I tried to provide an aswer to a similar question some months ago using the example of a rose, and, again, got so far without providing an unequivocal answer. Having spoken to L, the one who exhales happily and gives birth to a whirlwind; for whom rainbows are a prototype of her smile; I am now ready to either build upon or discard my previous assertions.
L and I more-or-less agreed upon the following statements, or principles, which demonstrate romantic thinking or sentiment:
- The sentiment must (for the present purposes) be something which is mutually comprehensible. I cannot present a piece of balsa wood as an 'artifact of romance' and expect it to be understood, in a culture where balsa wood is not tied to the idea of love or commitment.
- Mutually comprehensible objects are - amongst other things - ones which we have been conditioned to accept for their symbolism - in western culture roses, flowers, heart-shaped objects.
- The presentation of a mutually comprehensible object is understood to represent a sentiment or sentiments beyond both words and actions. It states that which cannot be stated, yet it can be understood upon receipt of the object. Such receipt we call a 'simple romantic gesture.'
- Mutually comprehensible objects might exist in a transitory fashion. The playing of a (mutually understood) piece of music, its significance pulsating against the air, is another simple romantic gesture.
'Extended romantic gestures' are built upon their simple relatives. As well as being extended, they require more effort in their execution and comprehension:
- Extended romantic gestures are, as the name implies, more significant - due to the idea of sacrifice which is at their core. If I have a fear of heights, then asking someone to marry me when stationed at the top of the tallest building in England is an extended romantic gesture.
- Extended romantic gestures require an explanation before they can become (extended) mutually comprehensible objects. Only when the subject of the gesture is presented with supplementary information its significance be fully imparted. So a piece of balsa wood in lieu of the sentiment which binds could be an extended romantic gesture - providing that its attendant explanation is sufficient.
- L, the flash of lightning which bisects the sky, pointed out that even a detailed explanation does not necessarily convey the full power of particularly esoteric or difficult gestures. If L is in general reluctant to articulate what or how she is feeling, then for her to do this in itself is an extended romantic gesture. I, however, need to be fed with more information than is reasonable for her to provide before the full force of her symbolism becomes apparent. Hence we speak of a discontinuity.
- L, who folds the universe symbiotically into herself as she sleeps, disagrees with the assertion that all extended romantic statements are the fusion of at least two innocuous or simple romantic statements. This needs more thought and dialogue with L before I can draw a conclusion.
