[2019] in Depressing_Thoughts
Re: marriage & divorce
ckclark@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ckclark@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Tue Apr 2 04:43:45 1991
Actually, my comment to jtkohl was just a rude quip, but I will play
devil's advocate and present a few justifications for it anyway.
Increasingly over the past few decades, the media and popular literature
have been advocating the idea that the most important facet of a good
marriage is an enduring sense of romantic love. We see it in the films
we watch, and in the books and magazines we read. The ``hero'' in such
dramas is always the person who goes to all length to win over an
improbable lover, who for all practical purposes is totally incompatible
as a mate. To make it worse, the hero often ``rescues'' the object of
his or her affection from some current lover, who is inevitably
portrayed as being disgustingly dull, and often obnoxious as well. But
upon examination, neglecting the antagonist's most exaggerated
characteristics, it becomes clear the *essential* difference between our
hero and villan is that the hero's goal is to be exciting, sensual, and
risky, while the evil counterpart is only trying to be practical. When
the superficial mannerisms are stripped away from both of these
characters, the underlying philosophy becomes clear---the rational and
practical side of humanity is considered dull, while the improbable,
wild, spontaneous facets are glorified.
Of course, movies and novels are only entertainment, right? You might
ask, ``What's wrong with an unrealistic fantasy or two, to take the mind
off the daily grunge?'' I would say that the problem with this type of
popular culture is that it encourages people to associate the sexy with
the unpredicatable, uncontrolled behavior of the type of person who acts
before thinking. I think it is sad to see a story which does everything
short of stating straight out that a person who is organized and
practical is unappealing, not in spite of this nature, but rather
*because* of it. I can only say that the sexiest person I ever knew was
also the most level-headed, and that the type of behavior that I see
portrayed in many of these pop-culture ``heros'' is not something I
would care to emulate, nor is it something I find attractive in others.
I know people who have the fundamental opinion that all women are by
nature irrational, and I confess that I have also entertained the idea
in some of my angrier moments. I think it may be that it's irrational
women that men are being taught to desire. This is unfortunate.
So what does this have to do with marriage? Well, the idea that
romantic love should be the key factor is a successful marriage,
although certainly not new, is being fed and driven by the pop-culture
idea that spontaneous, random, and even irresponsible behavior is
romantic. Yet these same characteristics are exactly the ones which are
likely to lead to an unstable, erratic relationship.
We are taught to sneer at the days when pre-arranged marriages were
popular, and to look down upon modern cultures where this is still the
norm. I'm not saying that people should not be able to make their own
choices; quite to the contrary, I wish people could and did make more of
their own choices. But should we have such terrible criticism of a
system which at least makes an attempt at providing a sensible and
thought out method of selecting a mate? Who ever came up with the
phrase ``madly in love,'' anyway? And what happens if one believes that
love implies madness, and then one proceeds to place love as the primary
goal of a marriage?
I know that I'm going to get flamed at for some of these ideas, so I'll
forego saying any more until I get to read the responses. This is not
really the forum for this my long transaction, but since the was a
request or two for explanation, I decided to put in my two cents.
