\u0158\u00edk\u00e1 se mu \u010daj pot\u011b\u0161en\u00ed nebo alkovn\u00ed p\u011bna a m\u00e1 jednu v\u00fdhodu: probouz\u00ed na\u0161i smyslnost v ultrapropojen\u00e9, ale fyzicky odpojen\u00e9 existenci.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Co kdybychom vr\u00e1tili n\u011bze jej\u00ed d\u0159\u00edv\u011bj\u0161\u00ed sl\u00e1vu? To je to, po \u010dem tou\u017e\u00ed filozof Charles P\u00e9pin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Vynechejte reklamu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Madame Figaro. \u2013 Kdy\u017e tr\u00e1v\u00edme 90 % sv\u00fdch dn\u016f \u201ev hlav\u011b\u201c, kdy\u017e n\u00e1\u0161 profesn\u00ed \u017eivot k\u00e1\u017ee o kontrole a efektivit\u011b, st\u00e1v\u00e1 se zm\u011bna na\u0161eho \u017eivotn\u00edho stylu, n\u00e1hl\u00e9 otev\u0159en\u00ed se vlastn\u00edm t\u011bl\u016fm a t\u011bl\u016fm druh\u00fdch, v\u00fdzvou?
Charles P\u00e9pin. \u2013 Mo\u017en\u00e1 bychom byli v poku\u0161en\u00ed srovnat dobu zrychlen\u00ed s dobou zpomalen\u00ed, dobou, kter\u00e1 by n\u00e1m umo\u017enila znovuobjevit smyslnost. Ale \u2013 a to je paradox \u2013 mysl\u00edm, \u017ee jsme mnohem slo\u017eit\u011bj\u0161\u00ed a ve skute\u010dnosti mnohem schopn\u011bj\u0161\u00ed rychle p\u0159ech\u00e1zet z jednoho \u017eivotn\u00edho stylu do druh\u00e9ho, z jednoho stavu do druh\u00e9ho. To je s\u00edla n\u011bhy: m\u016f\u017eeme b\u00fdt \u00fazkostliv\u00ed, stresovan\u00ed nebo unaven\u00ed, ale sta\u010d\u00ed, aby n\u00e1m n\u011bkdo projevil n\u011bhu, aby n\u00e1m polo\u017eil ruku na na\u0161i \u2013 n\u011bkdy je to tak jednoduch\u00e9 \u2013 a okam\u017eit\u011b se zm\u011bn\u00ed n\u00e1\u0161 vztah k p\u0159\u00edtomnosti. A to je za\u010d\u00e1tek touhy. Najednou si uv\u011bdom\u00edme, \u017ee m\u00e1me inteligentn\u00ed t\u011blo. T\u011blo, kter\u00e9 si pamatuje, kter\u00e9 ch\u00e1pe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u0158\u00edk\u00e1te, \u017ee n\u011bha n\u00e1m pom\u00e1h\u00e1 b\u00fdt tady a te\u010f?
Znovu opakuji, \u017ee nesrovn\u00e1v\u00e1m tento \u010das nasycen\u00ed, nep\u0159\u00edtomnosti sebe sama, ment\u00e1ln\u00edho rozpt\u00fdlen\u00ed s t\u00edm, \u010demu dnes \u0159\u00edk\u00e1me pln\u00e1 p\u0159\u00edtomnost nebo pln\u00e9 v\u011bdom\u00ed. Mysl\u00edm, \u017ee lid\u00e9 jsou schopni \u201enep\u0159\u00edtomnosti\u201c. M\u016f\u017eu tu b\u00fdt, mluvit s v\u00e1mi a pamatovat si, \u017ee jsem zapomn\u011bl n\u011bkomu zavolat. N\u011bha m\u00e1 moc p\u0159ipomenout n\u00e1m p\u0159\u00edtomnost jin\u00e9ho \u010dlov\u011bka, v jemn\u00e9m p\u0159echodu z onoho shonu. M\u016f\u017ee b\u00fdt velmi dobrou p\u0159edehrou k n\u011b\u010demu m\u00e9n\u011b n\u011b\u017en\u00e9mu. K transformaci stav\u016f vhodn\u00fdch pro napln\u011bnou sexualitu, ve kter\u00e9 \u010dlov\u011bk m\u016f\u017ee b\u00fdt n\u011b\u017en\u00fd, pak tvrd\u00fd a pak zase n\u011b\u017en\u00fd. Toto je akt l\u00e1sky: tato mnohost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Pro\u010d je n\u011bha v z\u00e1padn\u00edm sv\u011bt\u011b dlouho vn\u00edm\u00e1na jako zabij\u00e1k l\u00e1sky?
Je to vlastn\u011b naprosto nepochopiteln\u00e9. Nemysl\u00edm si, \u017ee p\u00e9\u010de o n\u011bkoho jin\u00e9ho, \u200b\u200bproto\u017ee p\u0159esn\u011b o to jde, m\u016f\u017ee b\u00fdt zabij\u00e1kem l\u00e1sky. Samoz\u0159ejm\u011b za p\u0159edpokladu, \u017ee smyslnou l\u00e1sku nebo touhu neredukujeme na n\u011bhu. Mus\u00edme rozli\u0161ovat n\u011bhu, kter\u00e1 se vztahuje k desexualizovan\u00e9 l\u00e1sce (s odkazem na p\u00edse\u0148 \u201eLa Tendresse\u201c od Daniela Guicharda: \u201eN\u011bha n\u011bkdy \/ nen\u00ed milov\u00e1n\u00ed jeden druh\u00e9ho, ale b\u00fdt \u0161\u0165astn\u00fd\u201c), od jin\u00e9, sexualizovan\u00e9 n\u011bhy, kter\u00e1 vede k sexualit\u011b, na n\u00ed\u017e se pod\u00edl\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Jak to?
P\u00e9\u010de o t\u011blo jin\u00e9ho \u010dlov\u011bka je dobr\u00fd za\u010d\u00e1tek. My lid\u00e9 m\u00e1me \u017eivotn\u00ed pot\u0159ebu n\u011bhy, proto\u017ee jsme se narodili p\u0159\u00edli\u0161 brzy, proto\u017ee jsme p\u0159ed\u010dasn\u00ed, nedokon\u010den\u00ed. Mal\u00ed lid\u00e9 ji pot\u0159ebuj\u00ed k p\u0159e\u017eit\u00ed, k rozpt\u00fdlen\u00ed \u00fazkosti \u2013 \u201ed\u011btsk\u00e9 \u00fazkosti\u201c, o kter\u00e9 mluvil Freud \u2013 a prost\u011b k p\u0159e\u017eit\u00ed. Jako dosp\u011bl\u00ed si tuto pot\u0159ebu zachov\u00e1v\u00e1me. N\u011bha m\u00e1 tu v\u00fdhodu, \u017ee zm\u00edr\u0148uje existenci\u00e1ln\u00ed \u00fazkost, kter\u00e1 je sou\u010d\u00e1st\u00ed lidsk\u00e9ho zv\u00ed\u0159ete, prost\u0159ednictv\u00edm pohlazen\u00ed a p\u00e9\u010de. To n\u00e1s stav\u00ed na velmi dobrou cestu k otev\u0159en\u00ed se touze a sexualit\u011b bez strachu, bez z\u00e1bran. Kdy\u017e n\u011bkdo \u0159ekne: \u201eU\u017e se nechci b\u00fdt dot\u00fdk\u00e1n,\u201c je to \u010dasto proto, \u017ee po tom p\u0159\u00edli\u0161 tou\u017e\u00ed: tou\u017e\u00ed po tom tak moc, \u017ee \u200b\u200bkonfrontace s t\u00edm by byla t\u00e9m\u011b\u0159 p\u0159\u00edli\u0161 brut\u00e1ln\u00ed. A je tu je\u0161t\u011b n\u011bco k zamy\u0161len\u00ed: \u0161t\u011bdrost. \u010clov\u011bk by si mohl myslet \u2013 to je diskutabiln\u00ed \u2013 \u017ee napln\u011bn\u00e1 sexualita mus\u00ed b\u00fdt nutn\u011b \u0161t\u011bdr\u00e1. Ale n\u011bha je \u0161t\u011bdrost v doslovn\u00e9m smyslu. Je to nepopirateln\u00e1, hmatateln\u00e1 a pevn\u00e1 \u0161t\u011bdrost. A z tohoto pohledu m\u016f\u017ee v\u00e9st k touze a smyslnosti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Projevov\u00e1n\u00ed n\u011bhy n\u011bkomu tak\u00e9 umo\u017e\u0148uje b\u00fdt zraniteln\u00fdm, nechat j\u00edt…
Rozhodn\u011b. Projevov\u00e1n\u00ed n\u011bhy n\u011bkomu znamen\u00e1 v\u011bd\u011bt, \u017ee i on s\u00e1m n\u011bhu pot\u0159ebuje. V\u011bd\u011bt lidskou zranitelnost. Sexualita m\u016f\u017ee b\u00fdt vn\u00edm\u00e1na jako \u00fat\u011bcha. Ve skute\u010dnosti je to n\u011bkdy jedin\u00e1 \u00fat\u011bcha pro lidi, kte\u0159\u00ed nic nemaj\u00ed nebo jsou velmi nemocn\u00ed: je to v\u0161e, co existuje. To znamen\u00e1, \u017ee na n\u011bze v lidsk\u00e9 existenci je n\u011bco neuv\u011b\u0159iteln\u011b jasn\u00e9ho. O tom je p\u00edse\u0148 Otise Reddinga \u201eTry a Little Tenderness\u201c. B\u00fdt necitliv\u00fd znamen\u00e1, \u017ee se v hloubi du\u0161e nesetkal s pravdou lidsk\u00e9 existence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Etymologicky slovo \u201en\u011bha\u201c poch\u00e1z\u00ed z latinsk\u00e9ho tendere: to, co se natahov\u00e1n\u00edm zten\u010dilo a zk\u0159ehlo. Je tedy n\u011bha neodd\u011bliteln\u011b spjata s nap\u011bt\u00edm?
V sexualit\u011b v\u017edycky existuje tato souhra, tento pohyb, ve kter\u00e9m se ukazujeme na jedn\u00e9 stran\u011b siln\u00ed a schopn\u00ed a na druh\u00e9 stran\u011b k\u0159ehc\u00ed a zraniteln\u00ed. Mo\u017en\u00e1 pr\u00e1v\u011b to vytv\u00e1\u0159\u00ed erotickou intenzitu, tento n\u011bkdy velmi rychl\u00fd p\u0159echod mezi t\u011bmito dv\u011bma stavy. A co v\u00edc, b\u00fdt… \u200b\u200bMysl\u00edm, \u017ee n\u011bco je velmi p\u0159\u00edjemn\u00e9, kdy\u017e se nau\u010d\u00edme b\u00fdt zraniteln\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Cel\u00e1 japonsk\u00e1 estetika je zalo\u017eena na t\u00e9to sm\u011bsi protiklad\u016f: tvrdosti a m\u011bkkosti, klidu a pohybu, mu\u017enosti a \u017eenskosti. Nen\u00ed pr\u00e1v\u011b v tomto prostoru, v tomto nap\u011bt\u00ed, erotika?
Naprosto souhlas\u00edm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
N\u011bha n\u00e1s vede k n\u011b\u017en\u00e9mu gestu, k pohlazen\u00ed. Sartre v d\u00edle \u201eByt\u00ed a nicota\u201c napsal, \u017ee jazyk je to, co my\u0161len\u00ed znamen\u00e1 tou\u017eit. Co t\u00edm mysl\u00ed?
Mysl\u00ed t\u00edm, \u017ee n\u011b\u017en\u00e9 gesto je v\u00edc ne\u017e smyslnost: m\u00e1 v\u00fdznam. \u0158\u00edk\u00e1 n\u011bco o smyslu existence a o m\u00edst\u011b, kter\u00e9 d\u00e1v\u00e1me druh\u00e9mu. Fenomenologie ukazuje, \u017ee smyslnost je duchovn\u00ed. \u017de t\u011blo je inteligentn\u00ed. Nestav\u00ed se proti mysli: je to t\u011blo, kter\u00e9 c\u00edt\u00ed a mysl\u00ed sou\u010dasn\u011b. \u201e\u010cist\u00e9 t\u011blo\u201c, jak ho nazval Merleau-Ponty. T\u011blo, kter\u00e9 se nach\u00e1z\u00ed v nejinteligentn\u011bj\u0161\u00edm vztahu na sv\u011bt\u011b. V jist\u00e9m smyslu je to metafyzick\u00e9: i kdy\u017e jsme m\u011bli \u0161patn\u00fd den, st\u00e1le m\u016f\u017eeme naj\u00edt radost a zp\u016fsob, jak b\u00fdt spolu. M\u00e1me v sob\u011b tento neuv\u011b\u0159iteln\u00fd zdroj. A nej\u010dast\u011bji se ani nedok\u00e1\u017eeme otev\u0159\u00edt t\u00e9to jednoduch\u00e9 p\u0159\u00edle\u017eitosti dot\u00fdkat se a b\u00fdt dot\u00fdk\u00e1ni.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201eV pohlazen\u00edch je to m\u00e9 t\u011blo z m\u00e9ho t\u011bla, kter\u00e9 rod\u00ed t\u011blo druh\u00e9ho,\u201c napsal Jean-Paul Sartre. Jak m\u016f\u017ee b\u00fdt n\u011bha zp\u016fsobem, jak erotizovat druh\u00e9ho, vn\u00edmat ho jako objekt touhy?
Na Sartrov\u011b p\u0159\u00edstupu je kr\u00e1sn\u00e9 to, \u017ee pro n\u011bj se z pohlazen\u00ed n\u011bco rod\u00ed. \u0158\u00edk\u00e1, a jako v\u017edy odporuje Freudovi (pro kter\u00e9ho touha existuje je\u0161t\u011b p\u0159ed sv\u00fdm objektem), \u017ee touha neexistuje bez Druh\u00e9ho. Druh\u00fd je prim\u00e1rn\u00ed; pr\u00e1v\u011b dotykem druh\u00e9ho ho konstituuji jako objekt sv\u00e9 touhy. Anne Dufourmantelle p\u00ed\u0161e tot\u00e9\u017e v knize \u201eS\u00edla n\u011bhy\u201c \u2013 lze to vzt\u00e1hnout i na n\u011bhu. Slovo \u201es\u00edla\u201c by m\u011blo b\u00fdt ch\u00e1p\u00e1no v \u0159eck\u00e9m, aristotelsk\u00e9m smyslu, kde s\u00edla je to, co rod\u00ed n\u011bco jin\u00e9ho. Kdy\u017e mluv\u00edme o s\u00edle n\u011bhy, m\u00e1me na mysli, \u017ee m\u00e1 s\u00edlu stvo\u0159it n\u011bco jin\u00e9ho ne\u017e sebe sama. Mo\u017en\u00e1 i divokou, nezkrocenou, ba a\u017e n\u00e1silnou smyslnost. N\u011bha vede ke konci n\u011bhy a to je p\u0159esn\u011b to, co pot\u0159ebujeme v na\u0161ich komplikovan\u00fdch, unaven\u00fdch a usp\u011bchan\u00fdch \u017eivotech: tu p\u0159echodnou stavidla, kter\u00e1 se otev\u00edraj\u00ed n\u011b\u010demu jin\u00e9mu \u2013 i kdyby jen proto, abychom se k tomu vr\u00e1tili v lep\u0161\u00edm stavu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Jak\u00e1 s\u00edla!
Je snadn\u00e9 p\u0159edst\u00edrat sexu\u00e1ln\u00ed vzru\u0161en\u00ed, l\u00e1sku, v\u00e1\u0161e\u0148. M\u016f\u017eete dokonce p\u0159edst\u00edrat orgasmus. Ale p\u0159edst\u00edrat n\u011bhu je mnohem slo\u017eit\u011bj\u0161\u00ed. Jako by n\u011bha byla v kone\u010dn\u00e9m d\u016fsledku n\u011bco jist\u011bj\u0161\u00edho ne\u017e l\u00e1ska a touha. Hmatateln\u00e1 hloubka. N\u011bco skute\u010dn\u00e9ho, \u200b\u200bn\u011bco, co nel\u017ee. V p\u00e1ru, kdy\u017e se jeden partner nut\u00ed k n\u011bze, druh\u00fd ho odstrkuje. A proto m\u016f\u017ee n\u011bha v\u00e9st ke \u0161\u0165astn\u00e9 sexualit\u011b: sexualit\u011b bez l\u017e\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Jak se to p\u011bstuje?
Je tu nad\u0161en\u00ed pro t\u011blo druh\u00e9 osoby, kter\u00e9 vytv\u00e1\u0159\u00ed hloubku n\u011bhy, zbavenou jej\u00ed p\u0159eslazen\u00e9 str\u00e1nky. A tak\u00e9 nad\u0161en\u00ed pro neuv\u011b\u0159itelnou s\u00edlu n\u011b\u017en\u00e9ho gesta. Schopnost p\u0159edat takov\u00e9 nesm\u00edrn\u00e9 pot\u011b\u0161en\u00ed tak jednoduch\u00fdmi gesty… Na tom je n\u011bco podvratn\u00e9ho uprost\u0159ed ve\u0161ker\u00e9ho kultu performance artu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Jak byste definovala smyslnou \u017eenu?
\u017denu s neuv\u011b\u0159iteln\u011b inteligentn\u00edm t\u011blem. A mo\u017en\u00e1 \u017eenu, kter\u00e1 se neboj\u00ed rozko\u0161e.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A smysln\u00fd mu\u017e?
Mu\u017e, kter\u00fd si ze sv\u00e9 citlivosti ud\u011blal tajemstv\u00ed sv\u00e9 s\u00edly. A kter\u00fd se raduje z pot\u011b\u0161en\u00ed druh\u00fdch.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\u0158\u00edk\u00e1 se mu \u010daj pot\u011b\u0161en\u00ed nebo alkovn\u00ed p\u011bna a m\u00e1 jednu v\u00fdhodu: probouz\u00ed na\u0161i smyslnost v ultrapropojen\u00e9, ale fyzicky odpojen\u00e9 existenci. Co kdybychom \n [...]<\/a>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":319,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-318","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-blog"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/318","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=318"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/318\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":320,"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/318\/revisions\/320"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/319"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=318"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=318"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fakt24.biz.ua\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=318"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}