Discussions of love and care might seem a natural alliance for early childhood teachers. Yet, while care is now at last beginning to be accepted as a legitimate feature of early years childhood within professional discourse alongside 'education' (enshrined in concepts such as 'educare', 'ECEC', or 'well-being'), articulations of love remain an elusive concept for practice. In this paper, we explore some of the reasons for this--not least because love is difficult to define, almost impossible to measure and implicates teachers both personally and professionally. We suggest that the present alignment of love with (or as) professional care sets a risky precedent for the field since it ignores the loving relationships that exist beyond caregiving acts. We argue for the necessity to distinguish between love and care in educational practice based on the writings of Scheler [1970. "The nature of sympathy." London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd.]. Drawing on the theoretical concept of 'aesthetic love' and "vzhivanie" posited by Bakhtin [1981. "The dialogic imagination." Austin, Texas: University of Texas; 1986. "Estetika slovestnogo tvorchestva." Moscow: Isskustvo.], we suggest alternative ways love might be understood thus granting love the status it deserves in the education and care of young children.