What is obsession the shadow of? Is it devotion? Dedication? Where is the line drawn? I would say that devotion is selfless, it comes from within and goes out to the recipient of the devotion. Obsession is selfish and seeks satisfaction, taking something from the object of obsession. These traits have inverse properties: Devotion defines what is being devoted. The devotee, in a sense, vanishes. But obsession defines the one obsessing, the object losing meaning. That is to say, you can learn about the obsessed person by how the obsession makes them behave, but when you take the object of obsession on its own terms, you gain different information.

To illustrate: Say I am obsessed with chocolate. This may tell you that I prefer dark, sweet things. I am ruthless in my pursuit of such things. I may spend money foolishly to get chocolate. Perhaps you learn I am unfaithful because you witness me abandon other candies if chocolate is made available. But if you removed me from the context and examined a bit of chocolate for yourself, it wouldn’t suggest any of these things about me. Obsession attempts to imprint a context that may not actually exist.

Does this analogy work for devotion? I’m not sure it does or maybe the distinction is too subtle and slippery. Let me try: I am devoted to chocolate. I extoll the virtues of its sweet goodness. I add it to certain recipes and they are much improved. I remark on how its color and shape are pleasing. Some of these behaviors are similar to obsession, but what seems different is that attention is drawn away from me and towards the chocolate. Though my feelings about the chocolate are subjective, I am not tampering with the context very much: it is accurate to describe chocolate as sweet and generally pleasant.

Another thought: Can someone tell if they are obsessed or devoted? Is another party, an impartial observer, required to judge this? Hmmm.