke, sexual rejections are apt at sending one into an “epicentre of suffering.” Yikes. o_O De Boton also begins to offer some bizarre advice, culminating in the chapter on adultery, suggesting people enjoy some infidelity or achieve a “colossal failure of the imagination.”
Despite a great amount of insight littered throughout, there’s an equal amount of weaknesses. Some of De Botton’s ideas are just so far removed from reality. My fave: porno of the future should not only take aesthetic cues from the “sexiness” of Renaissance-era Madonnas, but should incorporate “people performing oral sex on one another with an air of sweetness and regard.” Excuse me? Does that scene come before or after the gangbang in the “former Soviet Union” De Botton described 20 pages prior? Because, see, any porn industry wherein such films exist ain’t ready for “witty” porn stars or “people caught looking embarrassed.” (Well, the latter actually exists; it’s called “Gay-for-Pay” and I don’t think it’s the aloofness De Botton had in mind.)
The book ends with a bibliography (annoyingly titled "Homework") in which De Botton claims, "I have learnt about pornography from Pornhub .com," before going on to recommend Natalie Merchant's album "Ophelia." Hmm. At the end of journey, you can't help thinking that maybe De Botton is not the best tour guide for the caverns of human desire. His prose is comfortably sparky, and he expresses his ideas thoughtfully. He makes an impact with big, initial concepts about sex and self, shame and kink. But De Botton leaves the fire unkindled after the first half. He flings some intriguing ideas around before settling into a series of so-so cultural criticisms. (Jane Austen inspired the myth of a perfect marriage! Porn abandons aesthetics! Impotence is a sign of respect! etc. etc.) His chapters on porn and Natalie Portman (separate chapters fyi) are amusing(ly strange) in their own right.
So does De Botton succeed? Does one walk away from “How To Think About Sex” empowered and virile, ready to tame the wild “problem” of sex? No, not really. In his conclusion, De Botton somewhat cops out. “We would be so much better off if we didn’t have a sex drive,” he writes. Really? 170 pages to glean that gem? De Botton then chalks up sex as just one of those cah-razy things we have to deal with as human beings. Great. Awesome. Now what?
Da Takeaway: De Botton thinks sex is a desirous monster we must approach cautiously. If we win its favor, we’re treated to physical bliss, an escape from self, possibly even a completion of self. Still, De Botton reminds us throughout: sex is a force of nature, not some domesticated impulse. Sex is, and will always be, 100-percent cray.
February 6, 2021
Nije ovo toliko loša knjiga, koliko je
1) Pandemija dodatno usrala ovaj segment ljudske aktivnosti koji mi je ionako bio nezavidno tužan
2) Alan de Boton poslednja osoba na ovom svetu koju mogu da zamislim da ima seksualne odnose zbog toga što deluje svetački, kao androgina verzija Diva iz Tvin Piksa i kako sad njemu da verujem
1) Pandemija dodatno usrala ovaj segment ljudske aktivnosti koji mi je ionako bio nezavidno tužan
2) Alan de Boton poslednja osoba na ovom svetu koju mogu da zamislim da ima seksualne odnose zbog toga što deluje svetački, kao androgina verzija Diva iz Tvin Piksa i kako sad njemu da verujem
June 6, 2013
So far I thought «Ass Goblins of Auschwitz» would be pretty safely the worst book I've read in 2013, but now I'm not too sure anymore. This book basically is a mix of the worst of Freud, the worst of evolutionary psychology and – for good measure – adds lots of naturalistic fallacies. Put this all in a blender and you end up with this mess… Got any fetishes? Let's grab some Freud. Oh, and evolution made sure sex in relationships will get boring after time, don't rebel against it, it's natural and thus must be fine.
Oh, and did I mention that he actually thinks censorship might be the way to go in order to limit online pornography consumption? The best thing about this is his motivation for encouraging censorship: Because otherwise we stupid people would never come around to read highbrow literature. When I came to this part of his essay I actually thought I might read a polemic and he would just be trolling…
But in the end his shaky arguments really make me wonder: How could de Botton get a degree in philosophy? Either King's College must be basically handing them out to everyone, or he knows better and is just hoping that his audience won't notice. I can't decide which scenario would be worse.
If you want a longer rant on this book I recommend reading this review.
Oh, and did I mention that he actually thinks censorship might be the way to go in order to limit online pornography consumption? The best thing about this is his motivation for encouraging censorship: Because otherwise we stupid people would never come around to read highbrow literature. When I came to this part of his essay I actually thought I might read a polemic and he would just be trolling…
But in the end his shaky arguments really make me wonder: How could de Botton get a degree in philosophy? Either King's College must be basically handing them out to everyone, or he knows better and is just hoping that his audience won't notice. I can't decide which scenario would be worse.
If you want a longer rant on this book I recommend reading this review.
July 6, 2013
I have tried, and failed, to love Alain de Botton's other books after reading (and loving) The Consolations of Philosophy. This book is a pathetic attempt at explanations for why we behave the way that we do about sex. De Botton has somehow managed to categorize sexual experiences into very stereotypical, Hollywood-esque boxes that are in no way reflective of reality. The book also contains some very boring attempts at humor, that are neither funny nor witty in any way. Ugh.
Alain de Botton is not a psychologist. This is all too apparent in his other works and essays, which, far from being enlightening, are often basically textbooks that analyze emotions and values that are personal and learned. Most of his ideas are borrowed from Freud, whose theories, like de Botton's, were often plausible to a certain degree, but also incredibly reductive. What aggravates me is that de Botton makes huge leaps and arrives at conclusions with little evidence. He rarely attempts to offer alternative solutions to or explanations on a subject. He was clearly not meant to be a psychologist or therapist, and when he churns out garbage like this, I really wonder how much he really knows about anything.
One of de Botton's main problems is that he somehow manages to trivialize, contradict and confuse notions of love, sex, honor, humanity and integrity with one another. I think what makes me angriest about this book is that it boasts to be a self-help book, and to teach people about life (it is part of a 'School of Life' series) - but it is really just a book that offers explanations for conventional practices and values without ever attempting to challenge them.
De Botton makes himself out to be this incredible authority on issues like a 'lack of desire' by using absolutes (X is because of Y, this WILL be stopped if we do this). I found this, despite all of de Botton's professed philosophy, entirely unconvincing.
Read this if you are looking for some incredibly facile explanations for why you feel the way you do. Maybe then you can blame your weird libidinous urges on your inner bestial desires.
De Botton really missed the mark on this one.
Alain de Botton is not a psychologist. This is all too apparent in his other works and essays, which, far from being enlightening, are often basically textbooks that analyze emotions and values that are personal and learned. Most of his ideas are borrowed from Freud, whose theories, like de Botton's, were often plausible to a certain degree, but also incredibly reductive. What aggravates me is that de Botton makes huge leaps and arrives at conclusions with little evidence. He rarely attempts to offer alternative solutions to or explanations on a subject. He was clearly not meant to be a psychologist or therapist, and when he churns out garbage like this, I really wonder how much he really knows about anything.
One of de Botton's main problems is that he somehow manages to trivialize, contradict and confuse notions of love, sex, honor, humanity and integrity with one another. I think what makes me angriest about this book is that it boasts to be a self-help book, and to teach people about life (it is part of a 'School of Life' series) - but it is really just a book that offers explanations for conventional practices and values without ever attempting to challenge them.
De Botton makes himself out to be this incredible authority on issues like a 'lack of desire' by using absolutes (X is because of Y, this WILL be stopped if we do this). I found this, despite all of de Botton's professed philosophy, entirely unconvincing.
Read this if you are looking for some incredibly facile explanations for why you feel the way you do. Maybe then you can blame your weird libidinous urges on your inner bestial desires.
De Botton really missed the mark on this one.
Read
October 14, 2023من ترجمهٔ فارسی این کتاب را ــ به نام «چگونه دربارهٔ سکس بیشتر بیندیشیم» ــ از کانال مترجمش، مهدی خسروانی، به قیمت ۱۰۰ هزار تومان خریدم و خواندم (که به گمانم، قیمت مناسب یک کتاب کاغذی با این حجم است و نه یک فایل پیدیاف که هزینههای کاغذ و چاپخانه و ... را ندارد)۰
بخشهایی از کتاب را هیچ نپسندیدم؛ به نظرم رسید که نویسنده درصدد است امیال، تخیلات و فرهنگ خودش را به همه تعمیم دهد. اما بخشهایی را هم بسیار زیاد پسندیدم؛ به ویژه در اواخر کتاب که از تحول مفهوم ازدواج در دورهٔ مدرن سخن میگوید و از دشواری حفظ همزمان سه بعد عشق عاطفی، میل جنسی و روابط خانوادگی، به ویژه در سالهای میانی ازدواج۰
اما حتی اگر هیچ یک از آراء نویسنده را هم نمیپسندیدم، خواندنشان دست کم فرصت و تمرکز فکر دربارهٔ این موضوعات را ــ که به لطف نویسنده، برایمان روشنتر شدهاند ــ میداد۰
بخشهایی از کتاب را هیچ نپسندیدم؛ به نظرم رسید که نویسنده درصدد است امیال، تخیلات و فرهنگ خودش را به همه تعمیم دهد. اما بخشهایی را هم بسیار زیاد پسندیدم؛ به ویژه در اواخر کتاب که از تحول مفهوم ازدواج در دورهٔ مدرن سخن میگوید و از دشواری حفظ همزمان سه بعد عشق عاطفی، میل جنسی و روابط خانوادگی، به ویژه در سالهای میانی ازدواج۰
اما حتی اگر هیچ یک از آراء نویسنده را هم نمیپسندیدم، خواندنشان دست کم فرصت و تمرکز فکر دربارهٔ این موضوعات را ــ که به لطف نویسنده، برایمان روشنتر شدهاند ــ میداد۰
September 30, 2013
My conclusion is this poor man has had some very bad sexual experiences. Why else would someone write this: "We might be so much better off if we didn’t have a sex drive; for most of our lives it causes nothing but trouble and distress. In its name, we do revolting things with people we don’t really like, only to feel disgusting and sinful afterwards." How sad. But how horrible that he feels he has the ability to write a "sexual self-help" book for other people!
The book is also blandly conventional; the people he imagines for his examples are heterosexual. The married couple, in their 30s, have had sex 9 times in the last year. De Botton seems to think this is normal. He says explicitly that if you have a handful of great sexual experiences in a lifetime you're doing well.
I enjoyed another of the books in this "School of Life" series, "How to Stay Sane," and looked forward to the same bare-bones, no-nonsense approach to life. But, unfortunately, there's no concept of a "saner" sexuality here. He starts the book with “For most of our lives, sex seems fated to remain steeped in longing and awkwardness. Whatever the manuals promise, there are really no solutions to the majorities of the dilemmas sex creates for us. A useful self-help book on this subject ought hence to focus on the management of pain rather than its outright elimination." What an ugly warped view of the possibilities of human sexuality. I think the only proper response is to feel sorry for him.
The book is also blandly conventional; the people he imagines for his examples are heterosexual. The married couple, in their 30s, have had sex 9 times in the last year. De Botton seems to think this is normal. He says explicitly that if you have a handful of great sexual experiences in a lifetime you're doing well.
I enjoyed another of the books in this "School of Life" series, "How to Stay Sane," and looked forward to the same bare-bones, no-nonsense approach to life. But, unfortunately, there's no concept of a "saner" sexuality here. He starts the book with “For most of our lives, sex seems fated to remain steeped in longing and awkwardness. Whatever the manuals promise, there are really no solutions to the majorities of the dilemmas sex creates for us. A useful self-help book on this subject ought hence to focus on the management of pain rather than its outright elimination." What an ugly warped view of the possibilities of human sexuality. I think the only proper response is to feel sorry for him.
April 23, 2013
I like Alain de Botton, and I hate self help books. Now de Botton spearheaded a new series of philosophical self help books, the first one by him.
So, he says some weird things in this book, all of which are pointed out by the many reviews below. I liked the book a lot, I think because this is the only book I've ever read that tackles the themes of sex, long term commitment, love, attraction, etc in such a clear and simple way. He does say a lot of weird things (like, the way to make your partner of many years sexy again is to watch him/her sleep with someone else), but I read them as (for the most part) rhetorical flourishes that help get a point across. This book made me understand adultery in a way I've been working toward for a while, but which is fairly unusual in our culture today.
Don't let these things inhibit the real benefits of this book: it's short, it's smart, and it will help you think more clearly and more compassionately about love and sex and relationships. And it's very short, it doesn't preach, it doesn't tell you to do any little activities or go on and on about other peoples' situations in excruciating detail. He takes the best of what the humanities have to say about this subject and wraps it up in a helpful and entertaining way.
So, he says some weird things in this book, all of which are pointed out by the many reviews below. I liked the book a lot, I think because this is the only book I've ever read that tackles the themes of sex, long term commitment, love, attraction, etc in such a clear and simple way. He does say a lot of weird things (like, the way to make your partner of many years sexy again is to watch him/her sleep with someone else), but I read them as (for the most part) rhetorical flourishes that help get a point across. This book made me understand adultery in a way I've been working toward for a while, but which is fairly unusual in our culture today.
Don't let these things inhibit the real benefits of this book: it's short, it's smart, and it will help you think more clearly and more compassionately about love and sex and relationships. And it's very short, it doesn't preach, it doesn't tell you to do any little activities or go on and on about other peoples' situations in excruciating detail. He takes the best of what the humanities have to say about this subject and wraps it up in a helpful and entertaining way.
November 24, 2021
jer je svaki brak kavez i ne dao bog da budes veran osobi s kojom si, jer to je veliki napor i onda moras da povremeno pohvalis i sebe i tu osobu sto ste istrajali u tom naporu GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK
March 2, 2017
I have always had ambivalent feelings towards Alain de Botton. On one hand, I hate the fact that he simplifies everything and on the other hand, I'm fascinated with his ability to make the most complicated concepts understandable for everyone. anyway, I cannot but admit that he has a broad knowledge about many things! "How to Think more About Sex" is not his best, yet it is an interesting and easy read.
If you are looking for a simple reading of Freud, that doesn't go deep into all his sophisticated ideas about childhood, unconsciousness and sexuality, or if you are wondering how you can apply evolution theory to your everyday life, this is the book for you. Plus you don't need to put too much brain into it, you can read it on a buss, while brushing your teeth or cooking. It may help you decipher your fears or irritating feelings before/while/after having sex.
If you are looking for a simple reading of Freud, that doesn't go deep into all his sophisticated ideas about childhood, unconsciousness and sexuality, or if you are wondering how you can apply evolution theory to your everyday life, this is the book for you. Plus you don't need to put too much brain into it, you can read it on a buss, while brushing your teeth or cooking. It may help you decipher your fears or irritating feelings before/while/after having sex.
January 26, 2013
The title is misleading; it could (accurately) be renamed as HOW TO THINK ABOUT SEX IN A MORE INTERESTING WAY. It's a little chapbook, this, really, not terribly ambitious, but full of lovely writing and the more than occasional arresting thought. He's very good on pornography, very good on how sex is a bear, particularly insightful on Our Culture's misunderstanding of fidelity, or perhaps I should say its unuseful way of regarding that concept. I read paragraphs of this aloud to friends. It's smooth, elegant, funny. It adds up to less than you want it to, maybe, but it's worth the hour or so it asks for. De Botton's book of about ten years ago, HOW PROUST CAN SAVE YOUR LIFE, was pretty terrific. This new book is a ditty, nothing more, but sweet enough to make me search (and find) nis recent A WEEK AT THE AIRPORT, which I'm going to read next.
October 1, 2014
After Alain de Botton touches himself (to Boticelli paintings and the cinematic works of Godard), he feels empty. Past 40, he is painfully aware of death. People find him sexually repugnant, and shame bathes his world.
'I know', de Botton bottons, 'If I convince everyone they have to feel like me, I will have all the power. But what to do with it?'
So begins his increasingly powerful legacy, beginning with Religion for Atheists, where he convinces the 40 and not-yet 40 to either fear death or begin fearing death respectively so they can gain interest on their fear, to remind all new lovers that they will not caress those milkyslender legs with such joy ten years from now, nor will those legs look so milkyslender, and why?
Simple.
Alain de Botton wants to have sex with your wife while you watch. And if you can pay him to convince you to do so, all's the better for it.
'And I'll call it "How to let me sleep with your wife! No, that won't work. Let's put a title that would convince people to buy it, rather than tell them what the book's really about.'
'I know', de Botton bottons, 'If I convince everyone they have to feel like me, I will have all the power. But what to do with it?'
So begins his increasingly powerful legacy, beginning with Religion for Atheists, where he convinces the 40 and not-yet 40 to either fear death or begin fearing death respectively so they can gain interest on their fear, to remind all new lovers that they will not caress those milkyslender legs with such joy ten years from now, nor will those legs look so milkyslender, and why?
Simple.
Alain de Botton wants to have sex with your wife while you watch. And if you can pay him to convince you to do so, all's the better for it.
'And I'll call it "How to let me sleep with your wife! No, that won't work. Let's put a title that would convince people to buy it, rather than tell them what the book's really about.'
March 31, 2017
"חרף מאמצינו הרבים להשיל מהסקס את המוזרויות שלו, הוא לעולם לא יהיה פשוט או נחמד באופן שאולי היינו רוצים שיהיה. בבסיסו, סקס איננו דמוקרטי או אדיב. הוא כרוך באכזריות, בחריגה מהמוסר ובתשוקה לכיבוש ולהשפלה. הוא מסרב להתיישב בצורה מסודרת עם אהבה, כפי שהוא אמור. "
ספר המרכז באופן תמציתי ובהיר ניתוח של הצורך האנושי בסקס והמניעים האנושיים לרצות בסקס מעבר להסברים האבולציו- ביולוגים.
לעיתים נוטה לאובר דרמטיזציה בעיני והתיאורים הופכים לסוג של טלנובלה. אבל, כשמתעלמים מהניסיונות הפואטים והדרמטיים של המחבר מדובר במסה מאירת עיניים.
ספר המרכז באופן תמציתי ובהיר ניתוח של הצורך האנושי בסקס והמניעים האנושיים לרצות בסקס מעבר להסברים האבולציו- ביולוגים.
לעיתים נוטה לאובר דרמטיזציה בעיני והתיאורים הופכים לסוג של טלנובלה. אבל, כשמתעלמים מהניסיונות הפואטים והדרמטיים של המחבר מדובר במסה מאירת עיניים.
January 3, 2013
Having read some of the other reviews, I’ve decided instead of simply reviewing the material, I’d put in my bit to perhaps to defend this book. The title, and reactions to it (“Oh, I definitely need to read that” or “I’m embarrassed this will appear on the top of my 2013 book list”) demonstrate the need for this book. I’m quite relieved my copy is the little one with a modest cover which another person can’t see me reading. De Botton addresses the way in which we think about sexual activity – how sex is “everywhere” and yet private, what goes on internally when we entertain this part of ourselves in a variety of different ways, something that is shameful but we kind of have a lot of fun with this shame.
The key message is that you are not as weird as you imagine.
This is part of the School of Life publications series – which attempt to cover quite considerable topics usually covered in whole university courses and big weighty tomes in nice little books. Naturally, they simply can’t cover the breadth and depth of the universal experience, especially as the publications have international audiences. So I have read many criticisms of this book that address some of the assertions made (yeah, he lost me in the fetish section) and the many gaps that appear in his attempt to discuss the common, yet unsaid. For example, much of the reasoning behind initial sexual desire is put down to the procreative drive, which isn’t the be all end all for everyone.
Of course de Botton really only covered the male heterosexual experience, especially in a long term family orientated marriage as he is a heterosexual man in a long term family orientated marriage – he did not attempt to determine how sex would be for women, homosexuals or a variety of other people because it’s not his area. With something so intimate and personal as the experience of sex, it would be trespassing.
And, quite frankly, it was weird enough having de Botton in my head discussing sex as it was. I mean, I like the guy and his work, but I’ve belonged to enough chess clubs in my time to accept a cross-over between high intellectual activity and what really goes on in my head. It was kind of like getting the birds and bees talk from the shy, retiring maths teacher. And there is one diagram which had me believing a 14 year old boy had vandalised my book when I wasn’t looking. You’ll know what I mean when you see it (page 81 in the School of Life version.)
And this brings me to one aspect I expected de Botton to briefly mention, which is the practice of abstinence – especially in regards to those who take holy orders, deciding to go without sex in the pursuit of a richer internal life, under the assumption that sex is antithetical to deeper thought, and how/why this has sometimes failed.
It is important to focus on the purpose of this book – it wasn’t to tell us a history of sexual desire or an instruction manual on improving our sexual selves. I understood the purpose to be an attempt to get people to think about sex more – but by “more” it’s less about frequency and about depth – however, how to think deeper about sex without killing your enjoyment of it.
This book was about opening a dialogue, even if it’s just one you have with yourself while reading the book. While I hate to mention its name, what made “50 Shades of Grey” a phenomenon – rather than simply a popular book – was less about what the author actually said, but how the readers engaged with the material and its effects on them. So naturally, there is much in the book left to be articulated, but not by de Botton himself – he wants you to respond, to argue with him, to get on forums like this and put your two cents in, as this demonstrates you are already thinking more and more deeply about this strange group of activities we don’t want respectable people to know we do.
So I highly recommend this book – even if you’re reading it simply to make a list of things to argue against, at least it gets your mind out of your head and back in your pants.
The key message is that you are not as weird as you imagine.
This is part of the School of Life publications series – which attempt to cover quite considerable topics usually covered in whole university courses and big weighty tomes in nice little books. Naturally, they simply can’t cover the breadth and depth of the universal experience, especially as the publications have international audiences. So I have read many criticisms of this book that address some of the assertions made (yeah, he lost me in the fetish section) and the many gaps that appear in his attempt to discuss the common, yet unsaid. For example, much of the reasoning behind initial sexual desire is put down to the procreative drive, which isn’t the be all end all for everyone.
Of course de Botton really only covered the male heterosexual experience, especially in a long term family orientated marriage as he is a heterosexual man in a long term family orientated marriage – he did not attempt to determine how sex would be for women, homosexuals or a variety of other people because it’s not his area. With something so intimate and personal as the experience of sex, it would be trespassing.
And, quite frankly, it was weird enough having de Botton in my head discussing sex as it was. I mean, I like the guy and his work, but I’ve belonged to enough chess clubs in my time to accept a cross-over between high intellectual activity and what really goes on in my head. It was kind of like getting the birds and bees talk from the shy, retiring maths teacher. And there is one diagram which had me believing a 14 year old boy had vandalised my book when I wasn’t looking. You’ll know what I mean when you see it (page 81 in the School of Life version.)
And this brings me to one aspect I expected de Botton to briefly mention, which is the practice of abstinence – especially in regards to those who take holy orders, deciding to go without sex in the pursuit of a richer internal life, under the assumption that sex is antithetical to deeper thought, and how/why this has sometimes failed.
It is important to focus on the purpose of this book – it wasn’t to tell us a history of sexual desire or an instruction manual on improving our sexual selves. I understood the purpose to be an attempt to get people to think about sex more – but by “more” it’s less about frequency and about depth – however, how to think deeper about sex without killing your enjoyment of it.
This book was about opening a dialogue, even if it’s just one you have with yourself while reading the book. While I hate to mention its name, what made “50 Shades of Grey” a phenomenon – rather than simply a popular book – was less about what the author actually said, but how the readers engaged with the material and its effects on them. So naturally, there is much in the book left to be articulated, but not by de Botton himself – he wants you to respond, to argue with him, to get on forums like this and put your two cents in, as this demonstrates you are already thinking more and more deeply about this strange group of activities we don’t want respectable people to know we do.
So I highly recommend this book – even if you’re reading it simply to make a list of things to argue against, at least it gets your mind out of your head and back in your pants.
March 17, 2016
Picked this one up for free at NEIBA.
I love the idea -- A little school in a storefront with a mission to help people live wisely and well. Sweet, well-meaning. Unfortunately, as of p.49, it seems like the author of this volume is a sad person who is projecting his disappointments as "universal." I think there is a lot of negative opinion here that is offered as "fact." It is readable and parts of it are fun -- I'll keep going, and see if my opinion changes by the end.
Here's what I can appreciate about this book: de Boton discusses sex calmly and openly, without any cutesy or embarrassed language. That's worthwhile. At its heart, it also says: good communication is an important element of a good sex life.
What's making it very slow going: Everything about his writing screams 'I am a college freshman and I have just discovered deep thought!' It also is permeated everywhere with the feeling that the author just hasn't had a lot of sex. (Sorry.) He has a whole chapter that basically says, satisfying sex within marriage is a false expectation. Expect to be bored by your partner's body. So gloomy! There is no reason why two people in a mutually loving long-term relationship can't continue to have lots of fun in bed. It just takes paying attention and making it a priority.
I looked up de Boton's CV and, he's not that young, and he's written a lot of intriguing-sounding philosophical books. Not being as well-versed in architecture or religion, I might read one of those and be swayed. In How to Think More About Sex, however, he's on the sad side of the street and I wouldn't recommend anyone join him.
(P.S. Now that I have read his section on pornography which, by the way, ignores women and non-heterosexual men completely, I am beginning to think that this book is satire. We're supposed to get turned on by classical paintings of the virgin Mary? Fully clothed strangers reading novels while reclining? Just too silly. He must be channeling some alter ego who has never had sex.)
I love the idea -- A little school in a storefront with a mission to help people live wisely and well. Sweet, well-meaning. Unfortunately, as of p.49, it seems like the author of this volume is a sad person who is projecting his disappointments as "universal." I think there is a lot of negative opinion here that is offered as "fact." It is readable and parts of it are fun -- I'll keep going, and see if my opinion changes by the end.
Here's what I can appreciate about this book: de Boton discusses sex calmly and openly, without any cutesy or embarrassed language. That's worthwhile. At its heart, it also says: good communication is an important element of a good sex life.
What's making it very slow going: Everything about his writing screams 'I am a college freshman and I have just discovered deep thought!' It also is permeated everywhere with the feeling that the author just hasn't had a lot of sex. (Sorry.) He has a whole chapter that basically says, satisfying sex within marriage is a false expectation. Expect to be bored by your partner's body. So gloomy! There is no reason why two people in a mutually loving long-term relationship can't continue to have lots of fun in bed. It just takes paying attention and making it a priority.
I looked up de Boton's CV and, he's not that young, and he's written a lot of intriguing-sounding philosophical books. Not being as well-versed in architecture or religion, I might read one of those and be swayed. In How to Think More About Sex, however, he's on the sad side of the street and I wouldn't recommend anyone join him.
(P.S. Now that I have read his section on pornography which, by the way, ignores women and non-heterosexual men completely, I am beginning to think that this book is satire. We're supposed to get turned on by classical paintings of the virgin Mary? Fully clothed strangers reading novels while reclining? Just too silly. He must be channeling some alter ego who has never had sex.)
September 25, 2017
Has some flaws but really lucid and astute. Has problematic aspects that made me cringe a number of times while reading. But I think there are some really interesting ideas in it, as long as you don't take them too far, or read them too literally.
I do feel like he's writing from his own very personal experience and perspective, but then bringing in bits and pieces of theory to support it. It kind of reminds me of the kind of thing Naomi Woolf does, when she takes her experience and then writes about it but brings in all this other research.
de Botton does write incredibly beautifully and so strikingly sometimes, and those moments really stand out and resonate with the full force of all the humanity that stands behind them. But at other times there's a huge gulf and those times are when he is most writing from his very specific male, white, hetero, privileged experience. But I still think this book has a lot of value, so long as it's read with a critical mind.
I will say it's incredibly generous of Alain de Botton to provide an annotated bibliography at the back, guiding you through where some ideas he wrote about can be found and explored in their original form. Reads kind of like getting an email and reading list from your favourite professor, letting you into their intellectual journey. Super grateful for that, and will be checking out many of the recommendations and sources.
I do feel like he's writing from his own very personal experience and perspective, but then bringing in bits and pieces of theory to support it. It kind of reminds me of the kind of thing Naomi Woolf does, when she takes her experience and then writes about it but brings in all this other research.
de Botton does write incredibly beautifully and so strikingly sometimes, and those moments really stand out and resonate with the full force of all the humanity that stands behind them. But at other times there's a huge gulf and those times are when he is most writing from his very specific male, white, hetero, privileged experience. But I still think this book has a lot of value, so long as it's read with a critical mind.
I will say it's incredibly generous of Alain de Botton to provide an annotated bibliography at the back, guiding you through where some ideas he wrote about can be found and explored in their original form. Reads kind of like getting an email and reading list from your favourite professor, letting you into their intellectual journey. Super grateful for that, and will be checking out many of the recommendations and sources.
June 12, 2016
Well I don't think it's a masterpiece nor a must read; but it's good to read it once in a lifetime.
" we might be so much better off if we didn't have a sex drive; for most of our lives, it causes us nothing but trouble and distress. In its name we do revolting things with people we don't really like, only to feel disgusting and sinful afterwards. Those we desire usually dismiss us for being too ugly or not their type; the cute ones have always already got a boyfriend or a girlfriend; most of our early adult life is a continuous round of rejection, sad music and bad pornography. It seems a miracle when eventually someone takes pity on us and gives us a chance, yet even then, we find ourselves before long starting to take an interest in other people's legs or hair again..."
" we might be so much better off if we didn't have a sex drive; for most of our lives, it causes us nothing but trouble and distress. In its name we do revolting things with people we don't really like, only to feel disgusting and sinful afterwards. Those we desire usually dismiss us for being too ugly or not their type; the cute ones have always already got a boyfriend or a girlfriend; most of our early adult life is a continuous round of rejection, sad music and bad pornography. It seems a miracle when eventually someone takes pity on us and gives us a chance, yet even then, we find ourselves before long starting to take an interest in other people's legs or hair again..."
September 15, 2013
The passages quoted from the book are beautifully written and sound like a refreshing take on thinking about sex. de Botton is clearly an excellent writer, and the beginning of the book is so very promising. For example: "Ultimately, sex is a grounding mechanism that reminds us of our own imperfect humanity, and in that imperfection lies the messy richness of being human" and "We are granted an extraordinary opportunity to feel comfortable in our own skin wen a willing and generous lover invites us to say or do the very worst things we can imagine."
Beautiful, yes? Selectively quote a book and you can make anything sound wonderful, even to the extent of giving the impression that it is about the exact opposite of its actual content. In this case, the content is primarily that we should feel shame about sex, and focus on it LESS. I still haven't figured out why the book is titled "How to Think More About Sex."
To start, an amped-up version of Freudianism appears when the author insists that the reason the amount of sex had in a relationship diminishes over time because we start to see our partners as our parents, and sex with our parents is icky. Since this is normal and inevitable, we should resign ourselves to this state and disregard our sexual impulses. But don't go assuming that you're in the clear if you just give up on expecting to have sex with your partner. Want to watch porn? Congratulations. You are destroying society.
"The associated waste of time is naturally horrific. Financial analysts put the value of the online pornography industry at $10 billion a year, but this figure doesn't begin to evoke its true cost in terms of squandered human energy: perhaps as many as two hundred million man-hours annually that might otherwise have been devoted to starting companies, raising children, curing cancer, writing masterpieces or sorting out the attic, are instead spent ogling the mesmerizing pages of [porn] sites."
You could be curing cancer! How selfish to spend that time and energy on porn. Besides, you really should have known since "how deeply contrary pornography is to the rest of our plans and inclinations becomes clear only after orgasm. Where just a moment before we might have sacrificed our worldly goods for one more click, now we must confront with horror and shame the temporary abandonment of our sanity." That's right, watching porn and masturbating should make you feel immediately ashamed and horrified.
If all this stress leads to some impotence, worry not. It just means you're a good and ethical human because:
"...what is often termed 'nerves' in a man, far from being a problem, is in fact an asset that should be sought out and valued as evidence of an evolved type of kindness. The fear of being disgusting, absurd or a disappointment to someone else is a first sign of morality. Impotence is an achievement of the ethical imagination - so much so that in the future, we men might learn to act out episodes of the condition as a way of signaling our depth of spirit, just as today we furtively swallow Viagra tablets in the bathroom to prove the extent of our manliness."
Perhaps we should start having Impotence Pride Day to celebrate our evolution.
Who can we turn to for guidance around our sexuality? According to de Botton, religion (specifically Judeo-Christian religions) is the answer. Without religion, we in the West would have been devoid of any sense of morality or ethics. He states, "Reason and kindness had not yet intruded upon the free flow of animal impulses - nor, in the West, would they do so convincingly for many millennia to come, until the influences of classical philosophy and Judeo-Christian ethics at last percolated through the general population in the centuries after the death of Christ." Not only are we finally kind and reasonable, we can absolutely rely on religion to dictate how we should think about sex and sexuality.
"Only religions still take sex seriously, in the sense of properly respecting its power to turn us away from our priorities. Only religions see it as something potentially dangerous and needing to be guarded against. We may not sympathize with what they would wish us to think about in the place of sex, and we may not like the way they go about trying to censor it, but we can surely - though perhaps only after killing many hours online at [porn site] - appreciate that on this one point religions have got it right: sex and sexual images can overwhelm our higher rational faculties with depressing ease."
(Who exactly does de Botton think creates and maintains religions? It's the very people he insists are unable to overcome their impulses and hormones, and who set aside all goodness for the sake of a quick orgasm.)
Religion will help us kick our porn habit by redefining pornography.
"The new pornography would combine sexual excitement with an interest in other human ideals. The usual animalistic categories and hackneyed plots, replete with stock characters seemingly incapable of coherent speech, would give way to pornographic images and scenarios based around such qualities as intelligence (showing people reading or wandering the stacks in libraries), kindness (people performing oral sex on one another with an air of sweetness and regard) or humility (people caught looking embarrassed, shy or self-conscious). No longer would we have to make a painful choice between being human and being sexual."
Can't you just imagine it? Whole shelves devoted to library porn. Perhaps we can have some really hard-core stuff like videos of people studying physics or organic chem. Mmm… I'm getting wet already.
Turning to religion will also improve our marriages, which also happens "to suit children well. It spares them anxiety over the consequences of their parents' arguments: they can feel confident that their mum and dad like each other well enough to work things out, even though they may bicker and fight every day, as kids themselves do in the playground." Staying together for the kids, even if you're fighting all the time, is just so beneficial! de Botton also insists that any sexual exploration outside of a marriage, consensual or not, will destroy the relationship and that staying faithful necessarily means that you will miss out on "some of life's greatest and most important sensory pleasures along the way." But since we're slaves to our urges and hormones, it's pretty likely that we will stray, in which case de Botton has some counterintuitive advice for us:
"Rather than ask their 'betrayers' to say they are sorry, the 'betrayed' might begin by saying sorry themselves - sorry for being themselves, sorry for getting old, sorry for being boring sometimes, sorry for forcing their partners to lie by setting the bar of truthfulness forbiddingly high and (while we are at it), sorry for being human."
Yeah. That'll fix it.
To sum up, all relationships lead to marriage, which is important for children regardless of the health of the relationship. During the course of a marriage, we will start thinking of our spouses as our parents and stop having sex because incest is taboo. Ideally, we will just give up on our sexuality at that point, because watching porn is the equivalent of taking food from starving children and hosting book burnings. If we're lucky, our genitals will stop working entirely. Religion, however, will save us by shaming us into having as little sex as possible, to the extent that we will eventually evolve to find images of people reading erotic. And if we ever make a mistake in all this, don't worry too much. Our partners will apologize for making us do whatever bad thing it is we did.
Or, as the author says towards the end of the book: "We would be so nice without sex - nice in the way that seven-year-old boys and girls are, full of sweetness and wonder about the lives of marmosets or deer."
Never have I wanted so badly to throw a book across the room. This is the most shaming, sex-negative book I've read in ages, and it is shocking that it gets such good reviews.
Beautiful, yes? Selectively quote a book and you can make anything sound wonderful, even to the extent of giving the impression that it is about the exact opposite of its actual content. In this case, the content is primarily that we should feel shame about sex, and focus on it LESS. I still haven't figured out why the book is titled "How to Think More About Sex."
To start, an amped-up version of Freudianism appears when the author insists that the reason the amount of sex had in a relationship diminishes over time because we start to see our partners as our parents, and sex with our parents is icky. Since this is normal and inevitable, we should resign ourselves to this state and disregard our sexual impulses. But don't go assuming that you're in the clear if you just give up on expecting to have sex with your partner. Want to watch porn? Congratulations. You are destroying society.
"The associated waste of time is naturally horrific. Financial analysts put the value of the online pornography industry at $10 billion a year, but this figure doesn't begin to evoke its true cost in terms of squandered human energy: perhaps as many as two hundred million man-hours annually that might otherwise have been devoted to starting companies, raising children, curing cancer, writing masterpieces or sorting out the attic, are instead spent ogling the mesmerizing pages of [porn] sites."
You could be curing cancer! How selfish to spend that time and energy on porn. Besides, you really should have known since "how deeply contrary pornography is to the rest of our plans and inclinations becomes clear only after orgasm. Where just a moment before we might have sacrificed our worldly goods for one more click, now we must confront with horror and shame the temporary abandonment of our sanity." That's right, watching porn and masturbating should make you feel immediately ashamed and horrified.
If all this stress leads to some impotence, worry not. It just means you're a good and ethical human because:
"...what is often termed 'nerves' in a man, far from being a problem, is in fact an asset that should be sought out and valued as evidence of an evolved type of kindness. The fear of being disgusting, absurd or a disappointment to someone else is a first sign of morality. Impotence is an achievement of the ethical imagination - so much so that in the future, we men might learn to act out episodes of the condition as a way of signaling our depth of spirit, just as today we furtively swallow Viagra tablets in the bathroom to prove the extent of our manliness."
Perhaps we should start having Impotence Pride Day to celebrate our evolution.
Who can we turn to for guidance around our sexuality? According to de Botton, religion (specifically Judeo-Christian religions) is the answer. Without religion, we in the West would have been devoid of any sense of morality or ethics. He states, "Reason and kindness had not yet intruded upon the free flow of animal impulses - nor, in the West, would they do so convincingly for many millennia to come, until the influences of classical philosophy and Judeo-Christian ethics at last percolated through the general population in the centuries after the death of Christ." Not only are we finally kind and reasonable, we can absolutely rely on religion to dictate how we should think about sex and sexuality.
"Only religions still take sex seriously, in the sense of properly respecting its power to turn us away from our priorities. Only religions see it as something potentially dangerous and needing to be guarded against. We may not sympathize with what they would wish us to think about in the place of sex, and we may not like the way they go about trying to censor it, but we can surely - though perhaps only after killing many hours online at [porn site] - appreciate that on this one point religions have got it right: sex and sexual images can overwhelm our higher rational faculties with depressing ease."
(Who exactly does de Botton think creates and maintains religions? It's the very people he insists are unable to overcome their impulses and hormones, and who set aside all goodness for the sake of a quick orgasm.)
Religion will help us kick our porn habit by redefining pornography.
"The new pornography would combine sexual excitement with an interest in other human ideals. The usual animalistic categories and hackneyed plots, replete with stock characters seemingly incapable of coherent speech, would give way to pornographic images and scenarios based around such qualities as intelligence (showing people reading or wandering the stacks in libraries), kindness (people performing oral sex on one another with an air of sweetness and regard) or humility (people caught looking embarrassed, shy or self-conscious). No longer would we have to make a painful choice between being human and being sexual."
Can't you just imagine it? Whole shelves devoted to library porn. Perhaps we can have some really hard-core stuff like videos of people studying physics or organic chem. Mmm… I'm getting wet already.
Turning to religion will also improve our marriages, which also happens "to suit children well. It spares them anxiety over the consequences of their parents' arguments: they can feel confident that their mum and dad like each other well enough to work things out, even though they may bicker and fight every day, as kids themselves do in the playground." Staying together for the kids, even if you're fighting all the time, is just so beneficial! de Botton also insists that any sexual exploration outside of a marriage, consensual or not, will destroy the relationship and that staying faithful necessarily means that you will miss out on "some of life's greatest and most important sensory pleasures along the way." But since we're slaves to our urges and hormones, it's pretty likely that we will stray, in which case de Botton has some counterintuitive advice for us:
"Rather than ask their 'betrayers' to say they are sorry, the 'betrayed' might begin by saying sorry themselves - sorry for being themselves, sorry for getting old, sorry for being boring sometimes, sorry for forcing their partners to lie by setting the bar of truthfulness forbiddingly high and (while we are at it), sorry for being human."
Yeah. That'll fix it.
To sum up, all relationships lead to marriage, which is important for children regardless of the health of the relationship. During the course of a marriage, we will start thinking of our spouses as our parents and stop having sex because incest is taboo. Ideally, we will just give up on our sexuality at that point, because watching porn is the equivalent of taking food from starving children and hosting book burnings. If we're lucky, our genitals will stop working entirely. Religion, however, will save us by shaming us into having as little sex as possible, to the extent that we will eventually evolve to find images of people reading erotic. And if we ever make a mistake in all this, don't worry too much. Our partners will apologize for making us do whatever bad thing it is we did.
Or, as the author says towards the end of the book: "We would be so nice without sex - nice in the way that seven-year-old boys and girls are, full of sweetness and wonder about the lives of marmosets or deer."
Never have I wanted so badly to throw a book across the room. This is the most shaming, sex-negative book I've read in ages, and it is shocking that it gets such good reviews.
April 1, 2023
من این رو با ترجمه مهدی خسروانی خوندم. که در کانال
@paradoxizer
در تلگرام میتونید پیداش کنید.
و اما خود کتاب، بیشتر از اینکه درمورد سکس باشه، راجع به رابطهست. و گرچه شاید خیلی چیزهای جدیدی نگه، اما مرور کردنش بدی نیست. و خوبه که بهشون فکر کنید.
مخصوصا بخش اول کتاب برای من جالبتر بود.
@paradoxizer
در تلگرام میتونید پیداش کنید.
و اما خود کتاب، بیشتر از اینکه درمورد سکس باشه، راجع به رابطهست. و گرچه شاید خیلی چیزهای جدیدی نگه، اما مرور کردنش بدی نیست. و خوبه که بهشون فکر کنید.
مخصوصا بخش اول کتاب برای من جالبتر بود.
March 5, 2015
Derivative, obvious and lacking a single good idea. Poorly written to boot. De Botton has really fallen off.
August 21, 2023
Topik yang diangkat memang bagus dan bisa memperluas cara pandang kita tentang relasi manusia. Hanya saja, aku merasa kalau tulisannya kadang sulit aku nikmati dan tidak mudah dipahami.
October 17, 2022
Despite its provocative name this was an absolute treat and very deep in many ways.
Alain de Botton real goes to the... botton of things. Understanding our deepest anxieties and fears in a way that makes it helpful to understand in our every-day.
This was actually my first "book" by Botton, but I will definitely follow this brain with such a capability to make complicated matters seem pretty easy to understand or SEE for a while.
Very humbling takes on marriage, sex, adultery, pornography, growing up... we are little kids, trying to do our best, deeply lost in the web of expectations, cultures, norms, profound feelings and moral standards and values. And also, the absolute vastness of pleasures. The part about Internet and all that it has to offer was just pure Vonnegut, so deep and humane and understanding and at the same time so god-awfully funny and cleverly clear.
I am still totally blown away by sex. How it is the deepest of things, completely free of charge and still of the highest forms of pleasure and, yes, status. I remember a quote from House of Cards so well: "Everything is about sex. Except sex. Sex is about power.", there is something in it.
And it's so simple yet so complex.
I remember a sketch from a Finnish comedy series Pulkkinen where they disappear from the society because sex is such a BURDEN for them. And they remain still suspicious that on the Antartica they might bump into someone they'd maybe have to share a tent with.
To me, I'd say, sex is a form of love. It can only exist in a place that is relaxed and free and devoid of demands. Because that's what true love is. And if sex isn't those things, it's something else.
Alain de Botton real goes to the... botton of things. Understanding our deepest anxieties and fears in a way that makes it helpful to understand in our every-day.
This was actually my first "book" by Botton, but I will definitely follow this brain with such a capability to make complicated matters seem pretty easy to understand or SEE for a while.
Very humbling takes on marriage, sex, adultery, pornography, growing up... we are little kids, trying to do our best, deeply lost in the web of expectations, cultures, norms, profound feelings and moral standards and values. And also, the absolute vastness of pleasures. The part about Internet and all that it has to offer was just pure Vonnegut, so deep and humane and understanding and at the same time so god-awfully funny and cleverly clear.
I am still totally blown away by sex. How it is the deepest of things, completely free of charge and still of the highest forms of pleasure and, yes, status. I remember a quote from House of Cards so well: "Everything is about sex. Except sex. Sex is about power.", there is something in it.
And it's so simple yet so complex.
I remember a sketch from a Finnish comedy series Pulkkinen where they disappear from the society because sex is such a BURDEN for them. And they remain still suspicious that on the Antartica they might bump into someone they'd maybe have to share a tent with.
To me, I'd say, sex is a form of love. It can only exist in a place that is relaxed and free and devoid of demands. Because that's what true love is. And if sex isn't those things, it's something else.
Read
September 27, 2012As I was reading How to Think About Sex, I posted:
It’s almost charming, that cynicism. It’s partly why I go to de Botton—how his examination of minutiae leads to glib truths, if not good ol’ pragmatism. Oh, and the prose: de Botton can articulate the most mundane things and have them aspire to profundity. Love, for example. And this time, sex. [This is de Botton on eroticism, the stasis of our daily lives, and rediscovery aided by “a pair of towelling bathrobes, a complimentary fruit basket, and a view out of a window onto an unfamiliar harbour”: “The furniture insists that we can’t change because it never does. Hence the metaphysical importance of hotels.”] [And this is de Botton on yet another glorious triviality of sexual relationships: “Beneath the kiss itself, it is its meaning that interests us—which is why the desire to kiss someone can be decisively reduced (as it may need be, for instance, when two lovers are already married to other people) by a declaration of that desire—a confession which may in itself be so erotic as to render the actual kiss superfluous.”]
It’s definitely nothing new. De Botton himself has waxed lyrical about relationships, their many rituals, and near-silly symbolisms. He’s done it at least three times, and I suspect that this slim volume is just an elaboration, some leftover notes from past releases, or an amendment to allow for recent discoveries in whatever field he cites. Or, maybe, it’s simply a pet preoccupation, and he can’t help but return to it time and again. I don’t know, and I don’t care. The prose is lovely, it lends me words for feelings and scenes I can’t be bothered to dissect with the same keenness he does. Oddly enough, I wish this wasn’t part of a series [I have another that’s called, How to Stay Sane]—that could have allowed de Botton more freedom to elaborate. I’d have more of those words, never mind if they’ve been saying much of the same things that’s been already said in other places, in less impressive ways.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[ cross-posted ]
Mayhap Alain de Botton is on to something here—to replace the usual vows and platitudes with something more cautionary, downbeat, pragmatic: “I promise to be disappointed by you and you alone. I promise to make you the sole repository of my regrets, rather than to distribute them widely through multiple affairs and a life of sexual Don Juanism. I have surveyed the different options for unhappiness, and it is you I have chosen to commit to.” And so, for example, upon the discovery of infidelity, the betrayed could more poignantly and justly cry: “I was relying on you to be loyal to the specific variety of disappointment that I represent.”
It’s almost charming, that cynicism. It’s partly why I go to de Botton—how his examination of minutiae leads to glib truths, if not good ol’ pragmatism. Oh, and the prose: de Botton can articulate the most mundane things and have them aspire to profundity. Love, for example. And this time, sex. [This is de Botton on eroticism, the stasis of our daily lives, and rediscovery aided by “a pair of towelling bathrobes, a complimentary fruit basket, and a view out of a window onto an unfamiliar harbour”: “The furniture insists that we can’t change because it never does. Hence the metaphysical importance of hotels.”] [And this is de Botton on yet another glorious triviality of sexual relationships: “Beneath the kiss itself, it is its meaning that interests us—which is why the desire to kiss someone can be decisively reduced (as it may need be, for instance, when two lovers are already married to other people) by a declaration of that desire—a confession which may in itself be so erotic as to render the actual kiss superfluous.”]
It’s definitely nothing new. De Botton himself has waxed lyrical about relationships, their many rituals, and near-silly symbolisms. He’s done it at least three times, and I suspect that this slim volume is just an elaboration, some leftover notes from past releases, or an amendment to allow for recent discoveries in whatever field he cites. Or, maybe, it’s simply a pet preoccupation, and he can’t help but return to it time and again. I don’t know, and I don’t care. The prose is lovely, it lends me words for feelings and scenes I can’t be bothered to dissect with the same keenness he does. Oddly enough, I wish this wasn’t part of a series [I have another that’s called, How to Stay Sane]—that could have allowed de Botton more freedom to elaborate. I’d have more of those words, never mind if they’ve been saying much of the same things that’s been already said in other places, in less impressive ways.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[ cross-posted ]
January 26, 2013
I had great hopes for this book but was somewhat disappointed. It is a very short book at least on the Kindle. Only 1339 locations. The fact that the print length is 185 pages tells me that the printed version of the book is loaded with white space.
de Botton will make a pithy observation, and you will think oh this is going to be good. Then he keeps writing and the pithy thoughts turn into somewhat boring sentences that turn into words that turn into letters that turn into pixels on my Kindle's screen and what started out as a really cool observation just seems to disintegrate into dust before your eyes and drifts off into some of sort of second law of thermodynamics iso-thematic fog. You go back and read it again because surely you missed something and soon enough you are once again staring at meaningless pixels thinking what the hell did that mean? Thank God it is short.
The other thing that bothered me about the book is that de Botton has seemingly become jaded with long term committed monogamy. He is pessimistic about the outcome of maintaining fidelity in most marriages and he almost seems pessimistic as to whether the effort is warranted.
There is something profoundly sad in the above quote. For a moment one thinks that de Botton is about to praise faithfulness in marriage and then he mocks it with medals and gongs. What has happened to de Botton that he can advise replacing the pain, humiliation and fury of discovering an infidelity with "a certain bemused amazement"? Why has he given up on monogamy?
I can't get over the feeling that great deal of what was going on in the book went straight over my head. Perhaps I need to read it again, I was hoping for a better understanding of the more philosophical elements of sex, instead I became depressed by a deep thinker who has abandoned fidelity.
de Botton will make a pithy observation, and you will think oh this is going to be good. Then he keeps writing and the pithy thoughts turn into somewhat boring sentences that turn into words that turn into letters that turn into pixels on my Kindle's screen and what started out as a really cool observation just seems to disintegrate into dust before your eyes and drifts off into some of sort of second law of thermodynamics iso-thematic fog. You go back and read it again because surely you missed something and soon enough you are once again staring at meaningless pixels thinking what the hell did that mean? Thank God it is short.
The other thing that bothered me about the book is that de Botton has seemingly become jaded with long term committed monogamy. He is pessimistic about the outcome of maintaining fidelity in most marriages and he almost seems pessimistic as to whether the effort is warranted.
Spouses who remain faithful to each other should recognize the scale of the sacrifice they are making for their love and for their children, and should feel proud of their valour. There is nothing normal or particularly pleasant about sexual renunciation. Fidelity deserves to be considered an achievement and constantly praised – ideally with some medals and the sounding of a public gong – rather than discounted as an unremarkable norm whose undermining by an affair should provoke spousal rage. A loyal marriage ought at all times to retain within it an awareness of the immense forbearance and generosity that the two parties are mutually showing in managing not to sleep around (and, for that matter, in refraining from killing each other). If one partner should happen to slip, the other might forgo fury in favour of a certain bemused amazement at the stretches of fidelity and calm that the two of them have otherwise succeeded in maintaining against such great odds.
de Botton, Alain (2012-12-24). How to Think More About Sex (The School of Life) (pp. 167-168). Picador. Kindle Edition.
There is something profoundly sad in the above quote. For a moment one thinks that de Botton is about to praise faithfulness in marriage and then he mocks it with medals and gongs. What has happened to de Botton that he can advise replacing the pain, humiliation and fury of discovering an infidelity with "a certain bemused amazement"? Why has he given up on monogamy?
I can't get over the feeling that great deal of what was going on in the book went straight over my head. Perhaps I need to read it again, I was hoping for a better understanding of the more philosophical elements of sex, instead I became depressed by a deep thinker who has abandoned fidelity.
April 16, 2022
İnsan kendini keşfetmeye başladıkça cinsellik hakkında düşünmeye başlıyor.Bu konu hakkında bir şeyler sormak istese de çoğu zaman çekiniyor.Ve bu konu hakkında bilinenler aslında dönem dönem değiştiği için yaşça çok büyük insanlardan tavsiyeler alması görece yanıltıcı olabilir.
Botton birçok farklı yerden inceliyor.Bu konuda en rahat açılabilecek kişi de partneriniz bile olamayabiliyor çoğu zaman.Normal biriyle kurulan ilişki de samimi olup olmadığı ne tepki vereceği kestirilemiyor.Ancak bu kadar yakınında hissedilen birine her şey rahatlık dökülebilir.
İlerleyen bölümlerde cinsel isteksizlik yaşayan çifti okuyoruz.Jim artık yeteri kadar istekli olmadı-ğını farkında ve geçen sene kaç kere seviştiklerinin istatistiğini tutacak kadar bu durumu düşünüyor ama karısı bu kadar düşündüğünün muhtemelen farkında bile değil.Birbirine bu denli yakın insan-ların zaman geçtikçe birlerinden bu denli uzaklaşmaları garip gelse de çok sık rastlanıyor.
Aslında esas sorun bu kadar utangaç olmamız.Karşı taraf ne der diyip harekete geçmekten bir şeyler yapmaktan korkmamız.Ama duygular karşılıklıysa yaşanacaklar için rezil olma riskini göze almaya değer.
En sevdiğim bölümlerinden biri de sevgiyi küçüklükten itibaren yanlış öğrendiğimizden bahsettiği kısım oldu sanırım.Anne babamızdan gördüğümüz şefkati her zaman yanımızda olacağını bildi-ğimiz sevgiyi büyüyünce yabancılardan da bekliyoruz.Ama onlarda o kadar kredimiz olmadığını,o şekilde iletişim kuramayacağımızı öğrenmek için epey bir ilişki kurduktan sonra ancak kavrayabi-liyoruz.
Bir yerden sonra ''Cinsellik acaba gerçekten de bu kadar kötü bir şey mi?''nin galiba kötü bir şey kısmına daha yaklaşırken;yazar aslında cinselliğin dünyada olan bir çok şeyin nedeni olduğunu, normalde yapmayacağımız şeylere bizi yakınlaştırdığını söyleyerek bu düşüncelerden bizi uzaklaş-tırıyor.
Her zaman yanımızda kafamızın içindeki şeyleri soracak birilerini bulamayabiliriz.Button bizim için bu soruları sorarak hepsine makul bir yerden bakmaya çalışıyor.
''Sahte ilgilerin bu kadar yoğun sergilendiği,insanların bizden gerçekten hoşlanıp hoşlanmadıkla-rını,bize yalnızca zorunluluktan iyi davranıp davranmadıklarını anlamanın pek mümkün olmadığı mümkün olmadığı bir dünyada ıslak vajina ve sert penis yakınlığın gerçek göstergeleri olma işlevini rahatlıkla üstlenirler.''
Botton birçok farklı yerden inceliyor.Bu konuda en rahat açılabilecek kişi de partneriniz bile olamayabiliyor çoğu zaman.Normal biriyle kurulan ilişki de samimi olup olmadığı ne tepki vereceği kestirilemiyor.Ancak bu kadar yakınında hissedilen birine her şey rahatlık dökülebilir.
İlerleyen bölümlerde cinsel isteksizlik yaşayan çifti okuyoruz.Jim artık yeteri kadar istekli olmadı-ğını farkında ve geçen sene kaç kere seviştiklerinin istatistiğini tutacak kadar bu durumu düşünüyor ama karısı bu kadar düşündüğünün muhtemelen farkında bile değil.Birbirine bu denli yakın insan-ların zaman geçtikçe birlerinden bu denli uzaklaşmaları garip gelse de çok sık rastlanıyor.
Aslında esas sorun bu kadar utangaç olmamız.Karşı taraf ne der diyip harekete geçmekten bir şeyler yapmaktan korkmamız.Ama duygular karşılıklıysa yaşanacaklar için rezil olma riskini göze almaya değer.
En sevdiğim bölümlerinden biri de sevgiyi küçüklükten itibaren yanlış öğrendiğimizden bahsettiği kısım oldu sanırım.Anne babamızdan gördüğümüz şefkati her zaman yanımızda olacağını bildi-ğimiz sevgiyi büyüyünce yabancılardan da bekliyoruz.Ama onlarda o kadar kredimiz olmadığını,o şekilde iletişim kuramayacağımızı öğrenmek için epey bir ilişki kurduktan sonra ancak kavrayabi-liyoruz.
Bir yerden sonra ''Cinsellik acaba gerçekten de bu kadar kötü bir şey mi?''nin galiba kötü bir şey kısmına daha yaklaşırken;yazar aslında cinselliğin dünyada olan bir çok şeyin nedeni olduğunu, normalde yapmayacağımız şeylere bizi yakınlaştırdığını söyleyerek bu düşüncelerden bizi uzaklaş-tırıyor.
Her zaman yanımızda kafamızın içindeki şeyleri soracak birilerini bulamayabiliriz.Button bizim için bu soruları sorarak hepsine makul bir yerden bakmaya çalışıyor.
''Sahte ilgilerin bu kadar yoğun sergilendiği,insanların bizden gerçekten hoşlanıp hoşlanmadıkla-rını,bize yalnızca zorunluluktan iyi davranıp davranmadıklarını anlamanın pek mümkün olmadığı mümkün olmadığı bir dünyada ıslak vajina ve sert penis yakınlığın gerçek göstergeleri olma işlevini rahatlıkla üstlenirler.''
November 30, 2013
Who isn't interested in sex? This book is a quick and entertaining read, and while it doesn't answer all one's questions about sex--how could it? Sex is too complex for easy answers--it does provide some interesting insights. Most of us are attracted to people who radiate health and well-being. Sometimes people are unaware of their real feelings--e.g., subtle anger--that could result in sexual withdrawal. The regularity and security of marriage isn't great for sex (although some sex therapists disagree with this, saying that regularity is good for sex and that desire results from willingness, not the other way around); people need to spice things up (probably accounts for the popularity of the Fifty Shades of Gray series. Impotence is a sign that a man may be anxious about pleasing his mate and/or about his performance, and as such, it is a sign of civility and politeness--what a great reframe that is!
February 24, 2013
This is a short book, an extended essay in the School of Life, which is a kind of philosophical self-help venture that all of Alain de Botton's work has been leading up to seemingly. That said, I really enjoy his particular take on life--I get the sense that many men do not share this attitude. Much of his take on sex may strike one as overly conservative, but the idea that human nature remains essentially unchanged even as our expectations and trappings of life change is convincing to me. The point of the book is that it is worth thinking more about sex in a more careful frame of mind and with a longer view. I think it succeeds very well in that, and without the bizarre thought experiments that made up too much of Religion for Atheists.
But be aware, the US edition is not something you might be totally comfortable with on the library hold shelf or on a crowded bus. I got over it, but it's very strikingly a book about sex.
But be aware, the US edition is not something you might be totally comfortable with on the library hold shelf or on a crowded bus. I got over it, but it's very strikingly a book about sex.
September 16, 2020
Taking a step back and exploring the idea of sex from psychological, biological, and social lenses paints a very vivid picture. Not only is the stigma surrounding conversations around sex touched upon in this short read - so too are themes of fidelity and romance, in an unbiased and objective way. My only criticism is that it centers more around the male psychology, the male biology and the social orientations of men about and toward sex.
October 10, 2016
Alain de Botton's name climbed up on my to-read list because of his wonderful YouTube channel 'School of Life', and when I found an audiobook of this short book I took the chance to finally 'read' some of his work.
The title feels a bit like the bookish variant on clickbait, and could have been called 'How to think about sexuality' or 'How Alain de Botton thinks about sexuality'.
In the beginning I was quite charmed by this book. He starts with the taboos still resting on sex (which in 'liberated times' as he calls them, can also be the taboo on not having frequent sex), which was pretty neat. But soon enough it all went downhill.
That de Botton is a great fan of psychoanalysis can't go undetected for a long time. For example, early in the book he talks of how we develop fetishes, and asserts they are exclusively parent-focused. He excludes all factors but the parents. Peers, culture and media are left completely unconsidered for an explanation for why we develop certain sexual desires. He also asserts we're attracted to qualities we're lacking ourselves and uninterested in qualities we possess ourselves. There is however evidence for the opposite - we are attracted to people with whom we have something in common - political views, interests, etc. - that is left unaddressed.
The scientific edge is supposed to come from one phenomenon in evolutionary biology, which is the finding that people consistently across cultures prefer symmetrical faces, which are supposed to be a sign of health. De Botton then tries to expand this idea to the preference of certain facial traits as a sign of good personality, which is hardly more substantial than the long abandoned phrenology. His reasoning gets awkward exactly because of the lack of consideration of peers, culture and media, and is in part based on this idea that beauty is an objective and consistent idea, based on the symmetry finding (which he assumes to be the same thing). This is just wrong; these studies have been designed to exclude factors such as clothing, hair-styles and anything but the uncharacteristic neutral facial expression to look at facial symmetry, but this doesn't say anything about the importance of the symmetry in relation to other factors.
Because of his inability to look beyond the ideas he held from the beginning, the book becomes a lesson in cherry-picking, given away by the stereotypical ideas he tries to fit his book inside of. His examples are always of heterosexual pairs. The parent mentioned in examples related to child-care is always the mother. In general, the book has an unmentioned heterosexual, monogamous norm. And not enough with that, because long-term relationships are frequently called 'marriages', and our sexual partners 'wife' or 'husband'.
The intention with this book may have been good, but trying to transcend taboos by using psychoanalysis as a springboard is exactly what keeps his argumentation chained to ideas of taboo, as well as to the lowest point of my rating scale.
The title feels a bit like the bookish variant on clickbait, and could have been called 'How to think about sexuality' or 'How Alain de Botton thinks about sexuality'.
In the beginning I was quite charmed by this book. He starts with the taboos still resting on sex (which in 'liberated times' as he calls them, can also be the taboo on not having frequent sex), which was pretty neat. But soon enough it all went downhill.
That de Botton is a great fan of psychoanalysis can't go undetected for a long time. For example, early in the book he talks of how we develop fetishes, and asserts they are exclusively parent-focused. He excludes all factors but the parents. Peers, culture and media are left completely unconsidered for an explanation for why we develop certain sexual desires. He also asserts we're attracted to qualities we're lacking ourselves and uninterested in qualities we possess ourselves. There is however evidence for the opposite - we are attracted to people with whom we have something in common - political views, interests, etc. - that is left unaddressed.
The scientific edge is supposed to come from one phenomenon in evolutionary biology, which is the finding that people consistently across cultures prefer symmetrical faces, which are supposed to be a sign of health. De Botton then tries to expand this idea to the preference of certain facial traits as a sign of good personality, which is hardly more substantial than the long abandoned phrenology. His reasoning gets awkward exactly because of the lack of consideration of peers, culture and media, and is in part based on this idea that beauty is an objective and consistent idea, based on the symmetry finding (which he assumes to be the same thing). This is just wrong; these studies have been designed to exclude factors such as clothing, hair-styles and anything but the uncharacteristic neutral facial expression to look at facial symmetry, but this doesn't say anything about the importance of the symmetry in relation to other factors.
Because of his inability to look beyond the ideas he held from the beginning, the book becomes a lesson in cherry-picking, given away by the stereotypical ideas he tries to fit his book inside of. His examples are always of heterosexual pairs. The parent mentioned in examples related to child-care is always the mother. In general, the book has an unmentioned heterosexual, monogamous norm. And not enough with that, because long-term relationships are frequently called 'marriages', and our sexual partners 'wife' or 'husband'.
The intention with this book may have been good, but trying to transcend taboos by using psychoanalysis as a springboard is exactly what keeps his argumentation chained to ideas of taboo, as well as to the lowest point of my rating scale.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 625 reviews