Function of Love - Essay Example

Marriage: Function of Love The meaning of marriage, and the function of love, has long been the of debate. Some have argued that romantic love is a cultural creation and that marriage as a cultural institution transcends lesser notions of love in many important respects (de Munck, 1998: 17-18). Such arguments often treat love as an idealistic aspiration, fuelled by the media, and reason that the marital institution demands a firmer grounding than some vague notion of erotic attraction; Wexman, for instance, has noted that "Cultural historians generally agree that the emphasis on romantic love and association with marriage and personal fulfillment first took hold in the nineteenth century as part of the romantic cult of individualism" (1993: 12). What is important to note, for purposes of this essay, is that fact that romantic love was associated with marriage and marital fulfillment as a growing trend in an increasingly individualistic world rather than love itself. Love, in short, is more than a romantic or idealistic state of mind; indeed, as pointed out by Duby and Dunnet, love has, throughout history, been associated with such notions as respect, admiration, and a sense of security (1994: 37). The preliminary step, therefore, is to define love as it has been understood historically rather than to rely on unnecessarily inaccurate and narrow definitions as commonly portrayed in the mass media. This essay will argue that love is more comprehensive than lesser notions such as romantic love and that it can therefore function as the basis of a successful and enduring marriage; more specifically, this essay will argue that the media has idealized the notion of love more than is true of the concept itself and that the marital institution, as it has evolved over time, is more than capable of being founded and sustained about this broader concept of love. As an initial matter, there is no question that marriage has been sustained by a variety of different factors and motivations throughout history; these motivations have varied and differed according to cultural contexts, local conditions, and sociological stages of development. Although often portrayed negatively y the western media, arranged marriages have been the historical and cultural norm historically; this is true not only in cultures and countries traditionally associated with arranged marriages, such as in India, but in embryonic western nations and cultures as well. These arranged marriages were frequently motivated by such notions as pooling family wealth, maintaining social status or cementing political alliances, nurturing the continuation of certain religious or ideological communities, or simply continuing well-established cultural or local traditions (Shumway, 2003: 118). The arranged marriage was characterized by an oversight function performed by the older generation and the opinions or the preferences of the younger generation were subservient. This is not to say that the opinions of the people to be married were wholly irrelevant, though is many cases they were definitely of lesser value, but that the older generation relied upon considerations that were not consistent with modern notions of romantic or erotic love. It cannot be argued, however, that love as it was more generally known was irrelevant to marriage; more particularly, as noted by De Munck, men and women have fallen in love for reasons more compelling than an erotic attraction or a sudden physical or emotional impulse (1998: 78). Those whom would reduce love to the romantic concept exploited by capitalist media companies would do a great disservice to love and marriage, to people's individual judgment and reason, and to the sociological sciences. The marital institution did not become a prisoner of sudden irrational impulses; quite the contrary, as outlined by Wexman By the early twentieth century the emergence of a public sphere fostered the development of a youth culture centered on courtship rituals largely cut off from supervision by the older generation. Social historians attribute this change to a variety of factors, including mobility, weakening family ties, increasing age segregation, a growing climate of material abundance, and newly available forms of commercial amusement (1993: 12). An objective examination of the relationship of love to marriage, as the sociological data demonstrates, suggests that neither the traditional definitions of love or marriage have changed. Rather is the culture, the society, and the governing legal and ethical norms that have changed. Some of these societies have changed very much, such as in the United States where marital unions between homosexuals are now being sanctioned in limited circumstances, whereas things have changed more slowly in countries such as India and China. The fundamental issue really isn't whether love is defined broadly or narrowly but in whom the choice to marry is vested. The older generation has typically valued marriage and calculated its potential benefits in different ways than younger generations. These valuations and calculations involved perceptions related to considerations of security and sustainability; although some parents and caregivers may have had selfish motives, it is fair to suggest that in the majority of cases these factors were motivated by a genuine concern for the long-term happiness and security of the betrothed. To argue that such considerations were not love, that they failed to satisfy some modern-day notions of idealistic emotional bliss, is disingenuous. The older generation was motivated by love in the past, they are motivated by love today, and the younger generation is wise enough to make similar type of partnership valuations and calculations today. Love is not romantic love, the younger generation still values and respects suck factors and personal and financial security, and humans are much more than impulsive animals controlled by sudden erotic desires. The only illusion that arises is that which results from an unnecessarily narrow definition of love; if one is to accept the media and Hollywood as accurate barometers of love and marriage then one is bound to ignore the historical realities, the sociological data, and the broader judgment exercised by real human beings as opposed to scripted actors and financially motivated producers and directors. Marriage has responded to love rather than vice versa; to illustrate, mixed race marriages have prevailed, homosexual marriages are beginning to prevail, and cultural norms and social laws have evolved and changed as a function of this broader notion of love. Love in all its forms, whether a product of admiration, physical attraction or some combination thereof, drives the definition of marriage. In the final analysis, love is an essential and fundamental factor underlying marriage; this is not the idealized types of romantic or erotic love portrayed by the media but those types of love characterized by the exercise of individual judgments predicated on particular cultural and social stages of development. The media does more than good in promoting unrealistic or unduly narrow versions of love and of marriage. People, love, and marital institutions deserve much better. Works Cited De Munck, V. C. (1998). Romantic Love and Sexual Behavior: Perspectives from the Social Sciences. Greenwood Publishing Group. Duby, G. and Dunnet, J. (1994). Love and Marriage in the Middle Ages. University of Chicago Press. Shumway, D. (2003). Modern Love: Romance, Intimacy, and the Marriage Crisis. New York University Press. Wexman, V.W. (1993). Creating the Couple: Love, Marriage and Hollywood Performance. Princeton University Press. Read More