"Try, try, try to separate 'em...It's an illusion"
Not too long from now, I'm going to a wedding of an old friend of mine.
This friend was married to another friend of mine for many years. Then, some significant things--significantly negative things-- happened in their marriage, and after a period of making a concerted effort to sort it out and repair the damage, they decided it was just too far gone to be fixable and they decided to get divorced. My friend walked away from the divorce significantly hurt by the experience.
Not six months after the divorce papers had been signed, my friend met and was well on his way to falling in love with another woman. Six months after that, he proposed to her, and they planned to be married only a few short months from then. The wedding is very soon. He is happy and looking forward to starting his new life with his new bride.
Now, I'm absolutely happy that he's happy--I wouldn't want it any other way. I'm glad he's found someone he feels love for and with, especially after a period of serious unhappiness.
But for some reason I'm having trouble deciding if the entire story, laid out as a map in front of me, says something very doubtful about the believability of both love and marriage as concepts, or if it says something very hopeful about both. Like the clipped lyrics in my title from that famous song about both, it can be read more than one way. But which is the right interpretation?
What do you think?
Comments (8)
But for some reason I'm having trouble deciding if the entire story, laid out as a map in front of me, says something very doubtful about the believability of both love and marriage as concepts, or if it says something very hopeful about both.
I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to ask...
1. Posted by Hiromi on July 1, 2007
I would say he has unrelenting hope for himself. As an uninvolved bystander with just THAT information, I'd have to say he's deluded, personally. The whole idea that you must be married to them to be happy is one that, quite frankly, must go away. It doesn't suffice in today's extended familial society, frankly.
Me, personally, I'd say 'Live without being married as long as you were married', but that's me.
2. Posted by Darkneuro on July 1, 2007
I am pretty sure it's both hopeful and cynical at the same time. Second marriages usually work better because people are stripped of some of their romantic ideals and are more likely to try to make it work.
I think marriage, commitment, is more about work than it is about love.
3. Posted by Fluffy Cat on July 1, 2007
Hiromi: I meant that the myth, at least (and at least in this country), is that you marry the person you love most in the world--who you think is your ultimate, true love, and you commit to a lifetime of loving that person enough to stay with them forever.
So I guess what I was trying to say was:
When looked at through the "doubtful" lens: It would seem the concept of "love" as a concept is really a fraud. He loved his ex-wife, but then he stopped loving her, and shortly after was in love with someone else to the same extent--now, this one is supposed to be the "real" love. the doubtfulness of the concept of marriage as an "everlasting union" speaks for itself in this context. One wonders why people make the committment.
When looked at through the "hopeful" lens: It would seem that even in the worst of circumstances, the heart can repair itself and find love and happiness again--and no matter how hopeless it seems, there is love out there for you. And on the marriage front, the hopefulness is that despite an extremely negative first marriage experience, the person feels strongly enough about the values of that style of relationship that he wants to do it again--which would indicate there IS some value there.
I'm not sure which to think of it as. Sometimes stories like his make me worry that there's no point to looking for or expecting a real, consistent level of love over the long haul. Or that marriage has any meaning at all. Why do people do it? Do they *really* go in intending to make those vows they're supposedly signing to work? Or are they just not paying attention?
4. Posted by Miss Syl on July 1, 2007
DN: I hope he's not deluded. The new wife will be much more like him than the first; they share many more interests. I think that bodes well. And I'm happy he's recovered from a painful experience. Though, yes, it does seem a little fast.
I go back and forth on the marriage thing. I co-habitated with someone for a long time. At the time I said I was doing it because i didn't need to be married to feel committed to someone. But looking back, i think i have to be honest and say i also did it because actually making that kind of legal committment DID seem to have a particular kind of weight that i didn't feel comfortable giving that relationship. A contract DOES make a difference in any relationship, business or otherwise. These days, I often feel i will never live with another person unless i'm ready to marry them. Which, by the way doesn't mean I necessarily want to get married--only that I don't want to pretend a committment to someone I don't have, or give up personal freedoms to a relationship that I'm not fully committed to in every way.
Interesting that i see marriage and co-habitationi as giving up freedom. I wonder if there's a way to do it in which that does not have to be a condition on any level. I don't ever think I've seen a model that didn't involve at least some of that. Of course, in many models the freedom is given up willingly. They *want* to make those concessions, because being in the marriage is important to them, for whatever reason they personally want to be in it (and sometimes I'm not even sure they know why they want to be in it). Hm, fodder for another post.
Flufficat: So, do you think romance is antithetical to marriage? If so, our society's got it all wrong and marriage should be more like it used to be--a strategic union between people who can better themselves in society more effectively by being together than by being separate.
I don't know that my friend feels unromantic about his second wife. He seems to be crushing on her pretty heavily. This, by the way, is her first marriage--so she may indeed feel very romantic herself. Though, they tend to be fairly practically-minded people as personalities, so I don't know.
5. Posted by Miss Syl on July 1, 2007
It's more that I think that romantic feelings are temporary. You can crush on someone pretty badly for a while, maybe up to a year, and eventually it can fade away. You have to have something else behind it, in the marriage, for it to work. I think marriage is more about work and compromise, than about the romance itself. Often people expect the romantic part to last forever, and it doesn't.
I've been thinking a lot on this subject myself because I just got out of a long relationship without passion, and don't ever want to do that again, but I'm not sure how people do keep the passion going.
I do think that a marriage that is more of a strategic union, a partnership, and a friendship could work better in the long run. You need all those things if the passion dies down.
6. Posted by Fluffycat on July 2, 2007
i'm of two minds.
i've seen beautiful and long lasting marriages and i've been in one that shattered almost instantly. what i'm nearly always struck by is the sense of realism those long term couples have about each other.
they get each other, warts and all.
so i do in fact believe in marriage. that said, i also believe in courtship that lasts at least a year and that it's not a bad idea to spend thirty days apart to see if you still miss each other... cause that's how you sort the pheremones from the feelings.
anyway... this story? this story hits my cynical 'oh please' side.
7. Posted by badinfluencegirl on July 4, 2007
For the first time, today I wear a necklace with a "True Companion" medallion. It is not as beautiful as many of my other necklaces or even my normal style. Yet, my husband found it and I know that I will it often and it will be one of my favorites.
I'm always sad when I hear that people wonder about the value of marriage or long lasting commitment. I was married days before I turned 22. I heard many times that I married too young. It hasn't always been easy- especially the last few years. We dealt with new sexual challenges that almost tore me apart. But I love him more than I could ever love anyone else, and he loves me. There will be nobody else that could ever understand me as he does.
A marriage and a commitment is not merely about love though. It's about willingness to talk to each other, to solve problems together and work through the issues involved. Part of the value of a marriage is accepting it as a lifetime commitment that means you are committed to that work because you care about each other. There is no out. There is no option to leave if it gets tough.
If a couple is in love with each other enough to make the step of marriage, then I'm happy for them. I have friends that walk away from their marriage and I understand because I see the failure long ago. But I respect them just a bit less as well. Not just for what they lost or gave up- for love isn't always easy to find, but for making the commitment that much looser for others as well.
The story of your friend? Well- you'll see. Is he really committed to marriage or will he find he's not really in love when there is trouble. For it comes...
8. Posted by DevilBlueDress on July 7, 2007