Panliligaw

by Dominic Echiverri

Panliligaw translates to courting. But if we break the word down, the root word is "ligaw".

Ligaw = to court, to woo; likewise, ligaw = to confuse, to mislead.

Levinas discusses love and and filiation, and on the matter of identifying with and being for the Other, the general misconception or fault of love is that it seems to be a matter of convenience. "I like this person because she has the features that I want to see, she's the person I want to complement my personality, she has those which keep ME interested". Love, and courting, are misidentified as means of finding someone who reflects the I. "The rule of the I" of Western Philosophy where the central figure is oneself.

And this seems to be the dis-inter-esse, or the disinterest, which in breaking down, shows this movement towards the radically other, the Other who is radically different a selfsame.

Basically, it seems Levinas wants us to stop the panliligaw.

If your panliligaw holds true to the original Filipino breakdown of the verb, you mislead the person to thinking you like her because you find qualities that she uniquely exhibits or presents as her own. You confuse the person by identifying and highlighting notable traits about her as if they were genuinely and uniquely hers, when in fact, these traits are mainly what satisfy or interest YOU and it doesn't really matter how it contributes or exudes HER, the radically other.

Examples:
Crush kita kasi ang ganda ng mata mo (kasi may thing ka para sa mga mata)
Crush kita kasi ang ganda ng boses mo (kasi may thing ka sa mga tila pangmalandi ang boses)
Crush kita kasi ang cute mo tumawa (kasi may thing ka sa mga tumatawa na parang si Joker)

But as you can see, it isn't because it makes her, her. Cut the crap: you like those traits because they satisfy or they interest YOU. And in the process of panliligaw, you make her believe those are her strongest or most completing assets.

This confusion, however, actually also works against oneself. It makes one believe that he is in love with that person, when in fact, he is in love with someone who reflects what HE wants to see. The Her is lost because the I dictated or constituted what makes her "otherness".

The Other is reduced to an extension of the Self.

Examples:
She's beautiful (interpretation: pangtrophy wife ang dating, matching my confidence)
He's soooooo hawt (interpretation: pag eto nakuha ko, ultimate revenge sa chismosa kong blockmate)
She got that smart thang going on (interpretation: convenient reviewmate bago mag-Finals. G)

Levinas' assertion is this dis-inter-esse, which for me is the radical movement of going out (dis) and be in full contact (inter) with the other (esse), which definitely constitutes separating oneself from, or suspending, one's own biases.

Instead of dressing up the Other in a cloud of I's, why not allow the Other to exude that Other-ness to the I? After all (and to quote something cliche): it's not always about you.