The cult of love

An article from this week's Life magazine. Food for thought.

Pitfalls of passion - by Bella Ellwood-Clayton

Marrying for love is a 20th-century phenomenon. According to American anthroplogists John Borneman and Laurie Hart, the cult of romantic love is a recent innovation in the history of marriage. Every society has romantic passion, but not many have turned this unstable emotion into a social situation. And, really, how much sense does it make to base such weighty issues as lifelong cohabitation, child-rearing and caring for each other into the elderly years on a fickle emotion that, let's face it, is commonly driven by a mix of libido, capriciousness and commercial dating sites?

Historically, marriage has been a financial affair, arranged according to status, property, lineage or, in some villages, the exchange rate of cows per bride. It certainly hasn't been built on something as torrid and fleeting as passion. Yet, to us, a society seduced by Hollywood, the arranged marriage goes against everything Meg Ryan's film career has taught us to believe in, eradicating free will, romance and individual choice.

There seems to be a hierarchy about the 'proper' way to do love, with us on top. And, although this is my favourite position, it does make you think. In Australia, we act as if we have a monopoly of good relationships, casting those that don't fit in with the norm (such as same-sex, non-monogamous or arranged marriages) as declasse. As though we're so exemplary! In a country where commitment is concurrent with fashion, who are we to get all Simon Cowell?

The type of love Westerners chase doesn't, by and large, last. Arranged marriages, on the other hand, have a global divorce rate of four per cent compared to Australian, American and Canadian figures, which place us at about 40 per cent figure. So what do countries such as Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and India - where most marriages are arranged - know that we don't?

Typically, anthropologists have found that arranged marriages start off with lower expectations and preconceptions about what the other person can offer us. Love tends to unfold, as each partner gets to know, trust and rely on the other. Whereas for us, choosing a mate is not dissimilar to the experience of consumerism. Sociologist Zygmant Bauman believes we live an era where relationships are under the strain of endemic uncertainty. Seeking instant gratification and armed with an inventory of desires to be fulfilled, our expectations of love are so grandiose they practically guranteed relationship seppuku. I do, until you disappoint me. I do, until someone better comes along. I do, until I change my mind.

Beware the cult of love and using this unstable emotion as the only benchmark to unfold and build your life together.

Comments

Unknown said…
The best relationships I've seen have been focused on something outside the marital unit- social responsibility, living for God, a larger social role (less individualism), etc. When a perfect relationship is the only thing that satisfies, it seems like a more fragile institution. People often fail to see that a response to living for God is striving for the best in a relationship, but also weathering the difficulties, whereas if the purpose is only derived from the relationship, things get rocky when it doesn't fully satisfy.

I think I just said the same thing twice- but there's my thoughts :).

Although in contrast to this, I have to say, I'm a huge fan of individualism. In a way it let me choose my culture or rather, choose to live outside the norm.

Blog trolling instead of studying... *tsk tsk*

Bad Evan.

:)
zarawil said…
hey evan who should be studying at 7am in the morning :)

i like how you put it - 'people often fail to see that a response to living for GOd is striving for the best in a relationship, but also weathering the difficulties'

i do agree indeed. another interesting fact i read somewhere the divorce rate in same-sex marriages is much lower than that in heterosexual marriages. perhaps same sex couples value the institution of marriage much more -which is kinda of ironic i think given the current debate.