On Marriage

The New York Times recently posted an article which listed the questions that couples should ask prior to marriage, according to the unnamed author. I was drawn the article myself for good reason, as many of my close friends will tell you.

I've gotten to the point where I flippantly advise younger women to not get married. It's not worth the hassle, I tell them. But as they're younger and more idealistic than I am now, I don't think they truly listen and that's probably best. Although I can tell my ill-fated advice is colored by my experience, I feel a need to share my "wisdom," however wrong it may be.

I DO feel certain that it is wrong. I know many couples who have been married for quite a while, most of whom exude that happiness that exists for couples who really love each other. I can even see it in couples who are just married: I call it the "angels-sing wedding." This phenomenon is perhaps all in my head, but there's something about some weddings that makes them different. It doesn't happen at every wedding. It doesn't happen at all the weddings in which I've participated and it certainly doesn't happen at weddings where I intimately know the bride and/or groom (like those of my brother and sisters; I'd like to think that my perception for their weddings is unreliable because of that intimacy).

I also feel certain that the artists in the world wouldn't idolize love and all its wonderful qualities if it didn't happen that way, somewhere, somehow. Truly, I can't remember a time when I was able to read a Nicholas Sparks novel and think, "Why can't I have a relationship like this?" And what am I supposed to think in the closing scenes of Phantom of the Opera, when the Phantom loses the girl, but only because of his love for her?

The question becomes love vs. marriage. One is not necessarily dependent upon the other, a fact all too often overlooked in the case of young children, especially young girls. It also encompasses the difference between familial love and sexual love, about which I once heard a great homily which truly clarified the two for me. And one must not forget the precursor to both love and marriage itself: lust (or longing, if you want a kinder, gentler word). Simply said, without lust, neither love nor marriage (at least not voluntary marriages) would ever happen.

Throughout my fairly short life, I've heard of many reasons why people marry. Love, money, sex, opportunity, stability, children, family, expectations of others and self, social consequences, etc., etc. Earlier, I would have said that most of these are particularly bad reasons to wed. However, I've since met several couples who've had an arranged marriage - and who seem to exude that marital happiness. Thus, an argument can be made that a marriage can work if it's not based primarily in lust and subsequently love.

What's the difference? Why is it that marriages which aren't arranged can be held to a standard which necessitates a basis in love? Any why aren't arranged marriages more often considered a failure by Western observers? How can an arranged marriage, not based on love, grow into one that is not only based on love, but exudes it, while marriages by choice, for reasons other than love, seem unable to morph into a strong, loving relationship?

Here's my theory: often, those in arranged marriages are told that the marriage must work by others, and thus it appears so, as the individuals work on the appearance of stability and happiness. But that appearance is also completely transparent to others who are paying attention.

A "for love" marriage, as my Indian friend in an arranged marriage calls them, one truly based in love, has the motivation for both partners to fully pursue happiness and a strong relationship. However, a "for love" marriage based on any other reason needs strong, dedicated, patient, and willing individuals to morph the relationship into what it could truly become. Therefore, I'd argue that every marriage, at the beginning, has the possibility of being a true, strong, exuding happiness kind of marriage. It's simply what the partners bring to the relationship and their reaction to the other that either makes that union successful or not.

The Times' article does bring up good points that should be addressed before "tying the knot." However, one must remember that although discussing such questions beforehand will help overcome potentially serious problems later in the marriage, it must not be considered a cure all. A serious evaluation of each partner's needs and wants in a relationship, with the help of a good counselor, may be much more effective and a much better predictor of the success of the marriage.