Summary of A. Kollontai: "Make Way for the Winged Eros: A Letter to Working Youth"

The article “Make Way for the Winged Eros: A Letter to Working Youth” written by Alexandra Kollontai primarily focuses on the evolution of sexual relationships during the Russian Civil War and presents the division of people into those who supported love and those who considered it to be an unnecessary thing that could hurt partners. According to Alexandra Kollontai, during the years of the Civil War, there was a need for less demanding relationships, and women as well as men needed to be free to meet and part without tears (1977, p. 277, para. 1). The author argues that there should be a new society that will not expect women to spend their whole lives in the kitchen cooking for the family and having no time for their personal growth. She also says that women should break the monotony and explore the world. The author believes that females are not supposed to be limited to boundaries, races or stereotypes that have been created in the society by male chauvinism. Women should have richer and happier lives satisfying their need for personal growth and development. Sexual satisfaction is a right of all women not because they are greedy but because they are made to enjoy it with their husbands. According to Alexandra Kollontai, there were two ideologies governing the society during the Civil War in Russia – the proletarian and bourgeois ones (1977, p. 276, para. 2). The proletariat was the group of working class citizens who were regarded as the lowest class in Russia, and the bourgeoisie were rich, middle-class citizens having material possessions. The proletarian and bourgeois ideologies had great influence on people’s attitudes towards love and sexual relationships during the Civil War.

Typically, during the Civil War, low-class citizens had little or no interest in love, and relationships were based only on sexual instincts (Kollontai, 1977, p.280, para. 2). The only thing that people needed was sexual satisfaction. Kollontai calls this situation the “wingless Eros.” This means that people did not have to spend sleepless nights thinking about their sexual partners because there was no love between them. Relationships were formed and broken without tears since there was no much commitment. Prostitution disappeared from the society as relationships that existed at that time were similar to it, and people suffered no heart-break since there were no obligations (Kollontai, 1977, p. 277, para. 2). However, unfortunately, the “wingless Eros” did not fulfill psychological or emotional needs of people.

The “wingless Eros” was meant to bring people together to satisfy their need for sex and reproduction. According to Alexandra Kollontai, although the “wingless Eros” was based on friendship and trust between partners, it did not have any emotional attachment that could make people change their lives to meet the needs of their partners (1977, p. 277, para. 3). Thus, men did not have to look good and be worthy of their female partners since sexual relationships did not demand it. However, if people experience true love, they should make sure that they live according to the needs of their partners and always strive to look presentable as well as responsibly behave to maintain this love. The supporters of the “wingless Eros” were against such emotional demands as they could lead to stress, exhaustion, and pain. The proletariat were the main supporters of the “wingless Eros.” In contrast, the bourgeoisie were in favor of the “winged Eros” and claimed that a man should have love-comradeship only with one woman. This ensured that they had enough time and energy for each other until they broke the bond. During the revolution, people did not fall in love due to the civil demands for their efforts and energy in the war. However, as the war ended, the “wingless Eros” ceased to exist as people needed not only sexual satisfaction but also love.

. The proletarian ideology advocated relationships without exclusive and all-embracing love between partners (Kollontai, 1977, p. 288, para. 3). Marriage and love were separated, and only the bourgeoisie made attempts to merge them (Kollontai, 1977, p. 280, para. 3). The main aim of the bourgeois ideology was to develop a communist society where people shared their emotions and feelings. According to the bourgeoisie, a person should have feelings only for one partner. They believed that feelings for only one person facilitated the formation and development of comradeship that could later turn into marriage. Compared to the bourgeoisie, the proletariat did not encourage monogamy because it could lead to unnecessary commitments, physical as well as emotional exhaustion, and pain (Kollontai, 1977, p. 286, para. 2).

The proletariat and bourgeoisie agreed on the fact that love-comradeship was important during the struggle since it brought people closer and gave them an opportunity to oppose dictatorship. Both ideologies agreed that love for one partner allowed to make bonds of friendship stronger for a common purpose (Kollontai, 1977, p. 290, para. 2). However, compared to the bourgeoisie, the proletariat rejected the long-term love-comradeship and advocated the communist style of expressing feelings in the society. According to the proletariat, the morality supported by the bourgeoisie was hypocritical because people still sought sexual relationships outside their bonds. Moreover, they could easily end their relationships with one partner and start new ones with another partner. However, later the proletariat changed their opinion. As it has already been mentioned, the dominant idea of the bourgeois ideology was monogamous relationships (Kollontai, 1977, p. 288, para. 3). As the society progressed, new proletarian love ideals appeared. The proletariat adopted monogamy supported by the bourgeoisie, but there were three basic principles that regulated relationships. The first principle was equality between partners in love (Kollontai, 1977, p.291, line 3). The second one was mutual recognition of partners’ rights in the relationship. The third one was comradely sensitivity and the ability to respect inner needs of partners.

Alexander Herzen and Chernyshevsky agree that the issue of inner feelings in love relationships is complex and complicated. Goethe and Byron agree with the bourgeoisie on the need for intimacy and commitment in relationships, and the author considers them to be pioneers of the “winged Eros” (Kollontai, 1977, p. 287, para. 2). In the article, the position of the author is on the side of the bourgeoisie and their ideology stating that people should love and stay close to each other at all times. Kollonatai’s position can be found at the end of the article where she says that love should prevail in the lives of young workers. She believes that people need love and companionship to lead happy lives. The author also says that in the new society, Eros will occupy its honorable position bringing people joy and multiplying their happiness. This means that the author does not agree with the proletariat who advocated the “wingless Eros” and a communist society where people were unfaithful to each other and could change partners whenever they wanted. According to the author, the “winged Eros” provides the foundations for the family, and young people need it to raise good children and create the better future.