Posted by R. Ann Siracusa
Romance
writers, for the most part, believe that “Love Conquers All” -- Didn’t
the Roman poet, Virgil, and Harlequin both say so? Heaven forbid that anyone contradict
icons like Virgil and Harlequin.
The
promise, and reality, of love gives us hope. It boosts our belief in humanity
and nature that everything can come out right in the end. A warm and fuzzy feeling many of us need in today's world.
But
let’s take a closer look. Virgil did, indeed write “Amor vincit
omnia, et nos cedamus amori. - Love
conquers all things, so we too shall yield to love.” Even our
popular songs perpetuate the ideal vision of a happy love-marriage, so it’s easy
to forget, in today’s world, that marrying for love is a relatively new concept
… and maybe not such a good one at that.
MARRYING FOR LOVE
Virgil
did, indeed write “Amor vincit omnia, et nos cedamus amori.
- Love conquers all things, so we too
shall yield to love,” but he also wrote, although not in the same poem,
that “Work Conquers All”, and he never suggested love should be the primary
reason for marrying.
Harleguin? Well, maybe a little.
As strange as it may seem to romance
writers and reader today, love been embraced as a primary reason for marriage only since the late 1700s, and that is
only in part of the world. It’s not that in many cultures and at many times a
love-marriage was not to and hoped for eventually, but it wasn’t essential.
There
have even been times and cultures where love was viewed as a disadvantage to a
marriage. Stephanie Coontz tells us in her 2005 book [Marriage, A History: From Obedience to
Intimacy, or How Love Conquered Marriage], that the
ancient Greeks considered love a form of insanity. In India, falling in love
before marriage was considered disruptive and a danger to society. In China too
much love between a husband and wife was treated as a threat to the extended
family. She writes,
“Only rarely in history has love been seen as the main reason for
getting married. When someone did advocate such a strange belief, it was no
laughing matter. Instead it was considered a serious threat to social order.” …
“Through most of human history, love was not at all the point of
marriage. Marriage was about getting families together, which was why there
were so many controls.” www.thesunmagazine.org/issues/489
Until
a few short centuries ago, marriage was all about survival, reproduction, social
acceptance, and power.
The
radical idea of marriage for love sprang up and began to take hold in the late
18th and early 19th centuries, in part because the
Industrial Revolution allowed people to move away from a agrarian society – thus
reducing the need for large families to work the land – and in part because the
Enlightenment thinkers of the time embraced
the issues of human rights and the right to personal happiness. The growth of
capitalism led to growth in wealth and in the middle class, leading to more
freedom of choice and the elevating the status of women [a little but certainly
not to equality].
The
Enlightenment’s rhetoric about the “right to personal happiness” may have
proved to be sophistry. In the 21st century marriage and love are
often depicted, together or apart, as being a state other than personal
happiness.
Coontz
quotes George Bernard Shaw’s portrayal of marriage as an institution that brings together two people
“under the influence of the most violent, most insane, most delusive, and most
transient of passions. They are required to swear that they will remain in that
excited, abnormal, and exhausting condition continuously until death do them
part.”
Good luck with that. www.thesunmagazine.org/issues/489/
WHAT’S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT?
In
most cultures throughout history and throughout the world, marriages have been
arranged, usually by parents but not always. In places where the arranged
marriage tradition dates back to ancient times, the pact resulted in the merger
of the two families.
Such
a fusion carried with it broad ramifications relating to money and/or politics,
which include power, influence, political authority, security, allies, social
prestige, progeny, inheritance, and privilege. Choices were carefully
calculated to advantage both families. Nonetheless,
in most societies, including those with arranged marriages, the relationship
with the greatest importance was that of the birth family. A person’s loyalty
and emotional connection was owed to blood ties rather than to marriage.
MARRYING
FOR MONEY
Nowadays,
society tends to look down on the practice of marrying for money [which is
equivalent to marrying for power], but that was one of the primary reasons for
marriage until a few hundred years ago.
The
Dowry
The
dowry is the transfer of property or money from the bride’s family to the groom
or to his family. Its purpose was to help the newly-wed couple establish a new
household and also a form of protection for the bride against ill treatment by
the husband or his family. Where this is the tradition, it is actually a
conditional gift which should be restored to the wife and her family if the husband abuses or divorces her.Cartoon By Paul Lynch
- Photo source: The Daily Toonwww.humortimes.com/cartoon-mark-lynch/
The husband can
profit by it during the marriage, but the dowry would have to give it back in
the case of mistreatment or divorce. My research found conflicting opinions
regarding who controlled the money or property during the marriage.
Regardless of what the laws might have said, I'd put my money on the husband. Just sayin'.
This tradition most common in cultures that are
strongly patrilineal and expect women to reside with or near their husband's
family.
“I can’t offer
you a dowry, but I can get you on my health plan.”Cartoon
By Wildt
The
Dower
A
dower means a wife’s rights to her husband’s real property or wealth after his
death. Her inheritance.
The
Bride Price
The
bride price [also called bride service or bride wealth]
is a payment from the groom or his family to the bride’s parents. According to
the Encyclopedia Britannica, the bride price was less an economic gesture but
served to consolidate the friendship between the two families.
Whatever
property belonging to the bride at the time of marriage remained her property
under her control. The tradition of dowry and the expectations varied from one
society and century to another.
IF IT WEREN’T FOR MY
SPOUSE, WE’D BE THE PERFECT COUPLE
Cartoon by George
Jartos, Source: Pinterest
Most
people who aspire to marriage hope for the perfect match … hope to be the
perfect couple. Soulmates.
American
writer Richard Bach writes, “A soulmate is someone who has locks that fit our
keys, and keys to fit our locks. When we feel safe enough to open the locks,
our truest selves step out and we can be completely and honestly who we
are."
Psychologist
and relationship expert Dr. Carmen Harra writes, “Your
soulmate makes you feel entirely whole, healed and intact, like no piece is
missing from the puzzle. A life partner, on the other hand, can be a great
supporter and long-time companion, but is limited in his or her capacity to
enrich your spirit. Most of us remain in life-partner relationships because we
"settle," for a multitude of reasons.”
I
agree with Barsha Nag Bhowmick, editor for Indiatimes.com,
that “perfect couples” couples are really “imperfect couples” who have learned
to enjoy their differences, regardless of whether it started out as a love
marriage or an arranged marriage.
SHOPPING ON THE
INTERNET
Western
culture seems securely “entrenched” in the concept of marrying for love.
Unfortunately, the person you fall in love with may not be the correct one for
you to marry, much less a soulmate. Love frequently makes poor choices. Cupid
would benefit from a few archery lessons.
Most
surveys show that the number one place that singles meet in America is online,
although family, friends, church, social is almost the same percentage. How is
that so different from an arranged marriage? In the 21st century,
even in an arranged marriage, the parties in question have to agree and accept
the arrangement [according to what I read and have been told]. So, as I see it,
the major difference occurs in the first part of the process: i.e. the
screening of potential mates and introducing the best matches.
Of
the two, I definitely prefer the online route. It doesn’t vet nearly as well as
an eagle-eyed mother who wants the best for her son or daughter, but in these
times of rapid change and more open communication, I trust people to know more
about who they are and what they prefer than their parents do. Although parents
often see things about their children that those individuals deny or are blind
to, parents can be just as blind and have their own baggage, prejudices,
experiences, and beliefs to deal with.
NO
MATTER HOW YOU MEET, MARRIAGE A CRAP SHOOT!
AUTHOR R. ANN SIRACUSA
Converting oxygen to carbon dioxide for more than three
quarters of a century
